web development takes too long
-
it always comes down to trial and error. make a thing, try a thing, go back and *remake* the thing because DHTML and CSS are funny in a sad kind of way - like an old married couple that hates each other but won't divorce. is there a better way to do it? I mean other than schlepping it off onto someone else, which is my first choice. :laugh: is there some magic to web development that makes it not suck?
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
The zenith of web development ease was reached with ASP.NET's WebForms. Though the internals were constantly being refined, in 2010 ao decision was made somewhere to promote the MVC paradigm of development. Everyone got on the band wagon and the rest is history. The result is the mess of tools, tool kits, JavaScript frameworks, JavaScript, and a lots of other technologies people now have to contend with simply to develop web applications. People should learn to leave well enough alone and stop complaining about every technical idiosyncrasy they come across. WebForms was surely not a perfect environment but to date there has been nothing better to compete with it in terms of ease of use and just getting the job done.... WebForms is still available so maybe it would be a good idea to return to them and drop the rest of the crap that has been promoted in the past 9 years...
Steve Naidamast Sr. Software Engineer Black Falcon Software, Inc. blackfalconsoftware@ix.outlook.com
-
The zenith of web development ease was reached with ASP.NET's WebForms. Though the internals were constantly being refined, in 2010 ao decision was made somewhere to promote the MVC paradigm of development. Everyone got on the band wagon and the rest is history. The result is the mess of tools, tool kits, JavaScript frameworks, JavaScript, and a lots of other technologies people now have to contend with simply to develop web applications. People should learn to leave well enough alone and stop complaining about every technical idiosyncrasy they come across. WebForms was surely not a perfect environment but to date there has been nothing better to compete with it in terms of ease of use and just getting the job done.... WebForms is still available so maybe it would be a good idea to return to them and drop the rest of the crap that has been promoted in the past 9 years...
Steve Naidamast Sr. Software Engineer Black Falcon Software, Inc. blackfalconsoftware@ix.outlook.com
I tend to agree, but then I've never liked MVC and I find it heavy handed. Usually I just develop UI apps as kind of last mile glue, and all the important stuff is wrapped up in nice class based apis the the UI calls. I don't care about separating content and layout and control in such an environment, although I'll concede that the web with its myriad of devices make it somewhat useful, but it's still a lot of churn to build and maintain. MVC is useful if you're building something like Visual Studio or MS Word. With UIs being glue I just tie whatever i need to work together, factor only as much as I have to, or as much comes naturally, and make my class libraries do all the heavy lifting. No need for MVC. No need for huge UI frameworks. Just give me what i need. WebForms was good at that. Its abstractions were clunky in the beginning sometimes (postback initially not working on all browsers in ASP.NET 1, etc) but they're generally just enough to be useful without being impositional. I really liked it. HTML layout was still a pain. But then CSS is CSS and it's cranky about layouts, especially doing single screen layouts that don't scroll and require fixed heights. I just get frustrated with it.
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
-
Angular lost me years ago when they promised a new major version every 6 months.
"Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by stupidity." - Hanlon's Razor
Nathan Minier wrote:
Angular lost me years ago
I doubt Angular has recovered from the loss :wtf:
«Where is the Life we have lost in living? Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge? Where is the knowledge we have lost in information?» T. S. Elliot
-
Nathan Minier wrote:
Angular lost me years ago
I doubt Angular has recovered from the loss :wtf:
«Where is the Life we have lost in living? Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge? Where is the knowledge we have lost in information?» T. S. Elliot
Wow. Have another, guv'na! So you're the guy that likes the idea of new major versions of libraries every 6 months? Never would have guessed that.
"Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by stupidity." - Hanlon's Razor
-
I tend to agree, but then I've never liked MVC and I find it heavy handed. Usually I just develop UI apps as kind of last mile glue, and all the important stuff is wrapped up in nice class based apis the the UI calls. I don't care about separating content and layout and control in such an environment, although I'll concede that the web with its myriad of devices make it somewhat useful, but it's still a lot of churn to build and maintain. MVC is useful if you're building something like Visual Studio or MS Word. With UIs being glue I just tie whatever i need to work together, factor only as much as I have to, or as much comes naturally, and make my class libraries do all the heavy lifting. No need for MVC. No need for huge UI frameworks. Just give me what i need. WebForms was good at that. Its abstractions were clunky in the beginning sometimes (postback initially not working on all browsers in ASP.NET 1, etc) but they're generally just enough to be useful without being impositional. I really liked it. HTML layout was still a pain. But then CSS is CSS and it's cranky about layouts, especially doing single screen layouts that don't scroll and require fixed heights. I just get frustrated with it.
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
I always found WebForms to be far superior to all of the MVC nonsense. True, they had their own complexities but they were all manageable within its development environment. When the migration to MVC began I started considering retiring and 4 years later I did so. The entire case for MVC and Agile and everything else that surrounded MVC just made no sense to me. Who really cares about the edges in performance, which over the larger scheme of things really wasn't all that impressive, when compared to the ease of development that webForms provided? The entire profession took a very bad turn in 2010 and it has been paying the price since...
Steve Naidamast Sr. Software Engineer Black Falcon Software, Inc. blackfalconsoftware@outlook.com
-
I always found WebForms to be far superior to all of the MVC nonsense. True, they had their own complexities but they were all manageable within its development environment. When the migration to MVC began I started considering retiring and 4 years later I did so. The entire case for MVC and Agile and everything else that surrounded MVC just made no sense to me. Who really cares about the edges in performance, which over the larger scheme of things really wasn't all that impressive, when compared to the ease of development that webForms provided? The entire profession took a very bad turn in 2010 and it has been paying the price since...
Steve Naidamast Sr. Software Engineer Black Falcon Software, Inc. blackfalconsoftware@outlook.com
I agree. MVC is too much baggage for most apps, in terms of development lifecycle and maintenance and it doesn't have a compelling advantage to WebForms unless you're writing something like Office or Visual Studio, or maybe Outlook web or something seriously complex in terms of the UI. The only thing about it that makes sense for the web is separation of presentation, data, and control that's kind of nice, but again, it's not necessary for so many apps.
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
-
I agree. MVC is too much baggage for most apps, in terms of development lifecycle and maintenance and it doesn't have a compelling advantage to WebForms unless you're writing something like Office or Visual Studio, or maybe Outlook web or something seriously complex in terms of the UI. The only thing about it that makes sense for the web is separation of presentation, data, and control that's kind of nice, but again, it's not necessary for so many apps.
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
What is very interesting was that up until some point last year, one of Microsoft's web pages devoted to MVC on their web site actually discouraged its use for database intensive applications as its primary advantage was in basic, content web sites. When I went back to find the statement as a result of an online discussion I was having with someone at the time, it had mysteriously disappeared...
Steve Naidamast Sr. Software Engineer Black Falcon Software, Inc. blackfalconsoftware@outlook.com
-
What is very interesting was that up until some point last year, one of Microsoft's web pages devoted to MVC on their web site actually discouraged its use for database intensive applications as its primary advantage was in basic, content web sites. When I went back to find the statement as a result of an online discussion I was having with someone at the time, it had mysteriously disappeared...
Steve Naidamast Sr. Software Engineer Black Falcon Software, Inc. blackfalconsoftware@outlook.com
That seems odd to me but then I come at MVC from a desktop UI background and most of what I know about MVC comes from that perspective. I can't imagine it's much different for web dev though. MVC complicates things
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
-
That seems odd to me but then I come at MVC from a desktop UI background and most of what I know about MVC comes from that perspective. I can't imagine it's much different for web dev though. MVC complicates things
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
You are one of the very few professionals, I have discussed this topic with that agrees with my perspectives. Leave it to a young lady to have a superior intelligence to most of our male colleagues... :) In any event, I came out of the DBASE world of the 1980s and early 1990s. I worked with just about every single DBASE variant available with the exception of one. Developing database applications with these environments was quite easy and enjoyable. The Emerald Bay version of this environment was the best of them all. It was fast, had a very unique database system that was relatively close to the standard DBF file system and came with a complete client-server implementation right out of the box. I was able to set up a server on my own workstation and then access it from any workstation in my division at the time. Yet, I couldn't convince anyone to consider the system for future development as it was not moving in a SQL Language direction. I spoke with one of the developers of the system at Emerald Bay back then and they believed that SQL was inefficient and wasn't worth the effort to develop a layer for their database system. This single decision destroyed the company very quickly as they entire database world at that time was moving to the SQL Language in one way or another...
Steve Naidamast Sr. Software Engineer Black Falcon Software, Inc. blackfalconsoftware@outlook.com
-
You are one of the very few professionals, I have discussed this topic with that agrees with my perspectives. Leave it to a young lady to have a superior intelligence to most of our male colleagues... :) In any event, I came out of the DBASE world of the 1980s and early 1990s. I worked with just about every single DBASE variant available with the exception of one. Developing database applications with these environments was quite easy and enjoyable. The Emerald Bay version of this environment was the best of them all. It was fast, had a very unique database system that was relatively close to the standard DBF file system and came with a complete client-server implementation right out of the box. I was able to set up a server on my own workstation and then access it from any workstation in my division at the time. Yet, I couldn't convince anyone to consider the system for future development as it was not moving in a SQL Language direction. I spoke with one of the developers of the system at Emerald Bay back then and they believed that SQL was inefficient and wasn't worth the effort to develop a layer for their database system. This single decision destroyed the company very quickly as they entire database world at that time was moving to the SQL Language in one way or another...
Steve Naidamast Sr. Software Engineer Black Falcon Software, Inc. blackfalconsoftware@outlook.com
I think that's sort of sad considering that several years later lots of people moved away from SQL to "nosql" databases. For the record I'm male, I do get mistaken for a woman a lot, both online and off, so no worries. I'm just genderweird. I'm not that young either - i put a teenager through college. He's grown now. :laugh:
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.