The Demise of C#

Discussion in 'ASP .Net' started by Kevin Spencer, Feb 22, 2005.

  1. About 2 years ago, and as recently as perhaps 1 year ago, I can recall
    seeing many posts about what language to use with ASP.Net. The consensus was
    that employers paid more for C# programmers, and it seems that C# became the
    darling of the ASP.Net crowd.

    In the meantime, I have observed an interesting phenomenon. Originally,
    employers hired programmers who used C# because it was based on C, and the
    prevailing opinion was (and may still be) that C# developers were better
    because they must have known and/or practiced C or C++ at some time, which
    would make them better programmers overall. C and C++ are hard-core
    programming languages compared to VB.

    However, now that nearly everyone has jumped on the C# bandwagon, it seems
    to me that the distinction between the languages has nearly disappeared, at
    least in terms of evaluating programmers for hire. There seem to be almost
    as many clueless C# developers out there as VB.Net developers. Many C#
    developers today are basically VB.Net developers using a different syntax. I
    wonder if the employers have become aware of this trend?

    --

    Kevin Spencer
    Microsoft MVP
    ..Net Developer
    Neither a follower nor a lender be.
     
    Kevin Spencer, Feb 22, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. When it comes to ASP.NET development, I'd think VB developers stand the
    better chance of being more experienced, since classic ASP used VBScript.
    C++ programmers, while they might be smart people, don't necessarily know
    anything about web development, so C++ experience wouldn't necessarily
    impress me when interviewing for a web developer. C++ experience would
    probably only excite me if I was hiring a developer for creating low level
    software such drivers.

    Then again, I've always been more of a VB guy so perhaps I'm biased. But my
    experience tells me you don't need to be from C land to be a solid
    developer. That's really little more than a stereotype, and prospective
    employees shouldn't be evaluated based on assumptions and stereotypes.

    --
    That's my two cents,
    Steve C. Orr, MCSD, MVP
    http://SteveOrr.net



    "Kevin Spencer" <> wrote in message
    news:%...
    > About 2 years ago, and as recently as perhaps 1 year ago, I can recall
    > seeing many posts about what language to use with ASP.Net. The consensus
    > was that employers paid more for C# programmers, and it seems that C#
    > became the darling of the ASP.Net crowd.
    >
    > In the meantime, I have observed an interesting phenomenon. Originally,
    > employers hired programmers who used C# because it was based on C, and the
    > prevailing opinion was (and may still be) that C# developers were better
    > because they must have known and/or practiced C or C++ at some time, which
    > would make them better programmers overall. C and C++ are hard-core
    > programming languages compared to VB.
    >
    > However, now that nearly everyone has jumped on the C# bandwagon, it seems
    > to me that the distinction between the languages has nearly disappeared,
    > at least in terms of evaluating programmers for hire. There seem to be
    > almost as many clueless C# developers out there as VB.Net developers. Many
    > C# developers today are basically VB.Net developers using a different
    > syntax. I wonder if the employers have become aware of this trend?
    >
    > --
    >
    > Kevin Spencer
    > Microsoft MVP
    > .Net Developer
    > Neither a follower nor a lender be.
    >
    >
     
    Steve C. Orr [MVP, MCSD], Feb 22, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Kevin Spencer

    Smithers Guest

    Two random thoughts on this:

    ..NET is simply too intimidating for many of the incompetent VB developers
    (which is not all VB developers). They had their fun with VB6 - but .NET is
    simply too much for the incompetent ones - regardless of .NET languagage (C#
    or VB.NET). This point is beyond my opinion - as over the past couple of
    years various industry journals have documented how Microsoft is trying to
    dumb down VB.NET in an effort to get more people to migrate to .NET (because
    the VB6 crowd didn't come running as initially hoped for by Microsoft). Just
    look at the features they're adding to VB.NET.

    IMHO, the incompetence you are seeing more of is people jumping to Web
    development from desktop/thick client application development. Take any
    "hard core" C++ developer awash in all his/her OOP glory: If this person has
    never developed for the Web and has instead spent a career doing low-level
    programming (device drivers, etc), and throw them into a Web Application,
    they'll probably be asking a lot of dumb questions - of the same sort you
    are currently attributing to the VB6 crowd. IMHO, it's the application type
    (Web vs desktop), not the prior language.

    FWIW

    -Smithers





    "Kevin Spencer" <> wrote in message
    news:%...
    > About 2 years ago, and as recently as perhaps 1 year ago, I can recall
    > seeing many posts about what language to use with ASP.Net. The consensus
    > was that employers paid more for C# programmers, and it seems that C#
    > became the darling of the ASP.Net crowd.
    >
    > In the meantime, I have observed an interesting phenomenon. Originally,
    > employers hired programmers who used C# because it was based on C, and the
    > prevailing opinion was (and may still be) that C# developers were better
    > because they must have known and/or practiced C or C++ at some time, which
    > would make them better programmers overall. C and C++ are hard-core
    > programming languages compared to VB.
    >
    > However, now that nearly everyone has jumped on the C# bandwagon, it seems
    > to me that the distinction between the languages has nearly disappeared,
    > at least in terms of evaluating programmers for hire. There seem to be
    > almost as many clueless C# developers out there as VB.Net developers. Many
    > C# developers today are basically VB.Net developers using a different
    > syntax. I wonder if the employers have become aware of this trend?
    >
    > --
    >
    > Kevin Spencer
    > Microsoft MVP
    > .Net Developer
    > Neither a follower nor a lender be.
    >
    >
     
    Smithers, Feb 22, 2005
    #3
  4. Oh, I agree, Steve. There are plenty of good VB developers out there (such
    as yourself!).

    I also agree that a solid understanding of HTML, HTTP, and the web are very
    important to ASP.Net (critically important, actually).

    > But my
    > experience tells me you don't need to be from C land to be a solid
    > developer.


    I agree here as well, with one caveat: You don't need to know C to be a
    solid developer, but it sure helps! I could elaborate on why, but again, I'm
    really not interested in a debate about languages!

    > prospective employees shouldn't be evaluated based on assumptions and
    > stereotypes.


    I've always agreed with that point!

    Actually, I wasn't trying to dredge up the old argument about which language
    is "better." I was actually remarking on the trend toward hiring developers
    who know C#, and whether it was valid or not any more.

    My point is NOT that a VB developer is necessarily not as strong as a C#
    developer. However, at one point there was at least some statistical
    evidence that C# developers were more likely to be skilled than VB
    developers, due to their background, hence the trend. You know the old
    adage: The race is not always to the swift, nor the battle to the strong,
    but that's how you bet. I just don't believe that the language is useful any
    more as a general (statistical) measuring stick.

    And I'm wondering what the hiring trend is these days, whether it has
    adjusted with the times. My guess would be "not yet." Corporate types are
    generally slow to catch up.

    --
    HTH,

    Kevin Spencer
    Microsoft MVP
    ..Net Developer
    Neither a follower nor a lender be.

    "Steve C. Orr [MVP, MCSD]" <> wrote in message
    news:e$...
    > When it comes to ASP.NET development, I'd think VB developers stand the
    > better chance of being more experienced, since classic ASP used VBScript.
    > C++ programmers, while they might be smart people, don't necessarily know
    > anything about web development, so C++ experience wouldn't necessarily
    > impress me when interviewing for a web developer. C++ experience would
    > probably only excite me if I was hiring a developer for creating low level
    > software such drivers.
    >
    > Then again, I've always been more of a VB guy so perhaps I'm biased. But
    > my experience tells me you don't need to be from C land to be a solid
    > developer. That's really little more than a stereotype, and prospective
    > employees shouldn't be evaluated based on assumptions and stereotypes.
    >
    > --
    > That's my two cents,
    > Steve C. Orr, MCSD, MVP
    > http://SteveOrr.net
    >
    >
    >
    > "Kevin Spencer" <> wrote in message
    > news:%...
    >> About 2 years ago, and as recently as perhaps 1 year ago, I can recall
    >> seeing many posts about what language to use with ASP.Net. The consensus
    >> was that employers paid more for C# programmers, and it seems that C#
    >> became the darling of the ASP.Net crowd.
    >>
    >> In the meantime, I have observed an interesting phenomenon. Originally,
    >> employers hired programmers who used C# because it was based on C, and
    >> the prevailing opinion was (and may still be) that C# developers were
    >> better because they must have known and/or practiced C or C++ at some
    >> time, which would make them better programmers overall. C and C++ are
    >> hard-core programming languages compared to VB.
    >>
    >> However, now that nearly everyone has jumped on the C# bandwagon, it
    >> seems to me that the distinction between the languages has nearly
    >> disappeared, at least in terms of evaluating programmers for hire. There
    >> seem to be almost as many clueless C# developers out there as VB.Net
    >> developers. Many C# developers today are basically VB.Net developers
    >> using a different syntax. I wonder if the employers have become aware of
    >> this trend?
    >>
    >> --
    >>
    >> Kevin Spencer
    >> Microsoft MVP
    >> .Net Developer
    >> Neither a follower nor a lender be.
    >>
    >>

    >
    >
     
    Kevin Spencer, Feb 22, 2005
    #4
  5. > When it comes to ASP.NET development, I'd think VB developers stand the
    > better chance of being more experienced, since classic ASP used VBScript.
    > C++ programmers, while they might be smart people, don't necessarily know


    I disagree with the above statement because VBScript and VB.NET have little
    in common other then the name. That would be like saying that a person who
    know JavaScript can program in Java.

    "Steve C. Orr [MVP, MCSD]" <> wrote in message
    news:e$...
    > When it comes to ASP.NET development, I'd think VB developers stand the
    > better chance of being more experienced, since classic ASP used VBScript.
    > C++ programmers, while they might be smart people, don't necessarily know
    > anything about web development, so C++ experience wouldn't necessarily
    > impress me when interviewing for a web developer. C++ experience would
    > probably only excite me if I was hiring a developer for creating low level
    > software such drivers.
    >
    > Then again, I've always been more of a VB guy so perhaps I'm biased. But

    my
    > experience tells me you don't need to be from C land to be a solid
    > developer. That's really little more than a stereotype, and prospective
    > employees shouldn't be evaluated based on assumptions and stereotypes.
    >
    > --
    > That's my two cents,
    > Steve C. Orr, MCSD, MVP
    > http://SteveOrr.net
    >
    >
    >
    > "Kevin Spencer" <> wrote in message
    > news:%...
    > > About 2 years ago, and as recently as perhaps 1 year ago, I can recall
    > > seeing many posts about what language to use with ASP.Net. The consensus
    > > was that employers paid more for C# programmers, and it seems that C#
    > > became the darling of the ASP.Net crowd.
    > >
    > > In the meantime, I have observed an interesting phenomenon. Originally,
    > > employers hired programmers who used C# because it was based on C, and

    the
    > > prevailing opinion was (and may still be) that C# developers were better
    > > because they must have known and/or practiced C or C++ at some time,

    which
    > > would make them better programmers overall. C and C++ are hard-core
    > > programming languages compared to VB.
    > >
    > > However, now that nearly everyone has jumped on the C# bandwagon, it

    seems
    > > to me that the distinction between the languages has nearly disappeared,
    > > at least in terms of evaluating programmers for hire. There seem to be
    > > almost as many clueless C# developers out there as VB.Net developers.

    Many
    > > C# developers today are basically VB.Net developers using a different
    > > syntax. I wonder if the employers have become aware of this trend?
    > >
    > > --
    > >
    > > Kevin Spencer
    > > Microsoft MVP
    > > .Net Developer
    > > Neither a follower nor a lender be.
    > >
    > >

    >
    >
     
    Peter Rilling, Feb 22, 2005
    #5
  6. Okay, I write this message with the full knowledge that I am going to piss a
    large number of people off. So I fully expect some flaming to happen.

    As languages evolve, there becomes less and less that differentiates them.
    There is nothing that you can do in C# that you cannot do in VB.NET.

    I came from a VB development background and moved to C# about five years
    ago. I do not necessarily think that companies look for C# people because
    of the tie-in with C++, but rather that C# develops have more of an OOP
    sense about them. C++ and C# are object oriented languages and therefore
    those people tend to think in object design. VB used to be thought of a toy
    and only used for RAD development. There was little emphasis placed on
    proper coding styles. It was more of a "let's get it done" mentality rather
    then "let's design something for expandability and maintainability". Keep
    in mind that until VB.NET was released, the concept of classes was shoddy at
    best and certainly did not have inheritance or polymorphism, which means
    that VB was NEVER an object oriented languages.

    Remember that when the GUI first came out it was also thought of as a toy.
    Why would real computer uses use a graphical interface, was the mantra of my
    command-line gurus.

    "Kevin Spencer" <> wrote in message
    news:#...
    > About 2 years ago, and as recently as perhaps 1 year ago, I can recall
    > seeing many posts about what language to use with ASP.Net. The consensus

    was
    > that employers paid more for C# programmers, and it seems that C# became

    the
    > darling of the ASP.Net crowd.
    >
    > In the meantime, I have observed an interesting phenomenon. Originally,
    > employers hired programmers who used C# because it was based on C, and the
    > prevailing opinion was (and may still be) that C# developers were better
    > because they must have known and/or practiced C or C++ at some time, which
    > would make them better programmers overall. C and C++ are hard-core
    > programming languages compared to VB.
    >
    > However, now that nearly everyone has jumped on the C# bandwagon, it seems
    > to me that the distinction between the languages has nearly disappeared,

    at
    > least in terms of evaluating programmers for hire. There seem to be almost
    > as many clueless C# developers out there as VB.Net developers. Many C#
    > developers today are basically VB.Net developers using a different syntax.

    I
    > wonder if the employers have become aware of this trend?
    >
    > --
    >
    > Kevin Spencer
    > Microsoft MVP
    > .Net Developer
    > Neither a follower nor a lender be.
    >
    >
     
    Peter Rilling, Feb 22, 2005
    #6
  7. There are plenty of clueless C++, VB, et al, developer.


    ---

    Gregory A. Beamer
    MVP; MCP: +I, SE, SD, DBA

    ***************************
    Think Outside the Box!
    ***************************

    "Kevin Spencer" wrote:

    > About 2 years ago, and as recently as perhaps 1 year ago, I can recall
    > seeing many posts about what language to use with ASP.Net. The consensus was
    > that employers paid more for C# programmers, and it seems that C# became the
    > darling of the ASP.Net crowd.
    >
    > In the meantime, I have observed an interesting phenomenon. Originally,
    > employers hired programmers who used C# because it was based on C, and the
    > prevailing opinion was (and may still be) that C# developers were better
    > because they must have known and/or practiced C or C++ at some time, which
    > would make them better programmers overall. C and C++ are hard-core
    > programming languages compared to VB.
    >
    > However, now that nearly everyone has jumped on the C# bandwagon, it seems
    > to me that the distinction between the languages has nearly disappeared, at
    > least in terms of evaluating programmers for hire. There seem to be almost
    > as many clueless C# developers out there as VB.Net developers. Many C#
    > developers today are basically VB.Net developers using a different syntax. I
    > wonder if the employers have become aware of this trend?
    >
    > --
    >
    > Kevin Spencer
    > Microsoft MVP
    > ..Net Developer
    > Neither a follower nor a lender be.
    >
    >
    >
     
    =?Utf-8?B?Q293Ym95IChHcmVnb3J5IEEuIEJlYW1lcikgLSBN, Feb 22, 2005
    #7
  8. I don't know what employers are aware of, but they do seem to request C#
    more than VB.NET.

    As a long-time VB person who fumbles with C#, I'm one of those "VB.Net
    developers using a different syntax."


    "Kevin Spencer" <> wrote in message
    news:%...
    > About 2 years ago, and as recently as perhaps 1 year ago, I can recall
    > seeing many posts about what language to use with ASP.Net. The consensus
    > was that employers paid more for C# programmers, and it seems that C#
    > became the darling of the ASP.Net crowd.
    >
    > In the meantime, I have observed an interesting phenomenon. Originally,
    > employers hired programmers who used C# because it was based on C, and the
    > prevailing opinion was (and may still be) that C# developers were better
    > because they must have known and/or practiced C or C++ at some time, which
    > would make them better programmers overall. C and C++ are hard-core
    > programming languages compared to VB.
    >
    > However, now that nearly everyone has jumped on the C# bandwagon, it seems
    > to me that the distinction between the languages has nearly disappeared,
    > at least in terms of evaluating programmers for hire. There seem to be
    > almost as many clueless C# developers out there as VB.Net developers. Many
    > C# developers today are basically VB.Net developers using a different
    > syntax. I wonder if the employers have become aware of this trend?
    >
    > --
    >
    > Kevin Spencer
    > Microsoft MVP
    > .Net Developer
    > Neither a follower nor a lender be.
    >
    >
     
    Ken Cox [Microsoft MVP], Feb 22, 2005
    #8
  9. Most of the classes in the .NET Framework are written in C#

    When I saw that when deciding whether to continue on with VB.NET
    (I was an old VB 6 and a C# coder), I went with C#.

    I figured if the Microsoft guys saw fit to use C#, maybe I should too.
    There must be a reason they picked it.

    --
    2005 Microsoft MVP C#
    Robbe Morris
    http://www.robbemorris.com
    http://www.mastervb.net/home/ng/forumvbcode/post10017013.aspx
    http://www.eggheadcafe.com/articles/adonet_source_code_generator.asp



    "Kevin Spencer" <> wrote in message
    news:%...
    > About 2 years ago, and as recently as perhaps 1 year ago, I can recall
    > seeing many posts about what language to use with ASP.Net. The consensus
    > was that employers paid more for C# programmers, and it seems that C#
    > became the darling of the ASP.Net crowd.
    >
    > In the meantime, I have observed an interesting phenomenon. Originally,
    > employers hired programmers who used C# because it was based on C, and the
    > prevailing opinion was (and may still be) that C# developers were better
    > because they must have known and/or practiced C or C++ at some time, which
    > would make them better programmers overall. C and C++ are hard-core
    > programming languages compared to VB.
    >
    > However, now that nearly everyone has jumped on the C# bandwagon, it seems
    > to me that the distinction between the languages has nearly disappeared,
    > at least in terms of evaluating programmers for hire. There seem to be
    > almost as many clueless C# developers out there as VB.Net developers. Many
    > C# developers today are basically VB.Net developers using a different
    > syntax. I wonder if the employers have become aware of this trend?
    >
    > --
    >
    > Kevin Spencer
    > Microsoft MVP
    > .Net Developer
    > Neither a follower nor a lender be.
    >
    >
     
    Robbe Morris [C# MVP], Feb 23, 2005
    #9
  10. Re: Most of the classes in the .NET Framework are written in C#

    The main reasons they went with C# is because they were experienced with C++
    (becuase C++ was more powerful than VB6) so it was more of a natural
    progression for them, and the other reason was because C# was the "new"
    language and they wanted to eat their own dog food to ensure C# would become
    capable of all that they'd envisioned and all they needed.

    It wasn't because they saw C# as superior to VB.NET in any way.

    --
    I hope this helps,
    Steve C. Orr, MCSD, MVP
    http://SteveOrr.net


    "Robbe Morris [C# MVP]" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > When I saw that when deciding whether to continue on with VB.NET
    > (I was an old VB 6 and a C# coder), I went with C#.
    >
    > I figured if the Microsoft guys saw fit to use C#, maybe I should too.
    > There must be a reason they picked it.
    >
    > --
    > 2005 Microsoft MVP C#
    > Robbe Morris
    > http://www.robbemorris.com
    > http://www.mastervb.net/home/ng/forumvbcode/post10017013.aspx
    > http://www.eggheadcafe.com/articles/adonet_source_code_generator.asp
    >
    >
    >
    > "Kevin Spencer" <> wrote in message
    > news:%...
    >> About 2 years ago, and as recently as perhaps 1 year ago, I can recall
    >> seeing many posts about what language to use with ASP.Net. The consensus
    >> was that employers paid more for C# programmers, and it seems that C#
    >> became the darling of the ASP.Net crowd.
    >>
    >> In the meantime, I have observed an interesting phenomenon. Originally,
    >> employers hired programmers who used C# because it was based on C, and
    >> the prevailing opinion was (and may still be) that C# developers were
    >> better because they must have known and/or practiced C or C++ at some
    >> time, which would make them better programmers overall. C and C++ are
    >> hard-core programming languages compared to VB.
    >>
    >> However, now that nearly everyone has jumped on the C# bandwagon, it
    >> seems to me that the distinction between the languages has nearly
    >> disappeared, at least in terms of evaluating programmers for hire. There
    >> seem to be almost as many clueless C# developers out there as VB.Net
    >> developers. Many C# developers today are basically VB.Net developers
    >> using a different syntax. I wonder if the employers have become aware of
    >> this trend?
    >>
    >> --
    >>
    >> Kevin Spencer
    >> Microsoft MVP
    >> .Net Developer
    >> Neither a follower nor a lender be.
    >>
    >>

    >
    >
     
    Steve C. Orr [MVP, MCSD], Feb 23, 2005
    #10
  11. Kevin Spencer

    Alvin Bruney Guest

    Re: Most of the classes in the .NET Framework are written in C#

    I believe they did. (can of worms here)

    I really don't see a reason for VB.NET given the fact that it certainly
    isn't VB with .NET classes. Eventually, VB.NET will have to morph into
    something else. Programmers who need to learn VB.NET coming from VB classic
    are better off learning C#.

    --
    Regards
    Alvin Bruney
    [Shameless Author Plug]
    The Microsoft Office Web Components Black Book with .NET
    available at www.lulu.com/owc
    --------------------------------------------------


    "Steve C. Orr [MVP, MCSD]" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > The main reasons they went with C# is because they were experienced with
    > C++ (becuase C++ was more powerful than VB6) so it was more of a natural
    > progression for them, and the other reason was because C# was the "new"
    > language and they wanted to eat their own dog food to ensure C# would
    > become capable of all that they'd envisioned and all they needed.
    >
    > It wasn't because they saw C# as superior to VB.NET in any way.
    >
    > --
    > I hope this helps,
    > Steve C. Orr, MCSD, MVP
    > http://SteveOrr.net
    >
    >
    > "Robbe Morris [C# MVP]" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> When I saw that when deciding whether to continue on with VB.NET
    >> (I was an old VB 6 and a C# coder), I went with C#.
    >>
    >> I figured if the Microsoft guys saw fit to use C#, maybe I should too.
    >> There must be a reason they picked it.
    >>
    >> --
    >> 2005 Microsoft MVP C#
    >> Robbe Morris
    >> http://www.robbemorris.com
    >> http://www.mastervb.net/home/ng/forumvbcode/post10017013.aspx
    >> http://www.eggheadcafe.com/articles/adonet_source_code_generator.asp
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> "Kevin Spencer" <> wrote in message
    >> news:%...
    >>> About 2 years ago, and as recently as perhaps 1 year ago, I can recall
    >>> seeing many posts about what language to use with ASP.Net. The consensus
    >>> was that employers paid more for C# programmers, and it seems that C#
    >>> became the darling of the ASP.Net crowd.
    >>>
    >>> In the meantime, I have observed an interesting phenomenon. Originally,
    >>> employers hired programmers who used C# because it was based on C, and
    >>> the prevailing opinion was (and may still be) that C# developers were
    >>> better because they must have known and/or practiced C or C++ at some
    >>> time, which would make them better programmers overall. C and C++ are
    >>> hard-core programming languages compared to VB.
    >>>
    >>> However, now that nearly everyone has jumped on the C# bandwagon, it
    >>> seems to me that the distinction between the languages has nearly
    >>> disappeared, at least in terms of evaluating programmers for hire. There
    >>> seem to be almost as many clueless C# developers out there as VB.Net
    >>> developers. Many C# developers today are basically VB.Net developers
    >>> using a different syntax. I wonder if the employers have become aware of
    >>> this trend?
    >>>
    >>> --
    >>>
    >>> Kevin Spencer
    >>> Microsoft MVP
    >>> .Net Developer
    >>> Neither a follower nor a lender be.
    >>>
    >>>

    >>
    >>

    >
    >
     
    Alvin Bruney, Feb 23, 2005
    #11
  12. Kevin Spencer

    Karl Seguin Guest

    "Many C# developers today are basically VB.Net developers using a different
    syntax"

    This may be true today, but it's equally important to look at where the
    languages are going. It seems to me that in the 2.0 release, we are
    starting to see a divergence, albeit slight, between the two language which
    i expect will be a continuing trend. I agree that refactoring is only a
    tool which can easily be done as an addon, but that the C# IDE supports it
    and the VB.Net one doesn't suggests that the VB.Net team sees the needs of
    its developers as being different than those of C# developers. Other
    features such as My, Iterators and enhanced nullable types which are either
    in one language or another (anonymous functions in vb.net??) are all signs
    that MS is moving away from having the languages simply be "different
    syntax".

    As far as the crappiness of VB programmers which was touched on by others,
    my personal opinion is that the programming language doesn't make the
    quality, it's the person behind the keyboard. A bad programmer will
    programming equally bad using whichever language. I think the belief that
    there are simply more bad VB programmers out there is highly speculative and
    even if true, an HR departement would be foolish to ignore the fact that
    there are plenty of good programmers in either language. Having said that,
    VB.Net does make it a little easier to be sloppy (option explicit and
    strict, on error resume next, ....), but I'm sure that if someone wanted to
    they could come up, item for item, of a list of things C# allows which could
    be argued it shouldn't.

    Karl
    --
    MY ASP.Net tutorials
    http://www.openmymind.net/


    "Kevin Spencer" <> wrote in message
    news:%...
    > About 2 years ago, and as recently as perhaps 1 year ago, I can recall
    > seeing many posts about what language to use with ASP.Net. The consensus

    was
    > that employers paid more for C# programmers, and it seems that C# became

    the
    > darling of the ASP.Net crowd.
    >
    > In the meantime, I have observed an interesting phenomenon. Originally,
    > employers hired programmers who used C# because it was based on C, and the
    > prevailing opinion was (and may still be) that C# developers were better
    > because they must have known and/or practiced C or C++ at some time, which
    > would make them better programmers overall. C and C++ are hard-core
    > programming languages compared to VB.
    >
    > However, now that nearly everyone has jumped on the C# bandwagon, it seems
    > to me that the distinction between the languages has nearly disappeared,

    at
    > least in terms of evaluating programmers for hire. There seem to be almost
    > as many clueless C# developers out there as VB.Net developers. Many C#
    > developers today are basically VB.Net developers using a different syntax.

    I
    > wonder if the employers have become aware of this trend?
    >
    > --
    >
    > Kevin Spencer
    > Microsoft MVP
    > .Net Developer
    > Neither a follower nor a lender be.
    >
    >
     
    Karl Seguin, Feb 23, 2005
    #12
  13. > There is nothing that you can do in C# that you cannot do in VB.NET.

    I'm afraid that's simply untrue. You can't use unmanaged code in VB,
    pointers, and several other less important items. Yes, it may be a rare
    occasion that you need to, but believe it or not, I've worked on several
    projects over the past year which process very large (200 - 500 MB) images,
    and there's no substitute for pointers in a situation like that. In fact,
    even with the use of pointers, I have one app that takes several hours to
    process a single image.

    --
    HTH,

    Kevin Spencer
    Microsoft MVP
    ..Net Developer
    Neither a follower nor a lender be.

    "Peter Rilling" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Okay, I write this message with the full knowledge that I am going to piss
    > a
    > large number of people off. So I fully expect some flaming to happen.
    >
    > As languages evolve, there becomes less and less that differentiates them.
    > There is nothing that you can do in C# that you cannot do in VB.NET.
    >
    > I came from a VB development background and moved to C# about five years
    > ago. I do not necessarily think that companies look for C# people because
    > of the tie-in with C++, but rather that C# develops have more of an OOP
    > sense about them. C++ and C# are object oriented languages and therefore
    > those people tend to think in object design. VB used to be thought of a
    > toy
    > and only used for RAD development. There was little emphasis placed on
    > proper coding styles. It was more of a "let's get it done" mentality
    > rather
    > then "let's design something for expandability and maintainability". Keep
    > in mind that until VB.NET was released, the concept of classes was shoddy
    > at
    > best and certainly did not have inheritance or polymorphism, which means
    > that VB was NEVER an object oriented languages.
    >
    > Remember that when the GUI first came out it was also thought of as a toy.
    > Why would real computer uses use a graphical interface, was the mantra of
    > my
    > command-line gurus.
    >
    > "Kevin Spencer" <> wrote in message
    > news:#...
    >> About 2 years ago, and as recently as perhaps 1 year ago, I can recall
    >> seeing many posts about what language to use with ASP.Net. The consensus

    > was
    >> that employers paid more for C# programmers, and it seems that C# became

    > the
    >> darling of the ASP.Net crowd.
    >>
    >> In the meantime, I have observed an interesting phenomenon. Originally,
    >> employers hired programmers who used C# because it was based on C, and
    >> the
    >> prevailing opinion was (and may still be) that C# developers were better
    >> because they must have known and/or practiced C or C++ at some time,
    >> which
    >> would make them better programmers overall. C and C++ are hard-core
    >> programming languages compared to VB.
    >>
    >> However, now that nearly everyone has jumped on the C# bandwagon, it
    >> seems
    >> to me that the distinction between the languages has nearly disappeared,

    > at
    >> least in terms of evaluating programmers for hire. There seem to be
    >> almost
    >> as many clueless C# developers out there as VB.Net developers. Many C#
    >> developers today are basically VB.Net developers using a different
    >> syntax.

    > I
    >> wonder if the employers have become aware of this trend?
    >>
    >> --
    >>
    >> Kevin Spencer
    >> Microsoft MVP
    >> .Net Developer
    >> Neither a follower nor a lender be.
    >>
    >>

    >
    >
     
    Kevin Spencer, Feb 23, 2005
    #13
  14. > There are plenty of clueless C++, VB, et al, developer.

    True. But that's like saying there are plenty of terrorists in Iraq.
    Statistically speaking, they are still in the minority.

    Employers often make decisions based on statistics or trends. While it is
    impossible to predict an individual outcome, statistics provide a calculated
    risk factor, which, in the past, affected their decisions with regard to
    hiring .Net programmers that did not know C#. Statistically, C# programmers
    were paid more, and hired more.

    My observation was simply that with the blooming popularity of C#, and the
    enormous number of VB.Net developers learning the syntax, language could
    potentially no longer be a statistical factor to employers, and probably
    should NOT be. And I was wondering what the trends are.

    --
    HTH,

    Kevin Spencer
    Microsoft MVP
    ..Net Developer
    Neither a follower nor a lender be.

    "Cowboy (Gregory A. Beamer) - MVP" <> wrote
    in message news:...
    > There are plenty of clueless C++, VB, et al, developer.
    >
    >
    > ---
    >
    > Gregory A. Beamer
    > MVP; MCP: +I, SE, SD, DBA
    >
    > ***************************
    > Think Outside the Box!
    > ***************************
    >
    > "Kevin Spencer" wrote:
    >
    >> About 2 years ago, and as recently as perhaps 1 year ago, I can recall
    >> seeing many posts about what language to use with ASP.Net. The consensus
    >> was
    >> that employers paid more for C# programmers, and it seems that C# became
    >> the
    >> darling of the ASP.Net crowd.
    >>
    >> In the meantime, I have observed an interesting phenomenon. Originally,
    >> employers hired programmers who used C# because it was based on C, and
    >> the
    >> prevailing opinion was (and may still be) that C# developers were better
    >> because they must have known and/or practiced C or C++ at some time,
    >> which
    >> would make them better programmers overall. C and C++ are hard-core
    >> programming languages compared to VB.
    >>
    >> However, now that nearly everyone has jumped on the C# bandwagon, it
    >> seems
    >> to me that the distinction between the languages has nearly disappeared,
    >> at
    >> least in terms of evaluating programmers for hire. There seem to be
    >> almost
    >> as many clueless C# developers out there as VB.Net developers. Many C#
    >> developers today are basically VB.Net developers using a different
    >> syntax. I
    >> wonder if the employers have become aware of this trend?
    >>
    >> --
    >>
    >> Kevin Spencer
    >> Microsoft MVP
    >> ..Net Developer
    >> Neither a follower nor a lender be.
    >>
    >>
    >>
     
    Kevin Spencer, Feb 23, 2005
    #14
  15. >I don't know what employers are aware of, but they do seem to request C#
    >more than VB.NET.


    Now, THAT's what I was asking about! :)

    > As a long-time VB person who fumbles with C#, I'm one of those "VB.Net
    > developers using a different syntax."


    Somehow, Ken, I have a hard time imaginging you "fumbling." ;-)

    --
    HTH,

    Kevin Spencer
    Microsoft MVP
    ..Net Developer
    Neither a follower nor a lender be.

    "Ken Cox [Microsoft MVP]" <> wrote in message
    news:%...
    >I don't know what employers are aware of, but they do seem to request C#
    >more than VB.NET.
    >
    > As a long-time VB person who fumbles with C#, I'm one of those "VB.Net
    > developers using a different syntax."
    >
    >
    > "Kevin Spencer" <> wrote in message
    > news:%...
    >> About 2 years ago, and as recently as perhaps 1 year ago, I can recall
    >> seeing many posts about what language to use with ASP.Net. The consensus
    >> was that employers paid more for C# programmers, and it seems that C#
    >> became the darling of the ASP.Net crowd.
    >>
    >> In the meantime, I have observed an interesting phenomenon. Originally,
    >> employers hired programmers who used C# because it was based on C, and
    >> the prevailing opinion was (and may still be) that C# developers were
    >> better because they must have known and/or practiced C or C++ at some
    >> time, which would make them better programmers overall. C and C++ are
    >> hard-core programming languages compared to VB.
    >>
    >> However, now that nearly everyone has jumped on the C# bandwagon, it
    >> seems to me that the distinction between the languages has nearly
    >> disappeared, at least in terms of evaluating programmers for hire. There
    >> seem to be almost as many clueless C# developers out there as VB.Net
    >> developers. Many C# developers today are basically VB.Net developers
    >> using a different syntax. I wonder if the employers have become aware of
    >> this trend?
    >>
    >> --
    >>
    >> Kevin Spencer
    >> Microsoft MVP
    >> .Net Developer
    >> Neither a follower nor a lender be.
    >>
    >>

    >
     
    Kevin Spencer, Feb 23, 2005
    #15
  16. > This may be true today, but it's equally important to look at where the
    > languages are going. It seems to me that in the 2.0 release, we are
    > starting to see a divergence, albeit slight, between the two language
    > which
    > i expect will be a continuing trend. I agree that refactoring is only a
    > tool which can easily be done as an addon, but that the C# IDE supports it
    > and the VB.Net one doesn't suggests that the VB.Net team sees the needs of
    > its developers as being different than those of C# developers. Other
    > features such as My, Iterators and enhanced nullable types which are
    > either
    > in one language or another (anonymous functions in vb.net??) are all signs
    > that MS is moving away from having the languages simply be "different
    > syntax".


    Very interesting point, Karl. Unfortunately, I think you may be right. I
    only say unfortunately because I saw VB.Net as a chance to elevate existing
    VB programmers to a deeper understanding of programming, which makes one a
    better programmer overall. I have long resented the "dumbing down" of
    programming that VB provided, allowing people to manipulate data that they
    didn't have to understand. It sounds like Microsoft is backing away from
    that bold move, and going back to the old "let the programmers be ignorant"
    philosophy, which, IMHO, has resulted in a lot of poor programmers, and a
    lot of poor programming.

    > As far as the crappiness of VB programmers which was touched on by others,
    > my personal opinion is that the programming language doesn't make the
    > quality, it's the person behind the keyboard.


    Absolutely. My point was that this is statistically more true today than
    several years ago.

    --
    HTH,

    Kevin Spencer
    Microsoft MVP
    ..Net Developer
    Neither a follower nor a lender be.

    "Karl Seguin" <karl REMOVE @ REMOVE openmymind REMOVEMETOO . ANDME net>
    wrote in message news:...
    > "Many C# developers today are basically VB.Net developers using a
    > different
    > syntax"
    >
    > This may be true today, but it's equally important to look at where the
    > languages are going. It seems to me that in the 2.0 release, we are
    > starting to see a divergence, albeit slight, between the two language
    > which
    > i expect will be a continuing trend. I agree that refactoring is only a
    > tool which can easily be done as an addon, but that the C# IDE supports it
    > and the VB.Net one doesn't suggests that the VB.Net team sees the needs of
    > its developers as being different than those of C# developers. Other
    > features such as My, Iterators and enhanced nullable types which are
    > either
    > in one language or another (anonymous functions in vb.net??) are all signs
    > that MS is moving away from having the languages simply be "different
    > syntax".
    >
    > As far as the crappiness of VB programmers which was touched on by others,
    > my personal opinion is that the programming language doesn't make the
    > quality, it's the person behind the keyboard. A bad programmer will
    > programming equally bad using whichever language. I think the belief that
    > there are simply more bad VB programmers out there is highly speculative
    > and
    > even if true, an HR departement would be foolish to ignore the fact that
    > there are plenty of good programmers in either language. Having said
    > that,
    > VB.Net does make it a little easier to be sloppy (option explicit and
    > strict, on error resume next, ....), but I'm sure that if someone wanted
    > to
    > they could come up, item for item, of a list of things C# allows which
    > could
    > be argued it shouldn't.
    >
    > Karl
    > --
    > MY ASP.Net tutorials
    > http://www.openmymind.net/
    >
    >
    > "Kevin Spencer" <> wrote in message
    > news:%...
    >> About 2 years ago, and as recently as perhaps 1 year ago, I can recall
    >> seeing many posts about what language to use with ASP.Net. The consensus

    > was
    >> that employers paid more for C# programmers, and it seems that C# became

    > the
    >> darling of the ASP.Net crowd.
    >>
    >> In the meantime, I have observed an interesting phenomenon. Originally,
    >> employers hired programmers who used C# because it was based on C, and
    >> the
    >> prevailing opinion was (and may still be) that C# developers were better
    >> because they must have known and/or practiced C or C++ at some time,
    >> which
    >> would make them better programmers overall. C and C++ are hard-core
    >> programming languages compared to VB.
    >>
    >> However, now that nearly everyone has jumped on the C# bandwagon, it
    >> seems
    >> to me that the distinction between the languages has nearly disappeared,

    > at
    >> least in terms of evaluating programmers for hire. There seem to be
    >> almost
    >> as many clueless C# developers out there as VB.Net developers. Many C#
    >> developers today are basically VB.Net developers using a different
    >> syntax.

    > I
    >> wonder if the employers have become aware of this trend?
    >>
    >> --
    >>
    >> Kevin Spencer
    >> Microsoft MVP
    >> .Net Developer
    >> Neither a follower nor a lender be.
    >>
    >>

    >
    >
     
    Kevin Spencer, Feb 23, 2005
    #16
  17. > Somehow, Ken, I have a hard time imagining you "fumbling." ;-)

    Ha! See my previous answers to C# questions! <grin>
     
    Ken Cox [Microsoft MVP], Feb 23, 2005
    #17
  18. Re: Most of the classes in the .NET Framework are written in C#

    > It wasn't because they saw C# as superior to VB.NET in any way.

    No, it wasn't because they saw C# as superior. However, I'm sure it was
    because C# could do things at lower levels that VB.Net could not. There is a
    lot of unmanaged code at the bottom of the .Net platform.

    --
    HTH,

    Kevin Spencer
    Microsoft MVP
    ..Net Developer
    Neither a follower nor a lender be.

    "Steve C. Orr [MVP, MCSD]" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > The main reasons they went with C# is because they were experienced with
    > C++ (becuase C++ was more powerful than VB6) so it was more of a natural
    > progression for them, and the other reason was because C# was the "new"
    > language and they wanted to eat their own dog food to ensure C# would
    > become capable of all that they'd envisioned and all they needed.
    >
    > It wasn't because they saw C# as superior to VB.NET in any way.
    >
    > --
    > I hope this helps,
    > Steve C. Orr, MCSD, MVP
    > http://SteveOrr.net
    >
    >
    > "Robbe Morris [C# MVP]" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> When I saw that when deciding whether to continue on with VB.NET
    >> (I was an old VB 6 and a C# coder), I went with C#.
    >>
    >> I figured if the Microsoft guys saw fit to use C#, maybe I should too.
    >> There must be a reason they picked it.
    >>
    >> --
    >> 2005 Microsoft MVP C#
    >> Robbe Morris
    >> http://www.robbemorris.com
    >> http://www.mastervb.net/home/ng/forumvbcode/post10017013.aspx
    >> http://www.eggheadcafe.com/articles/adonet_source_code_generator.asp
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> "Kevin Spencer" <> wrote in message
    >> news:%...
    >>> About 2 years ago, and as recently as perhaps 1 year ago, I can recall
    >>> seeing many posts about what language to use with ASP.Net. The consensus
    >>> was that employers paid more for C# programmers, and it seems that C#
    >>> became the darling of the ASP.Net crowd.
    >>>
    >>> In the meantime, I have observed an interesting phenomenon. Originally,
    >>> employers hired programmers who used C# because it was based on C, and
    >>> the prevailing opinion was (and may still be) that C# developers were
    >>> better because they must have known and/or practiced C or C++ at some
    >>> time, which would make them better programmers overall. C and C++ are
    >>> hard-core programming languages compared to VB.
    >>>
    >>> However, now that nearly everyone has jumped on the C# bandwagon, it
    >>> seems to me that the distinction between the languages has nearly
    >>> disappeared, at least in terms of evaluating programmers for hire. There
    >>> seem to be almost as many clueless C# developers out there as VB.Net
    >>> developers. Many C# developers today are basically VB.Net developers
    >>> using a different syntax. I wonder if the employers have become aware of
    >>> this trend?
    >>>
    >>> --
    >>>
    >>> Kevin Spencer
    >>> Microsoft MVP
    >>> .Net Developer
    >>> Neither a follower nor a lender be.
    >>>
    >>>

    >>
    >>

    >
    >
     
    Kevin Spencer, Feb 23, 2005
    #18
  19. Kevin Spencer

    Karl Seguin Guest

    Kevin, you should check out the OutpuCache directive....hahahahha j/k :)

    Karl

    --
    MY ASP.Net tutorials
    http://www.openmymind.net/


    "Kevin Spencer" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > > There is nothing that you can do in C# that you cannot do in VB.NET.

    >
    > I'm afraid that's simply untrue. You can't use unmanaged code in VB,
    > pointers, and several other less important items. Yes, it may be a rare
    > occasion that you need to, but believe it or not, I've worked on several
    > projects over the past year which process very large (200 - 500 MB)

    images,
    > and there's no substitute for pointers in a situation like that. In fact,
    > even with the use of pointers, I have one app that takes several hours to
    > process a single image.
    >
    > --
    > HTH,
    >
    > Kevin Spencer
    > Microsoft MVP
    > .Net Developer
    > Neither a follower nor a lender be.
    >
    > "Peter Rilling" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > Okay, I write this message with the full knowledge that I am going to

    piss
    > > a
    > > large number of people off. So I fully expect some flaming to happen.
    > >
    > > As languages evolve, there becomes less and less that differentiates

    them.
    > > There is nothing that you can do in C# that you cannot do in VB.NET.
    > >
    > > I came from a VB development background and moved to C# about five years
    > > ago. I do not necessarily think that companies look for C# people

    because
    > > of the tie-in with C++, but rather that C# develops have more of an OOP
    > > sense about them. C++ and C# are object oriented languages and

    therefore
    > > those people tend to think in object design. VB used to be thought of a
    > > toy
    > > and only used for RAD development. There was little emphasis placed on
    > > proper coding styles. It was more of a "let's get it done" mentality
    > > rather
    > > then "let's design something for expandability and maintainability".

    Keep
    > > in mind that until VB.NET was released, the concept of classes was

    shoddy
    > > at
    > > best and certainly did not have inheritance or polymorphism, which means
    > > that VB was NEVER an object oriented languages.
    > >
    > > Remember that when the GUI first came out it was also thought of as a

    toy.
    > > Why would real computer uses use a graphical interface, was the mantra

    of
    > > my
    > > command-line gurus.
    > >
    > > "Kevin Spencer" <> wrote in message
    > > news:#...
    > >> About 2 years ago, and as recently as perhaps 1 year ago, I can recall
    > >> seeing many posts about what language to use with ASP.Net. The

    consensus
    > > was
    > >> that employers paid more for C# programmers, and it seems that C#

    became
    > > the
    > >> darling of the ASP.Net crowd.
    > >>
    > >> In the meantime, I have observed an interesting phenomenon. Originally,
    > >> employers hired programmers who used C# because it was based on C, and
    > >> the
    > >> prevailing opinion was (and may still be) that C# developers were

    better
    > >> because they must have known and/or practiced C or C++ at some time,
    > >> which
    > >> would make them better programmers overall. C and C++ are hard-core
    > >> programming languages compared to VB.
    > >>
    > >> However, now that nearly everyone has jumped on the C# bandwagon, it
    > >> seems
    > >> to me that the distinction between the languages has nearly

    disappeared,
    > > at
    > >> least in terms of evaluating programmers for hire. There seem to be
    > >> almost
    > >> as many clueless C# developers out there as VB.Net developers. Many C#
    > >> developers today are basically VB.Net developers using a different
    > >> syntax.

    > > I
    > >> wonder if the employers have become aware of this trend?
    > >>
    > >> --
    > >>
    > >> Kevin Spencer
    > >> Microsoft MVP
    > >> .Net Developer
    > >> Neither a follower nor a lender be.
    > >>
    > >>

    > >
    > >

    >
    >
     
    Karl Seguin, Feb 23, 2005
    #19
  20. Kevin Spencer

    Scott Allen Guest

    On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 08:44:41 -0500, "Kevin Spencer"
    <> wrote:

    >
    >Very interesting point, Karl. Unfortunately, I think you may be right. I
    >only say unfortunately because I saw VB.Net as a chance to elevate existing
    >VB programmers to a deeper understanding of programming, which makes one a
    >better programmer overall. I have long resented the "dumbing down" of
    >programming that VB provided, allowing people to manipulate data that they
    >didn't have to understand. It sounds like Microsoft is backing away from
    >that bold move, and going back to the old "let the programmers be ignorant"
    >philosophy, which, IMHO, has resulted in a lot of poor programmers, and a
    >lot of poor programming.
    >


    The technology has enabled a lot of people to jump into programming
    without learning, training, or understanding what is happening
    underneath the surface. Some people would argue this is a 'good
    thing', but during the gold rush of the bubble years I saw a huge
    influx of people into application development roles that were there
    only because it paid better than being a hair dresser.

    The person who cuts my hair is licensed and trained. The worst hair
    cut might cost $30 and a few months of wearing a hat.

    --
    Scott
    http://www.OdeToCode.com/blogs/scott/
     
    Scott Allen, Feb 23, 2005
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Kevin Spencer

    The Demise of the Art of Programming

    Kevin Spencer, Mar 16, 2005, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    42
    Views:
    949
    Juan T. Llibre
    Apr 6, 2005
  2. NahtMy ReelName

    JAXM's demise in JWSDP 1.2 and 1.3

    NahtMy ReelName, Nov 27, 2003, in forum: Java
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    557
    NahtMy ReelName
    Nov 29, 2003
  3. Zed A. Shaw
    Replies:
    15
    Views:
    220
    Jos Backus
    Sep 12, 2005
  4. Roedy Green

    demise of sun.com

    Roedy Green, Sep 15, 2012, in forum: Java
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    445
    Gunter Herrmann
    Sep 19, 2012
Loading...

Share This Page