C# Downgrade

[Konstantin Vasserman]

Paul Watson wrote: But right now, right this moment I think we all need to give it, the subject, a break and wait until we have some cold hard data. Yes, but discussions like this one is not about reason. It is about "religion". Every time I read something like this thread I am split between getting pissed off at the comments like "but the real programmers don't use VB" and laughing at how much it all reminds me of "my OS is better than your OS", "my daddy have a better job than your daddy", "my toy is better than your toy". So childish, don't you think? As far as "real programmers" concern: I have written programs in VB, C++, Java, ASP-Scripts, PHP, Perl, C, Pascal, Delphi, Fortran, DBase, Clipper, FoxBase, various Basic(s), Assembly and probably some other languages. Now I am learning C# because I want to understand it, learn what it brings to the table and what its limitations (:)) are. This is how I form my opinion - not by listening to someone's views of what real programmer is or isn't using. If someone wants to call me not a "real programmer" (whatever that is) because I use VB when I see fit - I say f**k them and I go back to my work...

[George]

Jason Gerard wrote: So I'm not a real programmer? From what you are describing you are a real programmer. The trouble is that you just use the wrong tools (VB etc.) and so you are wasting your talent ;)

[Jason Gerard]

You are greatly mistaken in why companies hire web developers. There is the obvious reason for the companies public site. But the more important reason is the companies intranet. All the companies I have ever done work for have an intranet that handles ALL there business needs. The applications do everything from order entry and tracking to payroll, insurance claims, etc. And what's the only difference between a web based intranet app and a native app that does the same thing? The interface, that's it. All the backend servcies are the same. One uses a browser and the other does not. Companies want web based intranets because they don't have to deploy anything. Just use the browser (which is 99.999% always IE). I create the ASP/JSP pages that generate that interface. I also create the back-end components that manipulate that data (COM or EJB's) George wrote: I am simply pointing out that "big company" doesn't buy anything from the people, they make it internally BTW, most companies outsource these projects so they are essentially "buying it from the people" Jason Gerard

[Paul Watson]

Jason Gerard wrote: So I'm not a real programmer? Good post Jason and no, you most definitley are a real programmer. Let the snobs carry on with their fancies while the rest of us use the right tools in the real world. regards, Paul Watson Bluegrass Cape Town, South Africa "The greatest thing you will ever learn is to love, and be loved in return" - Moulin Rouge Martin Marvinski wrote: Unfortunatly Deep Throat isn't my cup of tea Do you Sonork? I do! 100.9903 Stormfront

[Konstantin Vasserman]

Jason Gerard wrote: So I'm not a real programmer? Jason, you are a smart programmer. Let them be the "real programmers" (whatever that is). This is a matter of religion for some of the "real programmers", so don't take it too personally. :)

[Jason Gerard]

Thanks Paul, I was hoping you would give me some back up. :-) Jason Gerard

[Tim Smith]

Real programmers use toggle switches!!!! Tim Smith Descartes Systems Sciences, Inc.

[Paul Watson]

Jason Gerard wrote: George wrote: I am simply pointing out that "big company" doesn't buy anything from the people, they make it internally BTW, most companies outsource these projects so they are essentially "buying it from the people" Don't forget products like SharePoint Portal Server from MS. Actually a rather good product. lol I get the thick end of the stick in most cases as I do web development AND I used to do VB. To "real programmers" none of that is actually development. What a crock of... regards, Paul Watson Bluegrass Cape Town, South Africa "The greatest thing you will ever learn is to love, and be loved in return" - Moulin Rouge Martin Marvinski wrote: Unfortunatly Deep Throat isn't my cup of tea Do you Sonork? I do! 100.9903 Stormfront

[Paul Watson]

Konstantin Vasserman wrote: Yes, but discussions like this one is not about reason. It is about "religion". Well I am a bit sick of the whole religious standpoint some take. It gets a bit much when all you want to do is get your job done. Konstantin Vasserman wrote: If someone wants to call me not a "real programmer" (whatever that is) because I use VB when I see fit - I say f**k them and I go back to my work... Well said. We get back to work while they can carry on bleating from the top of the little mountain they have created for themselves. regards, Paul Watson Bluegrass Cape Town, South Africa "The greatest thing you will ever learn is to love, and be loved in return" - Moulin Rouge Martin Marvinski wrote: Unfortunatly Deep Throat isn't my cup of tea Do you Sonork? I do! 100.9903 Stormfront

[Paul Watson]

Tim Smith wrote: Real programmers use toggle switches!!!! Oh yeah? Well so does a Sopwith Camel! :laugh: Nice defuser Tim! regards, Paul Watson Bluegrass Cape Town, South Africa "The greatest thing you will ever learn is to love, and be loved in return" - Moulin Rouge Martin Marvinski wrote: Unfortunatly Deep Throat isn't my cup of tea Do you Sonork? I do! 100.9903 Stormfront

[George]

Jason Gerard wrote: And what's the only difference between a web based intranet app and a native app that does the same thing? The interface, that's it. All the backend servcies are the same. One uses a browser and the other does not. You are totally right. The one that uses browser suck while the native one rocks. Poor experience of the web-based interface doesn't hold a candle against the native app in the way it co-operates with user. Of course you will try to make it better for the users, ultimately endig up in imitating the native app interface in the browser. That is not trivial and takes more time than you would want to. Eventually you end up doing ActiveX that can do it right, but then you loose the advantage of "not having to deploy anything" since you will have to deploy componets. With time you will also discover that things work differently on different browsers, even with using IE only you will begin to verify the version numbers with greater precision than a PI. You will also learn that IE is a very fragile host and will have to search for work-arounds when facing lots of little troubles that can't be solved because you decided to use the browser which code you can't control... Jason Gerard wrote: BTW, most companies outsource these projects so they are essentially "buying it from the people" I am talking about big ones, not the most-ones.

[Paul Watson]

George wrote: don't see where is the development involved into making a website. Everybody and their dog can make a website now, just use HTML and Front Page, it will not even take a week and will cost you only as much a MS Office set. As you said, the point is content and HTML is all it takes to have it. No room for C# and no room for development... Oh boy, now I am pissed... So you are saying that Amazon.com, MSDN.Microsoft.com and CodeProject.com are a bunch of pages put together in a week using Microsoft Word and FrontPage? You ignorant button pusher... Aaarrgghhh! :) George, your mind will boggle at what it takes to put together a dynamic web-application. I have seen websites which actually run on C++ built components. They pull in data from literally hundres of legacy systems. They communicate with factories half way around the world which pick and pack what you chose to buy. They interact with banks to make your purchase happen, and banks are notoriously "old school" technology based. I have seen intranets which keep thirteen different world wide offices systems in parralel, serving up literally gigabytes of documents, email, memos, graphs, statistics and video conferences. They serve this to everything from a Palm Handheld to a WAP phone to a desktop PC to a wall mounted projector. My, my George, I never knew FrontPage and Microsoft Word could do all that, I shall give it a bash... I think even mild mannered Chris would go into apopoplexy if you said "Hey, did you make CP in Word and FrontPage?" regards, Paul Watson Bluegrass Cape Town, South Africa "The greatest thing you will ever learn is to love, and be loved in return" - Moulin Rouge Martin Marvinski wrote: Unfortunatly Deep Throat isn't my cup of tea Do you Sonork? I do! 100.9903 Stormfront

[Vivek Rajan]

Stan Shannon wrote: THe *real* problem with languages like VB and C# is the mindset which they engender in people who are making financial decisions related to the development process. These people are made to believe that a complex application can be made simple by using a simple language to design it, thus reducing the time it takes to create the app. Excellent - Stan !! I *knew* that was one of the side-effects of C#, VB, and Java - but I hv never been able to put it in words like you. I had a manager pick Java for a high complexity network management software. His reasoning seemed to be, "Hey! this problem is so complex, maybe it will become simpler by using a simple language". In the end, he (and the rest of his team) realised that the complexities of the problem are not going away. In fact, the problem had become that much more complex because we were using the wrong tool !! Stan Shannon wrote: in people who are making financial decisions related to the development process. Unfortunately, this mindset is seeping through to some lead developers and architects as well. Later- Vivek

[George]

Paul Watson wrote: So you are saying that Amazon.com, MSDN.Microsoft.com and CodeProject.com are a bunch of pages put together in a week using Microsoft Word and FrontPage? Would you mind to read the whole story and not just the last post? If you do you will discover that my point is that anything that takes a week to make and is a webpage is not a development. Amazon, MSDN and CP are not made in a week, so the whole rest of your post is off topic and I'm not even reading it... ;P

[Paul Watson]

George wrote: Would you mind to read the whole story and not just the last post? If you do you will discover that my point is that anything that takes a week to make and is a webpage is not a development. Amazon, MSDN and CP are not made in a week, so the whole rest of your post is off topic and I'm not even reading it... Heh, sorry George. I was a bit of an ass hole and idiot in my reply to you. BUT I used it as an excuse to let a bit of steam off over how "real programmers" treat us web developers. p.s. I made a small content management system using ASP, JavaScript, SQL, XML, XSL and of course HTML in about a week. It lets me edit my site content, add new pages and upload and insert new images. It was not elegant coding (except the XML/XSL bit which is really cool) but it works and it does it's job. Now I hate to think anyone would think that it is not a developed piece of code. :) regards, Paul Watson Bluegrass Cape Town, South Africa "The greatest thing you will ever learn is to love, and be loved in return" - Moulin Rouge Martin Marvinski wrote: Unfortunatly Deep Throat isn't my cup of tea Do you Sonork? I do! 100.9903 Stormfront

[George]

Paul Watson wrote: BUT I used it as an excuse to let a bit of steam off over how "real programmers" treat us web developers. I don't have any "special treatment" against web developers, but I am feeling a little bit sorry when I hear things like "I have to ge where the marker goes", or "my costumer wants me to use that or that technology". I prefer to choose my ways myself instead of being pushed around by any changes in the current hype. *I* choose the technology and language I want to work with, then I find the company that uses it and I work for them. Web developers seem to much more slaved by the market... Paul Watson wrote: Now I hate to think anyone would think that it is not a developed piece of code. A small piece of advice: relax! ;)

[Reno Tiko]

Vivek Rajan wrote: I had a manager pick Java for a high complexity network management software. His reasoning seemed to be, "Hey! this problem is so complex, maybe it will become simpler by using a simple language". In the end, he (and the rest of his team) realised that the complexities of the problem are not going away. In fact, the problem had become that much more complex because we were using the wrong tool !! C# is by far from a simple language. It's still a complex beast, but just not as obfuscated as C++. When tackling a complex problem such as a network managent solution, you'll want to borrow as much infrastructure code as possible to avoid writing the plumbing code. The plumbing code is usually already written and tested for you in languages such as Java and C#, so you don't have to worry about low level stuff and writing your own code to handle SOAP, SNMP, etc. Why write something when somebody else has written it already for you? But if there's a particular problem that hasn't yet been solved by any available package yet, then I concur that any choice of language won't make the problem go away; however it may make the problem less difficult to solve.

[Vivek Rajan]

Reno Tiko wrote: The plumbing code is usually already written and tested for you in languages such as Java and C#, so you don't have to worry about low level stuff and writing your own code to handle SOAP, SNMP, etc. Why write something when somebody else has written it already for you? Yeah, I agree plumbing code must be avoided. However, a balance has to be struck to avoid over-reliance on 3rd party frameworks. Unfortunately, the more you rely on pre-built plumbing products and frameworks (such as openview, dorado, etc), the more difficult it will be to add value. We needed a product to handle 1000-snmp traps per second, and updating a fault management display within 1 second of the fault happening. Java did not cut it - either in handling the trap volume or updating the GUI. I am afraid neither will C# (I have been testing the beta). So, some problems do call for getting ur hands dirty with C++. So, what Stan said is still a widespread misconception : A problem cant be made simpler by using a simple language. Using prebuilt libraries and/or frameworks is an orthogonal issue (topic for another discussion). Later- Vivek

[Nish Nishant]

****Christian Graus wrote: So you regard C# as useful as a source of entertainment ? To me, it was just that. I found it a fun language which I could learn, but not actually put to use :-) Nish Sonork ID 100.9786 voidmain www.busterboy.org If you don't find me on CP, I'll be at Bob's HungOut

[Nish Nishant]

Paul Watson wrote: you most definitley are a real programmer BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO LOL Nish Sonork ID 100.9786 voidmain www.busterboy.org If you don't find me on CP, I'll be at Bob's HungOut