Re: There has to be a better way to develop web applications.
- From: "Juan T. Llibre" <nomailreplies@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 16:38:48 -0400
re:
> if you elect to use .NET Framework and ASP.NET your bound to MS server OS.
Rob, take a look at :
http://www.dotnetpowered.com/languages.aspx
for a list of the languages/OS's which you can use with .Net.
You may have to reconsider your statement
quoted above after you see that page.
Sure, the learning curve is steep, but it's no more
steep than any other web platform's learning curve.
Progress demands fast change.
Complaining about the pace of change won't get you anywhere,
except to the place where archaic stuff is archived.
In any case, what do you suggest as an alternative ?
Juan T. Llibre
ASP.NET MVP
http://asp.net.do/foros/
Foros de ASP.NET en Español
Ven, y hablemos de ASP.NET...
======================
"Rob R. Ainscough" <robains@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:uwEe2LxhFHA.328@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>I realize I'm learning web development and there is a STEEP learning curve, but so far
>I've had to learn:
>
> HTML
> XML
> JavaScript
> ASP.NET using VB.NET
> .NET Framework
> ADO.NET
> SSL
> FormAuthentication
> (and probably a few more things)
>
> Now call me crazy, but this hog pog of languages & technologies is ridiculous!! The
> simplest of tasks become major R&D efforts (setting the enable state of a control on
> another ASPX page in a frame for example). And XML, OMG that has got to be the most
> ineffecient way to write out data I've ever seen -- the overhead is staggering!! So far
> the research I've seen are "frames are evil" -- great so freakin' helpful. This is just
> crazy, if the development community has to continue on in this bizarre environment of
> languages and technology, then web application development is never going to mature and
> become cost effective for companies to exploit.
>
> This is NOT an efficient way to get work done -- just the cost to get developers up to
> speed on all the technology can doom a project from the start. The pipe dream of using
> ASP.NET with VB.NET and .NET framework ONLY for web development is just that -- a pipe
> dream, for only the simplest of applications could anyone get away with just those three
> technology/tools.
>
> I just don't understand -- terms such as portability get tossed around, but the bottom
> line is, if you elect to use .NET Framework and ASP.NET your bound to MS server OS.
> And, if this is all done in the name of "portability" (at the cost of performance) how
> often are you folks moving servers around and changing platforms?? If platforms are
> changing that frequently, that begs the question why?! It's like building something for
> 5% that may need it while the majority don't -- so the majority have to take the
> penalty. There has got to be a better way?
>
> Rob.
>
>
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: There has to be a better way to develop web applications.
- From: Rob R. Ainscough
- Re: There has to be a better way to develop web applications.
- References:
- There has to be a better way to develop web applications.
- From: Rob R. Ainscough
- There has to be a better way to develop web applications.
- Prev by Date: Disable Visual studios offline cache?
- Next by Date: Re: Does it really matter?
- Previous by thread: Re: There has to be a better way to develop web applications.
- Next by thread: Re: There has to be a better way to develop web applications.
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading
