Maximum PC

I'll take off my Apple-fanboi hat for a bit and I'll write about why Windows 8 will continue to disappoint me. But first, some background.

1. My day to day work is a software engineer using Microsoft .NET (ASP.NET, Winforms - 2.0, 3.5 and 4.0)
2. I have been using .NET since 2000, but began work professionally in 2005 (about six years in the industry)

There are a few things that irritated me over the years with Microsoft, partly with the way they continue to have multiple models of development.

First off, the Windows API. It's sh**. MFC, Win32, COM, COM+ and ATL are already crap implementations of what should have been a clean OS level API's. The sad part is, MS continued this trend well into Windows XP. Anyone versed in these items knows that they are difficult to code in and the code is not easily readable.

Second, MS never took .NET anywhere. I understand that while Visual Studio revolves around .NET, a lot of MS's own products are built using a combination of old and new paradigms. For example, Sharepoint 2007 is built on C#, .NET 3.0 and COM+. Debugging issues is a nightmare in itself. Dynamics GP is still built using COM+ and ATL, it's also a nightmare to code in. No real API for app integration. Sharepoint 2007 and 2010 API's are so messy, you'll never want to touch Sharepoint ever again (I know I won't).

Third, Windows 8 should have re-introduced Windows with the following developer features:

1. A cleaner Windows API
2. 100% .NET support (i.e., only apps written in .NET are supported)
3. Restructure .NET, get rid of XAML (WPF/Silverlight) and focus on delivering the same UX on all Windows devices (i.e., using HTML5 canvas for Silverlight/WPF and using that as the standard for all applications written in .NET).

Instead, we know that MS is implementing HTML5/Javascript into Windows 8 development but what about .NET? I understand that Windows 8 should allure consumers but developers are just as equally important in that equation. What's going to be difficult is how HTML5/javascript will integrate into lower level system calls. Will MS provide JS API's for it? Seriously, what about .NET?

I'm hoping my assesment is wrong and that MS proves me wrong, but I'm hardly gonna hold my breath. MS suffers from inconsistent developer tools/products, they never seem to be able to deliver the same quality of care for tools for developers and they often mix-and-match their paradigms. All of this is pissing me off, if .NET is just another product set why bother pimping it out? Now with Windows 8, is .NET still in or will I be forced to write all of my apps in HTML5/Javascript?

Being the resident Windows fanboi, I feel it is appropriate for me to respond

My day to day work, is like you, .NET development. However with the recent job change I am now essentially 90% ASP.NET where I used to be 35% Win Forms, 30% ASMX Web Services, 25% ASP.Net, and 10% other. I have been developing in some shape or form, actively, since 2003. I have about the same number of years "professionally" developing.

The API has always been rough, no doubts. It could and should be fixed. Will it? ::shrug::

I don't understand what you mean by MS not taking .NET anywhere? Can you elaborate on this? I think the application APIs suffer from the same problems the Windows API does. It is hard to change things when you have such a long history of using them.

We don't know what Windows 8 will bring, I stand by the statement it is way too early to be making those kinds of calls.

1) Agree, the API should be fixed.
2) I totally disagree with this. Why would you exclude things like Java and other languages? I don't understand what you are going for here.
3) I also disagree with this. What is wrong with XAML? They are eventually going to get to a consistent UX but I don't think that HTML5 should be the way to do it. I really HATE how trendy HTML5 has become. It is not the solution. Lets not step backwards. I want my desktop to BE a desktop!

.NET development isn't going anywhere. It would be seppuku for MS to not keep .NET in the forefront of development in Windows. I really REALLY hope they don't hook up JS to the APIs. JavaScript is not a solid language, not for that kind of thing. I hate how Google made Ajax hip and now we are always trying to round peg/square hole it into an implementation that would be better suited with another technology. Something has to run the back end of all those JavaScript calls.

Are you really saying that VS 2010 isn't a quality developer tool? I am going to go out on a not so limb, limb and say that without it, .NET wouldn't be as big as it is today. The power of the IDE and tools around it has kept me developing in .NET and kept .NET a strong platform. Without it, I'd be developing with Java (::shudder::) or PHP (I think I am going to be a little sick here....) or more likely, C/C++ which has its own pain points.

.NET isn't going away. MS can't afford for it to. If it does... I might seriously have to find a new career. I have invested too much time and energy in MS's platform to have it abandoned. I'd be in some serious trouble in the short term. However, I R Engineer, and finding new work shouldn't be impossible for somebody of my skills and training.

If you look at the different product offerings Microsoft has across the board, it has been very inconsistent. Here are some examples:

1. Sharepoint 2007 was written using a combination COM+ and .NET.
2. Dynamics GP is written using pure COM+ and ATL.

When I say that "Microsoft didn't take .NET anywhere", I meant that their product offerings are invariably inconsistent. They produce things using a multitude of technologies, all of which make 3rd party development more difficult. For example, in GP, trying to consume an API is almost impossible. In Sharepoint, the DLL's are awful and poorly thought-out.



Let me clarify, then. I believe that all Windows apps should have been written in .NET. .NET provided a superior layer for security and sandboxing - something a lot of Windows apps suffer from. I'm not alluding that we forego OS-level API's, but at least clean up the OS API's and force the use of .NET. Java can still run on Windows - whether it chooses to abstract its windowing API's to use Windows GDI (or whathaveyou). I'm jsut saying, for Microsoft developers, it would have been a huge benefit if the API were cleaner.


I'll step back from my "I don't like XAML"-ness and say that if you ARE going for a consistent UX, then stick to one technology! I love HTML5, I really do. But as a developer, there's already a plethora of tools that MS has in their arsenal for UX development. It pisses me off that MS told us to use XAML and only to find out that XAML is stuck to WinMo7 development? WTF? HTML5 on the desktop is not a bad idea, it's a bad idea when MS already has XAML! I would love to see MS deliver with consistency (and not consistently deliver buggy OS'): pick a tech stack and run with it. XAML for UX, .NET for apps, and simplify the OS-level API's - not that hard for a $60B company who has a two to four year timeline between OS'.

However, I don't like XAML. I've always believed that representation and behavior should be separate concerns. This is why I'm such a big fan of HTML5 - HTML is used for representation and javascript for interaction. XAML incorporated all these things, kind of like how server tags in ASP.NET contained references to methods in your code-behind.



That's the thing, even if .NET sticks around, what's it good for? Will we end up like COBOL programmers? Will we suffer the same fate as VB6 guys? That's the messed up part of it all, I always loved .NET (it's my first job out of college, has paid the bills and has helped me travel the world), but MS seems to be making one terrible decision after the next. It seems like the VS guys and the Windows guys exists into separate planes of existence - and none can talk to the other.

BTW, I like javascript. Prototyped languages are interesting in that you can easily generate new objects, add behavior and events just be extending the object itself.



Now that I began to experiment with other languages and frameworks, I noticed a few things that irritated me. Ruby on Rails has a flexible unit-test model. Don't like Test::Unit? There's RSpec. RSpec has Steak, Cucumber and BBQ (yes, those are products, don't laugh). Also, Unit Testing doesn't exist in a separate project, you can test using TDD or BDD, and you can trigger your testing module to run after a file edit.

VS2010 is nice. I like IDE's, but the IDE can be a big hindrance as well. Also, there are lots of awesome tools for VS2010 (Resharper, Redgate) but I feel that tools like Resharper should have been included in VS2010 and part of your development workflow. It seems that VS2010 chops up certain activities (i.e., tests in one project, app in the other)...it doesn't feel cohesive.

Why should we care what language MS uses to develop their products in?

What Windows apps are you talking about? Since I moved to Vista, and most definitely since Windows 7, I have not had any instability with any applications at all. I don't see any lack in security or sandboxing?

XAML is what runs WPF, which was supposed to be the replacement for Win Forms. How is XAML limited to Windows Phone 7? Windows 7 isn't "buggy" at all? I don't understand. It seems like you have a welled up predjudice and still hold ME and Vista against MS. Even though Vista was no worse than XP when it was released. You so BOTH XP and Vista get loads more stable with updates and SP 1 releases. After SP 2 XP was rock solid. I haven't had a BSOD for anything other than hardware failure in almost 6 years...

Unless Silverlight does something weird (I have never developed with it myself), XAML is a separation of presentation and function. My understanding is that all XAML is is an xml representation of UI elements. You still have C# code driving everything in the background. Why is it an issue that ASP.NET had references to the code-behind? That was just one model. You have to hook up the code somehow. What difference does it make if you have a JavaScript method hooked up to the UI element or a .NET call? Slap an update panel around it and it turns it into JavaScript anyway.

VB6 is old, and they all SHOULD have migrated to VB.NET. You can still use .NET to write desktop applications, ASP.NET websites, web services, etc. I don't understand where all of this doom and gloom is coming from....

There is the problem, you LIKE JavaScript

Meh, isn't an issue really. TDD and BDD are kind of fadish anyway (IMO). I think Unit testing can be, and should be, a useful thing to have in your solution. Use whatever framework you want; it really isn't that hard to do.

How is VS2010 a hindrance? Sure, it would be "nice" to have all of resharpers features included. Although IMO, they aren't doing it because ReSharper exists. Because Code Rush exists, etc. Why reinvent the wheel? They made VS extensible for a reason. Resharper isn't expensive and it should be fairly easy to justify its cost to your company. If management can't see how it is helpful then you probably don't wanna work for them anyway. I don't know of any other IDE that comes even close to being as powerful and as helpful as VS 2010 is.

I firmly believe that you should have different areas of the solution separated in different projects. There is no reason not to do that. If somebody breaks a feature in a shared library for example, I should be able to still build my data access library and test it. Having thins separate allows for that. QA broke the unit test project? You can exclude it from the build and still do your development and testing without having to wait for them to fix it. I guess I don't see it being disjointed at all. It enforces some logical separation and helps organize the solution. I hate nothing more than opening a project/solution and seeing hundreds of code files. That is just tedious and next to impossible to work with.

And you didn't even mention the fact that they've lost damn near all of their most innovative people during the past two years! With the exception of MSFT Research, I don't know anybody who actually wants to work for them anymore. Bill is going to have to fire Steve and rehire Ozzy for them to have any chance against GOOG.


It is amazing how much alphabet soup exists in the MSFT ecosystem. Is there a single document somewhere that explains the purpose, function, and possibly history of all their APIs and frameworks? I bet if we were to get our hand on the their source code, we'd find a lot of the same stuff in six places (written in 4+ languages).


Was it meant to go anywhere? It was meant to address the fears that Java created:
A) Risk losing the company B) Risk losing shareholder confidence C) Pay Sun $1B for being... well, MS.

The new fear is different and the new software ecosystem will address the new fear... whether Crashtech likes JS or not... =)


Work or personal apps? I don't see MS dropping the .NET framework anytime soon, but I'm sure that Crashtech will remind you that they'll work just fine in Mono. I would suggest porting them to Java. =)

Yeah, their slow browser... =)

So HTML5/JS is becoming the new VB for windows? I wonder if this is an attempt to get more web master types creating apps for Windows or something.


Yeah, it would be about 40MB smaller... =)

Seriously, I know plenty of people who use VS daily, but you've got to be the only person that I know who actually loves VS. It is a quality tool; However, it is also just another IDE... nothing special to see here. Move along.


How can you say Java/shudder when they COPIED C# from Java?!?!! Have you not noticed the similarity?! It's like saying "without my Honda Civic, I'd be driving a Toyota Camry ::shudder::... Dude, you're a riot!


I suspect that both of you could find a job within a couple of days... Hell, it sounds like you should go work for MS CrashTech.

What is logical about putting the source code and unit tests for a given project in separate projects within the IDE?

First, there shouldn't EVER be code that doesn't compile in the code repository. Don't work with idiots.
Second, if some junior college reject does break the build, is it really that hard to comment out the broken unit test and proceed. It's not a big deal. If it is a big deal, everyone has a great excuse to chill out at Starbucks until someone fixes their mess.
Third, most IDEs put the source code and unit tests in separate folders under a project. It isn't messy. Actually, it is rather nice being able to update a source file, hit ctrl-s then another key to run your unit tests without switching projects. And if there are hundreds of messy code files, unit tests are almost certainly NOT the culprit. In fact, the XP crowd would suggest that a LACK of unit tests is what led to the giant mess in the first place! =)

Oh, I highly doubt that. I think you (and those you work with) are very anti-MS (or were at some point?) and I am not sure and probably went in with a biased view. I could be wrong but I really don't understand how you could go in unbiased and hate VS. You might not love it but I can't see hating it.

Hey, somebody has to hate on it. Amirite?

Honestly though, I think it really came down to the tools. Java isn't the end of the world for me and I wouldn't want to hang myself if I was a java programmer. I won't deny that C# was made to compete with Java and as such is very, VERY similar. However similar the development is different. I would think of it more as "If I wasn't building Civics, I'd be buliding Camrys ::shudder::". Honda has robots with slick programmable interfaces and Toyota has manually controlled robot arms that feel clunky. That is more how I would describe my outlook. If there was a Java IDE that could rival VS then I wouldn't care so much.

I know I am a riot, I also knew if I bashed Java you'd come in and point out that it is the same as C#

I probably could and I would LOVE to work for MS, but it would have to be a gig like Scott Hanselman has. I couldn't move to Washington lol.

Let me answer by asking what ISN'T logical about it? It is all about logical separation for me. I don't want tests mixed in with my projects. I don't want code that is for testing getting build with my DLLs and released with my code. It is FAR easier to keep tests in another project than to include in the class library project (and have it built into the DLL). This puts distance between the implementation of the library and the tests used to verify that library. I can change out that code and modify it all I want. Then when I am satisfied I have it the way I want it, run my tests. I'd love to sit down with you and actually show you how I see it working.

You don't have to switch projects if you don't want to. A lot of the testing frameworks have test runner add-ins for VS. Gives you a menu option to run the tests. I think the real difference comes down to how projects and solutions are different between the IDEs. I'd call "putting them in a different folder" the closest thing other IDEs have to a VS project. Like I said, it is all about logical separation.

Because MS should set the standard for how products built in their own ecosystem should be built. Apple sets the gold-standard in app development using Objective-C. All of their apps are built around the same API's they built. Everything they build, they set the bar for it. For example, Cocoa is now the defacto development library for both OS X and iOS. Interface Builder (IB) is the defacto for UI/UX development in both OS X and iOS.

If MSFT is still writing apps with COM+/ATL, it tells me three things:

1. Does it mean that if I want to implement a similar feature in my application, I have to use COM+/ATL?
2. What am I able to accomplish with the new framework? Are things that I could do in COM+/ATL will be made available for me in the new framework?
3. In the case of Dynamics GP; using COM+/ATL makes it difficult for me to integrate directly to their apps. That means having to touch the database tables because there isn't a readily available API for me to consume. That is a no-no.



Office is still primarily written in the old-school ways. Sharepoint, Dynamics...their two main products are written differently. Let's not forget that Dynamics CRM is not written in the same manner as Dynamics GP.


How many WPF apps do you see are being deployed commercially? XAML never really took off and MSFT never seemed to have marketed it aggressively. With the move towards Windows 8, why isn't MSFT pushing for XAML, rather, they're telling people that you can build Win8 apps using HTML5/javascript? It's hardly a compliment when you've spent countless hours learning XAML, only to wonder why MSFT isn't doing much with it. I'm not saying XAML will be limited to Silverlight only (again, clarification is needed), but it seems that the only commercial venue where XAML exists in is WinMo phone development. BTW, I liked Vista, I never used ME (I went from 98 SE2 to 2000). My favorite is 7. I probably will stop at Windows 8 (it's either OS X or Linux for me, unless future Battlefields will require a newer OS).



XAML is strange because UI representation and code are integrated. XAML isn't just the XML representation of a UI element, it also drove its behavior. The one thing I found odd in XAML is event-bubbling; which I found daftly odd. I never did understandwhat it is.



A lot. ASP.NET makes it difficult to write solid RESTful resources. The concept of code behind is what makes ASP.NET suck at AJAX. The UpdatePanel still makes that same round-trip, btw. It still activates the ASP.NET page lifecycle, but the only difference is that the view state gets updated via javascript. Also, JSON support sucks and it's difficult to get hyper-media support in ASP.NET.

The web dev world is moving at a pace where even MSFT can't keep up. Do you want SproutCore support? Nope. What about jQuery? Barely feasible in ASP.NET 3.5/4.0 - at least trying to use jQuery with ASP.NET controls.



I don't think, I think TDD and BDD will be around for a while. BDD is a business friendly test framework, BDD frameworks like Cucumber and RSpec really drives that "easy to read" testing model.
A good example is Rails' belief in testing: you can test your models and controllers, as well as create integration tests. From my experience using tests in VS, it's kind of lacking. You can test your aspects of your application, but integration tests are just equally important. In Rails, being able to generate tests and run them is a great thing. There are tools that will automatically launch your tests everytime a file is modified (autotest-fsevent). At the end of the day, MSFT's approach to TDD and Agile is lackluster, at best.

Nowadays, it's about a couple of weeks.

Seriously, the longest I've gone is four months unemployed...back in 2008, just shortly after the market crashed. Oh, and I quit my job because I couldn't stand my bosses - so I left. Four months unemployment took a large chunk out of my savings, but hey, found a job later.

Now, I can't get recruiters to stop calling me. It's like every week, at least once a day someone's leaving a message on my voicemail pertaining to a new role I'd be a good fit for. *sigh*

None at all, in my opinion. But that's because TDD is important to me.

First, when I write code, I write the test first. Having separate projects means that either:

1. I'm writing my code first, then test second.
2. I don't have the same access to resources in my unit test as I do in my code.

With #2, it also means that I have to spend an enormous amount of time mocking - which is a royal PITA. Instead of mocking, I use a gem (i.e., module) in Ruby called "FactoryGirl" which allows me to stub objects. Also, I can run my model tests in a sandboxed, so it will actually test all of my models' features without commits to the database.

Second, separate folders is far more streamlined and productive than separate projects. In fact, a project I'm working on (using ASP.NET and VS2010) made TDD so difficult because I was, in effect, writing tests after code. Rather, I spent a few hours mocking my app, then I realized I had just wasted that many hours mocking...so I just said skip-it to TDD and testing it the old fashioned way. I'm regretting that decision.

I think so. .NET is a solid platform, but they seem akin to adding more to the MSFT acronym soup than they are solidifying a product - at least unifying their API's and various development tools.



Both. Will we write our apps using HTML5/Javascript if you want to use the new Windows 8 UX/UI? Is .NET going to be relegated to legacy style apps (i.e., Winforms, etc.)? That's the question I pose and an answer isn't readily available.

Don't have time to reply to everything right now, but this isn't true at all... In either case you at least need a stub of the object to be able to use intellisense against it and get the project (or in my case projects) to compile. You don't have to have the function implemented but it must be stubbed.

If the test project references the library every object is accessible or can be exposed if it isn't accessible by default. Again, neither of your arguments are correct.

Why on earth would you want your test built with the library when you will eventually want that code removed. You don't want to release your tests with your code. Put them in separate projects and then they never will be released unless you physically include a reference or copy a DLL file.

I will stop developing if I have to code in HTML5 and JavaScript for the desktop. Period.

Keep the web on the web and the desktop on the desktop.

I don't use intellisense, so.

Only when I'm in VS2010, do I use it, otherwse, I use TextMate on my Macbook Pro.

Stubbing my method is one thing, but I often will test the logic as I stub out the method. I start to see how, as I write my tests, the behavior will look like. Actually, in Rails, I write my test first before I even stub out my controller actions and models. I should have kept in mind that in the VS2010 world, you would be right, but I had Ruby on Rails in my mind. :/



In my Rails projects, I deploy my tests with my code. Why? Because I do integration testing in my production environment. I run my integration test scripts to see that my app works. Again, this is for a Rails app - I treat .NET differently. The whole idea behind including the test in the project as a separate folder is that it makes me streamline my work. I write tests, I run tests, if it passes I implement the code. I like being able to run a test as soon as I save my file(s) automatically.

I agree with you on this one, though the blur is starting to get big. SproutCore's introducing functionality that makes web development easier. Using HTML5, they can mimic the behavior of desktop apps for the web. Though it is still a web application.

Though I'll back you up on this one. HTML5/Javascript on Windows 8 should have been XAML by default.

I did a little reading on the topic... I highly doubt that .NET and XAML are going anywhere. It has been said (and I'd say their analysis is spot on) that the HTML5 / JS is a way to bring more developers to the platform, more ppl writing apps, the more people want to use the OS. WPF and Silverlight aren't something you can easily learn in an evening and be able to create full fledged applications (for most people). While I would argue it is the better option by far, it is difficult to get people to jump ship if they have to learn a new framework. So the HTML5/JS will get people the ability to more easily write apps that can target Windows.

What will really happen with .NET? Who knows... but it isn't likely to change for the next 5 years.

Why? Do you like punching yourself in the dick when you program?

Yes, yes you do



!!!!!!!!!!! Dude, I can't agree with this. You should NEVER EVER EVER EVER be testing in production! Period! No ifs, ands, or buts. What are you doing man! It doesn't matter what language, that is just bad! You need a proper pre-live environment. If you don't have one, priority number one is to get one! Don't for the love of whatever deity you believe in test in production!

I haven't developed Rails, so I guess it could be different for running as you go. Personally I would find that annoying. I want to write my code and then kick off my tests if I feel like it. Automation is great, except when it isn't. It can be so annoying to have that stuff kick off. I don't want anything happening on my dev box unless I tell it to. Might just be the way we want to work causing the differences though.

I don't like MSFTs business practices, but I can be unbiased. I agree with you that Vista and W7 are much better and fairly solid OSes. I just don't see anything special about VS. It does the same things that many other IDEs do. Can you list something that it does that someone can't do in another IDE?


Trust me, there are enough people already hating on Java.


On a pragmatic level, every IDE that I'm familiar with is designed to have unit tests in the accompanying project folder (and the test code doesn't end up in the build either... unless you included the unit test code in the source code for some reason). On a conceptual level, I don't see how this type of separation achieves any worthwhile purpose. Let's say that your company has written a library that is used in multiple applications. Based on what you've written, I would assume that you're going to place the various modules of library code into separate projects, but how are you going to make the distinction? Every package... every class?


Honestly, I don't see any difference... it is exactly the same way that I write unit tests except my project has a sub-folders for 'Source Packages' and 'Test Packages'. If VS doesn't include these sub-folders, then yes, I would say that it is better to have two separate projects in this case (because the IDE is deficient in this area). And the distance that you're speaking about isn't real in any sense: It is just a different project in the IDE. When you build and run your tests, the IDE & compiler are doing the same thing as when I build and run my tests. I guess it really comes down to how the IDE was intended to be used.

Haha... how do you manage with a vibrant social life.... =)
I joined LinkedIn a while back primarily because I was getting friend requests from people. I hadn't even updated my profile or anything and an HR rep from Google contacted me. Within a few days; I couldn't believe it. Apparently, one or more of the students that I knew from USC, who went on to work at GOOG, put me down in some employee recommendation system and they scan the site. Talk about big brother... =)

For kicks, on Friday I 'applied' to about eight jobs on Dice. Just clicked on the apply button and sent them my generic resume... by Sunday I had 4 inquires, today my email is a mess (I'm here avoiding it) and I missed 6 calls. That might have been a mistake.

While we're on the topic, have either of you worked with CyberCoders? Apparently, they're a pretty large consulting firm and they have some positions that look pretty interesting. A quant position and android dev position paying $70/hr caught my eye.