Fog Creek Software
Discussion Board




Why whine?

I've noticed lately on this board, especially as it relates to .NET.

Why are some people so damn negative? As soon as they find what they consider some reasonable sized bug, it makes them turn off their brain. I'm reading about people here who refuse to use .NET, making ridiculous claims that because of this bug or some other bug, that the system is completely unusable to them.

We're not talking about things like garbage collection bugs (there was a decent one in v1.0, which still didn't stop me from using it). We're talking about things like "the WinForms grid doesn't work exactly like I think it ought to." Super... have you heard of third party controls? "Oh, f**k that! The Microsoft provided grid has bugs, so I'm taking my toys and going home!" Yeah, that's rational. :-p

Nothing I've ever used has been perfect. I've been known to bitch about bugs, too. But that hardly stops me from using things with bugs in them.

Seriously, how can someone with that attitude survive in development?

Brad Wilson (dotnetguy.techieswithcats.com)
Tuesday, August 12, 2003

If users are permitted to complain about the software that you write, are you not entitled to complain about software that you have to use in order to create the users' software? Do you think that if you said "Yeah. Its a bug. Hard luck." you would continue to sell software for very long?


Tuesday, August 12, 2003

Oh, please.  If I think the program is difficult to use, and needlesly annoying, and I've heard it has some fairly large sized bugs - losing source code - I wouldn't call that whining, I'd call that complaining.  There's a big difference.

Again, if I'm using C++, and I'm not doing web services, why would I use .NET?  (I mean at this moment in time; someday, of course, we'll all be herded into the .NET groupthink... it's inevitable.)

Grumpy Old-Timer
Tuesday, August 12, 2003

Losing source code is a legitimate reason to stay away. Not being happy with a grid control isn't. Do you honestly think the two are equivalent, and that I was talking about you, GOT?

Brad Wilson (dotnetguy.techieswithcats.com)
Tuesday, August 12, 2003

Users can and should complain about their software bugs.

But what I'm saying is that I'm seeing people say the equivalent of "I typed a phrase into Word, and the spell checker didn't know what it was! Well, screw that, I'm uninstalling Word and going back to my typewriter."

You think that's normal, rational behavior for a DEVELOPER?

Brad Wilson (dotnetguy.techieswithcats.com)
Tuesday, August 12, 2003

Well, no, that's just silly.

I just expected this version of the IDE to be *fantastic*, given that it's been 100 years or so since VC6 came out.  The fact that it's not only not fantastic, but actively sucks, is very disappointing.

The compiler itself, though, seems much improved: it found hundreds of "trivial" flaws in our code, and two or three honest-to-goodness bugs - crashes waiting to happen.

Grumpy Old-Timer
Tuesday, August 12, 2003

I agree that, for VC++ 6 users (which I was), the IDE is more or less a joke. I wouldn't use it, if I had an alternative that had Intellisense in it. (Of course, I'm using C#, so it's not like I can stick with VC++ 6.)

The C++ compiler, especially the 7.1 compiler in VS.NET 2003, is much much improved, and worth slogging through the sub-optimal UI for.

Brad Wilson (dotnetguy.techieswithcats.com)
Tuesday, August 12, 2003

Brad:

It's called "gotcha" logic.

You've described the pattern pretty well: Does it do important-foo? It does? How about reasonably-useful-bar? That too? What about needlessly-trivial-blitz? It doesn't? Gotcha! Well then, it's obviously useless.

I used to be astounded at how inconsistently gotcha logic was applied: people would rail about petty stuff for one platform and ignore or rationalize major faults in another.

But now I realize that gotcha logic springs from prejudice. The gotcha logician has already made up her/his mind and uses gotcha logic to rationalize the decision they have already made.

When i started with Java in 1996 or so, I put up with tons of nonsense. But I was interested in the language/platform and I took it all in a pioneer spirit. I was prejudiced in favour of the platform: I saw opportunities and explained away or worked around problems.

And at the time, the gotcha logicians were out in full force decrying Java as a toy. Now some people are howling about .NET.

It seems obvious to me that it's going to have some issues, and that part of being an early adopter is working around the issues. In fact, isn't it something of a badge of honour to boast about how bad things were "in the old days"???

http://www.braithwate-lee.com/

Reginald Braithwaite-Lee
Tuesday, August 12, 2003

Um, actually, yes, I did assume that you were talking about me... I guess you weren't...

Then who were you talking about?

Grumpy Old-Timer
Tuesday, August 12, 2003

I was making a general observation. The most recent example was B.J. in the CityDesk VB6 thread.

Brad Wilson (dotnetguy.techieswithcats.com)
Tuesday, August 12, 2003

Well, see, that's what I get for skipping the VB threads... off I go to read it...

Grumpy Old-Timer
Tuesday, August 12, 2003

Brad wrote, "I've noticed lately on this board, especially as it relates to .NET. Why are some people so damn negative?"

Well, B.J.'s development platform of choice is Delphi so that probably explains why he feels the way he does.

There are a lot of reasons why people whine about the .NET platform:

* VB.NET isn't backward compatible with VB 6 and Microsoft hasn't said much about VBA's future.
* .NET doesn't run on every Microsoft OS like C++ and VB did.
* .NET is a Microsoft only development platform. Why would a company with a heterogeneous IT environment choose .NET or Java?
* There isn't a lot of demand for developers who have .NET related certs but little actual work experience with the .NET platform.
* People have invested a lot of time and money learning/mastering Microsoft's legacy software development products and now they find themselves being asked to do the same thing all over again (in many instances using their own money and personal time).
* Blah, blah, blah.....

One Programmer's Opinion
Tuesday, August 12, 2003

.NET is a vapourware that's the bottom line. I can't think of solution that REALLY needs to be developed with .NET.

It's a another monster marketing tactic by Microsoft. Nothing new, same ole' same ole' but gazillions of new buzzwords.

I wish other people follow the city of Munich example. I am getting my Linux server up and running in a few days.

memyselfandirene
Tuesday, August 12, 2003

Because of recent worms, we have setup a committe to brainstorm a migration plan from Windows 2000 to Unix servers for our mission critical app.

Voila!!

memyselfandirene
Tuesday, August 12, 2003

Time to feed the troll.

>.NET is a vapourware that's the bottom line. I can't think of solution that REALLY needs to be developed with .NET.

First of all, if you're going to use the term vaporware (or vapourware), take the time to find out what it means.

Secondly, I can't think of any solution that really needs to be developed in anything but assembly language.  Or even better, machine language.

>It's a another monster marketing tactic by Microsoft. Nothing new, same ole' same ole' but gazillions of new buzzwords.

Yup, the CLR & the ASP.NET model are nothing new - you're absolutely right. 

>I wish other people follow the city of Munich example. I am getting my Linux server up and running in a few days.

I wish other people would stop following the Linux/OSS movement + bashing Microsoft even when they build a good product, just because it's the cool geeky in-thing to do.

GiorgioG
Tuesday, August 12, 2003

Hey GiorgioG

Thanks for suggestions.

How's the weather up there in Redmond by the way?

memyselfandirene
Tuesday, August 12, 2003

>Because of recent worms, we have setup a committe to brainstorm a migration plan from Windows 2000 to Unix servers for our mission critical app.

Lets see, it is August 12th.  Microsoft patched this on July 16th.  That's almost a month ago.  Your servers aren't up to date?  Your fault.

Secondly,  Why would you leave any server out on the internet without a firewall to secure it? 

Grr.

GiorgioG
Tuesday, August 12, 2003

Please go back to slashdot

GiorgioG
Tuesday, August 12, 2003

Hey GiorgioG

Thanks for the update. The constant battle to keep up with the patches and all sorts of security breaches is insane. If MS had done its job properly in a first place, we shouldn't have gone through all these unncessary headaches. I am so glad that Microsoft isn't in Car, Airline or even toy business for that matter. I would have been a macabre.

You didn't tell me how's the weather in Redmond? what building are you in?

memyselfandirene
Tuesday, August 12, 2003

It should read

It would have been a macabre.

memyselfandirene
Tuesday, August 12, 2003

I can only hope the admins delete this thread, as it's now deteriorated into a troll-fest. :(

Brad Wilson (dotnetguy.techieswithcats.com)
Tuesday, August 12, 2003

Brad,

I think what we're seeing with .NET is the same FUD that we've seen with every new platform to ever come down the pike.

Many programmers feel threatened by things that simplify their jobs and take away the sanctomonious elitism that comes with "heavy metal" programming.

The inescapable fact is that .NET has merged the "drag and drop" programming paradigm with the ability to handle complex coding tasks and large scale projects.  Some are threatened by this; just like sysadmins were threatened by the GUI.

I think some are forgetting that we're on year 2 of .NET.  What was Linux like after 2 years?  How about Windows 2.0?  Java in 1996?  They sucked hard.  .NET is far ahead of where it "should be" in the grand scheme of things.

Most mature developers will embrace a platform that is great 90% of the time, and a pain 10% of the time.  If the 10% gets your goat, try finding uninitialized variables in a 2M+ LOC C++ project.  To expect the platform's benefits without the costs is crazy.

Personally, as someone who's done C++ for an embarassingly long time, I find .NET/C# a great step forward.

Bill Carlson
Tuesday, August 12, 2003

Well put, bill.  I don't think anyone could argue that java isn't a successful language, and I can say that c# and ASPX has FAR suprassed java in many areas.

vince
Tuesday, August 12, 2003

"even when they build a good product"

Dot Net might be okay, but it sounds like RPC sucks today

Mike
Tuesday, August 12, 2003

Mike,

Actually, RPC isn't half bad.  Have you looked at .NET remoting?  Not the web-services crap, but the actual "client and server know each other" remoting?

Once you get it working, it's painfully easy to do RPC stuff and marshal reasonably classes without writing any code.

The trick is suffering through the poor documentation.  For some reason MS likes to talk about remoting in adstract terms and doesn't have a "I wanna call a function over the internet; what do I do" white paper for the 95% that only care about that.  It's really pretty easy, though.

Bill Carlson
Tuesday, August 12, 2003

Why complain about .NET?

Well, because by complaining, you may force MS to clean up it's act. This is why I am actively complaining on public forums every time I hit a major bug.

The WinForms grid is severely broken. It's not only the fact that it "doesn't work the way I expect it to" - it has major bugs - for example, you select a whole row, and press delete, and it crashes your application.

Yes, I solved this by deriving a new component from that grid, and handling the delete keypress message myself. But, this is not normal.

The grid is the basis component for many database apps.

I don't expect the standard grid that comes with .NET to have 1,000 features like 3rd party grids do. But, I expect it to work correctly and without bugs.


Imagine this situation: you buy a nice car. It has a great engine, but, while driving, you discover that the chairs of the car are not well fixed in place, and you fall with the chair on the road, through the car's floor.

Now, wouldn't you complain about the chairs of the car? Wouldn't you think that it's a very crappy car, even if it had a great engine?

And what if somebody on a forum told you that "That's no big deal - just go install 3rd party chairs".


The grid is the basis for many apps. It is simply inexcusable to have bugs in such a basic and important part of the controls library. It MUST work correctly.


In Delphi 1.0 from 1995, and every version of Delphi since then, you could link a grid to a database component, and have it insert and delete records flawlessly, without any bugs.

And the Delphi 1.0 grid had about the same features as the .NET grid - the .NET grid has only a few extra features compared to the Delphi 1.0 grid.

If Borland could get right a basic thing such as the grid in 1995, why can't MS get it right in 2003?

More importantly - ok, in VS .NET 1.0, the grid had this bug. Why didn't they correct it in VS .NET 2003?

This is NOT excusable. Why do you put up with this?

Let's complain directly to MS, and let's write messages on public, high visibility boards, so they feel embarassed and presured to fix the problem.

This is what I do.


> The inescapable fact is that .NET has merged
> the "drag and drop" programming paradigm
> with the ability to handle complex coding tasks
> and large scale projects.  Some are threatened
> by this; just like sysadmins were threatened by
> the GUI.

Borland Delphi has done exactly this since 1995 - 1996.

Unfortunately, Borland simply sucks at marketing.

I don't want to argue into RAD tools holly wars. Yes, Delphi 7 has advantages and disadvantages over VS .NET 2003.

The largest disadvantage of Delphi over VS .NET is lack of garbage collection.

The largest advantages of Delphi over VS .NET is a huge number of 3rd party components, and it's native code compiler which results in fast, optimized x86 code.


If you compare Delphi 7 and VS .NET 2003 from a bugs point of view, you will find that VS .NET 2003 has a lot more bugs.

Yes, Delphi has some bugs in the controls, but they are maybe less than a tenth of the number of bugs VS .NET 2003 has in the controls.

People need to stop thinking that an average of 2-3 major bugs in every important control is acceptable.

Let's complain to MS. Let's complain on public, high visibility boards. Let's write articles. Let's complain to the press.

MAYBE they will do something about it.

B.J. Thunderstone
Tuesday, August 12, 2003

Why don't you just stick to Delphi then?

Honestly, VS.NET / .NET is alot more ambitious than Delphi 1.0 - so you really can't compare Delphi 7 with a 1.0/1.1 product.  Delphi 1.0 certainly had its share of problems, and it certainly didn't try to do web apps & winapps in its initial release.  It didn't have an extensive class library.  Need I continue? Quit whining.  If you want an example of a development environment that totally sucks beyond words, it's Lotus Notes/Domino.  Even at release version 6.0, it is still horribly lacking.

Yes, it sucks that there are bugs that are obvious.  Personally I spent $600 on the Infragistics Suite of Controls for .NET + 1 year subscription + source, and while it has its own issues & bugs, the rich functionality it adds over the default controls (Grids, etc) are definitely worth it.  And I can peak at the code.  No, I don't work or make any money from Infragistics...

GiorgioG
Tuesday, August 12, 2003

Grr.  That should read "And I can peek at the code."

GiorgioG
Tuesday, August 12, 2003

> Why don't you just stick to Delphi then?

I do stick with Delphi, thank you!

But, sometimes my clients ask me to develop using .NET.


> Honestly, VS.NET / .NET is alot more ambitious
> than Delphi 1.0

Yes, it is.

But Delphi 1 / 1995 got the grid right, while VS .NET 2003 didn't get that one right.

Hey - I'm not talking about a rarely used component, but about a basis and very important component for a very important class of applications (database applications).

They could have spent 50 more hours of work on the grid, in order to get it right!

B.J. Thunderstone
Tuesday, August 12, 2003

"Hey - I'm not talking about a rarely used component, but about a basis and very important component for a very important class of applications (database applications)."

Aside from the fact that you're positively sure it's broken beyond use (which I doubt), you could've spent the time you were here whining, on a new grid control. You realize time is worth money, right?

Brad Wilson (dotnetguy.techieswithcats.com)
Wednesday, August 13, 2003

B.J.,
judging from your behavior, I'd bet you even don't have a legit license for VS.NET 2003.

Johnny Bravo
Wednesday, August 13, 2003

Do you have the time
to listen to me whine
about everything and nothing
all at once?

Billie Joe
Wednesday, August 13, 2003

"They could have spent 50 more hours of work on the grid, in order to get it right! '

No they couldn't.  This is classic Microsoft.  Leave a LOT of unfinished business to ensure a robust 3rd party market.  Look at all the vb module vendors.  The same thing is springing up around .net. 

Rodan
Thursday, August 14, 2003

*  Recent Topics

*  Fog Creek Home