5 ms·

My company sells dev tools to software companies. Whenever I have talked to a startup about their tech stack and they reveal they’re on .NET, I later find out t

My company sells dev tools to software companies. Whenever I have talked to a startup about their tech stack and they reveal they’re on .NET, I later find out that none of the founders are technical, and they’ve outsourced development to Eastern Europe or India. This is not to say that a startup founded by technical people couldn’t be successful using .NET; I just haven’t seen it.

pnloyd 8y ago
Maybe not startups per say but. - jet.com uses F# - stackoverflow is C# I don't get why a startup couldn't just use .net for the application layer hooked up to a MySQL or Postgress backend. The drivers for both Db exist so someone must be doing it.
- maxxxxx 8y ago
  I work with C#/.NET but if I had to start from scratch I wouldn't use it. With a lot of platforms you are a second class citizen with .NET because most APIs get released as Java, Javascript or Python. The .NET version often comes much later. After working with MS for 20 years I am also not convinced they will sustain long term what they started with .NET Core. With a startup I would stick to open source. It's the more vibrant and reliable option.
  - CyanLite2 8y ago
    Lotsa FUD here.
    - maxxxxx 8y ago
      I think it help if you added some substance to your comment.
      - CyanLite2 8y ago
        .NET Core is open source and is the flagship development environment for Microsoft. They have no other alternative and have publicly announced multi-year roadmaps and support agreements spanning nearly the next decade.
        maxxxxx 8y ago
        I hope they will stick to it but after seeing what they did with Winforms, WPF, WinRT and Silverlight I have my doubts. We'll have to see.
    - angry_octet 8y ago
      So much irony.
  - pnloyd 8y ago
    Really surprised on your comment when it has so many amazing things going for it. - state of the art language features from .net (linq, async&await,powerful generics) - Multiplatform runtime and SDK, even development is great via Vscode + omnisharp. - MIT license - llvm backend via Ryu jit compiling straight to machine code (Wow!) - unparalleled language server capabilities via Roslyn's API, even available on Linux / Osx via omnisharp. And more stuff I'm not thinking of. Almost everywhere you turn .net is the toughest beast in the arena if you exclude ecosystem. I don't see how you could possibly think it doesn't have a fighting chance.
    - maxxxxx 8y ago
      C# is great, no question. The Roslyn stuff is also great. But if you also need other libraries or systems then things get thinner. For most cloud providers that aren't called Azure the .NET support usually is behind. A lot of popular libraries are either written in Java, Javascript or Python with maybe an outdated unmaintained .NET wrapper. Most CI/CD pipelines are not geared towards .NET. To me MS is a warm cozy place but the open source world is more chaotic and much richer.
      - scarface74 8y ago
        I'm using AWS, the SDKs for the most part are in lock step with Boto3. The SDK for Python. There are a few gaps like troposphere for cloud formation. What do you mean most CI/CD platforms aren't "geared" for .Net? Which CI/CD platform are you using?
        maxxxxx 8y ago
        I was looking at Jenkins a while ago. All samples were for git and PHP, JavaScript and others. .NET, TFS and windows just felt like second class citizens. You can make it work but I feel that the main work is done for things other than .NET. Same for AWS. C# is a fantastic language, .NET framework is good but in my view the ecosystem is too weak.
        8y ago
sokoloff 8y ago
This probably also depends on when the startup was founded. A 2018 startup choosing .Net is very different from a 2005 startup choosing .Net, IMO. (I would place a higher likelihood/possibility of technical cluefulness on the latter.)
abakker 8y ago
Is that...bad? I mean, the point of a startup is to start a business, not to write code, isn’t it? I’d bet that there are many startups that don’t need technical founders, and many who have them are building technology that isn’t really differentiated. One thing that is important is obviously fine-grained control over the business, so I could see how outsourcing might make that slightly harder to manage.
- reustle 8y ago
  Not only fine-grained control, but as they grow they need to consider the cost of growing and maintaining a system built with antiquated tech.
  - _up 8y ago
    Do you mean with antiquated? That the APIs aren't changing on a weekly basis and you can concentrate on developing instead of updating your code?
- __sr__ 8y ago
  > Is that...bad? For Microsoft and .NET community — yes.
- rovr138 8y ago
  Depends on the startup and product. Assuming the product is software, not having technical talent and outsourcing means the quality of the code could suffer. The problem with this is if the company/product grows it can be harder to work with in the future. Even if one outsources, having someone doing reviews, QAing the code being introduced and setting guidelines on what’s production quality code is a good thing. This could also be outsourced to someone else though. Doesn’t have to be a founder.
jordansjones 8y ago
Homie.com is a startup. We use .Net (C# specifically)
scarface74 8y ago
I’ve been making a living in the MS world for over 20 years. But, when I started focusing on AWS and cloud hosting in general, the Microsoft Tax becomes real. I see how much more costly Microsoft is than a Linux in terms of licensing and resource requirements. Besides, with AWS and all of the services being hosted, the only servers you really have to manage are your own app servers.
- angry_octet 8y ago
  Of course you're paying the AWS tax now...
  - scarface74 8y ago
    Either I pay the AWS tax or I pay the colo tax and either spend time doing netops or pay someone else to do. My hourly rate is much more than I would pay AWS to do the "undifferentiated heavy lifting" (https://joshlowryblog.com/2013/12/12/undifferentiated-heavy-lifting/ https://joshlowryblog.com/2013/12/12/undifferentiated-heavy-...). And there is the whole global infrastructure thing for regional redundancy.
    - angry_octet 8y ago
      I'm not saying its not worth it to use AWS (or GCE etc), but depending on your scale it can be quite exhorbitant, and you get quite dependent and coupled to those externally provided services.
      - scarface74 8y ago
        You're always dependent on something. It's like the developers who use the repository pattern because they don't want to be dependent on Oracle/Sql Server, etc. Your entire enterprise is built on top of your infrastructure. You're not going to just change out to save a few dollars. The costs and the risks are too great.

pnloyd 8y ago

Maybe not startups per say but. - jet.com uses F# - stackoverflow is C# I don't get why a startup couldn't just use .net for the application layer hooked up to a MySQL or Postgress backend. The drivers for both Db exist so someone must be doing it.

maxxxxx 8y ago
I work with C#/.NET but if I had to start from scratch I wouldn't use it. With a lot of platforms you are a second class citizen with .NET because most APIs get released as Java, Javascript or Python. The .NET version often comes much later. After working with MS for 20 years I am also not convinced they will sustain long term what they started with .NET Core. With a startup I would stick to open source. It's the more vibrant and reliable option.
- CyanLite2 8y ago
  Lotsa FUD here.
  - maxxxxx 8y ago
    I think it help if you added some substance to your comment.
    - CyanLite2 8y ago
      .NET Core is open source and is the flagship development environment for Microsoft. They have no other alternative and have publicly announced multi-year roadmaps and support agreements spanning nearly the next decade.
      - maxxxxx 8y ago
        I hope they will stick to it but after seeing what they did with Winforms, WPF, WinRT and Silverlight I have my doubts. We'll have to see.
  - angry_octet 8y ago
    So much irony.
- pnloyd 8y ago
  Really surprised on your comment when it has so many amazing things going for it. - state of the art language features from .net (linq, async&await,powerful generics) - Multiplatform runtime and SDK, even development is great via Vscode + omnisharp. - MIT license - llvm backend via Ryu jit compiling straight to machine code (Wow!) - unparalleled language server capabilities via Roslyn's API, even available on Linux / Osx via omnisharp. And more stuff I'm not thinking of. Almost everywhere you turn .net is the toughest beast in the arena if you exclude ecosystem. I don't see how you could possibly think it doesn't have a fighting chance.
  - maxxxxx 8y ago
    C# is great, no question. The Roslyn stuff is also great. But if you also need other libraries or systems then things get thinner. For most cloud providers that aren't called Azure the .NET support usually is behind. A lot of popular libraries are either written in Java, Javascript or Python with maybe an outdated unmaintained .NET wrapper. Most CI/CD pipelines are not geared towards .NET. To me MS is a warm cozy place but the open source world is more chaotic and much richer.
    - scarface74 8y ago
      I'm using AWS, the SDKs for the most part are in lock step with Boto3. The SDK for Python. There are a few gaps like troposphere for cloud formation. What do you mean most CI/CD platforms aren't "geared" for .Net? Which CI/CD platform are you using?
      - maxxxxx 8y ago
        I was looking at Jenkins a while ago. All samples were for git and PHP, JavaScript and others. .NET, TFS and windows just felt like second class citizens. You can make it work but I feel that the main work is done for things other than .NET. Same for AWS. C# is a fantastic language, .NET framework is good but in my view the ecosystem is too weak.
        8y ago

sokoloff 8y ago

This probably also depends on when the startup was founded. A 2018 startup choosing .Net is very different from a 2005 startup choosing .Net, IMO. (I would place a higher likelihood/possibility of technical cluefulness on the latter.)

abakker 8y ago

Is that...bad? I mean, the point of a startup is to start a business, not to write code, isn’t it? I’d bet that there are many startups that don’t need technical founders, and many who have them are building technology that isn’t really differentiated. One thing that is important is obviously fine-grained control over the business, so I could see how outsourcing might make that slightly harder to manage.

reustle 8y ago
Not only fine-grained control, but as they grow they need to consider the cost of growing and maintaining a system built with antiquated tech.
- _up 8y ago
  Do you mean with antiquated? That the APIs aren't changing on a weekly basis and you can concentrate on developing instead of updating your code?
__sr__ 8y ago
> Is that...bad? For Microsoft and .NET community — yes.
rovr138 8y ago
Depends on the startup and product. Assuming the product is software, not having technical talent and outsourcing means the quality of the code could suffer. The problem with this is if the company/product grows it can be harder to work with in the future. Even if one outsources, having someone doing reviews, QAing the code being introduced and setting guidelines on what’s production quality code is a good thing. This could also be outsourced to someone else though. Doesn’t have to be a founder.

jordansjones 8y ago

Homie.com is a startup. We use .Net (C# specifically)

scarface74 8y ago

I’ve been making a living in the MS world for over 20 years. But, when I started focusing on AWS and cloud hosting in general, the Microsoft Tax becomes real. I see how much more costly Microsoft is than a Linux in terms of licensing and resource requirements. Besides, with AWS and all of the services being hosted, the only servers you really have to manage are your own app servers.

angry_octet 8y ago
Of course you're paying the AWS tax now...
- scarface74 8y ago
  Either I pay the AWS tax or I pay the colo tax and either spend time doing netops or pay someone else to do. My hourly rate is much more than I would pay AWS to do the "undifferentiated heavy lifting" (https://joshlowryblog.com/2013/12/12/undifferentiated-heavy-lifting/ https://joshlowryblog.com/2013/12/12/undifferentiated-heavy-...). And there is the whole global infrastructure thing for regional redundancy.
  - angry_octet 8y ago
    I'm not saying its not worth it to use AWS (or GCE etc), but depending on your scale it can be quite exhorbitant, and you get quite dependent and coupled to those externally provided services.
    - scarface74 8y ago
      You're always dependent on something. It's like the developers who use the repository pattern because they don't want to be dependent on Oracle/Sql Server, etc. Your entire enterprise is built on top of your infrastructure. You're not going to just change out to save a few dollars. The costs and the risks are too great.