.NET Framework Version Comparision

Re:.NET Framework Version Comparision by jinushaun on Tuesday May 01, 2012 @06:31AM (#3913688)

Missing .NET 4.5, which introduces C# 5 with async support. C# is a great language. Shame it's stuck on Windows and the "enterprisey" .NET framework.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:.NET Framework Version Comparision by yatendra on Tuesday May 01, 2012 @10:58AM (#3914606)

I am not sure what is enterprisey about .Net. I am working on Live Post http://livepost.in using ASP.Net MVC/jQuery/jQuery Mobile/MySQL/MongoDB/Dapper(ORM). Just replace ASP.Net MVC/Dapper with django and it will become a common stack used by alot of startups these days. Also from cost point of view the difference is very minimal - I am running it on a 1GB VPS which at my host costs just 2.95$ extra per month compared to a linux VPS with similar specs. I use Visual Web Developer 2010 express edition IDE for development which is pretty good in terms of features and is free. So its just a matter of perception nothing else.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:.NET Framework Version Comparision by hamidpalo on Tuesday May 01, 2012 @07:33AM (#3913832)

What is "enterprisey" about .NET?

Mono is a real alternative, many businesses run it production, including the likes of Fog Creek.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:.NET Framework Version Comparision by gecko on Tuesday May 01, 2012 @10:50AM (#3914570)

Just so we're all on the same page here, Fog Creek is not currently using Mono in any part of Kiln or FogBugz On Demand. We use Mono to allow FogBugz to run on Unix systems for on-site installation, and we're looking at using Mono in Kiln for similar reasons. At the moment, though, Kiln and FogBugz On Demand are 100% WISC deployments.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:.NET Framework Version Comparision by hamidpalo on Tuesday May 01, 2012 @11:05AM (#3914644)

Sorry should have clarified that it's not run in-house but rather supported for full-on production deployments, from what I have heard.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:.NET Framework Version Comparision by TazeTSchnitzel on Tuesday May 01, 2012 @07:41AM (#3913852)

.NET is very "enterprisey". It seems to be designed to make creating line-of-business applications easier.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:.NET Framework Version Comparision by hamidpalo on Tuesday May 01, 2012 @08:59AM (#3914071)

What exactly makes it enterprisey? I am always really unclear on what makes something "enterprisey" other than perceptions.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:.NET Framework Version Comparision by powertower on Tuesday May 01, 2012 @09:24AM (#3914178)

IMO, complete integration (one solution, one vendor) across the board (from OS, to IDE, to Database, to Frameworks, etc) is what makes something "enterprisey". That, and a large and mature ecosystem built around it.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:.NET Framework Version Comparision by hamidpalo on Tuesday May 01, 2012 @10:00AM (#3914317)

But that's not true. Plenty of .NET users do use other OSs (through Mono) and databases (I use MySQL). Sure, the best IDE is VS and there's tons more docs and support on using it all on Windows, but the same can be said of Rails with Linux and Textmate for example.

Enterprisey is a matter of perception and shouldn't be a slur.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:.NET Framework Version Comparision by jinushaun on Wednesday May 02, 2012 @03:31PM (#3920722)

If you step outside of the startup bubble, you'll find that the bulk of .NET stuff is boring line-of-business apps developed by large corporations using the MS stack from top to bottom because MS is "safer" than open source.

I actually work at a .NET startup doing non-traditional things with .NET and we have the hardest time hiring new developers because of the "enterprisey" nature of .NET and the type of developer that generates.

[ Parent | on HN ]