Re: There has to be a better way to develop web applications.

No more alternatives -- just get MS to freakin' pick one and stay with it --
stop re-inventing the wheel every 5 years that does more or less the same
thing. Evolve the tool, stop dumping it and starting from scratch again --
the only message I see there is that MS got lost and their "code re-use"
went out the door -- which isn't exactly a great selling point for their
lastest and great new tools.

But I am waiting for the hard back version of "How Microsoft got lost" --
version 3.1 due out this holiday season ;)

Rob.

"Juan T. Llibre" <nomailreplies@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:emmKVvyhFHA.2852@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Your objections are acknowledged.
>
> What do you suggest as an alternate platform ?
>
>
>
> 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:O%23lgVnyhFHA.2424@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Juan,
>>
>> That is good, but think about what your just pointed out. 97% of the
>> listed languages are used by <2% of the dev community -- flexible yes,
>> but important to RAD (rapid application development), no.
>>
>> I have no problem with "Change", I do have a problem of change for the
>> sake of change OR change to benefit the few but penalizes the majority.
>> I do find it funny you point out a list of supported languages, some VERY
>> archaic that can now be used with .NET. Your sending a confusing
>> message.
>>
>> I don't care that I would need to learn A new language (as in one), but
>> it does me NO good to learned several new languages all of which are
>> simply different syntaxs (or exist to bridge the gap) that are ultimately
>> used to turn concepts into reality. All languages ultimately do the same
>> thing and people argue for days that language X is better than language
>> Y, but the reality is most good developers just want the best tool
>> available that is easiest to translate spec into code into reality -- as
>> a developer, I don't mind learning a new language, just make sure that is
>> it -- businesses can't afford to keep sending developers off to learn the
>> lastest fad language which will go out of "favor" in a few years for the
>> next "fad" language. Sure it maybe a money making scheme for Microsoft,
>> but it doesn't do the business world any good. I mean, I see resumes all
>> the time with a list of 90 languages long and someone is "proud" of that
>> fact -- think about it, it is really a pretty sad state of affairs.
>>
>> Rob.
>>
>> "Juan T. Llibre" <nomailreplies@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>> news:OibOqGyhFHA.2424@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> 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.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Help regarding writing a Source Filter
    ... Well, from a maintenance and supportability standpoint, there could be value ... re-use regularly that would have to be ported & tested in the new language. ... Plus, there will be a learning curve. ...
    (microsoft.public.win32.programmer.directx.video)
  • Re: Overflowing a Long
    ... That is likely true but restricting vb.net to vb6 syntax would have held it back a *huge* amount. ... There was of course a slight learning curve because of the event driven nature of VB5 but nevertheless I felt at home almost straight away and I could convert even the oldest of my previous BASIC programs to VB5 very quickly and with very few problems. ... It's definately less of learning curve to going from a dos language to an event driven language. ...
    (microsoft.public.vb.general.discussion)
  • Re: python vs c#
    ... You have a learning curve for the language, and a learning curve for the ... So learning the system becomes a much bigger task ... when I trace the bug into a subsystem that I have not written. ...
    (comp.lang.python)
  • Re: Text only apps
    ... Python's learning curve is a lot more gentle than perl's. ... Python language has a relatively small and simple grammar, ... Perl, on the other hand, has a much more complicated grammar and seems ... to require a new language primitive for each new piece of functionality. ...
    (uk.comp.os.linux)
  • Re: Any macro for inserting math "normally"
    ... language processing on brain. ... like [Juan loves Patri] instead lispy. ... I have this vague feeling the SVO form was hacked into the ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
Loading