4 ms·

I'm strictly speaking of web FE.

pjmlp 3y ago
Sure, since my list wasn't exaustive. Those of us that had a go at ASP, ASP.NET, ATLServer, ActiveX, Silverlight, WebForms, AJAX Control Toolkit, WebAPI, WebAPI 2, MVC, Core MVC, Razor Pages.
- CharlieDigital 3y ago
  If you group it like that, then there is a whole graveyard of Node and JS technologies that have died along the way, too. Ember.js, AngularJS, Knockout.js, Backbone.js, etc. Waaaaay more than Microsoft's go at it. I'm not even sure why you're counting WebAPI in there since it's for writing REST APIs.
  - pjmlp 3y ago
    I guess because writing Web FE with a .NET backend is something that many .NET developers happen to do, via WebAPI exactly. The graveyard of Node and JS technologies is orthogonal to the current burnout feeling in many Windows circles regarding Microsoft technologies. To the point that, as I already mentioned a few times, I happened to do .NET Framework to something else ports, instead of the more rational migration to modern .NET. You see the same in long time well known Microsoft partners like Sitecore, moving away from .NET.
    - CharlieDigital 3y ago
      Feels like moving goalposts here. Technologies change all the time in every stack; flavors come and go. By the standard of the web JS ecosystem, .NET has been relatively stable.
      - pjmlp 3y ago
        My goalposts are still the same, Microsoft FE frameworks since the dawn of time, Web and native, and their continuous replacements, when the team doesn't meet whatever KPIs. I don't care what others do. It is like kids on the kindergarten playground, arguing for who behaves better.
- stanac 3y ago
  Porting MVC to MVC core was not very complicated. ASP.NET Core, MVC Core, Razor Pages are all relevant and in use today. And all of them are using same rendering language (Razor), same language Blazor is using. It's not like your knowledge becomes obsolete when you move from one framework to another. Same thing with most of Windows GUI frameworks MS built. They all use same rendering language/interface (xaml).
  - pjmlp 3y ago
    The very fact that some code changes are required, regardless of how little, is a friction point. Doesn't matter how long they have been supported. If by "They all use same rendering language/interface (xaml)." you mean a XML based file format to describe the GUI layout, you are right. If on the other hand you mean a GUI description language that is compatible with zero code changes, then not really.

Sure, since my list wasn't exaustive. Those of us that had a go at ASP, ASP.NET, ATLServer, ActiveX, Silverlight, WebForms, AJAX Control Toolkit, WebAPI, WebAPI 2, MVC, Core MVC, Razor Pages.

CharlieDigital 3y ago
If you group it like that, then there is a whole graveyard of Node and JS technologies that have died along the way, too. Ember.js, AngularJS, Knockout.js, Backbone.js, etc. Waaaaay more than Microsoft's go at it. I'm not even sure why you're counting WebAPI in there since it's for writing REST APIs.
- pjmlp 3y ago
  I guess because writing Web FE with a .NET backend is something that many .NET developers happen to do, via WebAPI exactly. The graveyard of Node and JS technologies is orthogonal to the current burnout feeling in many Windows circles regarding Microsoft technologies. To the point that, as I already mentioned a few times, I happened to do .NET Framework to something else ports, instead of the more rational migration to modern .NET. You see the same in long time well known Microsoft partners like Sitecore, moving away from .NET.
  - CharlieDigital 3y ago
    Feels like moving goalposts here. Technologies change all the time in every stack; flavors come and go. By the standard of the web JS ecosystem, .NET has been relatively stable.
    - pjmlp 3y ago
      My goalposts are still the same, Microsoft FE frameworks since the dawn of time, Web and native, and their continuous replacements, when the team doesn't meet whatever KPIs. I don't care what others do. It is like kids on the kindergarten playground, arguing for who behaves better.
stanac 3y ago
Porting MVC to MVC core was not very complicated. ASP.NET Core, MVC Core, Razor Pages are all relevant and in use today. And all of them are using same rendering language (Razor), same language Blazor is using. It's not like your knowledge becomes obsolete when you move from one framework to another. Same thing with most of Windows GUI frameworks MS built. They all use same rendering language/interface (xaml).
- pjmlp 3y ago
  The very fact that some code changes are required, regardless of how little, is a friction point. Doesn't matter how long they have been supported. If by "They all use same rendering language/interface (xaml)." you mean a XML based file format to describe the GUI layout, you are right. If on the other hand you mean a GUI description language that is compatible with zero code changes, then not really.