

Dear Developers, We Think You’re Idiots, XOXO...Microsoft - SamAtt
http://www.tomstechblog.com/post/Dear-Developers-We-Think-Yoursquo3bre-Idiots-XOXOhellip3bMicrosoft.aspx

======
thismat
Everyone fails to mention now much more advanced and nicer developing in VS is
compared to any other platform. It's worth the money for a copy if you're a
serious developer looking to use .NET, it's worth it even more now that there
is little initial overhead.

No, I don't work exclusively in .NET, I work in a variety of platforms, but
now I have yet another service to offer clients and potential clients that is
cost effective.

Does everyone think that no matter what you're automatically locked into
having only one stack to work from? Why not use whatever is ideal for the job
at hand?

EDIT: Also, you don't have to hate on Microsoft anymore, that's very 2003,
instead of focusing on what is the negative, let's instead consider the
positive moves they've made, and the quality development environment they've
come up with.

~~~
etherael
Currently trying to learn asp.net after a long and happy career in ruby on
rails, django, grails, codeigniter based solutions.

Find it very hard to believe you seriously think people actually "prefer"
this? But I guess that just illustrates perfectly the fact that is entirely a
matter of opinion, which is probably why it isn't often mentioned :)

~~~
thismat
I feel your pain, the company I got my programming start with was locked into
the Microsoft stack already so I was really motivated to use .NET to get a leg
up.

And yes, I honestly can't stand webforms, the other person that replied here
was spot on, the MVC framework is what you want, there is still a learning
curve to the environment like anything else, but when it really starts to
shine is the debugging, really, that's what I feel personally is the most
power aspect of VS. The debugging is simply lightyears beyond using a terminal
debugger to me.

Of course you're right, and I worded my initial post a little wrong, it's
always a matter of opinion and what you're used to, but even after using
multiple frameworks, nothing feels quite as integrated and polished to me as
the VS environment.

------
RyanMcGreal
> I think a lot of the 'economic disparity' between developing LAMP apps and
> developing Microsoft apps is imagined and I think $999 a year for three team
> members is actually a pretty good deal.

Keep telling yourself that.

~~~
donw
In the commercial software development world, it's an amazingly good deal. It
comes with a four-CPU license for both your web and DB servers, full copies of
Visual Studio Professional, and a small pile of other tools that would easily
breech the $333/year/developer mark... if you used Microsoft technologies.

I agree with the parent poster -- the wording and intent of this 'deal' are
very, very different, and a bit insulting. But if you're already a Microsoft
developer, it's still a hell of a deal.

Sure, it locks you in to their software stack in the future, but if you were
an ASP.NET developer before WebSpark, it's not like this will change anything
there.

What this does do, if you're a Microsoft developer, is let you take a chance
at building a new company using your existing knowledge. Without having to
shell out more than $100 to get all the software you might need. And I think
that's a smart move for Microsoft.

~~~
RyanMcGreal
What you're saying is that this is a good deal for people who are already
locked into Microsoft technologies. Sorry, but that's still a bit like saying
being punched in the face twice is better than being punched in the face four
times - and I write this as someone with a background in web development using
Microsoft technologies.

~~~
nopassrecover
> What you're saying is that this is a good deal for people who are already
> locked into Microsoft technologies.

No, this is about new companies. If you _prefer_ using Microsoft technologies
(e.g. C# and LINQ, MS SQL, ASP.NET MVC) Microsoft would like to take economic
considerations out of the equation for new companies (same as they do with
BizSpark).

~~~
TomOfTTB
For the record one of the points I was trying to (perhaps badly) make in the
post (it's from my blog) is that I don't think it takes the economic
considerations out of the equation. When I talk to developers their economic
consideration is on the deployment side not on the development side. I don't
think most people care that much about the cost of their developer tools as
much as they care about the Windows 2008 license they'll need for every server

~~~
nopassrecover
Fair points but if you (instead of your clients) are hosting code you will
probably want to look to see if you're eligible for the BizSpark program which
does include server licences.

Alternatively, use an existing webhost.

------
nopassrecover
This isn't about treating developers as idiots. It's about subsidising the
cost of starting contracting/a new company using Microsoft technologies so
that you can build up some profits before licensing costs become an issue.

~~~
TomOfTTB
The question really is "who is the target of this program" If it's people who
were already sold on Microsoft technology than it's just a nice thing to do.
If they are trying to woo other developers away from open source solutions the
approach they've taken comes across as "we think we're outsmarting you"

~~~
amalcon
The developers using open source solutions might be of the class "I'm using
opensource solutions because they're better in this case," who Microsoft isn't
targeting with this thing. They might be of the class "I'm using opensource
solutions because there's no difference in quality, and the opensource stuff
is cheaper." Microsoft is trying to make the decision harder for these people,
but they're still not really the target audience.

This program is really meant for people of the class "I really want to use
Microsoft products X, Y, and Z, but I _can't_ , because I won't be able to
afford licenses until my business has spun up. I'll make do with this
opensource stuff instead." Now, I'm not entirely sure who these people are.
Maybe they're developing desktop software or something. Provided they exist,
though, this program could actually help them.

~~~
rksprst
I'm one of those people and am happily using Microsoft products through
BizSpark to develop web apps. Yes, I could use python with django or php with
mysql (and have in the past); but I can build products better and faster with
asp.net/c# (it's what I know and like best). And now that I don't have to pay
huge licensing fees before I make a profit I can do that.

~~~
timwiseman
It can be a good deal.

Personally, I use both MS and FOSS products extensively. I am a huge fan of
Python and it is my primary scripting language, but my main career is as an MS
SQL Server DBA, and I think that for many applications (not all) it compares
quite favorably with mysql and oracle.

------
acg
I have no doubt that this deal exists because this market is highly
competitive with many solutions available for nothing. I wish Microsoft luck
and hope that the competition continues.

There will be some customers that this deal will be right for, and it will
definitely help some startups.

------
pyre
While it might be/seem deceptive, I think that anyone that decides to base
their business off of these tools being free forever without bothering to read
the fine print is in for a rude awakening of their own making. Microsoft _has_
provided them with the information, just because they didn't bother to read
past the headline is their own fault (the headline is meant to grab attention,
not to impart 100% of necessary knowledge).

------
duncanj
This is called "puppy-dogging". You want to sell a puppy. The customer isn't
sure he wants to shell out the money. So, you say, "Take the puppy home, and
it's free for two weeks." It's obvious from there.

