4 ms·

> And here’s where the rubber meets the road: if I start promising tools and features to end-users based on what’s been promised by the .NET Core team and .NET

> And here’s where the rubber meets the road: if I start promising tools and features to end-users based on what’s been promised by the .NET Core team and .NET Core changes direction and pulls the rug out from under me, then I effectively screw up my users’ and customers’ timelines. .NET Core exists side-by-side the full .NET Framework. You can use the .NET Framework now, and into the future. Newer versions of ASP.NET and Entity Framework have adopted the "Core" moniker but they run on both platforms. For example, Microsoft.EntityFrameworkCore [1] ships the necessary bits for: * .NETFramework 4.5.1 (full "Desktop" framework) * .NETCore 5.0 and .NETStandard 1.3 (the "Core" framework) If you plan your timelines around pre-release software (that's what .NET Core is) then Microsoft is not to blame. For what it's worth, I'm not a fan of what happened with Release Candidate 1 [2] but I would NEVER place a dependency on pre-production software coming out of Microsoft. [1] https://www.nuget.org/packages/Microsoft.EntityFrameworkCore https://www.nuget.org/packages/Microsoft.EntityFrameworkCore [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11649578 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11649578

Aaronontheweb 10y ago
OP here. I'll re-paste what I wrote in reply to a similar comment on Reddit. When I wrote that, I was thinking like a business owner whose technology is rooted in .NET. Not like a developer working on a single project. I invite you to step into my shoes for a moment. For some background reading, read through: https://medium.com/swlh/how-one-announcement-destroyed-the-net-ecosystem-on-windows-19fb2ad1aa39#.it31pwnwu https://medium.com/swlh/how-one-announcement-destroyed-the-n... I expect that .NET Core (or any platform, really) will be able to deliver $X worth of value to my business in N months and set business plans accordingly. I invest my team's time, some capital, and maybe other resources like hardware into pursuing the value on that platform. Z months in, where Z < N, all of those plans are upset by a sudden direction change. Now I have to make a choice: my previous costs are all sunk, but any future investments I make into .NET Core - are they also at risk of being sunk also? Should I keep investing into .NET Core? Am I risking some portion of my business' future profits by not pursuing something else instead? I've, correctly, judged .NET Core to be a poor investment of my business' resources right now because the risk of my plans around it being upset is not just high, but higher than expected. Releasing RC2 and then reneging on it is pretty exceptional. You as an individual developer are effectively making the same choice that I am as a business owner when you invest your time and energy into .NET. Could that time be better spent elsewhere in a way that would increase your value? Does this explanation help explain my reasoning at all? Please let me know. Just because the technology is early doesn't mean it's a bad idea to invest in it if you think the impact for your business will be huge. That's just another risk you have to take into account and quantify. For what my company does specifically .NET Core could be transformational for us, so I'm quite excited for a future where I can rely on it. But my confidence that we'll be there sooner rather than later has been shaken. And no, the pre-release line doesn't really apply here. When you release RC2 with a Golive license and publicly state "you can be confident to use it in Production and we will support you" only to backtrack on it (days, weeks?) later then that's on Microsoft.
- taspeotis 10y ago
  I think your comment is confusing RC1 with RC2. RC1 was a debacle. And their go live license was not particularly generous [1]: > Starting with the RC1, we are including a “Go Live” license ... [the] duration of this license for the RC1 last until the next release candidate or the completed release of ASP.NET 5 (called an RTM release) that is currently scheduled for Q1 2016. So if you did choose to use RC1 in a production environment, you'd be unsupported as soon as the next RC or RTM occurred. You'd need to spend time upgrading your projects. Which means you're taking a gamble on the size of changes between RC1 and the next release. [1] https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/webdev/2015/11/18/announcing-asp-net-5-release-candidate-1/ https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/webdev/2015/11/18/announcin...
  - Aaronontheweb 10y ago
    You're correct. My mistake.
- Sacho 10y ago
  > And no, the pre-release line doesn't really apply here. When you release RC2 with a Golive license and publicly state "you can be confident to use it in Production and we will support you" only to backtrack on it (days, weeks?) later then that's on Microsoft. Where did they do that? Does .NET Core even have an RC2 or an RC1? Are you talking about ASP.NET Core? Where did they backtrack on the Golive license on ASP.NET Core RC2? I don't think Microsoft has ever announced a release date for .NET Core, so why you were confident it would release at a particular point is confusing to me. There's also never been a release date for ASP.NET Core. Certainly, RC2 took a lot longer than you would reasonably extrapolate from the speed between betas and RC1, but I don't see much support for the rest of your post in any announcements I've ever read.
  - Aaronontheweb 10y ago
    You're right - I got that confused with RC1. And yes .NET Core does: https://www.infoq.com/news/2016/05/dotNETcore-RC2 https://www.infoq.com/news/2016/05/dotNETcore-RC2

Aaronontheweb 10y ago

OP here. I'll re-paste what I wrote in reply to a similar comment on Reddit. When I wrote that, I was thinking like a business owner whose technology is rooted in .NET. Not like a developer working on a single project. I invite you to step into my shoes for a moment. For some background reading, read through: https://medium.com/swlh/how-one-announcement-destroyed-the-net-ecosystem-on-windows-19fb2ad1aa39#.it31pwnwu https://medium.com/swlh/how-one-announcement-destroyed-the-n... I expect that .NET Core (or any platform, really) will be able to deliver $X worth of value to my business in N months and set business plans accordingly. I invest my team's time, some capital, and maybe other resources like hardware into pursuing the value on that platform. Z months in, where Z < N, all of those plans are upset by a sudden direction change. Now I have to make a choice: my previous costs are all sunk, but any future investments I make into .NET Core - are they also at risk of being sunk also? Should I keep investing into .NET Core? Am I risking some portion of my business' future profits by not pursuing something else instead? I've, correctly, judged .NET Core to be a poor investment of my business' resources right now because the risk of my plans around it being upset is not just high, but higher than expected. Releasing RC2 and then reneging on it is pretty exceptional. You as an individual developer are effectively making the same choice that I am as a business owner when you invest your time and energy into .NET. Could that time be better spent elsewhere in a way that would increase your value? Does this explanation help explain my reasoning at all? Please let me know. Just because the technology is early doesn't mean it's a bad idea to invest in it if you think the impact for your business will be huge. That's just another risk you have to take into account and quantify. For what my company does specifically .NET Core could be transformational for us, so I'm quite excited for a future where I can rely on it. But my confidence that we'll be there sooner rather than later has been shaken. And no, the pre-release line doesn't really apply here. When you release RC2 with a Golive license and publicly state "you can be confident to use it in Production and we will support you" only to backtrack on it (days, weeks?) later then that's on Microsoft.

taspeotis 10y ago
I think your comment is confusing RC1 with RC2. RC1 was a debacle. And their go live license was not particularly generous [1]: > Starting with the RC1, we are including a “Go Live” license ... [the] duration of this license for the RC1 last until the next release candidate or the completed release of ASP.NET 5 (called an RTM release) that is currently scheduled for Q1 2016. So if you did choose to use RC1 in a production environment, you'd be unsupported as soon as the next RC or RTM occurred. You'd need to spend time upgrading your projects. Which means you're taking a gamble on the size of changes between RC1 and the next release. [1] https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/webdev/2015/11/18/announcing-asp-net-5-release-candidate-1/ https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/webdev/2015/11/18/announcin...
- Aaronontheweb 10y ago
  You're correct. My mistake.
Sacho 10y ago
> And no, the pre-release line doesn't really apply here. When you release RC2 with a Golive license and publicly state "you can be confident to use it in Production and we will support you" only to backtrack on it (days, weeks?) later then that's on Microsoft. Where did they do that? Does .NET Core even have an RC2 or an RC1? Are you talking about ASP.NET Core? Where did they backtrack on the Golive license on ASP.NET Core RC2? I don't think Microsoft has ever announced a release date for .NET Core, so why you were confident it would release at a particular point is confusing to me. There's also never been a release date for ASP.NET Core. Certainly, RC2 took a lot longer than you would reasonably extrapolate from the speed between betas and RC1, but I don't see much support for the rest of your post in any announcements I've ever read.
- Aaronontheweb 10y ago
  You're right - I got that confused with RC1. And yes .NET Core does: https://www.infoq.com/news/2016/05/dotNETcore-RC2 https://www.infoq.com/news/2016/05/dotNETcore-RC2