4 ms·
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
by 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 agoI 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 agoYou'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 agoYou'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> 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. The expectations that were casually set by members of the team at talks, on Twitter, on Podcasts, and so forth all indicated that .NET Core's arrival was imminent. The bulk of my criticism has been that their communication strategy on its readiness has not been carefully managed. Therein lies the problem.
- bad_user 10y agoMicrosoft's .NET is the only ecosystem where "component vendors" are a thing. I don't understand how people can buy and rely on proprietary "components".
- oceanswave 10y agoPlenty for Java too and components for iOS and Android apps
- UK-AL 10y agoIt's in addition too, open source components. If people want the commercial support, fast bug fixes and other benefits you get by buying these components why not?
- mb_72 10y agoSuch components - I use Developer Express components - greatly accelerate development time and offer extra functionality out of the box. None of my clients care one white about open source, they just want their products developed quickly.
- rdiddly 10y agoThink you can dot-net your "begging for social shares toolbar" the core outta the reading area? It's dot-netting the first word of every line and totally un-core.
- Aaronontheweb 10y agoResponded to you in Disqus. Should be disabled on mobile already by default. Added a second setting that disables it on screens less than 600px wide. Pain in the ass, sorry about that.