Coffeehouse Thread

21 posts

Forum Read Only

This forum has been made read only by the site admins. No new threads or comments can be added.

Is ASP.NET dead (to Microsoft) too?

Back to Forum: Coffeehouse
  • User profile image
    DeathBy​VisualStudio

    Looking at the MSDN site and the revised Dev Center it seems to leave out ASP.NET. Why not a "Web Developer" category?

    I'm not knocking the sites in general as they both look well done. I'm just puzzled at the apparent exclusion (or burrying thereof, or I'm just stupid). Is it because ASP.NET was open sourced?

  • User profile image
    blowdart

    , DeathBy​VisualStudio wrote

    Looking at the MSDN site and the revised Dev Center it seems to leave out ASP.NET. Why not a "Web Developer" category?

    Because that Dev Center is for writing apps for Windows. Not apps for the web.

    Heck I've just finished some code you'll see in asp.net v.next, so no, it's not dead. At least not to me.

  • User profile image
    DeathBy​VisualStudio

    @blowdart: That's understandable. How about the MSDN site in general? If I were a noob and didn't know where to begin for web development I don't think the "Development & Platform Tools" categories they have presented would suggest "pick me".

    It's good to know that guys like you are working on ASP.NET.

  • User profile image
    blowdart

    , DeathBy​VisualStudio wrote

    @blowdart: That's understandable. How about the MSDN site in general? If I were a noob and didn't know where to begin for web development I don't think the "Development & Platform Tools" categories they have presented would suggest "pick me".

    It's good to know that guys like you are working on ASP.NET.

    I'll point that out to the MSDN folks - it's an understandable reaction.

    And don't fret, it's only a couple of weird edge case auth providers, generally I'm still doing threat models and code reviews for the asp.net platform and tools bits.

  • User profile image
    DCMonkey

    @DeathByVisualStudio:

    There's a MORE DEVELOPER CENTERS (!) link on the first page. ASP.Net is buried in there.

    Also, I suppose Windows Azure could imply ASP.Net to some extent.

    But yeah, it seems like an odd omission from the front page.

    PS: Silverlight and Windows Desktop Apps have dev centers too (though WPF is buried deeply enough that I can't find it under the later or .Net). So I guess they aren't dead after all Wink

     

  • User profile image
    DeathBy​VisualStudio

    , blowdart wrote

    *snip*

    And don't fret, it's only a couple of weird edge case auth providers, generally I'm still doing threat models and code reviews for the asp.net platform and tools bits.

    I wasn't fretting; I was actually trying to compliment you. Sorry if that came off as sarcasm.

  • User profile image
    blowdart

    , DeathBy​VisualStudio wrote

    *snip*

    I wasn't fretting; I was actually trying to compliment you. Sorry if that came off as sarcasm.

    Ah it didn't. I was being self deprecating because I was embarrassed!

  • User profile image
    ZippyV

    If you go to the library page you see a whole Web section but most of the interesting stuff you can find is on http://www.asp.net/

     

  • User profile image
    wastingtime​withforums

    Speaking of ASP.NET, there is an interesting trend:

    web server survey

    Look at "Market share of active sites". Microsoft had a drop at April 2009 and continues dropping since then.

    Generic Forum Image

    From 38% in April 2009 to 11.08% now.

    Generic Forum Image

    Coincidentally, that drop happened exactly at the time when they have released ASP.NET MVC:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ASP.NET_MVC_Framework ("13 March 2009: ASP.NET MVC 1.0")

    I get the feeling that it's related. There was no other big release of some competitor web tech at that point. And sure, WebForms is still supported.. somewhat (just like Silverlight is!)

    But they annoyed some loyal WebForms devs off back then, and that hit them apparently. Here you can see a WebForms dev raging. He wasn't the only one.

    Also, despite some problems, WebForms was a pretty unique technology, while ASP.NET MVC is the one millionth MVC framework (in a sea of no-cost alternatives). MVC isn't also making good use of Visual Studio's "visuality", one less reason going the MS route.

    Another result of Microsoft chasing the hipsters. Marketshare was climbing constantly before the MVC release, then, exactly at release, it began to plumb.

    After Ruby-On-Rails, Django etc. appeared several years before, Microsoft apparently exploded with envy and had to annoy their WebForms devs, and now they are at their lowest marketshare in web servers since.. ever.

    I am not saying they shouldn't have released MVC. But the way they have done it was terrible and very condescending towards their established ASP.NET userbase. It sent out all the wrong signals. Just how many "is webforms now dead" posts appeared back then? If your strategy generates such reactions among your developers, you're failing.

  • User profile image
    cbae

    @wastingtimewithforums: I agree with you to an extent. While Microsoft did make some improvements to Web Forms even recently, the evangelists for MVC spoke of Web Forms in the same self-deprecating way as others in Microsoft speak of IE6 and Windows Vista in order push the new technology.

    However, I'm not exactly sure that the drop in web server market share can be tied directly to the release of ASP.NET MVC.

  • User profile image
    wastingtime​withforums

    , cbae wrote

    @wastingtimewithforums: I agree with you to an extent. While Microsoft did make some improvements to Web Forms even recently, the evangelists for MVC spoke of Web Forms in the same self-deprecating way as others in Microsoft speak of IE6 and Windows Vista in order push the new technology.

    However, I'm not exactly sure that the drop in web server market share can be tied directly to the release of ASP.NET MVC.

    But there was no other event around that time frame. ROR and the other hot stuff was released years before the sharp decline in Microsoft's web marketshare took place. The fall started right after the MVC release.

    Not the release of MVC was the problem, but how it was released.

    It's pretty obvious what happened: Thanks to Microsoft's own "marketing", Web Forms had the aura of J# or Active Desktop channels around it. And ASP.NET MVC itself isn't that special compared to ROR or Django or the myriad of other MVCs. Ironically, one major plus point for ASP.NET, Visual Studio, plays a lesser rolle with MVC than it does with Web Forms.

    After Microsoft's own negative-marketing, lots of Web Forms developers probably tried the other MVC frameworks too and stuck with one of them. Most of those were also far more mature than the early versions of ASP.NET MVC. There was also quite a noticeable feeling of betrayal among the webforms devs back then, given Microsoft's sudden shift, - further driving away developers.

    Microsoft's hope to attract ROR devs in turn didn't play out apparently, - certainly the number of converts to ASP.NET MVC didn't outweigh the disgruntled Web Forms developers who started to move away from it.

  • User profile image
    cheong

    @DeathByVisualStudio:The simple answer is that there's delicated website for ASP.NET - http://www.asp.net/ . And for most .NET framework sub-forums in MSDN forum, you can see redirection to http://forums.asp.net/ at the Announcements section or pinned post.

    Just like IIS ( http://www.iis.net/">http://www.iis.net ) the web technologies have their individual site. There's nothing special.

    Recent Achievement unlocked: Code Avenger Tier 4/6: You see dead program. A lot!
    Last modified
  • User profile image
    fanbaby

    @wastingtimewithforums: The train that wracked IIS/ASP and ASP MVC left way before 2009, it just took some time to show on the charts.

    I even heard mossyblog, which worked for MSFT (silverlight...), say that Azure was a reaction to the widespread rise of LAMP. Cannot find the reference right now, but it goes like this: MS execs, facing total domination of the LAMP stack in the hosting environment, said we have no choice but to pull our sleeves and do it ourselves. 

  • User profile image
    wastingtime​withforums

    LAMP was the de-facto standard before ASP.NET even appeared. ASP.NET was taking marketshare away from it, until 2009.

  • User profile image
    fanbaby

    @wastingtimewithforums: Found the reference, 10  - 15 min (watch for about 5 minutes, tough it's all interesting):

    http://vimeo.com/53237950

    CAVEAT: That guy isn't  EDIT: wasn't the sharpest pencil in Microsoft, let alone in development/computers, but he seems to have inside knowledge

     

  • User profile image
    fanbaby

    , wastingtime​withforums wrote

    LAMP was the de-facto standard before ASP.NET even appeared. ASP.NET was taking marketshare away from it, until 2009.

    No no no. Are you talking about the spike which begun around 2005? That's because some idiot at microsoft didn't understand the reasons for the trendline and decided to get EVERY PARKED DOMAIN on a Microsoft server, boosting the market share artificially which lasted for a few years.

    EDIT: It seems what hurts Microsoft the most is their mangers. I predict that when the ratio of engineers/MBAs at Google will sway the Microsoft way, it will be done with also.

  • User profile image
    wastingtime​withforums

    , fanbaby wrote

    *snip*

    No no no. Are you talking about the spike which begun around 2005?

    No.

    And that Godaddy bump was in 2006.

    http://www.webmasterworld.com/forum9/10188.htm

    I even heard mossyblog, which worked for MSFT (silverlight...), say that Azure was a reaction to the widespread rise of LAMP

    LAMP has risen in 1999 and was ALWAYS the behemoth since then. It's not a new superstar.

    Azure was a reaction to Microsoft's desire to suck more money out of customers.

    Fact is, since MVC Microsoft is hitting rock-bottom in web marketshare, it's now way lower than in 2000/1999, - so well before the godaddy thing (if they switched back to Apache from IIS, it still wouldn't cause such sharp drop).

  • User profile image
    DeathBy​VisualStudio

    , cheong wrote

    @DeathByVisualStudio:The simple answer is that there's delicated website for ASP.NET - http://www.asp.net/ . And for most .NET framework sub-forums in MSDN forum, you can see redirection to http://forums.asp.net/ at the Announcements section or pinned post.

    Just like IIS ( http://www.iis.net/">http://www.iis.net ) the web technologies have their individual site. There's nothing special.

    I'm glad you agree that the reference is buried. Smiley

    If we all believed in unicorns and fairies the world would be a better place.
    Last modified

Conversation locked

This conversation has been locked by the site admins. No new comments can be made.