5 ms·

Open Source, Windows and Teaching Python to New Developers

15 points by ch0wn 15y ago

jinushaun 15y ago
As a .NET developer on a Macbook Pro, I share his frustration. I code .NET at work, but live in Ruby and Node.js land when I'm at home. It's just so much easier to get git, svn, Ruby, Python or Node.js up and running on OSX than Windows. The only thing Windows does better/easier is WAMP thanks to the proliferation of free all-in-one installers. Windows is probably why PHP remains so popular. (I wonder how many companies develop PHP on Windows and deploy to cheap Linux hosts) As for the tools, Visual Studio feels like a walled garden and I'm too scared to edit the defaults because I might break something. Why did it create so many files and reference all these DLLs? Do I need all of them?! How do I edit this web.config file? Compare this with Rails where I know exactly why it creates the files that it does and have no fear in going in a ripping out the defaults and deleting files. While you're at it, let's talk community. The difference between the OSS and Windows developer community is striking. On one side, you have passionate Rubyists going on and on about how Ruby, Gems, etc are all so great. The same for Python and Node.js. These guys also code in their spare time and are active on GitHub. On the other side, you have the stereotypical .NET programmer who only codes from 9-5 making boring "enterprise" LOB software and only uses technology from MS. You know them, the programmers who only started using jQuery because it now comes bundled with ASP.NET. Programmers who probably can't even create a .NET project from scratch and build on the command line, but rely on the voodoo magic of File->New->Project and Build->Build Solution (F6) in Visual Studio. Does MS really want to woo these developers? When all the hobbyist programmers that can't afford Visual Studio ($550+) or like .NET jumps ship to OSX/Linux, learns free open source tools and creates billion dollar startups on the OSS stack, MS is fucked. They lose developer mind share. The next Facebook or Google won't be made on Windows systems and MS will be left supporting dinosaurs. Windows and VS doesn't matter in a world where we live in a web browser. Developers can now develop on Linux and 'deploy' to Windows via Chrome and Firefox. I think MS is finally seeing the light. NuGet is a trojan horse of change in the .NET world if MS lets it. We might actually start seeing a true open source community around .NET technology.
- idle_processor 15y ago
  I think MS's primary model, for development tools, involved targeting management and enterprise, above programmers. University outreach shows they're not entirely neglecting coders. It seems like being the hot new thing is less critical than providing management a sense of safety for when blub dev #79 breaks something or gets stuck, by way of commercial support.
- bendmorris 15y ago
  It sounds like you simply lack understanding of all the parts of a .NET application. That's not a valid criticism of the framework, it means you should go read a tutorial. There are plenty out there. Also, Visual Studio has had a free Express Edition for years (which, unlike this article implies, has no licensing restrictions), so not being able to afford it is a non-issue.
- shriphani 15y ago
  While you're at it, let's talk community. The difference between the OSS and Windows developer community is striking. On one side, you have passionate Rubyists going on and on about how Ruby, Gems, etc are all so great. The same for Python and Node.js. These guys also code in their spare time and are active on GitHub. On the other side, you have the stereotypical .NET programmer who only codes from 9-5 making boring "enterprise" LOB software and only uses technology from MS. You know them, the programmers who only started using jQuery because it now comes bundled with ASP.NET. Programmers who probably can't even create a .NET project from scratch and build on the command line, but rely on the voodoo magic of File->New->Project and Build->Build Solution (F6) in Visual Studio. Does MS really want to woo these developers? It is not impossible to be creative using the .Net stack: http://channel9.msdn.com/coding4fun/blog http://channel9.msdn.com/coding4fun/blog From this post I gauge that you're approaching .Net from a overly webbish perspective. .Net is more than that. From a computer science perspective, it is so beautiful, Linq is so sweet - I feel like hitting Java with a stick now. Also, here is what you can do with the .Net stack: -> Netduino (using the .Net micro framework) -> Apps on win -> A full-feature ML dialect with a very solid vm. -> Script# is a c# to js compiler so you can create js in vs. -> WP7 -> Robotics studio Also, express editions of VS are free. You don't need to shell out $550 if you want to get started coding - this is a myth that IMO needs a solid myth-busting. Also, the lineup of badass devices that you can code for using this stack is bigger than anything out on the market - Kinect for instance - nobody even in the near future can potentially produce a competing device and if you want to base a startup around ruling the living room, I think the kinect should factor in - everyone I see using it is blown away when they are able to say "xbox pause" and get their netflix to pause. Edit : formatting
sid0 15y ago
What licensing restrictions exactly does Visual Studio Express have?
- bendmorris 15y ago
  Apparently none: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/86562/what-is-missing-in-the-visual-studio-2008-express-editions/86614#86614 http://stackoverflow.com/questions/86562/what-is-missing-in-...
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]

15 points by ch0wn 15y ago

As a .NET developer on a Macbook Pro, I share his frustration. I code .NET at work, but live in Ruby and Node.js land when I'm at home. It's just so much easier to get git, svn, Ruby, Python or Node.js up and running on OSX than Windows. The only thing Windows does better/easier is WAMP thanks to the proliferation of free all-in-one installers. Windows is probably why PHP remains so popular. (I wonder how many companies develop PHP on Windows and deploy to cheap Linux hosts) As for the tools, Visual Studio feels like a walled garden and I'm too scared to edit the defaults because I might break something. Why did it create so many files and reference all these DLLs? Do I need all of them?! How do I edit this web.config file? Compare this with Rails where I know exactly why it creates the files that it does and have no fear in going in a ripping out the defaults and deleting files. While you're at it, let's talk community. The difference between the OSS and Windows developer community is striking. On one side, you have passionate Rubyists going on and on about how Ruby, Gems, etc are all so great. The same for Python and Node.js. These guys also code in their spare time and are active on GitHub. On the other side, you have the stereotypical .NET programmer who only codes from 9-5 making boring "enterprise" LOB software and only uses technology from MS. You know them, the programmers who only started using jQuery because it now comes bundled with ASP.NET. Programmers who probably can't even create a .NET project from scratch and build on the command line, but rely on the voodoo magic of File->New->Project and Build->Build Solution (F6) in Visual Studio. Does MS really want to woo these developers? When all the hobbyist programmers that can't afford Visual Studio ($550+) or like .NET jumps ship to OSX/Linux, learns free open source tools and creates billion dollar startups on the OSS stack, MS is fucked. They lose developer mind share. The next Facebook or Google won't be made on Windows systems and MS will be left supporting dinosaurs. Windows and VS doesn't matter in a world where we live in a web browser. Developers can now develop on Linux and 'deploy' to Windows via Chrome and Firefox. I think MS is finally seeing the light. NuGet is a trojan horse of change in the .NET world if MS lets it. We might actually start seeing a true open source community around .NET technology.

idle_processor 15y ago
I think MS's primary model, for development tools, involved targeting management and enterprise, above programmers. University outreach shows they're not entirely neglecting coders. It seems like being the hot new thing is less critical than providing management a sense of safety for when blub dev #79 breaks something or gets stuck, by way of commercial support.
bendmorris 15y ago
It sounds like you simply lack understanding of all the parts of a .NET application. That's not a valid criticism of the framework, it means you should go read a tutorial. There are plenty out there. Also, Visual Studio has had a free Express Edition for years (which, unlike this article implies, has no licensing restrictions), so not being able to afford it is a non-issue.
shriphani 15y ago
While you're at it, let's talk community. The difference between the OSS and Windows developer community is striking. On one side, you have passionate Rubyists going on and on about how Ruby, Gems, etc are all so great. The same for Python and Node.js. These guys also code in their spare time and are active on GitHub. On the other side, you have the stereotypical .NET programmer who only codes from 9-5 making boring "enterprise" LOB software and only uses technology from MS. You know them, the programmers who only started using jQuery because it now comes bundled with ASP.NET. Programmers who probably can't even create a .NET project from scratch and build on the command line, but rely on the voodoo magic of File->New->Project and Build->Build Solution (F6) in Visual Studio. Does MS really want to woo these developers? It is not impossible to be creative using the .Net stack: http://channel9.msdn.com/coding4fun/blog http://channel9.msdn.com/coding4fun/blog From this post I gauge that you're approaching .Net from a overly webbish perspective. .Net is more than that. From a computer science perspective, it is so beautiful, Linq is so sweet - I feel like hitting Java with a stick now. Also, here is what you can do with the .Net stack: -> Netduino (using the .Net micro framework) -> Apps on win -> A full-feature ML dialect with a very solid vm. -> Script# is a c# to js compiler so you can create js in vs. -> WP7 -> Robotics studio Also, express editions of VS are free. You don't need to shell out $550 if you want to get started coding - this is a myth that IMO needs a solid myth-busting. Also, the lineup of badass devices that you can code for using this stack is bigger than anything out on the market - Kinect for instance - nobody even in the near future can potentially produce a competing device and if you want to base a startup around ruling the living room, I think the kinect should factor in - everyone I see using it is blown away when they are able to say "xbox pause" and get their netflix to pause. Edit : formatting

sid0 15y ago

What licensing restrictions exactly does Visual Studio Express have?

bendmorris 15y ago
Apparently none: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/86562/what-is-missing-in-the-visual-studio-2008-express-editions/86614#86614 http://stackoverflow.com/questions/86562/what-is-missing-in-...
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]