4 ms·

A lot of developers and managers I work with don't seem to realize that what's best for Microsoft isn't necessarily what's best for another company. Instead the

by percept 16y ago

A lot of developers and managers I work with don't seem to realize that what's best for Microsoft isn't necessarily what's best for another company. Instead they get stuck in a cycle of adopting whatever MS throws down the channel (this week it's Entity Framework, last week SOA concepts, etc.). Good MS developers should learn to take what's best from the open source world and apply whatever is most useful behind the corporate firewall.

TomOfTTB 16y ago
In fairness (and as the person who made the decision that forces Sam above to use .Net technology) there are reasons to use Microsoft technology even when it isn’t the best fit. Let’s be honest about technology for a second: Things go wrong. No matter what solution you use things go wrong and for the most part non-technical management doesn’t understand that. When something goes wrong they want someone to blame. If you decide to go with something like Ruby on Rails you have to contend with the fact that management doesn’t understand open source (or trust it) and have never heard of 37Signals. So the blame falls to you for having gone with a small “experimental” company rather than a “trusted” one like Microsoft (and yes those words in quotes are actual quotes from my attempt at using such technology) Where as when something goes wrong with Microsoft technology it’s written of as inevitable (that’s where the saying “no one ever got fired for using Microsoft” came from) It’s a sad reality but sometimes you can’t pick the best technical solutions. Sometimes the extra time it takes to use proprietary Microsoft technology is worth the political capital you save by going with Microsoft. That fact doesn’t make me happy but it’s true.
- percept 16y ago
  Definitely, and in fairness these are situations where there's a huge investment in MS technologies, with entire teams dedicated to supporting and maintaining the infrastructure. It isn't feasible to throw it all away without a serious commitment from the highest levels of the organization, and a multi-year, multi-million-dollar implementation plan to do so. But at the team and individual developer levels I think there's lots of room for good open source solutions, and this option isn't always considered because developers are looking to MS for the next big thing. I believe this is reflected in the certification programs too, because they don't focus as much on building a sound programming foundation as on making good Microsoft evangelists. From Microsoft's viewpoint, why not? But it's that divergence again from the company's perspective.
- robconery 16y ago
  Your assumption here is that the blame game somehow is the path to productivity and "the answer". This, to me, means you have a lot of other problems where you work - your platform doesn't matter at all. You're very right, however in that no one gets fired for using Microsoft - but that's changing. Don't take my word for it - ask the guys in Building 42 - they know it too. You touch on a very particular, hot topic in the IT world - that having a phone number to Microsoft will solve problems. Sometimes it does - but most often that comes at more than a bit of a price :). On the flip side - my support channel is Google and I find my answers in about half the time as I would with a topic such as ASP.NET MVC. Rails is quite mature and people have tried everything with it - found where it's great and where it blows. I've had more to read on it than you can imagine. Anyway - it is a sad truth and one that's about to change as the old guard at your company cycles out and are replace by people with knowledge and pedigree - namely people like me - who will systematically cull the policies that don't make business sense, and keep the ones that do :). This doesn't mean "ax all things Microsoft" - it means "find the best value and leverage it". MS is changing its focus as it sees this - it knows this shift is coming - it's why ASP.NET MVC is Open Source and SQL Express is free, and more is on the way :).
  - SamAtt 16y ago
    I don't agree with your points on human nature. On blame, every executive staff of a large company that I've ever seen casts blame. Yes there are startups with a small number of people that are all pretty even keel but as soon as you get to a certain size you'll get opposing interests and that's where blame comes from. The blame game is a political game played by people trying to get leverage over other people in order to get more resources. It's stupid but it's the reality of the world. If you don't see it you just aren't high up enough to be the one fighting for resources. Because as someone who read about Microsoft as a kid I know it was happening at Microsoft (Silverberg/Alchin?) As far as brand, that's just human nature. Look at the side of any Grocery Store brand and you'll see the same ingredients as the big brands. But any grocery store manager will tell you Captain Crunch outsells generic white box crunch 100-to-1. That's why companies build up brands in the first place. That's why Microsoft brags about being one of the most trusted brands in the world. So this really isn't old guard as much as it's the stupidity of human nature and I really don't see it changing that much. P.S. This is Username: TomOfTTB not Username: SamAtt. If he doesn't want me posting as him he should learn to @#%& log out.
- jimbokun 16y ago
  "It’s a sad reality but sometimes you can’t pick the best technical solutions." But you can always pick a better employer.
- InclinedPlane 16y ago
  These are justifications for giving in to a disease. Sure, there are plenty of reasons why you might be forced by the giant, short-sighted enterprise you work at to rely on less sensible software stack. There are also plenty of reasons not to try to stop a guy from being stabbed at the bus-stop you're waiting at. That doesn't make it right.

by percept 16y ago

TomOfTTB 16y ago

In fairness (and as the person who made the decision that forces Sam above to use .Net technology) there are reasons to use Microsoft technology even when it isn’t the best fit. Let’s be honest about technology for a second: Things go wrong. No matter what solution you use things go wrong and for the most part non-technical management doesn’t understand that. When something goes wrong they want someone to blame. If you decide to go with something like Ruby on Rails you have to contend with the fact that management doesn’t understand open source (or trust it) and have never heard of 37Signals. So the blame falls to you for having gone with a small “experimental” company rather than a “trusted” one like Microsoft (and yes those words in quotes are actual quotes from my attempt at using such technology) Where as when something goes wrong with Microsoft technology it’s written of as inevitable (that’s where the saying “no one ever got fired for using Microsoft” came from) It’s a sad reality but sometimes you can’t pick the best technical solutions. Sometimes the extra time it takes to use proprietary Microsoft technology is worth the political capital you save by going with Microsoft. That fact doesn’t make me happy but it’s true.

percept 16y ago
Definitely, and in fairness these are situations where there's a huge investment in MS technologies, with entire teams dedicated to supporting and maintaining the infrastructure. It isn't feasible to throw it all away without a serious commitment from the highest levels of the organization, and a multi-year, multi-million-dollar implementation plan to do so. But at the team and individual developer levels I think there's lots of room for good open source solutions, and this option isn't always considered because developers are looking to MS for the next big thing. I believe this is reflected in the certification programs too, because they don't focus as much on building a sound programming foundation as on making good Microsoft evangelists. From Microsoft's viewpoint, why not? But it's that divergence again from the company's perspective.
robconery 16y ago
Your assumption here is that the blame game somehow is the path to productivity and "the answer". This, to me, means you have a lot of other problems where you work - your platform doesn't matter at all. You're very right, however in that no one gets fired for using Microsoft - but that's changing. Don't take my word for it - ask the guys in Building 42 - they know it too. You touch on a very particular, hot topic in the IT world - that having a phone number to Microsoft will solve problems. Sometimes it does - but most often that comes at more than a bit of a price :). On the flip side - my support channel is Google and I find my answers in about half the time as I would with a topic such as ASP.NET MVC. Rails is quite mature and people have tried everything with it - found where it's great and where it blows. I've had more to read on it than you can imagine. Anyway - it is a sad truth and one that's about to change as the old guard at your company cycles out and are replace by people with knowledge and pedigree - namely people like me - who will systematically cull the policies that don't make business sense, and keep the ones that do :). This doesn't mean "ax all things Microsoft" - it means "find the best value and leverage it". MS is changing its focus as it sees this - it knows this shift is coming - it's why ASP.NET MVC is Open Source and SQL Express is free, and more is on the way :).
- SamAtt 16y ago
  I don't agree with your points on human nature. On blame, every executive staff of a large company that I've ever seen casts blame. Yes there are startups with a small number of people that are all pretty even keel but as soon as you get to a certain size you'll get opposing interests and that's where blame comes from. The blame game is a political game played by people trying to get leverage over other people in order to get more resources. It's stupid but it's the reality of the world. If you don't see it you just aren't high up enough to be the one fighting for resources. Because as someone who read about Microsoft as a kid I know it was happening at Microsoft (Silverberg/Alchin?) As far as brand, that's just human nature. Look at the side of any Grocery Store brand and you'll see the same ingredients as the big brands. But any grocery store manager will tell you Captain Crunch outsells generic white box crunch 100-to-1. That's why companies build up brands in the first place. That's why Microsoft brags about being one of the most trusted brands in the world. So this really isn't old guard as much as it's the stupidity of human nature and I really don't see it changing that much. P.S. This is Username: TomOfTTB not Username: SamAtt. If he doesn't want me posting as him he should learn to @#%& log out.
jimbokun 16y ago
"It’s a sad reality but sometimes you can’t pick the best technical solutions." But you can always pick a better employer.
InclinedPlane 16y ago
These are justifications for giving in to a disease. Sure, there are plenty of reasons why you might be forced by the giant, short-sighted enterprise you work at to rely on less sensible software stack. There are also plenty of reasons not to try to stop a guy from being stabbed at the bus-stop you're waiting at. That doesn't make it right.