There has to be a better way to develop web applications.

R

Rob R. Ainscough

I realize I'm learning web development and there is a STEEP learning curve,
but so far I've had to learn:

HTML
XML
JavaScript
ASP.NET using VB.NET
..NET Framework
ADO.NET
SSL
FormAuthentication
(and probably a few more things)

Now call me crazy, but this hog pog of languages & technologies is
ridiculous!! The simplest of tasks become major R&D efforts (setting the
enable state of a control on another ASPX page in a frame for example). And
XML, OMG that has got to be the most ineffecient way to write out data I've
ever seen -- the overhead is staggering!! So far the research I've seen are
"frames are evil" -- great so freakin' helpful. This is just crazy, if the
development community has to continue on in this bizarre environment of
languages and technology, then web application development is never going to
mature and become cost effective for companies to exploit.

This is NOT an efficient way to get work done -- just the cost to get
developers up to speed on all the technology can doom a project from the
start. The pipe dream of using ASP.NET with VB.NET and .NET framework ONLY
for web development is just that -- a pipe dream, for only the simplest of
applications could anyone get away with just those three technology/tools.

I just don't understand -- terms such as portability get tossed around, but
the bottom line is, if you elect to use .NET Framework and ASP.NET your
bound to MS server OS. And, if this is all done in the name of
"portability" (at the cost of performance) how often are you folks moving
servers around and changing platforms?? If platforms are changing that
frequently, that begs the question why?! It's like building something for
5% that may need it while the majority don't -- so the majority have to take
the penalty. There has got to be a better way?

Rob.
 
R

Rob R. Ainscough

Trolls usually do one liners, kinda like what you just posted.

So do you have an opinion or do you just like to call everyone a Troll? I
think it is often called, I can't deal with this reality, so lets bring out
the "Troll Defense". -- I think it goes something like this -- "The fabric
of time is being questioned, therefore he must be a Troll"

Your input has demonstrate your value.
 
T

Teemu Keiski

Hello,

first of all. Using .NET and ASP.NET does not tie you to MS OS. There's also
open-source implementation for non-MS OS's
http://www.mono-project.com

Otherwise it is somewhat true. The term jungle has increased a lot,
however.NET is a effort to better as it ties APIs for these things together
in the Framework. If you try to do the same with previous versions of MS
technologies, you'd need to install tons of separate libraries such as
MSXML, MDAC (though .NET requires certain version too but that usually
exists with newer OS's).

Your example of XML being overhead is also true,. However there are
alternatives such as binary serialization, remoting etc etc. So iut's also
case.specific, not just always generally a problem.

It's a large topic to discuss but I understand the pain.
 
J

Juan T. Llibre

re:
if you elect to use .NET Framework and ASP.NET your bound to MS server OS.

Rob, take a look at :

http://www.dotnetpowered.com/languages.aspx
for a list of the languages/OS's which you can use with .Net.

You may have to reconsider your statement
quoted above after you see that page.

Sure, the learning curve is steep, but it's no more
steep than any other web platform's learning curve.

Progress demands fast change.

Complaining about the pace of change won't get you anywhere,
except to the place where archaic stuff is archived.

In any case, what do you suggest as an alternative ?
 
M

Mark Rae

There has got to be a better way?

So why don't you develop it, smart-arse, instead of whinging because you're
having to do some learning...?

No-one's forcing you to use .NET.

No-one's forcing you to write a single line of code.

No-one's forcing you even to own a PC.
 
R

Rob R. Ainscough

Yes, I do actually like Serialization and use it more often.

I didn't realize it was available for non-MS. Does the non-MS
implementation ofer identical feature sets and is it stable? I haven't seen
any hosting services that offer it or support it so I'd imagine it would be
a manage in-house situation?

I think the dev tools are a LONG way off from any real sense of
"unification" -- VS 2005 doesn't appear to be much different, basically
fixes and extends on things that should have been part of VS 2003.

I'm sure it is a little better than it was with just ASP, but we're going on
5 years now and it feels like the dev tools just aren't progressing at a
pace they should be to keep up with demand. RAD is what it is about and it
really doesn't feel any fast today than it did 5 years ago.

Rob.
 
R

Rob R. Ainscough

Juan,

That is good, but think about what your just pointed out. 97% of the listed
languages are used by <2% of the dev community -- flexible yes, but
important to RAD (rapid application development), no.

I have no problem with "Change", I do have a problem of change for the sake
of change OR change to benefit the few but penalizes the majority. I do
find it funny you point out a list of supported languages, some VERY archaic
that can now be used with .NET. Your sending a confusing message.

I don't care that I would need to learn A new language (as in one), but it
does me NO good to learned several new languages all of which are simply
different syntaxs (or exist to bridge the gap) that are ultimately used to
turn concepts into reality. All languages ultimately do the same thing and
people argue for days that language X is better than language Y, but the
reality is most good developers just want the best tool available that is
easiest to translate spec into code into reality -- as a developer, I don't
mind learning a new language, just make sure that is it -- businesses can't
afford to keep sending developers off to learn the lastest fad language
which will go out of "favor" in a few years for the next "fad" language.
Sure it maybe a money making scheme for Microsoft, but it doesn't do the
business world any good. I mean, I see resumes all the time with a list of
90 languages long and someone is "proud" of that fact -- think about it, it
is really a pretty sad state of affairs.

Rob.
 
J

Juan T. Llibre

Your objections are acknowledged.

What do you suggest as an alternate platform ?
 
R

Rob R. Ainscough

Mark,

Because, learning the language of the day to accomplish the same tasks over
and over is NOT efficient -- that's why. Like I said, listing 90 languages
on my resume is more of an embarrassment than an accomplishment. The
concepts don't change, only the syntax and all the restrictions and
limitations that go with it.

MS have the resources, not I -- and we should be there by now -- but as it
stands today, we're a good 5-10 years away.

No one is forcing you to post a response -- so what is your point?? So what
is your point? Don't complain, don't make waves, just accept it -- is that
how you think -- be a sheep, baaa baaa baaa

Rob.
 
R

Rob R. Ainscough

No more alternatives -- just get MS to freakin' pick one and stay with it --
stop re-inventing the wheel every 5 years that does more or less the same
thing. Evolve the tool, stop dumping it and starting from scratch again --
the only message I see there is that MS got lost and their "code re-use"
went out the door -- which isn't exactly a great selling point for their
lastest and great new tools.

But I am waiting for the hard back version of "How Microsoft got lost" --
version 3.1 due out this holiday season ;)

Rob.
 
J

Juan T. Llibre

re:
listing 90 languages on my resume

I see you're against choice.

Do you understand the difference between
*choice* of languages and learning all of them ?

re:
MS have the resources, not I -- and we should be there by now

OK, if not MS, then who ? Who is doing a better job than MS ?
Who is "there by now" ?
 
J

Juan T. Llibre

You managed to evade the question very well.

The question is :
What do you suggest as an alternate platform ?

Or, are you only focused on bitching about MS ?

What/who is doing the job better than MS's platform is doing ?

Is that too difficult a question ?

Or, do you aim to be recognized as the troll you were accused of being ?

Please answer.
 
R

Rob R. Ainscough

Why are you intent on comparisons? I'm not, so why are you? Who does it
better, I don't know, don't care -- I just want the insanity of language of
the day to be over so we can concentrate on design and produce results and
less of "oh yeah, can't do that with ASP.NET so ya have to do some
JavaScript and do a little HTML setup work and...".

So I take it you agree with the obvious problem in efficiency? yes or no?

Against choice? You on planet earth -- this ain't the business of pic your
favorite iPod color -- stay within context.

You sound like a Microsoft troll -- get over your loyality already.
 
J

Juan T. Llibre

re:
I don't know, don't care

Yup, that sums up your stance.

You are confirming that you'd rather complain,
than work towards getting a better product.

Do you have *anything* positive to offer ?
Like, maybe, a suggestion or two ?

Or, as is apparent, do you prefer to bitch
without offering any suggestions for improvement ?

You don't offer any alternatives,
and you don't offer any suggestions for improvement.

You just bitch. That doesn't get us anywhere.
 
R

Rob R. Ainscough

If you understood what I was saying, you'd realize it is not a bitch
session.

Yes, do away with HTML, XHTML, JavaScript, CSS and make it --

CLD - Common Language Development, CLF - Common Language Framework

If a huge base of HTML, XHTML, JavaScript, CSS code needs to be ported,
build a very good migration tool that will generate CLD (and do it right).

Make CLD syntatically easy to follow/read and provide an rich intelligent
IDE environment that has markers that work beyond a single module, provide
more sophisticated lookup linking, improve help link system and provide MUCH
more real world code samples in the help system. Provide managed and
unmanaged connection options, provide a real debugger (similar in power to
VB6 debugger). Just make life easier for the developer so we can get more
done, higher quality, and in less time.

That would be a start -- something .NET should have been but failed. And
don't start on "cross-platform" -- make that come later as "needed" (if
needed at all)? I mean that is the way it stands right now, you don't see
many folks doing ASP.NET with .NET Framework development on Unix servers.
This is not a debate about which is better, it is a reality of the
situation. Don't build an enormous amount of cross-platform
compatibility/flexibilty that is going to be used by <2% of dev community.

Rob.

Rob.
 
M

Mark Rae

Because, learning the language of the day to accomplish the same tasks
over and over is NOT efficient -- that's why. Like I said, listing 90
languages on my resume is more of an embarrassment than an accomplishment.
The concepts don't change, only the syntax and all the restrictions and
limitations that go with it.

Well, then, cast your mind back to the language in which you wrote your
first ever line of code, and stick with that...
 
K

Kevin Spencer

Yes, do away with HTML, XHTML, JavaScript, CSS and make it --
CLD - Common Language Development, CLF - Common Language Framework

Dude!

....

Dude!!

I hate to tell you this, but Microsoft didn't create the Internet (as we all
know, Al Gore did). Neither did Microsoft create HTML, XHTML, JavaScript,
CSS, HTTP, or any of that stuff that makes web pages what they are.

What Microsoft created was ASP.Net, which is a SERVER-SIDE technology for
working with all that stuff that Microsoft did NOT create.

Microsoft is not the God of the Intenet. If they were, I'm sure it would
have ended up much simpler to work with than it is. They are simply dealing
with it. I would suggest you do the same.

--
HTH,

Kevin Spencer
Microsoft MVP
..Net Developer
The sun never sets on
the Kingdom of Heaven
 
J

Juan T. Llibre

While you're at it, suggest that Microsoft should do away
with the W3C ( which is the standards body for HTML,
XHTML, CSS, and a host of other web "standards" ).

Then, Microsoft should do away with whomever
it is that controls Javascript standards, so Microsoft
can replace Javascript, HTML, XHTML, CSS with
a Microsoft-created unified system to be called
CLD - Common Language Development and with
CLF - Common Language Framework

How soon would the Justice Dept. breathe
on Microsoft's neck for attempting to do that ?

Maybe you should give this a bit more thought...
 
P

Phillip Ian

Because, learning the language of the day to accomplish the same tasks over
and over is NOT efficient -- that's why. Like I said, listing 90
languages
on my resume is more of an embarrassment than an accomplishment. The
concepts don't change, only the syntax and all the restrictions and
limitations that go with it.<<

Are you suggesting that MS should come out with ONE language and
somehow make everyone use it? That's ridiculous. The Microsoft = Borg
crowd would have a field day with that. You want on language for
everything, you go ahead and get all the programmers to agree on one,
and maybe then MS will do it.

Also, look at the list you provided in your original post. Only two of
the things listed there are languages (VB and Javascript), and even in
that case VB script exists, so you could get away with only one
language. The rest are tools for different tasks. You're basically
wondering why GM can't come up with a car that toasts my bread, so I
won't have to learn how to use a toaster.

-Phil
 

Ask a Question

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

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
473,744
Messages
2,569,482
Members
44,901
Latest member
Noble71S45

Latest Threads

Top