.NET cartoonish says businessman--valid point, or sour grapes?

[RayLopez99]

Read the below and comment. I say David Siminoff is simply crying
sour grapes because of some scalability issue he has, perhaps due to
hardware. He may be right about the dev community not liking it, but
that's due to ignorance. After all, even the most popular language,
Java, only has 33% market share, about 2x .NET's.

RL

http://www.businessweek.com/print/magazine/content/11_27/b4235053917570.htm

They also created what DeWolfe calls "technology debt." By 2005 the
site had outgrown ColdFusion. At that point it was too late to switch
over to the open-source-code software favored by developers; changing
would have delayed the site for a year or two just as it was exploding
in popularity. The easiest move, says DeWolfe, was to switch to .NET,
a software framework created by Microsoft.

"Using .NET is like Fred Flintstone building a database," says David
Siminoff, whose company owns the dating website JDate, which struggled
with a similar platform issue. "The flexibility is minimal. It is
hated by the developer community."

 

[Goblin]

When you become a IT professional programmer in any shape, form or
fashion, then you can run your mouth. You are just a dumb home user and
you'll be dust in your grave before .NET goes away.

Thats alot more than you are.....I wouldn't even rate you as a home user.

Time for one of your "Waahh I've not read that" posts?

What a child you are.

--
Openbytes the Linux/FOSS Blogazine! - http://www.openbytes.tk
"Cave quid dicis, quando, et cui."
Catch me in #techrights on freenode.net

BytesMedia: www.bytesmedia.co.uk

Email: (e-mail address removed)

Skype: tim.openbytes
Twitter: twitter.com/_goblin
Identi.ca: identi.ca/openbytes

 

[Registered User]

On Mon, 27 Jun 2011 07:30:51 -0700 (PDT), RayLopez99

First let me say nice cross-post between
microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.csharp and comp.os.linux.advocacy.
Are you trolling for evangelists?

Read the below and comment. I say David Siminoff is simply crying
sour grapes because of some scalability issue he has, perhaps due to
hardware. He may be right about the dev community not liking it, but
that's due to ignorance. After all, even the most popular language,
Java, only has 33% market share, about 2x .NET's.

Much of what passes for prognostication is actually people wishing-in
their agenda.

RL

http://www.businessweek.com/print/magazine/content/11_27/b4235053917570.htm

They also created what DeWolfe calls "technology debt." By 2005 the
site had outgrown ColdFusion. At that point it was too late to switch
over to the open-source-code software favored by developers; changing
would have delayed the site for a year or two just as it was exploding
in popularity. The easiest move, says DeWolfe, was to switch to .NET,
a software framework created by Microsoft.

Technical debt is nothing new and is often times created by the need
to get from A to B ASAP. Calendar-driven development is seldom a
recipe for success.AFA open-source being favored by developers I have
to ask whither the designers? A proper design is paramount regardless
of the chosen tool.

"Using .NET is like Fred Flintstone building a database," says David
Siminoff, whose company owns the dating website JDate, which struggled
with a similar platform issue. "The flexibility is minimal. It is
hated by the developer community."

First .NET is chosen because it's the "easiest" move and later the
tool is relegated to being from the stone age? Are "minimal
flexibility" and "hated by the developer community" the reasons why
JDate chose use to .NET instead of some other tool? As the linked
document suggests "mismanagement , ... and countless strategic
blunders" are likely to be more the blame for failure than any
specific tool or toolset.

No one wants to admit to making a bad decision. Faulting the chosen
tool (.NET or not) is at minimum an excuse to avoid the admission of
having choosen a tool unsuitable for either the task, the
designers/developers or both. As you say sour grapes.

regards
A.G.

 

[Arne Vajhøj]

Read the below and comment. I say David Siminoff is simply crying
sour grapes because of some scalability issue he has, perhaps due to
hardware. He may be right about the dev community not liking it, but
that's due to ignorance. After all, even the most popular language,
Java, only has 33% market share, about 2x .NET's.

http://www.businessweek.com/print/magazine/content/11_27/b4235053917570.htm

Pretty horrible article regarding technical substance. It is left to
the readers to guess or seek information elsewhere.

They also created what DeWolfe calls "technology debt." By 2005 the
site had outgrown ColdFusion. At that point it was too late to switch
over to the open-source-code software favored by developers; changing
would have delayed the site for a year or two just as it was exploding
in popularity. The easiest move, says DeWolfe, was to switch to .NET,
a software framework created by Microsoft.

It is left to the readers to speculate on what open source software
the developers favored.

It is most likely PHP.

But it could be ColdFusion via SmithProject, ASP.NET via
Mono or JavaEE via Tomcat and/or JBoss.

It is also left to the reader to guess at or research why migrating
to PHP would cause more interruption than migrating to ASP.NET.

The reason is that MySpace run ColdFusion on top of ASP.NET via
the BlueDragon product, so all the existing code could be reused.

"Using .NET is like Fred Flintstone building a database," says David
Siminoff, whose company owns the dating website JDate, which struggled
with a similar platform issue. "The flexibility is minimal. It is
hated by the developer community."

Again it is left to the reader to guess at what he means by flexibility.

And whether he means that the entire developer community hates ASP.NET
or that some parts of the developer community hates ASP.NET.

The first is obviously false.

The second is obvious true. But not very relevant.

Bottom line is there are nothing technically relevant in
the article.

Arne

PS: It must be rather obvious who can be blamed for MySpace's
decline. The CEO (Chris DeWolfe) and his advisor (David Siminoff)
must take a huge part of the blame.

 

[RayLopez99]

Well the original charter of this group was to discuss Linux compared to
other offerings. I am pretty interested to know that some developers
just hate it. I have not learned much of it yet. And probably won't have
time for it for some time to come. Maybe it vanishes before I get to it.
I don't plan to be a productive developer on it - I just want to know
the basics of it.

Kari

MySpace was built on .NET. True, they went bankrupt but through no
fault of .NET. If you go to the MySpace site it works as good as or
better than Facebook.

The LSE (London Stock Exchange) built a High Frequency Trading network
on .NET. True, they had to redesign it from scratch (apparently using
C/C++) since the response times were too slow for HFT, but the fact
they planned it with .NET in mind and did it (got it up and working)
is proof that you can do heavy duty stuff with .NET

'Nuff said.

RL

 

[Peter Köhlmann]

MySpace was built on .NET. True, they went bankrupt but through no
fault of .NET. If you go to the MySpace site it works as good as or
better than Facebook.

The LSE (London Stock Exchange) built a High Frequency Trading network
on .NET. True, they had to redesign it from scratch (apparently using
C/C++) since the response times were too slow for HFT, but the fact
they planned it with .NET in mind and did it (got it up and working)
is proof that you can do heavy duty stuff with .NET

'Nuff said.

As usual, RayLopez, worlds dumbest wintendo luser, has it all wrong

Read here that in fact .NET was *not* up to the task

http://blogs.computerworld.com/london_stock_exchange_to_abandon_failed_windows_platform

And no, they not only "redesigned" it from scratch, they *switched* to
linux, leaving the MS garbage on the dung heap where it belongs

 

[RayLopez99]

Pretty horrible article regarding technical substance. It is left to
the readers to guess or seek information elsewhere.


It is left to the readers to speculate on what open source software
the developers favored.

It is most likely PHP.

But it could be ColdFusion via SmithProject, ASP.NET via
Mono or JavaEE via Tomcat and/or JBoss.

It is also left to the reader to guess at or research why migrating
to PHP would cause more interruption than migrating to ASP.NET.

The reason is that MySpace run ColdFusion on top of ASP.NET via
the BlueDragon product, so all the existing code could be reused.


Again it is left to the reader to guess at what he means by flexibility.

And whether he means that the entire developer community hates ASP.NET
or that some parts of the developer community hates ASP.NET.

The first is obviously false.

The second is obvious true. But not very relevant.

Bottom line is there are nothing technically relevant in
the article.

Arne

PS: It must be rather obvious who can be blamed for MySpace's
     decline. The CEO (Chris DeWolfe) and his advisor (David Siminoff)
     must take a huge part of the blame.

Thanks Arne. I agree with your analysis. Nobody wants to invest time
in a language that is dying or dead, so this issue is indeed relevant
to the C# newsgroup. As for the Linux advocacy newsgroup, they
sometimes diss C#/NET so I cross-posted there.

BTW Google Groups is down / Google Groups is offline / Google Groups
is not working for the last few days (on and off, see this thread here
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/i...4WGcgM8azKIX;_ylv=3?qid=20110627155733AArWrax
) so I'm not able to read the latest stuff on time.

RL

 

[Arne Vajhøj]

Thanks Arne. I agree with your analysis. Nobody wants to invest time
in a language that is dying or dead, so this issue is indeed relevant
to the C# newsgroup.

Why would you expect ColdFusion developers to read the C# group??

BTW Google Groups is down / Google Groups is offline / Google Groups
is not working for the last few days (on and off, see this thread here
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/i...4WGcgM8azKIX;_ylv=3?qid=20110627155733AArWrax
) so I'm not able to read the latest stuff on time.

Google has either had a problem or been doing some upgrade so GG
has been a bit behind.

They are catching up now.

Arne

 

[Arne Vajhøj]

MySpace was built on .NET. True, they went bankrupt but through no
fault of .NET. If you go to the MySpace site it works as good as or
better than Facebook.

MySpace did not go bankrupt.

The LSE (London Stock Exchange) built a High Frequency Trading network
on .NET. True, they had to redesign it from scratch (apparently using
C/C++) since the response times were too slow for HFT, but the fact
they planned it with .NET in mind and did it (got it up and working)
is proof that you can do heavy duty stuff with .NET

LSE did not redesign from scratch.

LSE dumped their custom developed by Accenture system based
on .NET/Windows+SQLServer/Windows with a standard system
with 10 years of history from MillenniumIT based on
C++/Linux+Oracle/Solaris.

'Nuff said.

I would say so.

Arne

 

[Arne Vajhøj]

On the same line, language snobs deride PHP but the worlds busiest
social networking site and some huge cms systems use it.

PHP is an easy language to start with. Everybody can start coding PHP.
And everybody does. Some of which may not really have the necessary
skills.

To take the exact opposite: Ada. There are relative few bad developers
coding in Ada. Bad developers are usually not able to learn such a
difficult language.

Arne

 

[Arne Vajhøj]

As usual, RayLopez, worlds dumbest wintendo luser, has it all wrong

I think you need to work on your sarcasm understanding skills.

Read here that in fact .NET was *not* up to the task

http://blogs.computerworld.com/london_stock_exchange_to_abandon_failed_windows_platform

And no, they not only "redesigned" it from scratch, they *switched* to
linux, leaving the MS garbage on the dung heap where it belongs

It was not redesigned. They bought a system that had been used for
10 years by other exchanges.

It is true that the new run on Linux and Solaris.

Arne

 

[Arne Vajhøj]

Am I wrong when I gather that they got rid of .NET and redid the system
on Linux platform? You are right that part of the Linux problem is that
they started with .NET. Many organizations start with it because "it is
from Microsoft so it must be good".

When they redid it with Linux platform did they use MONO or Java or some
other framework?

They did not redo it. They bought an existing system with a proven
track record.

(actually they not only bought the system - they ended up buying the
company behind the system)

C++ and Oracle based.

Arne

 

[Arne Vajhøj]

The low down and somewhat trifling company called Google should be
boycotted by all US citizens for the back stabbing it practices in not
paying its US taxes.

Most companies try to minimize their taxes.

So if the people elect politicians that write laws that allow the
companies not to pay tax, then ...

Google is not the only one.

http://money.cnn.com/galleries/2011...ry.foreign_untaxed_profits.fortune/index.html

is like the top of US corporate world!

Arne

 

[Snit]

Arne Vajhøj stated in post [email protected] on 7/1/11
1:37 PM:

I think you need to work on your sarcasm understanding skills.

He needs to work on many skills. I have had a long-going challenge to find
*any* example of where Peter has been right in *any* even slightly technical
debate - something where there has been disagreement and he has taken a
stand on one side or the other.

So far nobody has found a single example of him being right. Do not get me
wrong: I suspect it has happened at *some* time in the past and/or will some
day happen - but so far nobody can find a single example.

Not one.

 

[RayLopez99]

PS: It must be rather obvious who can be blamed for MySpace's
     decline. The CEO (Chris DeWolfe) and his advisor (David Siminoff)
     must take a huge part of the blame.

Wow, thanks for the links Arne to the Peter Moulding site, which
explains the LSE switch to Linux (it was not really a switch to Linux
that made things better).

Some excerpts below. While I don't agree with Moulding that .NET
crashes computers (it's never crashed mine, but then again Moulding
has more experience), I agree with him on all his anti-Linux points.

BTW I was right on the new language for the new LSE system being "C"
as well as "C++", see below. Also the LSE, since it uses massive
databases stored in memory, is very fragile--one big long power cut
and your entire trading day is wiped out. Sure they have UPS, but how
long can UPS power an entire stock exchange? Probably at best 15
minutes. I'd hate to see the litigation that arises if there's a
massive power failure, but I bet there's some contract clause saying
all trades are automatically unwound to the previous day, and the LSE
takes no responsibility for failed transactions (and to save time I
notice that the transactions on the new system may not be atomic/
completed in a guaranteed manner, contrary to good database practice).

RL

http://petermoulding.com/london_stock_exchange_switches_linux

The new LSE system, using Linux, has failed at least one in the short
time since implementations and there is a report saying it failed
twice. The old system failed only once in several years of use. The
Linux promoters are quick to say the breakdowns are not the fault of
Linux but those same people keep mentioning Windows when they
highlight the one failure of the old system

People tell me they always have to reboot Windows and never have to
reboot Linux. I point out that I have used Linux, Solaris, Unix,
Windows, and various Apple operating systems side by side for years.
They all need reboots. When you run the same applications on Linux and
Windows, they need the same number and frequency of reboots. The
problems are usually the applications, not the operating system.

My current Windows XP 64 workstation runs many more applications than
my Linux equivalent. They both have to be rebooted due to applications
locking up. The Windows XP 64 machine does not need rebooting due to
operating system problems. The Linux system, using Ubuntu, needed
regular reboots for Ubuntu 8, 9, and 10.4. The latest Ubuntu 10.10
seems to work reliably but still needs a reboot each week during the
system update.

Stock exchanges typically work for only a few hours each day then shut
down giving you time to add more memory, replace failed disks, and
reboot.


The LSE new system was written in native code, meaning either
assembler or a hardware specific version of C.

If the LSE used Solaris for their second system and the system
crashed, would the Linux people be publicly complaining about Solaris
the way they complain about Windows? Why do they complain about the
LSE system crashing on Windows just once in several years but ignore
the Linux based replacement crashing twice in just a few months while
processing far less data?

 

[Arne Vajhøj]

Wow, thanks for the links Arne to the Peter Moulding site, which
explains the LSE switch to Linux (it was not really a switch to Linux
that made things better).

I did not provide that link.

BTW I was right on the new language for the new LSE system being "C"
as well as "C++", see below.

I don't have much confidence in that link.

#the biggest problem is not the language, it is the endless modules
#brought in from external libraries by people wanting to save coding
#time. Those modules are closed source and not properly tested.

Not correct. Most .NET libs are either from MS or open source.

#When you build a high reliability system, you have to replace those
#unknown external modules with your own code so you can test every
#aspect of the code.

That was a common belief 40-50 years ago. The industry has long given up
on that.

#Some of the Microsoft languages are pigs to use because there are so
#few people with solid experience of using them.

Not correct. C# and VB.NET are two of the most widely used languages.

(and I am pretty sure that the LSE system was written in one of those
and not one of the more exotic languages)

#A common alternative is Java and Java is a pig to learn, creating the
#same problems as the Microsoft languages.

Not correct. Java is the most widely used language and are especially
popular in education.

#If the LSE wanted a low cost reliable system, they should have used
#common Web based technologies because Web related technologies are the
#most heavily tested programming technologies in the world. They could
#then use commonly known ways to tune their Web based system.

Surprisingly web technologies are good at web not at transaction
processing systems.

Also the LSE, since it uses massive
databases stored in memory, is very fragile--one big long power cut
and your entire trading day is wiped out. Sure they have UPS, but how
long can UPS power an entire stock exchange?

I don't know - a month or two would be my guess.

Battery for maybe an hour and then diesel generators with
large supply of diesel.

Arne

 

[RayLopez99]

I don't have much confidence in that link.

That's interesting. I thought he sounded like a real experienced
programmer but after reading your comments perhaps he's just a
braggart or opinionated. A clue is the passage where he says the LSE
should have hired him and they would not have had any problems.
Either a joke or a foolish boast if he's as inexperienced as you
imply. But I do feel he is perhaps correct in the old hardware that
the LSE was using, that created the problem, namely their network was
slow, and that the problem was not as simple as "C# using Windows s/w"
vs "Java using Linux hardware", but rather "old" vs "new" hardware--
you need to upgrade all your hardware and that solves lots of
problems. And he's probably right that Microsoft SQL Server is a
cheap, almost open-source cheap, database, cheaper than the Oracle dB
solution they ended up using.

#the biggest problem is not the language, it is the endless modules
#brought in from external libraries by people wanting to save coding
#time. Those modules are closed source and not properly tested.

Not correct. Most .NET libs are either from MS or open source.

#When you build a high reliability system, you have to replace those
#unknown external modules with your own code so you can test every
#aspect of the code.

That was a common belief 40-50 years ago. The industry has long given up
on that.

Interesting. That's why I read these threads--for insights like that,
thanks.

#Some of the Microsoft languages are pigs to use because there are so
#few people with solid experience of using them.

Not correct. C# and VB.NET are two of the most widely used languages.

(and I am pretty sure that the LSE system was written in one of those
and not one of the more exotic languages)

#A common alternative is Java and Java is a pig to learn, creating the
#same problems as the Microsoft languages.

Not correct. Java is the most widely used language and are especially
popular in education.

But is it a pig to learn? I have several books on Java but after
learning C# I have no incentive to learn Java--especially if it's hard
to learn. It's not a managed OO lang either, meaning you have to
safely dispose of your pointers yourself? Like in unmanaged C++?
Without bothering to Google it I bet it is.

#If the LSE wanted a low cost reliable system, they should have used
#common Web based technologies because Web related technologies are the
#most heavily tested programming technologies in the world. They could
#then use commonly known ways to tune their Web based system.

Surprisingly web technologies are good at web not at transaction
processing systems.

I think you meant "Unsurprisingly" not "Surprisingly", but understood.

I don't know - a month or two would be my guess.

Battery for maybe an hour and then diesel generators with
large supply of diesel.

I did not think of diesel, thanks. But I doubt the LSE stores a
month's worth of diesel, for hazmat reasons, I guess maybe a day's
worth, and I bet they have a legal clause saying what I suggested: no
liability to the LSE in the event of a power cut (or actually, any
other fault--all risks of trades are probably on the parties
themselves--if they don't like the service they are getting from the
LSE they can trade on another exchange). You hear about on occasion
parties that mess up trades and in nearly every case I recall the
litigation is between the parties, not the exchange they used, because
I bet there's a legal clause involved. Otherwise the exchanges would
go bankrupt fast (recall the "flash crash" of last year on the NYSE,
where billions of dollars were won/lost in a few minutes of program
trading).

RL

 

[Registered User]

Also the LSE, since it uses massive
databases stored in memory, is very fragile--one big long power cut
and your entire trading day is wiped out. Sure they have UPS, but how
long can UPS power an entire stock exchange? Probably at best 15
minutes.

You need to stop guessing.

Here's an older article (2006) about NYSE's backup power evolution.
http://m.csemag.com/index.php?id=2832&tx_ttnews[tt_news]=23634&cHash=b16decb0a7

Here's a much newer article ...
http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/...s-data-fortress-powering-the-financial-cloud/

regards
A.G.

 

[Arne Vajhøj]

That's interesting. I thought he sounded like a real experienced
programmer but after reading your comments perhaps he's just a
braggart or opinionated. A clue is the passage where he says the LSE
should have hired him and they would not have had any problems.
Either a joke or a foolish boast if he's as inexperienced as you
imply. But I do feel he is perhaps correct in the old hardware that
the LSE was using, that created the problem, namely their network was
slow, and that the problem was not as simple as "C# using Windows s/w"
vs "Java using Linux hardware", but rather "old" vs "new" hardware--
you need to upgrade all your hardware and that solves lots of
problems. And he's probably right that Microsoft SQL Server is a
cheap, almost open-source cheap, database, cheaper than the Oracle dB
solution they ended up using.

SQLServer is cheaper than Oracle but far from free - check:
http://www.microsoft.com/sqlserver/2008/en/us/pricing.aspx

Hardware obviously mean something.

But I would expect by far the most important factor for the software
to be the developer.

But is it a pig to learn? I have several books on Java but after
learning C# I have no incentive to learn Java--especially if it's hard
to learn. It's not a managed OO lang either, meaning you have to
safely dispose of your pointers yourself? Like in unmanaged C++?
Without bothering to Google it I bet it is.

GC in Java works similar to C#.

If you can code C# then you will find learning Java relative easy since
they are very similar in many ways.

I think you meant "Unsurprisingly" not "Surprisingly", but understood.

Sarcastic "surprisingly" = normal "unsurprisingly".

I did not think of diesel, thanks. But I doubt the LSE stores a
month's worth of diesel, for hazmat reasons, I guess maybe a day's
worth,

They will have diesel for much more than a day.

That type of data centers always do. It is completely standard.

Example:
http://www.emc-corp.net/pdfs/specs.pdf

<quote>
Diesel Capacity: 300,000 gallons
</quote>

Unrelated but:

<quote>
Secure Bunker Space
Co-location space within a secure bunker facility capable to
support an atomic bomb explosion is available upon request.
</quote>

If money is not an issue then lots of things is possible.

Arne

 

[RayLopez99]

SQLServer is cheaper than Oracle but far from free - check:
   http://www.microsoft.com/sqlserver/2008/en/us/pricing.aspx

Hardware obviously mean something.

But I would expect by far the most important factor for the software
to be the developer.

You mean developer architect. The devs doing the coding are a team of
teens from India no doubt.

GC in Java works similar to C#.

If you can code C# then you will find learning Java relative easy since
they are very similar in many ways.

OK thanks. I'm sticking to C# for now.

Sarcastic "surprisingly" = normal "unsurprisingly".

Ah, you did that on purpose then? Don't be too clever by half, you'll
confuse anybody who is not a chess player like me.

They will have diesel for much more than a day.

That type of data centers always do. It is completely standard.

Example:
   http://www.emc-corp.net/pdfs/specs.pdf

<quote>
Diesel Capacity: 300,000 gallons
</quote>

Unrelated but:

<quote>
Secure Bunker Space
Co-location space within a secure bunker facility capable to
support an atomic bomb explosion is available upon request.
</quote>

LOL! THat was very funny, "available upon request". Good one!

I saw a video of an Azure Microsoft data center. They have modules
with their own fuel cells for backup--possibly diesel, which is safe
to store unlike gasoline or hydrogen. Here is a related Youtube video
on MSFT Azure:

What was impressive in the video at MSFT's site (not the YouTube,
which is generic) was the statement that they could run for about a
half hour before they needed auxiliary diesel generators. That's why
I mentioned "15 minutes". As stated in the Youtube video above, these
data centers suck so much power they need special sources of power--
this one in the Youtube video is next to a hydroelectric power plant.
And they are run at 95F (35C) even with air conditioning. Microsoft
further has modules that fit on lorries (trucks) and can be self-
contained so you can scale a data center by parking these modules next
to existing such modules.

RL