34 Comments Buy Ativan No Prescription

1. Tweets that mention http://herdingcode.com/?p=256utm_sourcepingback -- Topsy.com

   June 27th, 2010 at 5:40 am

   [...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by . said: [...]

2. Clint Rutkas

   June 27th, 2010 at 12:58 pm

   

   Scott’s comment about Microsoft not using .NET is not true. A lot of products use .NET in them. This list is from 2005.

   http://blogs.msdn.com/b/danielfe/archive/2005/12/16/504847.aspx
   Visual Studio 2005: 7.5 million lines
   SQL Server 2005: 3 million lines
   BizTalk Server: 2 million lines
   Visual Studio Team System: 1.7 million lines
   Windows Presentation Foundation: 900K lines
   Windows Sharepoint Services: 750K lines
   Expression Interactive Designer: 250K lines
   Sharepoint Portal Server: 200K lines
   Content Management Server: 100K lines

3. Mike Moore

   June 28th, 2010 at 11:00 am

   

   Clint, did Scott say .NET or WPF? I’ve heard chatter before about Microsoft not fixing some core WPF issues until they shipped a real product (Visual Studio) with it.

   O NOES, am I starting down the rathole of clarifying and defending Scott Bellware’s comments? This will not end well for me… :P

4. Philippe Monnet

   June 29th, 2010 at 9:17 pm

   

   I really enjoyed the show and could not agree more with you. Have been in the MS world since the days of COM+ all the way to .NET through now. I have also started to work with Ruby in 2004 for all my side-projects (and side-startup). During the day time I work for a financial services corporation using the traditional C#, SOAP web services, ASP.NET, SQL Server stack. I like the analogy with the “technology treadmill” and the perception that MS is keeping us focused on trying to follow all new technologies. Personally I have stopped moving up after .NET 2.0 and and deliberately avoided using WCF and WPF. New language features in C# seem “so” borrowed from Ruby but in a much less attractive way. I am really shocked to hear that some MS folks maybe referring to ASP.NET MVC as “Rails for .NET”. So far from reality! Having worked with MVC frameworks from the days of Smalltalk to today’s Ruby, ASP.NET MVC does not belong to the same league.
   Although I like Rails, I have actually starting to use the Camping web framework on IronRuby/IronRack to do some hybrid Ruby-.NET web prototypes.

5. K. M.

   June 30th, 2010 at 6:39 am

   

   I found one of the guest speakers to be somewhere between annoying and insulting. He is basically a walking advertisement for what is bad about Rails developers (not the framework, rather the evangelical attitude).

   There are many reasons to want to stick with an existing, established framework. Maybe the developers who appear to be afraid to consider alternatives are actually more focused on learning the domain than on another technology. Maybe management has been burned before with a technological change. Maybe the app is working fine and management wants to maximize its return on investment.

   Most of us are employed to add value to our employers business, not to attempt to enforce change.

   There are great aspects to .NET; there are great aspects to Ruby & Rails.

   Each also has not so great aspects.

   In the end it comes down to getting the job done. Use the tool which makes the most sense. Consider not just the specific technology but also the business drivers.

   Please PLEASE stop with the fundamentalist evangelical attitude and give me discussions on specific places where .NET lags Ruby/Rails; to be fair, perhaps also discuss where .NET comes out ahead.

6. Mark Stafford

   June 30th, 2010 at 7:39 am

   

   I always get stuck on the vagueries of the claims made in these types of arguments. Aside from the $$ issue, how do you measure that a Rails developer is 10x more productive than a .NET developer? I don’t buy that. What are some specific, tangible examples of the arguments the guests were making for Rails over .NET? Most of what I heard was pretty high-level MS-is-closed-Ruby-is-open nonsense that doesn’t provide me any claims that are empirically validatable.

   It also frustrates me when I hear people rail (no pun intended) against technologies like WPF, which was far beyond Windows Forms even in its first release, without giving an argument for a viable alternative. Sure, WPF is Windows specific – but what’s the viable alternative? GTK? Come on, now. I’m glad the performance improved a bunch when Microsoft started dogfooding it at a larger scale, but if it’s better than what I have today, I’ll use it.

   For someone who does a whole lot more service development than Web development, it’s hard for me to deal with the Ruby attitude. It felt to me like the guests were implicitly indicating how blind and dumb I am as a .NET developer to not have realized that the Ruby way is the better way.

7. Matt Briggs

   July 1st, 2010 at 6:23 am

   

   @mark: With productivity, I wouldn’t say 10x, more like 2-3x. You are right that it is hard to measure, but it pretty much comes down to a more succinct language, and more mature framework/tooling. Having used both professionally, it is not really comparable from a perspective of “getting stuff done”

   wrt WPF, in my last job we used it to make a few small internal tools, and at least back then (in v1), the perf was downright shocking. A small tool that was basically just a ui around some web services had an extremely long startup time, and the UI wasn’t terribly responsive. For example, we had a list with checkboxes with about 50 or so entries. If they were all checked, scrolling down the list too fast would cause the checkboxes to lag about half a second behind the text, on a quad core with a decent vid card, a raid-0 setup, and 8 gigs of ram. The viable alternative is winforms, which has a pretty high ram requirement, but other then that is pretty solid by now.

   The “ruby” attitude you are talking about is what paul graham talked about with the whole “blub” programmer thing.

   “”As long as our hypothetical Blub programmer is looking down the power continuum, he knows he’s looking down. Languages less powerful than Blub are obviously less powerful, because they’re missing some feature he’s used to. But when our hypothetical Blub programmer looks in the other direction, up the power continuum, he doesn’t realize he’s looking up. What he sees are merely weird languages. He probably considers them about equivalent in power to Blub, but with all this other hairy stuff thrown in as well. Blub is good enough for him, because he thinks in Blub.
   When we switch to the point of view of a programmer using any of the languages higher up the power continuum, however, we find that he in turn looks down upon Blub. How can you get anything done in Blub? It doesn’t even have y.
   By induction, the only programmers in a position to see all the differences in power between the various languages are those who understand the most powerful one. (This is probably what Eric Raymond meant about Lisp making you a better programmer.) You can’t trust the opinions of the others, because of the Blub paradox: they’re satisfied with whatever language they happen to use, because it dictates the way they think about programs.”

   You see this attitude with .net guys looking at java guys, because C# is definitely a more powerful language. You are seeing it here with ruby guys looking at .net guys. You can see it in other places with clojure guys looking at ruby guys. And you see it with Haskell guys looking at clojure guys.

   It is a natural attitude to take, the only way to have any sort of objectivity when talking about languages is to have a wide range of knowledge to draw from. I am a ruby guy, I love the language, but I also know there are loads of other languages that are better in different ways. That doesn’t invalidate me as a rubyist, it just means my choices in career path weren’t completely based on language power.

8. Ken Jackson

   July 1st, 2010 at 8:02 pm

   

   @Matt, I hadn’t used WPF until 3.5SP1. It’s not blazing fast, but its certainly not noticeably slow and we have scenarios with treeviews of 100k+ elements that render quick as day (w/ UI virtualization, container recycling, etc…).

   I do think this was an enlightening episode in that I think it made clearer why the fuss about Ruby from some ex-MS devs. It sounds like they’re “blue crystal” followers. They go from one shiny object to the next. And really, there are tons of .NET devs I’ve worked with. I’ve never heard one of them mention anything about wanting to be an MVP. There’s nothing wrong with being one, but I think that that is more about seeking affirmation from the community.

   Most great devs I know don’t have blogs, or twitter accounts, but they ship some great products. Lets be clear, most of you have probably never heard a peep from David Cutler, he just writes great code.

   Also the language hierarchy that Matt lists is just absurd. But I think it is represetative of the smaller thinking that goes on in these debates. That everything is a strictly ordered list. If you’re not using Haskell with TDD and Cucumber then you’re not a real dev. Oh, you just shipped Red Dead Redemption written in C++? Clearly that’s no match to my e-commerce website.

   To me, it’s put up or shut up. If you’re going to claim superiority, show it by posting your product. Because if your product is no good then having 110% test code coverage really means squat.

9. Ken Jackson

   July 1st, 2010 at 8:13 pm

   

   And one last thing, if Paul Graham actually said that Blub thing, he’s an idiot or he’s lying. I don’t know which. But most everyone knows that virtually every language is Turing Complete. They are all equal in power. This isn’t an issue of language power. It’s about how a language expresses this power.

   Haskell users certainly don’t look down on Clojure users, at least none I know of, and I know some of the people who created it. Even Simon will admit to Haskell probably not being appropriate for building a wide class of real-world applications.

   I think you’re looking for Ruby developers trying to be relevant — I think this is sometimes a function of being web devs. A title that generally was/is looked down upon. Me thinks thou dost protest too much though. Ship great apps.

10. Daniel Pratt

    July 2nd, 2010 at 10:39 am

    

    While aspects of this podcast were interesting and informative, I found it very difficult to listen to a very long stream of RoR praise and Microsoft criticism with not a hint of rebuttal or skepticism from anyone else. I wish that there were some guests present willing to (intelligently) question some of what was being presented.

    Furthermore, I don’t have much experience with the RoR community at large, but I find some of these .NET expatriates *very* hard to listen to. Their comments are just dripping with condescension towards .NET programmers who have yet to become enlightened. Perhaps .NET programmers are (on the whole) not quite as ignorant and sheep-like as imagined.

11. Matt Briggs

    July 2nd, 2010 at 10:52 am

    

    @ken: wrt WPF, it could very well have gotten a lot better. Most of the WPF bashing that went on were people that used it back when I did though, so that sort of experience would explain the impression they got.

    With the whole “blub” thing, I think you misunderstood what i was getting at. I agree that what is important is what you are building and what you ship, the language is just a tool.

    Maybe instead of “power”, I should have said “Flexibility and succinctness”. It boils down to being able to write the same thing with less code, more clarity, and the ability to adapt it later to meet new requirements with less effort. That is what pg was talking about in that essay. If I am a c# guy that has only really worked with C# and Java, I may look down on java for not having extension methods, since it is a really handy language feature that helps me get stuff done faster. But then I look at something like monads in haskell, and think the whole idea is dumb (I mean, who cares if functions do more then one thing?). I have just made a value judgement because my experience with c# and java is enough to let me see how awesome extension methods are, and I think that gives me enough ground to make similar evaluation of Haskell language features.

    Now, as for my product, I work at a place called nulogy, which is sort of an ERP/WMS type system for the packaging industry (specifically the contract packaging vertical). It is only about two years old, but it one of those mind rendingly complex projects you only get in enterprise development (i think we are somewhere between 175-200 models at this point). Our customers love us for a whole bunch of reasons, but the biggest one directly related to the engineering group is our fantastic turnaround time on bugs and enhancements (we deploy every two weeks).

    There are other things that go into the amount and quality of the output of the team (like pairing, tdd, and average skill level), but I would say that the language and the platform is at least a third of it. We do pay more in infrastructure you would expect for a similar app on .net or java, but for us and what we do (enterprise webapp), the tradeoff is more then worth it in developer time.

    What it comes down to at the end of the day, is choosing the best tools for the job, that will let you deliver quality and speed in addressing the needs of your clients. If you think all languages are equal in that regard, I will have to respectfully, (but violently) disagree :)

12. Matt Briggs

    July 2nd, 2010 at 11:19 am

    

    and regarding the pg quote,
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Graham_(computer_programmer)#Blub

    it is actually a fairly common term nowadays on programmer blogs and forums that aren’t related to c# or java.

13. Ken Jackson

    July 2nd, 2010 at 1:27 pm

    

    @Matt, in your follow-up post I actually agree with a lot you say. But still some points were made that I think represent a skewed perspective:
    “If I am a c# guy that has only really worked with C# and Java, I may look down on java for not having extension methods”

    I’m sure there are a lot of developers that fit into this mold, but I think a lot fewer than you believe. Most devs I know simply aren’t that naive. I asked some devs “what’s better C# or Java” and the first response I got was “I like Java for writing Android apps”. A little smirk, but I think appropriate. It’s about the tool for the job.

    So I don’t think all languages are equal. But I also don’t think there is a strict ordering amoung the languages, or even a partial ordering. I think you have to look at the job at hand. I’m a huge Haskell fan, but there’s never been a time in my life where I’ve thought… if I had written this all in Haskell my life would be simpler. It just doesn’t map well to my domain. But oddly, I have thought that about Fortran — yet few people would say Fortran devs look down at Haskell devs.

    I do think there is a fundamental divide right now though between different kinds of developers and it’s not C# vs Ruby. But rather there are devs that think there are silver bullets. RoR is the silver bullet. It is strictly better than what you’re using. Or functional programming solves all problems. Then there’s another set of devs, the camp I’m in, who thinks you need to look at every problem differently. We don’t have a strong affinity to one language or one style of programming. But we do have a strong affinity to the tool that will help us do the job. And we want to be judged, not on which tool we used, but on the product we ship.

14. Ken Jackson

    July 2nd, 2010 at 1:45 pm

    

    Interesting parallel, after I wrote that it did remind me of an interesting parallel in academia. It’s the case that less applied fields always look down on the more applied fields.

    Philosophy looks down at everyone.
    Theoretical math looks down at applied math.
    Applied math looks down on physics.
    Physicists look down on computer scientists.
    Computer scientists look down on EEs.
    EEs look down at home economics.

    Or something like that :-)

    Similarly the group at the bottom of the programming language hierarchy is always conveniently the one that consumes the most cycles. And the language at the type of hierarchy will be one that generates few cycles. It’s the same reason why every pop artist sucks and every indie artist who has only sold five albums is great — until they sell a bunch of albums, then they suck too.

    I grew out of that phase with music/movies 20 years ago. I also did so for languages many moons ago as well.

15. P.C.

    July 4th, 2010 at 9:39 am

    

    On the listen to this podcast, I was struck by:

    * a lot of high-level business points, and lots of low-level developer/language points.
    * the absolute arrogance and condescension of the guests. How many times can you paint the pictures of .NET developers being mindless sheep or unthinking schlubs who lap up whatever the Microsoft marketing department decides to release to align with the next version of SharePoint.
    * the complicity of the HC hosts. One played or tried to play “me too” to curry favour to the guests, and came off a bit of a brown-noser.
    * reinforced the takeaway of the ALT.NET podcast folks who basically complained the whole way through.

    Microsoft is a platform company. We get it. In fact, that’s why I choose to be a Microsoft platform developer. I want to *focus on business problems*, not on bundling all the non-value-added technology pieces together in the IT world. Developers are paid to add business value, not look down on each other for the flavour of their ice cream.

    The derisiveness and scorn that one guest used when describing the release dates of products to coincide with SharePoint was baffling. Yes, SP is an easy target. The high level point here is that Microsoft produces a LOT of products for developers, and they want to be more integrated. Isn’t that a good thing? Features matching platforms?

    The Entity Framework example is great, in the sense that you shouldn’t ALWAYS have to adopt the products each and every time. I’ll agree — choose the right tool for the job. If nHib or SubSonic or LINQ To SQL works best, choose that, or not.

    It seems the ALT.NET movement was crushed under the weight of their own bitterness. ALT.NET == bitter.

    I’d prefer to listen to the more-positive vibes by Hanselman, Franklin+Campbell. Nobody’s perfect, and listeners should always have a critical ear and be open to question whatever any podcast suggests.

    Herding Code is not a .NET-centric podcast, and I appreciate hearing about other languages and frameworks. Can the next Herding Code perhaps introduce Ruby to the .NET devs? Perhaps talk about how to get started with IronRuby? Please no condescension about our use of Visual Studio.

    I’d give this episode a C-. Looking forward to hearing and learning more about how a .NET dev can get productive with Ruby in the Microsoft stack to add value to their customers.

16. Adventures in Code Club

    July 4th, 2010 at 2:44 pm

    [...] been solving Project Euler and S-99 problems.  Admittedly, I may be slightly influenced by the Mike Moore, Jeff Cohen and Scott Bellware’s recent Ruby conversation on Herding Code, but Ruby is fun and productive and really easy to get one’s head around. And the way I can [...]

17. Alex

    July 5th, 2010 at 9:56 am

    

    I cannot believe the arrogance of these guys. They think that all .NET developers are ignorant saps who don’t know any better. I honestly cannot find the words to express how small-minded and naive these people appear to be.

18. Scott Koon

    July 5th, 2010 at 9:30 pm

    

    P.C. (If that is in fact your REAL name)

    You might enjoy our interview with Cory Foy and Will Greene where they compare .NET development with Ruby development.
    http://herdingcode.com/?p=254

    You might also enjoy Will’s IronLanguages podcast. Which covers IronRuby, IronPython and anything else running on the DLR.
    http://ironlanguages.net/

    Alex: WHAT!?! Some software developers are arrogant? I for one sir, am SHOCKED. SHOCKED I say. I WILL report this finding to my congressperson. Good day to you

19. Mike Moore

    July 5th, 2010 at 9:53 pm

    

    C’mon guys! They asked us why we left, and we answered. We all found something we thought was better and had several shared frustrations at getting many .NET devs to see it. Nobody is attacking anyone. I don’t think any of us think .NET devs are ignorant or small-minded. Having and voicing an opinion does not equate arrogance. Perhaps you should listen to what is actually said instead of rounding the wagons up and fortifying your defenses.

20. Liam McLennan

    July 5th, 2010 at 9:55 pm

    

    I thought this was a great episode and I am surprised that it inspired such angry comments.

    Someone suggesting that there is a better way is not arrogance – it’s an opinion.

21. Mike Moore

    July 5th, 2010 at 9:57 pm

    

    As an aside, I don’t think Alt.NET was bitter. I don’t understand why there is so much animosity towards Alt.NET. I personally tried very hard to highlight many of the awesome elements of Alt.NET, and it seems obvious to me that the total affect on the .NET community and Microsoft was overwhelmingly positive. It also appears that many who are angry over this podcast are also angry with Alt.NET, and I just don’t get it.

22. Mark Stafford

    July 6th, 2010 at 6:47 am

    

    @Mike,

    Listen to the episode. It might sound pretty different in retrospect. It went way beyond answering why you left. More than one of the guests expressed verbally that they just wished their .NET developer friends could see things as they really are (paraphrase).

    @Scott,

    Don’t be a dick. It’s not helping. I like listening to the podcast because it talks about a lot of things that aren’t covered by my other podcasts, but geez, man, show a little maturity. You’re a show host.

23. Mike Moore

    July 6th, 2010 at 8:37 am

    

    Mark, I have listened to it. (And I was even there when it was recorded!) I don’t begrudge anyone the ability to make their own choices. But we all had fairly similar experiences with a philosophical resistance to change that appears to be endemic with the .NET community. That is a fact. This is not new, and is likely discussed by other “outside” communities looking “in” at .NET. I choose to think of this as merely an unflattering reflection of one aspect of the .NET community and not a condemnation of the whole of it.

    As far as seeing things “as they are” or not “getting it”; it is my firm belief that the shortest path to improving your C# skills is to learn Ruby. This is not fundamentally different than improving your C++ or Java skills by learning Smalltalk in the ’90s. I believe this and am happy to discuss my belief. If you haven’t seriously investigated Ruby you should! (And Clojure! And Erlang! And tons of other great languages that will fundamentally change how you think about programming!) I try to be respectful of other’s views but I can’t couch every single one of my statements as “just my opinion” to shield someone’s ego.

    Its okay to disagree! But so far not many have disagreed; they have dismissed by labeling us fundamentalists or condescending or arrogant or (my favorites) searching for a silver bullet and distracted by the new and shiny.

24. Steve

    July 10th, 2010 at 10:53 pm

    

    I must say that as someone who manages groups of .NET developer for a large corporation, this talk was pretty much spot on.

    Having read the comments first I was fully expecting foaming at the mouth, vile towards Microsoft, and frankly there wasn’t any.

    Then again, people got “mad” at Rob Conrey’s NDC talk when all he said was “Guys, let’s start demanding better from Microsoft, the company we pay billions of dollars as year to to sell us software”.

25. Peter

    July 13th, 2010 at 7:44 pm

    

    That was disappointing. I was expecting / hoping to hear a list of “did you know you can do X operation so much easier?”, “check out this cool thing ruby can do”, “I used to spend hours doing X but now I can do it in X/n using ruby”… You know: passionate, positive support for the platform you moved to; a genuine excitement about the new-found tool.

    To be honest, there was some of that. However, there was also a lot of venting, petty remarks, and looking down on .NET developers. That’s unfortunate, because there were some good points too, but when you exaggerate a .NET flaw or shortcoming to support your point I just can’t take you seriously.

    The whole discussion was also very vague. How you can be a developer and talk for so long without getting into details is beyond me. You guys sounded more like politicians. The whole thing smelled like forced evangelism, like listening to a bunch of snob Apple fan-boys rather than developers.

    If you really like Ruby as much as you claim, then please next time try to put your personal rants behind you and show positive support (i.e. without the need to put anybody down), otherwise, in my opinion, you’re harming the adoption more than you’re helping it.

26. Scott Koon

    July 14th, 2010 at 7:44 pm

    

    Peter,

    This wasn’t the show about “why Ruby is cool”. Check out our show with Cory Foy and Will Green for that. This was the show about “Why did you stop doing .NET development”. For some of these developers, the .NET community, Microsoft, and the .NET framework in general just weren’t cutting it for them anymore.

27. Andrew

    July 24th, 2010 at 4:13 pm

    

    You’ve had some great shows and I like new things too, but this episode is titled “The Bile Show”.

28. start and drive toyota gts on labour day | ToyotaDaily.info

    July 29th, 2010 at 10:12 am

    [...] Herding Code 84: Ex-Microsoft Developer Panel with Mike Moore … [...]

29. A'braham Barakhyahu

    August 1st, 2010 at 5:34 am

    

    Don’t know how I missed this one, but I would like to hear more.  I agree some devs rely on what Microsoft puts out (I’ve been told this verbally), but some just want to do good work.  Microsoft is a business first, so it’s constraints/approaches on he they do things is different from an opensource framework like rails.  The approaches for both will always be different because of their origins (product created by company, product opensourced by company).  As developers we should recognize the constraints, but not live solely in them. When we do that we will use the right tool, and more importantly, have knowledge of other tools to make a informed decision.  

    Bring on the final chapter of this talk. :)

30. ShaderOp

    August 6th, 2010 at 2:51 pm

    

    I think the guests ought to be admired for stepping out of their comfort zone, looking at alternative technologies to .NET, and then making the jump. I think it’s easy for us .NET developers to get overly comfortable in the Microsoft ecosystem to the point that we irrationally fear for its demise if (God forbid) something better would come along that would require upgrading one’s skill set.

    But then again the guests’ claims are a prime example of the kind of vague, almost mystical rhetoric that often comes from the Ruby evangelism camp. The one claim that I find most alarming is the *ten times* increase in productivity.

    I’m sure that a lot of developer (including the guests of this episode) are familiar with the Mythical Man-Month by Fred Brooks. And I’m sure that they are also familiar with “No Silver Bullet” essay in that book, in which he groups technological factors (like choice of operating system, programming languages, etc.) into what he terms “Accidental Complexity,” which he estimates to constitute no more than 50% of the effort of building a software system. This means that no advances in programming languages and techniques, even if they somehow translate to zero effort, would take us past 50% increase in productivity.

    Let’s say the move from good ol’ assembly to C resulted in 10% increase in productivity. And moving from C to .NET and all related Microsoft technologies and platforms would result in a mere 10% further increase in productivity. That leaves just a 30% potential productivity gain to be had from any new technology or programming language. Are we to believe that somehow Ruby cancels all the accidental complexity overhead? And even if that is true, that leaves the other 50% of the complexity that cannot be programmed away, the part where you actually have to know what software to build.

    I’m guessing that the guests are confusing satisfaction with productivity. They are probably much happier with Ruby than they were with anything .NET. And that’s fine. I believe programming is still a craft, and passion is probably one of the most valuable traits a programmer can bring to his craft. I would argue that if working with even a slightly inferior technology is fully justifiable if it would translate to a programmer being happier and more passionate about his or her job.

    But passion shouldn’t mean that we ought to do away with logic and common sense. I would have liked to see more of those in this episode.

31. Developer Community and Technology - August 2010 Meeting

    August 11th, 2010 at 6:25 am

    [...] A round table discussion of some of the topics discussed recently on the Herding Code Podcast. Episode #84 – Ex-Microsoft Developer Panel with Mike Moore, Jeff Cohen, and Scott Bellware http://herdingcode.com/?p=256 [...]

32. Mike Moore

    August 13th, 2010 at 8:55 pm

    

    ShaderOp, since I was the one who brought up the “ten times increase in productivity” up, and you aren’t the first one to ask about it, I suppose I should put that in context. I was referencing Curt Hibb’s Rolling with Ruby on Rails article (http://oreilly.com/ruby/archive/rails.html) as the time that I first looked closely at Ruby on Rails. In the article Curt said the following:

    “What would you think if I told you that you could develop a web application at least ten times faster with Rails than you could with a typical Java framework? You can–without making any sacrifices in the quality of your application! How is this possible?”

    Again, put this in historical context. Java web frameworks six years ago were bloated, overly complex and XML heavy. At the time the claim did have merit. As you can imagine, this caused quite a stir at the time. (Slashdot reaction here: http://developers.slashdot.org/story/05/01/21/1514234/Rolling-With-Ruby-On-Rails)

    I haven’t heard anyone claim that Rails still holds a ten times increase in productivity, due to the advances in Java and .NET frameworks. Again, I did not make that claim, I was merely referring to the original article to provide a timeline. But I do think Rails has a two or three times productivity advantage over a Java and .NET frameworks.

33. Arnis L

    August 15th, 2010 at 8:25 am

    

    Just learn the damn thing. That’s all I got to say.

34. NCR

    August 27th, 2010 at 8:06 am

    

    Even before I downloaded the podcast, just looking at the 1st couple of words of the title “Ex-Microsoft Developer Panel”, well I knew that was going to be a “grudge-fest”. How could it not? Otherwise, why would you be “Ex”. Add Bellware into the mix, and I knew what to expect even before I listened.

    But it’s ok. I take it as an opportunity to learn about .NET perceived flaws, and to open my mind. It was a great podcast, IMHO.

RSS feed for comments on this post · TrackBack URI