4 ms·

> Good old C#, SQL Server and a proper boring stack And? What is the proper boring stack for targeting a browser? The reason React is so popular is because it

> Good old C#, SQL Server and a proper boring stack And? What is the proper boring stack for targeting a browser? The reason React is so popular is because it answers a fundamental problem of application delivery to the browser client. If you're living in C# land that's not always boring either, as soon enough you have a GC nightmare. I agree with everything in this article in principle, but it fails to leave room for innovation, where innovation is necessary. And an MS stack when 80% of the world deploys to Linux on the serverside. You might be stuck in the wrong decade...

rpeden 10y ago
If you're running a small SaaS company, it doesn't matter all that much what 80% of the world is doing. I used to feel the same way you do. My apps were all Ruby or Java, usually with Postgres, deployed on Linux. My past couple of employers, though, have used C# and SQL Server running on Windows Server. And they've both been able to handle heavy workloads without using a huge amount of resources. I'd think twice about using SQL Server if I were launching a small SaaS app due to licensing costs. But the extra cost of a Windows VM wouldn't hurt much if I had more than a couple of users. And I know from personal observation that a relatively boring Windows/IIS/.NET stack would handle the workload of my SaaS app without breaking a sweat. And there's no reason you couldn't mix in React on the front end. I haven't run into any noticeable GC issues even while running heavy workloads, but I could see it being an issue depending on the type of work you do. That's not to say you shouldn't deploy a cutting edge web stack on Linux or the BSD of your choice. You can certainly be successful that way too. Perhaps a balance is best: use boring, battle tested technology where you can, and use the cutting edge tech in places where it will give you a competitive advantage.
vlunkr 10y ago
I like React, but it's delusional to think you can't target a browser without it. I mean, we lived without front end frameworks for a loong time before that.
- bluejekyll 10y ago
  I'm not saying you can't target a browser without it, I'm saying it answers a development problem of having rich applications built on the clientside.
  - blakeyrat 10y ago
    1) We had those before React.js and all the modern JS frameworks 2) A lot of people don't like having "rich applications built on the clientside", because in their experience that means buggy, broken applications that never work quite right and often break the scrollbar and back button.
UK-AL 10y ago
Having been developing quite large ASP.NET MVC applications for about 7 years on 60M+ Revenue Websites, I don't think I've ever once had a GC problem for a website.
blakeyrat 10y ago
> If you're living in C# land that's not always boring either, as soon enough you have a GC nightmare. You mean garbage collection? I'd love to hear about the "nightmare" you had. The worst I've ever had to do was restart the app pool, about 15 seconds of downtime and all was well again. > And an MS stack when 80% of the world deploys to Linux on the serverside. The MS stuff works. Reliably. For years. Decades. And has development tools no Linux solution even comes remotely close to matching. > You might be stuck in the wrong decade... That's kind of exactly the point the article was making. If the tools from "the wrong decade" are solid and reliable, just keep using them. That's the point.
flukus 10y ago
> And? What is the proper boring stack for targeting a browser? HTML, CSS and javascript :)

rpeden 10y ago

If you're running a small SaaS company, it doesn't matter all that much what 80% of the world is doing. I used to feel the same way you do. My apps were all Ruby or Java, usually with Postgres, deployed on Linux. My past couple of employers, though, have used C# and SQL Server running on Windows Server. And they've both been able to handle heavy workloads without using a huge amount of resources. I'd think twice about using SQL Server if I were launching a small SaaS app due to licensing costs. But the extra cost of a Windows VM wouldn't hurt much if I had more than a couple of users. And I know from personal observation that a relatively boring Windows/IIS/.NET stack would handle the workload of my SaaS app without breaking a sweat. And there's no reason you couldn't mix in React on the front end. I haven't run into any noticeable GC issues even while running heavy workloads, but I could see it being an issue depending on the type of work you do. That's not to say you shouldn't deploy a cutting edge web stack on Linux or the BSD of your choice. You can certainly be successful that way too. Perhaps a balance is best: use boring, battle tested technology where you can, and use the cutting edge tech in places where it will give you a competitive advantage.

vlunkr 10y ago

I like React, but it's delusional to think you can't target a browser without it. I mean, we lived without front end frameworks for a loong time before that.

bluejekyll 10y ago
I'm not saying you can't target a browser without it, I'm saying it answers a development problem of having rich applications built on the clientside.
- blakeyrat 10y ago
  1) We had those before React.js and all the modern JS frameworks 2) A lot of people don't like having "rich applications built on the clientside", because in their experience that means buggy, broken applications that never work quite right and often break the scrollbar and back button.

UK-AL 10y ago

Having been developing quite large ASP.NET MVC applications for about 7 years on 60M+ Revenue Websites, I don't think I've ever once had a GC problem for a website.

blakeyrat 10y ago

> If you're living in C# land that's not always boring either, as soon enough you have a GC nightmare. You mean garbage collection? I'd love to hear about the "nightmare" you had. The worst I've ever had to do was restart the app pool, about 15 seconds of downtime and all was well again. > And an MS stack when 80% of the world deploys to Linux on the serverside. The MS stuff works. Reliably. For years. Decades. And has development tools no Linux solution even comes remotely close to matching. > You might be stuck in the wrong decade... That's kind of exactly the point the article was making. If the tools from "the wrong decade" are solid and reliable, just keep using them. That's the point.

flukus 10y ago

> And? What is the proper boring stack for targeting a browser? HTML, CSS and javascript :)