Re: In need of .NET advocacy
- From: "Nick Malik [Microsoft]" <nickmalik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 21:35:47 -0800
Hello Alex,
>> You can get public numbers from http://www.spr.com
> I could not find public data on cpr.com, only reports for sale.
I said "public". I didn't say "free."
>> The reasons "why" vary from person to person, mostly because each person
>> finds a different reason for the productivity gains of .Net. Besides,
>> why
>> do you care? If its more productive, its more productive.
> I care because I have been asked these questions when I tried to
> informally broach the subject to some decision makers.
> I've been told that we would have to (a) purchase new tools and (b)
> re-train our developers, both of which costs.
> We are not exactly swimming in money so unless I can demonstrate good ROI
> in the short-to-medium term, I am not going to have a sympathetic
> audience.
You will not get a demonstration from a newsgroup. You will get one from a
demonstration. Have some of the devs write a simple app in C#. Let them
tell you. Better yet, contact the local sales office of MS and have someone
come over and speak with the execs. Walking in to a meeting with an expert
by your side can really help.
>
>> I thought you were pulling this stuff together for managers and
>> executives.
>> Now I'm beginning to wonder.
>> Is Cor right?
> Cor is free to think and say whatever he (or she) wishes. I am free to
> ignore him (or her).
> Your sig notwithstanding, you still work for Microsoft. When a person
> asks for help in nudging his company towards a platform that YOUR EMPLOYER
> develops, markets and advocates, making allegations about this person's
> motives is not your best course of action.
> I thank you for your help so far but I can do without the veiled insults.
No insult intended.
> 5) Framework.
>
> >>Can anyone comment what parts of the framework proved to be "lifesavers"
> >>compared to the "old way"?<<
>> Are you familiar with Design Patterns?
>Since before they were called that.
>They are usually solutions to problems that only arise in a specific
>context.
>A bunch of "classic" design patters are unneccessary in, say, LISP or
>Smalltalk.
Your response answered my question, but I don't agree with your implicit
conclusion: that you understood what I meant. I suggest that you read up...
your reply was not indicative of someone who is up to date on OO Design
Patterns.
> I am not familar with the intricacies of the framework. My frirst
> exposure to .NET was less than a month ago and it is still on a part-time
> basis.
> Some examples where the framework simplifies the developer's job would be
> appreciated.
Not the kind of question that can be reasonably answered in a newsgroup. To
get this level of detail, contact your local MS district office and sign up
for one of the many public talks that are provided, or have a pre-sales
engineer visit your site. They will be much better able to answer detailed
questions like this.
> > 6) RAD features.
> > >>MFC had them, no?<<
> > You are kidding, right?
> I never spent much time with MFC (I dislike it) and not yet a lot of time
> with the framework.
Another responder did a fine job of answering this already. Basically MFC
is a fine library but isn't RAD in any real sense. Each control had to be
learned seperately from the other, and features that you would expect for OO
systems, like development to interfaces, was sorely lacking. That has been
fixed in the framework, allowing a great deal of flexibility in the way that
the framework can be used and extended.
> 7) Programmer availability.
>
>> >>I guess that if a lot of VB6 coders are "forced" to switch to VB.NET
>> >>then
>> >>the market of .NET developers will get a big boost.<<
>> Now, you are being prejudiced. I know many excellent programmers in the
>> VB
>> ranks, and some pretty lousy ones in the C++ ranks.
> Not much disagreement from me here. I have seen (and had to maintain) C++
> code that still makes me shake my head in amazement.
> However, you cannot deny that since VB 6 is very easy to pick up, there
> are a lot of people using it who lack the fundamentals of computer science
> and
> software engineering.
agreed.
>> Also, _your_ projects will have
>> average developers on them, if not now, then later during maintenance.
>> This
>> is a fact of life. Average developers outnumber top developers about 20
>> to
>> 1 in my experience.
> Again, I agree completely and my statement was meant as an endorsement of
> .NET rather than a critique.
> This is exactly what can persuade a manager: An average .NET developer
> will cost the company less that a top C++ developer would, even taking
> talent and > knowledge differences into account. An average C++ developer
> on the other hand would probably not.
Hey... two points of agreement in a row!
Seriously, you would be surprised how helpful the folks at your local
district office can be. Assuming you are in the US:
http://www.microsoft.com/mscorp/info/usaoffices/default.mspx
--
--- Nick Malik [Microsoft]
MCSD, CFPS, Certified Scrummaster
http://blogs.msdn.com/nickmalik
Disclaimer: Opinions expressed in this forum are my own, and not
representative of my employer.
I do not answer questions on behalf of my employer. I'm just a
programmer helping programmers.
--
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: In need of .NET advocacy
- From: Alex
- Re: In need of .NET advocacy
- From: Cor Ligthert
- Re: In need of .NET advocacy
- References:
- Re: In need of .NET advocacy
- From: Alex
- Re: In need of .NET advocacy
- From: Nick Malik [Microsoft]
- Re: In need of .NET advocacy
- From: Alex
- Re: In need of .NET advocacy
- Prev by Date: Re: Abstract Classes vs Interfaces
- Next by Date: RE: Design question about real time polling.
- Previous by thread: Re: In need of .NET advocacy
- Next by thread: Re: In need of .NET advocacy
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
