Why many programmers don't like ASP.NET?
-
Few platforms draw the same amount of ire as ASP.NET (or .NET in general) from the development community.
"In time we hate that which we often fear."
-
Few platforms draw the same amount of ire as ASP.NET (or .NET in general) from the development community.
"In time we hate that which we often fear."
Qn-Why I don't like such article? Ans-Because it's contentless.
-
Few platforms draw the same amount of ire as ASP.NET (or .NET in general) from the development community.
"In time we hate that which we often fear."
Kent Sharkey wrote:
"In time we hate that which we often fear."
or don't understand!
New version: WinHeist Version 2.1.0 When you are dead you don't know it, it's only difficult for others. It's the same when you're stupid.
-
Few platforms draw the same amount of ire as ASP.NET (or .NET in general) from the development community.
"In time we hate that which we often fear."
I'ma dyed-in-the-wool ASP.NET developer. I've been using it (and loving it) since 2005. It pays my bills and endless supply of Champagne and caviar. But I do wonder why (it appears, at least) no globally successful sites use it?
How do you know so much about swallows? Well, you have to know these things when you're a king, you know.
-
I'ma dyed-in-the-wool ASP.NET developer. I've been using it (and loving it) since 2005. It pays my bills and endless supply of Champagne and caviar. But I do wonder why (it appears, at least) no globally successful sites use it?
How do you know so much about swallows? Well, you have to know these things when you're a king, you know.
Probably the same reason why no globally successful site uses windows hosting.
-
Probably the same reason why no globally successful site uses windows hosting.
EveryNameIsTakenEvenThisOne wrote:
Probably the same reason why no globally successful site uses windows hosting.
What is the reason for that though? Is it down to cost, reputation, reliability, security, something else? Do you foresee things changing with ASP.NET MVC 6?
How do you know so much about swallows? Well, you have to know these things when you're a king, you know.
-
EveryNameIsTakenEvenThisOne wrote:
Probably the same reason why no globally successful site uses windows hosting.
What is the reason for that though? Is it down to cost, reputation, reliability, security, something else? Do you foresee things changing with ASP.NET MVC 6?
How do you know so much about swallows? Well, you have to know these things when you're a king, you know.
-
EveryNameIsTakenEvenThisOne wrote:
Probably the same reason why no globally successful site uses windows hosting.
What is the reason for that though? Is it down to cost, reputation, reliability, security, something else? Do you foresee things changing with ASP.NET MVC 6?
How do you know so much about swallows? Well, you have to know these things when you're a king, you know.
Yes, I think it's down to cost (massive licensing fees), reputation(If it works, you did not turn it on), reliability(Do I really need to say anything?) and I can't really comment on security as my opinion would be biased a lot :P I don't think that ASP vNext or the next few iterations will change it a lot. They first have to battle the stigma they carry along. Don't get me wrong tough, I'd always use ASP over PHP, I love ASP.NET
-
Yes, I think it's down to cost (massive licensing fees), reputation(If it works, you did not turn it on), reliability(Do I really need to say anything?) and I can't really comment on security as my opinion would be biased a lot :P I don't think that ASP vNext or the next few iterations will change it a lot. They first have to battle the stigma they carry along. Don't get me wrong tough, I'd always use ASP over PHP, I love ASP.NET
I think with cloud services like Azure the cost difference isn't so great. The problems with OpenSSL has shown that Linux and Apple aren't as secure as people like to believe (I'm a big Apple fan, btw). You're probably right about the stigma though - it takes people a long time to move on. It's a shame as ASP.NET MVC is really good these days (the old WebForms way of doing things also probably didn't help establish ASP.NET either). I keep taking a look at other technologies like Ruby on Rails, and occasionally revisiting PHP, but I don't see anything there to tempt me away from ASP.NET.
How do you know so much about swallows? Well, you have to know these things when you're a king, you know.
-
-
I think with cloud services like Azure the cost difference isn't so great. The problems with OpenSSL has shown that Linux and Apple aren't as secure as people like to believe (I'm a big Apple fan, btw). You're probably right about the stigma though - it takes people a long time to move on. It's a shame as ASP.NET MVC is really good these days (the old WebForms way of doing things also probably didn't help establish ASP.NET either). I keep taking a look at other technologies like Ruby on Rails, and occasionally revisiting PHP, but I don't see anything there to tempt me away from ASP.NET.
How do you know so much about swallows? Well, you have to know these things when you're a king, you know.
Security is a subject I rather not talk about because you can never say something is secure. You can secure it but it will never be secure. Talking about security is talking about an abstract idea. PHP, Ruby, Pearl,... nothing could drive me away from ASP.NET. Have you seen the performance of out of the box PHP? It's horrible! I don't get how such a "slow" framework got that much success or better, how does it keep its ranking? Oh yeah, it's free and runs anywhere. It has a lot documentation, everything has been done, resources are available in masses. ASP.NET still lacks some of it.
-
Security is a subject I rather not talk about because you can never say something is secure. You can secure it but it will never be secure. Talking about security is talking about an abstract idea. PHP, Ruby, Pearl,... nothing could drive me away from ASP.NET. Have you seen the performance of out of the box PHP? It's horrible! I don't get how such a "slow" framework got that much success or better, how does it keep its ranking? Oh yeah, it's free and runs anywhere. It has a lot documentation, everything has been done, resources are available in masses. ASP.NET still lacks some of it.
I started web development with PHP - it was okay, certainly better than "classic" ASP. I think that's part of the problem people have with ASP.NET, the "ASP" bit in the name. That plus the WebForms way of doing things. The way ASP.NET MVC is these days, I wouldn't choose anything else, but it's been a long time getting here! :laugh:
How do you know so much about swallows? Well, you have to know these things when you're a king, you know.
-
Qn-Why I don't like such article? Ans-Because it's contentless.
That's supposed to be my flame for clickbait drivel...
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging all things in the balance of reason? Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful? --Zachris Topelius Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies. -- Sarah Hoyt
-
I'ma dyed-in-the-wool ASP.NET developer. I've been using it (and loving it) since 2005. It pays my bills and endless supply of Champagne and caviar. But I do wonder why (it appears, at least) no globally successful sites use it?
How do you know so much about swallows? Well, you have to know these things when you're a king, you know.
There aren't any Facebooks or Twitters running ASP.NET that I'm aware of. But last I recall SO runs a flavor of it, and that gets plenty of traffic (what I'm assuming is your measure of 'globally successful'). There's also the cost of the tools to consider. These huge sites (FB, Twitter, Amazon, et al.) were developed quite some time ago. Long before MS offered any significant tooling free of charge. PHP, Java, JS dev tooling has always been lower cost. You've already discussed hosting costs in another thread, but also remember the timing - Azure is competitive today, but not back when these huge sites went live.
-
There aren't any Facebooks or Twitters running ASP.NET that I'm aware of. But last I recall SO runs a flavor of it, and that gets plenty of traffic (what I'm assuming is your measure of 'globally successful'). There's also the cost of the tools to consider. These huge sites (FB, Twitter, Amazon, et al.) were developed quite some time ago. Long before MS offered any significant tooling free of charge. PHP, Java, JS dev tooling has always been lower cost. You've already discussed hosting costs in another thread, but also remember the timing - Azure is competitive today, but not back when these huge sites went live.
That's a good point about the tools. I think Microsoft missed something when making Visual Studio so expensive. It's a lot better price-wise these days and good to see the Community Edition free of charge. They've probably lost a lot of business in the meantime. I wasn't aware SO runs on ASP.NET, that's cool that there's at least one well known site running on it :)
Vark111 wrote:
Azure is competitive today, but not back when these huge sites went live.
Hopefully given the changes currently going on with ASP.NET we'll see a lot more coming online. Fingers crossed.
How do you know so much about swallows? Well, you have to know these things when you're a king, you know.
-
That's a good point about the tools. I think Microsoft missed something when making Visual Studio so expensive. It's a lot better price-wise these days and good to see the Community Edition free of charge. They've probably lost a lot of business in the meantime. I wasn't aware SO runs on ASP.NET, that's cool that there's at least one well known site running on it :)
Vark111 wrote:
Azure is competitive today, but not back when these huge sites went live.
Hopefully given the changes currently going on with ASP.NET we'll see a lot more coming online. Fingers crossed.
How do you know so much about swallows? Well, you have to know these things when you're a king, you know.
Brent Jenkins wrote:
I wasn't aware SO runs on ASP.NET,
They're quite open about how the sites are built: http://meta.stackexchange.com/a/10370[^] ASP.NET MVC 5, C#, Razor 3, IIS8, SQL 2014. The only real surprise is the data access layer - they still use LINQ to SQL, which fell out of favour with Microsoft in 2008[^].
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer
-
Brent Jenkins wrote:
I wasn't aware SO runs on ASP.NET,
They're quite open about how the sites are built: http://meta.stackexchange.com/a/10370[^] ASP.NET MVC 5, C#, Razor 3, IIS8, SQL 2014. The only real surprise is the data access layer - they still use LINQ to SQL, which fell out of favour with Microsoft in 2008[^].
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer
They're also using Dapper (which I've never heard of before).. I guess maybe they're in the process of switching over from Linq to SQL? https://github.com/StackExchange/dapper-dot-net[^] The stats there on EF are pretty horific compared to the others. It'd be interesting to see the code they used to perform the tests.
How do you know so much about swallows? Well, you have to know these things when you're a king, you know.
-
I'ma dyed-in-the-wool ASP.NET developer. I've been using it (and loving it) since 2005. It pays my bills and endless supply of Champagne and caviar. But I do wonder why (it appears, at least) no globally successful sites use it?
How do you know so much about swallows? Well, you have to know these things when you're a king, you know.
Brent Jenkins wrote:
But I do wonder why (it appears, at least) no globally successful sites use it?
Because it costs money: when you are a startup in your mom's basement and all your money goes on pizza, it's far easier to use LAMP to get your business idea up and running. I have also made a very nice living from the MS stack but it is rarely the first choice of new and underfunded companies because of the perception of cost and open-sourcers deep seated and utterly irrational hatred of MS. OTOH, I recently worked for a startup that did use ASP.Net... and... MySQL!!! Pleased to be away from that steaming pile of free crap. :-)
-
Brent Jenkins wrote:
But I do wonder why (it appears, at least) no globally successful sites use it?
Because it costs money: when you are a startup in your mom's basement and all your money goes on pizza, it's far easier to use LAMP to get your business idea up and running. I have also made a very nice living from the MS stack but it is rarely the first choice of new and underfunded companies because of the perception of cost and open-sourcers deep seated and utterly irrational hatred of MS. OTOH, I recently worked for a startup that did use ASP.Net... and... MySQL!!! Pleased to be away from that steaming pile of free crap. :-)
Karel Čapek wrote:
ASP.Net... and... MySQL
I've seen that.. MySQL used to be good years ago, but it's been terrible since Oracle worked their magic on it :doh:
How do you know so much about swallows? Well, you have to know these things when you're a king, you know.
-
That's a good point about the tools. I think Microsoft missed something when making Visual Studio so expensive. It's a lot better price-wise these days and good to see the Community Edition free of charge. They've probably lost a lot of business in the meantime. I wasn't aware SO runs on ASP.NET, that's cool that there's at least one well known site running on it :)
Vark111 wrote:
Azure is competitive today, but not back when these huge sites went live.
Hopefully given the changes currently going on with ASP.NET we'll see a lot more coming online. Fingers crossed.
How do you know so much about swallows? Well, you have to know these things when you're a king, you know.
