Preferred Web Framework

[BFD]

Feb 26, 2013 18:22:32 GMT -8 Jordan said:

Ha, yeah, I forgot to mention it in my first post for some reason. If your company can afford Microsoft then I think it is a great route simply because their tool chain is awesome. When it comes to development, Microsoft delivers, but they are so dang expensive.

Too expensive? Really? I can see where $500 or $1100 may seem like a lot when compared to open source, but for a professional development company, it is a drop in the bucket compared to what it takes to house, equip and pay good programmers and system architects. If I were a customer and considering a developer that used open source tools simply because they were free, I would be very, very suspicious. Then again, I am a bit touchy on this as I have seen the damage done by "kitchen table" programmers many, many times, both as the rescuer and having lost customers to cut rate developers who eventually botched the project.

I don't see Silverlight dying as a surprise. Flash has always dominated, and even it is dying which can be seen from its complete withdrawal from the mobile industry, and the fact that HTML5 should make it obsolete eventually.

And it's never too late to try out new languages; there's a lot of really cool stuff out there now.

I will admit, I have never developed anything in Flash so I don't know it's capabilities, but I never really saw Silverlight as a Flash competitior - it is an application development platform with the .net framework behind it. And I am more disappointed than surprised. It has a lot of potential. Hopefully HTML5 delivers.

[Jordan]

Feb 27, 2013 8:49:29 GMT -8 BFD said:

Feb 26, 2013 18:22:32 GMT -8 Jordan said:

Ha, yeah, I forgot to mention it in my first post for some reason. If your company can afford Microsoft then I think it is a great route simply because their tool chain is awesome. When it comes to development, Microsoft delivers, but they are so dang expensive.

Too expensive? Really? I can see where $500 or $1100 may seem like a lot when compared to open source, but for a professional development company, it is a drop in the bucket compared to what it takes to house, equip and pay good programmers and system architects. If I were a customer and considering a developer that used open source tools simply because they were free, I would be very, very suspicious. Then again, I am a bit touchy on this as I have seen the damage done by "kitchen table" programmers many, many times, both as the rescuer and having lost customers to cut rate developers who eventually botched the project.

Well where I worked they were annoyed by the licenses per person just for Visual Studio haha, and it was a very large company. Maybe that particular department within the company was low on cash, I'm not sure. I think it really depends on what you are developing, because in some cases Microsoft is not the solution and open source tools and frameworks would be better. The company I was working for was almost pure Java, and didn't have that many projects written with .NET. I also know a lot of really good Microsoft tools such as their cloud service can be crazy expensive, but it really all depends on what you need to accomplish.

That being said, if I had the option to go the Microsoft route I would probably take that route.

I don't see Silverlight dying as a surprise. Flash has always dominated, and even it is dying which can be seen from its complete withdrawal from the mobile industry, and the fact that HTML5 should make it obsolete eventually.

And it's never too late to try out new languages; there's a lot of really cool stuff out there now.

I will admit, I have never developed anything in Flash so I don't know it's capabilities, but I never really saw Silverlight as a Flash competitior - it is an application development platform with the .net framework behind it. And I am more disappointed than surprised. It has a lot of potential. Hopefully HTML5 delivers.

HTML5 will take a while to get there, but I really hope it does well. The reason I love web applications is because they work on nearly everything: personal PCs, work PCs, mobile devices, tablets etc. And they are extremely easy to access because all you need is a browser.

[BFD]

Feb 27, 2013 12:11:46 GMT -8 Jordan said:

Feb 27, 2013 8:49:29 GMT -8 BFD said:

Too expensive? Really? I can see where $500 or $1100 may seem like a lot when compared to open source, but for a professional development company, it is a drop in the bucket compared to what it takes to house, equip and pay good programmers and system architects. If I were a customer and considering a developer that used open source tools simply because they were free, I would be very, very suspicious. Then again, I am a bit touchy on this as I have seen the damage done by "kitchen table" programmers many, many times, both as the rescuer and having lost customers to cut rate developers who eventually botched the project.

Well where I worked they were annoyed by the licenses per person just for Visual Studio haha, and it was a very large company. Maybe that particular department within the company was low on cash, I'm not sure. I think it really depends on what you are developing, because in some cases Microsoft is not the solution and open source tools and frameworks would be better. The company I was working for was almost pure Java, and didn't have that many projects written with .NET. I also know a lot of really good Microsoft tools such as their cloud service can be crazy expensive, but it really all depends on what you need to accomplish.

From what I see, between the partner program and the express editions, Microsoft pretty much gives away their tools to companies that are willing to commit to developing for their platforms. We looked into the cloud stuff when it was first launched and have been tracking it since, but really haven't seen where it was worthwhile. The tools just aren't rich enough.

I can see where a non-Microsoft shop would see the standard edition tools as expensive. The key is you have to be willing to pay for the tools you actually need.

I will admit, I have never developed anything in Flash so I don't know it's capabilities, but I never really saw Silverlight as a Flash competitior - it is an application development platform with the .net framework behind it. And I am more disappointed than surprised. It has a lot of potential. Hopefully HTML5 delivers.

HTML5 will take a while to get there, but I really hope it does well. The reason I love web applications is because they work on nearly everything: personal PCs, work PCs, mobile devices, tablets etc. And they are extremely easy to access because all you need is a browser.

I am just the opposite - I have always dreaded web applications because it was so much more difficult to write a decent, easy to use application. The Silverlight apps I wrote were the first "web" apps that I was satisfied with.

[Jordan]

Feb 27, 2013 14:49:42 GMT -8 BFD said:

Feb 27, 2013 12:11:46 GMT -8 Jordan said:

Well where I worked they were annoyed by the licenses per person just for Visual Studio haha, and it was a very large company. Maybe that particular department within the company was low on cash, I'm not sure. I think it really depends on what you are developing, because in some cases Microsoft is not the solution and open source tools and frameworks would be better. The company I was working for was almost pure Java, and didn't have that many projects written with .NET. I also know a lot of really good Microsoft tools such as their cloud service can be crazy expensive, but it really all depends on what you need to accomplish.

From what I see, between the partner program and the express editions, Microsoft pretty much gives away their tools to companies that are willing to commit to developing for their platforms. We looked into the cloud stuff when it was first launched and have been tracking it since, but really haven't seen where it was worthwhile. The tools just aren't rich enough.

I can see where a non-Microsoft shop would see the standard edition tools as expensive. The key is you have to be willing to pay for the tools you actually need.

Makes sense. I guess the company has to figure out if the Microsoft tools significantly improve development for them.

HTML5 will take a while to get there, but I really hope it does well. The reason I love web applications is because they work on nearly everything: personal PCs, work PCs, mobile devices, tablets etc. And they are extremely easy to access because all you need is a browser.

I am just the opposite - I have always dreaded web applications because it was so much more difficult to write a decent, easy to use application. The Silverlight apps I wrote were the first "web" apps that I was satisfied with.

Web development has gotten a lot better over the past few years, and you can make some truly beautiful interfaces in pure HTML/CSS/Javascript. Requiring people to only need a browser to connect to the web is a truly remarkable accomplishment in my opinion. I personally don't like to have to download programs anymore; I want something quick and easy, and that's what web apps do. Plus, it makes it so easy to update your software, because it's all on the backend. The user never has to update anything or install anything.

[RedBassett]

I'm not a fan of Microsoft's systems usually because they are so platform specific. While I use Macs for personal machines, and develop on Macs, all of my web code can be deployed on any Unix-based system, which is useful since most of my servers are running either Ubuntu or Debian right now.