3 ms·
You can also use that to explain why dotnet developers are looked down on too. They don’t have the keywords start ups expect.
by 0xCMP 9y ago
You can also use that to explain why dotnet developers are looked down on too. They don’t have the keywords start ups expect.
- exabrial 9y agoI think a lot of that is a gripe with the Windows platform itself and the "enterprisey" culture that surrounded Windows. It's pretty decent now but carries a really really ugly legacy in terms of performance, security, technical debt, and bad managers that insisted on $MS everything.
- hackerfromthefu 9y agoI agree with all the above points, and like to add a few more. There's incredibly good aspects to .NET, and it was better in the past than it is now relative to the competition.. However it's been a victim of it's own success, both in attracted a lot of recent mediocre talent due to it's success, and in growing more complex in it's 15 year lifespan so far. The platform complexity has increased significantly with PCLs, .NET Core, and moving from a dependable 18 month release cycle to a fragmented multi-channel release cycle.. ostensibly to keep up with the competition, but really just getting trapped into a classic prisoners dilemma of a race to the bottom of fragmentation and dependency hell. I think they should have left that particular trick to the Javascript framework of the month .. Another issue that holds .NET back is licensing, startups don't want to worry about the licensing in case they scale. .NET core is improving this though and there is a huge amount of open source .NET code available. Despite these drawbacks it's still an awesome platform, with possibly the best general purpose language available in C#. But it's not cool, and yes a lot of that is cargo cult based misunderstanding of it's abilities.