Topic: C#/ASP.NET

[ober]

I'm just stating to learn more about these two languages, and I'm really questioning whether I want to learn them or not.  ASP.NET seems like an EXTREMELY bloated language.  I was reading through a book in Borders the other day and it just seemed like I could do the same thing in PHP and plain HTML and do it faster, lighter, and more efficiently.

ASP.NET seems like an extension to VB, IMO.  And I know that you can use VB apps with ASP.NET, but why?  Why not use one language that can do both?  And C# didn't look that much better either.

I just don't get it, but maybe I haven't read enough.  Anyone else have any opinions on this?

[ahluka]

I personally despise the .NET Framework. It's bloated, slow (both development and execution) and really 'unclean'. Yeah so I just re-wrote what you said, but it's the straight truth (IMO).

When developing under Windows I stick to Visual C++ 6 for everything. Almost. I occasionally use VB6 for a quick GUI, but then I could do that same with Qt or wxWidgets - whatever's at my disposal.

Of course everything .NET related is (apparently) easier to learn for newbie programmers, but it hardly encourages 'real world' concepts like tight, clean and efficient code.

Again this is all IMO (I've been bitched at before about this )

[Bassy]

i actually love .Net - however, whilst vb.net is able to be used by people who just pick it up and use it for the first time like vb, proper vb.net programmers will write more efficient and reuseable code etc. I actually know very very few large companies in the UK using PHP on a commercial level (in fact i dont think i can name one currently)- most use asp, asp.net and some java (though there are sooo many more jobs for .net than java). Also remember that most companies will look at the development of a project with a TCO slant.

[ober]

TCO = total cost of ownership?

That discourages me then.  From what I've seen, I don't like ASP.NET (never really dealt with pre-.NET asp).  I could see myself using C#, but I still don't like the ASP front end.

And I really don't know why PHP isn't catching on more.  It is sooo powerful and much cleaner IMO for doing the simple tasks, and AFAIK, you can still tie into more powerful backend stuff written in C# or Java or whatever if you don't want to use PHP for the backend as well.

*sigh*... I see myself being forced into the ASP camp to find future work, however.  I may have to pick up the pace on my side-reading.

[ahluka]

Don't mention TCO in my presence! (If it's the TCO I think it is).
TCO in front of a Linux user is like mentioning the clap in a red light district.

[ahluka]

TCO = total cost of ownership?

That discourages me then.  From what I've seen, I don't like ASP.NET (never really dealt with pre-.NET asp).  I could see myself using C#, but I still don't like the ASP front end.

And I really don't know why PHP isn't catching on more.  It is sooo powerful and much cleaner IMO for doing the simple tasks, and AFAIK, you can still tie into more powerful backend stuff written in C# or Java or whatever if you don't want to use PHP for the backend as well.

*sigh*... I see myself being forced into the ASP camp to find future work, however.  I may have to pick up the pace on my side-reading.

I think it's amusing how companies tend to sway towards things like .NET ASP when the common oppinion on them is negative.

[ygfperson]

Don't mention TCO in my presence! (If it's the TCO I think it is).
TCO in front of a Linux user is like mentioning the clap in a red light district.

You're thinking of SCO

[ahluka]

You're thinking of SCO

I thought these Linux / Windows arguments were about TCO? Obviously I don't mean ALL of the arguments.

[Bassy]

TCO - total cost of ownership - that doesnt just include how much the software costs but all the other costs of a project and supporting it afterwards. So you'd include hardware and software needed, support and training for helpdesk staff, the person who looks after your code after you etc etc etc - its not an argument between linux and windows but is something that is used continuously (eg what IT direction a company will go in - its okay for example to get lots of free OS's but who is going to support them, how much extra training would staff need, what happens if there is an issue the staff cant handle - who would they escalate to etc)

[ober]

Ahh... another good point.  No stupid OS requirement for PHP to run on.

I'm probably going to end up learning the stupid language (not that it'll be that much of a stretch from what I already know), but I'm sticking to my PHP guns.

[ahluka]

TCO - total cost of ownership - that doesnt just include how much the software costs but all the other costs of a project and supporting it afterwards. So you'd include hardware and software needed, support and training for helpdesk staff, the person who looks after your code after you etc etc etc - its not an argument between linux and windows but is something that is used continuously (eg what IT direction a company will go in - its okay for example to get lots of free OS's but who is going to support them, how much extra training would staff need, what happens if there is an issue the staff cant handle - who would they escalate to etc)

I see. I still hate Windows. And .NET *oppinions*

*edit*

Well I can't completely hate Windows because I kinda need it for playing games...

[webwhy]

ahhh...why are these types of discussions so alluring?

I don't have ANY experience with ASP.NET, but we do have a ASP.NET/C# developer in our office.  He's also a php programmer, but his heart isn't in it.

From my discussions with him, I have concluded that it is a very capable platform..  And you should consider learning it if you work requires you to build significant web applications.  It should be compared to java more so to php IMHO...

Here's why I will never use it.  There is absolutely no choice in the microsoft web stack.  Everyone of the "super" cool features are tightly coupled with other microsoft software products.  This strategy complete turns me off.

I code in php and java.  Both give me complete freedom to use the best tools for the job.  I can choose Spring for my framework, Hibernate for my persistance layer, deploy to Jboss or Websphere running on linux or AIX or solaris....even windows if i'm off my rocker...There are loads of vendors that supply libraries so i can shop for i like the most and for the best deal.  That type of freedom is important to me, and I know i can deploy my product on any infrastructure that supports php or a JVM.  I don't have to tell my clients...you're going to have to run Windows with IIS.  I've always thought of it as a selling feature when you're dealing with clients that understand technology.  

I can't say...ya know i could do some really cool stuff if you guys ported all of you data over to MS SQL Server...oh yeah.  that AIX machine....that will have to be replaced by an INTEL machine running windows 2003. hmmm...your cold fusion website...i can't work with that either...we'll have to rebuild it in ASP.NET.  oh...you web servers run on red hat?  well...we need windows licences for all those too..

In fact in my discussions with clients and their IT staff, I think more companies in the US are standardizing on J2EE than .NET.  Especially those that do business on top of DB2 and/or Oracle, and have already invested heavily in expensive software that runs or major big iron.  J2EE is a standard developed under the JCP (java community process).  That's comforting to a business.  No one company has them by the balls.  The majority of them feel like .NET (or php) wasn't even an option.  That's just my experience though...it's hardly scientific.

ON the filp side if you ask or ASP.NET developer this lack of choice is a feature of .NET.  The java landscape was too overwhelming for him, which i totaly understand.  

php is great.  It's far from perfect, but it's our utility knife.  There are quite a bit of large companies in the US hiring php developers.  Yahoo! being the largest right off hand.  My company has built several systems with php/mysql for large and midsize food companies and advertising agencies although major components are being moved to java in the upcoming releases.  

php in large "enterprise" projects can get messy fast because it's so easy to do so.  ASP.NET (from what i've heard) and java frameworks like struts and spring make it much easier for code maintenance to scale, which is extremely important as was pointed out.  PHP sucks for this as one undiciplined developer can make future development next to impossible on a budget.  There are several frameworks i have yet to try that may make this problem less significant such as Mojavi and Prado.  

That's why ruby on rails is so interesting to me.  It has the framework, and it's fast to develop in like php.  Best of both worlds...maybe

[ahluka]

Ruby on rails? What's that?
I've used Ruby a little bit before (I even own the "pickaxe book") and it's certainly very capable.

[webwhy]

http://www.rubyonrails.org

it's a web framework for ruby