Coffeehouse Thread

23 posts

Development platform going forward?

Back to Forum: Coffeehouse
  • boogop

    Hiya C9!

    The small company I work for has installed codebases in Access 2003 and VS2005/.NET 2.0 (C#, I'm the C# guy, we do winforms and ASP.NET), both of which talk to SQL 2000. My question for anon is where should the company put their eggs going forward?

    The death of access has been predicted for years but doesn't seem to be happening. On the other hand I'm not real sanguine about the future of .NET either. Microsoft gives us 10 years in each development paradigm--we had 10 years in DOS, 10 years in COM and now we're at about that point with .NET.

    Wat do? Leave both sets of codebases alone and continue on with both access and .NET until the market isn't in such a state of flux? Migrate access to something else? Migrate .NET elsewhere? Wait to see what happens with winRT and the enterprise?

  • JohnAskew

    I guess it depends on the nature of the codebases. Which new features will enhance your companies' offerings? That's where I would research.

    Business decisions are most often motivated by value added to products and not upgrades for upgrade's sake, (of course).

  • spivonious

    I agree with JohnAskew. Why should the eggs be moved? With that said, I really don't see .NET going anywhere soon, at least not the web pieces. For native, desktop apps, MS really wants devs to start using WinRT, but even that still interfaces with .NET.

    I'd work on upgrading from SQL 2000 first. A lot has happened to that product since then, and it shouldn't be too much of a development effort to upgrade.

  • JohnAskew

    +1

    I'd encourage Entity Framework and WCF services research in general.

  • boogop

    I'd be most concerned about something suddenly 'not working.' Although that's a worst-case scenario, it used to happen with releases of MDAC.

  • ryanb

    .NET, ASP.NET, SQL, and even Access ... none of those are going to go away any time soon, and definitely not without a long amount of warning and transition time.  .NET is a very safe place to be right now.  Don't make any major changes unless you have a driving reason to do so.  Migrating slowly away from Access might not be a bad idea anyway. 

  • figuerres

    @boogop:

    rule #1 if it's not broke then do not try to fix it.

    if a given thing is having problems then evaluate what needs to be fixed.

    there is a lot about access that is really great, other bits not so much....

    .Net - IMHO it's going to be around for a good long time ....

  • Bass

    I would look at building solutions on top of non-proprietary technology. This is so that your company won't be having to predict a random external vendor's next strategy (like you are currently doing) to make technology decisions.

    I can't provide any specific suggestions without knowing what you are doing, but I personally like PostgreSQL and MySQL for databases.

  • AndyC

    , Bass wrote

    I would look at building solutions on top of non-proprietary technology. This is so that your company won't be having to predict Microsoft's next strategy (like you are currently doing). I can't provide any specific suggestions without knowing what you are doing, but I personally like PostgreSQL and MySQL for databases.

    That just means you're predicting the Open Source communities' next strategy though, which given there is rarely any sort of roadmap or consistency, can be a far harder thing to predict. And the recent debacle over DNT and Apache only goes to prove you aren't even free from the whims of corporate paymasters when you go with a FOSS solution either, even if it's a long standing project.

  • Blue Ink

    @figuerres: +1

    The only problem I see is that mdb files don't play nicely with .NET nowadays. Switching to a different solution (such as SQL Server Compact, for instance) can be a life saver in some case.

  • figuerres

    , Blue Ink wrote

    @figuerres: +1

    The only problem I see is that mdb files don't play nicely with .NET nowadays. Switching to a different solution (such as SQL Server Compact, for instance) can be a life saver in some case.

    the OP also mentioned SQL 2000 and i would have them look at at the least upgrading to SQL 2008 or 2012 if they want to stay with the Microsoft servers.....

  • boogop

    Interesting read over on ZDNet

    http://www.zdnet.com/as-the-microsoft-developer-world-turns-guidance-for-the-perplexed-7000004423/

    though I disagree with Telerik on WPF and Silverlight and don't intend doing anything with them (see some of the comments on WPF). Winforms and ASP.NET seem to be good bets going forward, and I like the comment above on gradually edging away from Access.

  • boogop

    And I should mention: we're stuck with SQL 2000 due to an ancient dinosaur of a 3rd party program the company is locked into and depends on for some of the business. That makes doing pivot tables an enormous pain.

  • Harlequin

    Hope I don't sound like an arse asking this, but why the concern about moving forward with technologies when your company seems to be running on ancient/unsafe platforms and there doesn't seem to be a change coming any time soon? If you're going to be "stuck with SQL 2000", then you can't move forward with the rest of us.

    Unless you find a job with a better company =)

  • boogop

    Sure I can, SQL 2000 is fine as long as you can work around some of its limitations. Pull data out, use it, stick it back.

    Can't get another job, brosef. At 53 I'm too old. I'm at the top of my game and can't get on anywhere else. Years in the field = more expensive to hire.  Sad

  • JohnAskew

    Winforms is not a good choice for the future. It is stuck in Win32 API, so it is obsolete imho.

    You'd better consider WPF, my .02

  • JohnAskew

    , boogop wrote

    Sure I can, SQL 2000 is fine as long as you can work around some of its limitations. Pull data out, use it, stick it back.

    Can't get another job, brosef. At 53 I'm too old. I'm at the top of my game and can't get on anywhere else. Years in the field = more expensive to hire.  Sad

    Then I am an extreme exception to your rule at 51, old man. I can't shake headhunters off fast enough.

  • evildictait​or

    , JohnAskew wrote

    Winforms is not a good choice for the future. It is stuck in Win32 API, so it is obsolete imho.

    A) WinForms is a set of APIs that could be repurposed if the Win32 API changed - see Mono for an example of WinForms that sits on top of fopens etc instead of CreateFiles.

    B) Win32 cannot, and will not ever die - at least not in my lifetime. The fact that a hundred billion world-critical applications run on it effectively guarantees Win32's future.

    C) All of the alternatives you might think have killed Win32, are actually Win32 in disguise. WinRT and WPF and Silverlight and even the HTML rendering in Windows all ultimately boil down to Win32.

     

    So I would, in fact, argue the exact opposite. I'd program in Win32 in preference to new kids on the block like WinRT. WinRT is new, there aren't many developers and those key facts make it easy for Microsoft to mess you around, like they've done with Silverlight and WPF.

    Microsoft can't mess around with Win32, so as long as tablets aren't important to you, I'd keep using that.

Comments closed

Comments have been closed since this content was published more than 30 days ago, but if you'd like to continue the conversation, please create a new thread in our Forums, or Contact Us and let us know.