@Some Idiot said:
Sorry if you didn't read my previous posts.
Actually I'm reading every new post in this thread and I'm responding to your funny statements that MS is to blame for the tools allowing people to create shi**y programs. How comes that MS marketing VS.NET and putting ads in magazines does that?
@Some Idiot said:
<FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3>I think CLI and C# are wonderful things, and .NET has pretty a damn fine implementation of each. Visual studio is okay as long as you stay within a limited toolset. For example, if you try to integrate VS.NET with any kind of professional quality source control system, you may start to see what I mean.</FONT>
<FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3>
I used perforce in the past and I use VSS right now without any problems. My experience with CVS (without the integration, but using a server on the other side of the world) is very good as well - yes it had it's glitches and because the connection to the server was very slow we couldn't use from inside the IDE but that's what wincvs is for. Please explain...
</FONT>
<FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3></FONT>
@Some Idiot said:
<FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3>Having used a few IDEs, my personal favourite is Eclipse. I don't need WYSIWYG web forms, and if I'm developing web applications, I may just want them to work nicely in Firefox, Safari, Konqueror and Opera as well as IE. VS.NET doesn't make that easy. Plus, Eclipse speaks more languages. That said, they both have their problems. I just don't see Eclipse marketed anywhere with the same "Even a chimpanzee could do it" attitude.</FONT>
Well, I turned off the WYSIWYG option in VS.NET long ago and I keep working with the HTML directly and the only time I really need to switch from HTML to design mode is when I have to drag some component on the form or access it's properties however it has the irritating habbit to f**k up the html so usually what I do is just take a look at what I need then go back to html and type it myself the way I want. The point here is you have the option and you may or may not use it. Screaming out loud that MS gives tools to people who don't deserve it and because they have these tools they will create WTFs doesn't sound really logical. You can create as bigger WTFs with Eclypse and JSP as well with VS.NET. Here the example: I had a guy working for me who used to break the source lines in the middle because of his monitor... I found some javascript code like this:
function foo()
{document.getElementById("something").value = call_a_function(
"param1", param2, param3); call_some_other_function(other_param1,
other_param2, other_param3, etc.)}
So how about that? Or writing a 10 line sql statement using the same approach? That does not relate to any IDE... when asking the guy why he did it this way his response was : "but it works now". I explained why it was bad and he said "ok I'll do it as you said in the future" (like a 5 years old kid that broke something and said "sorry daddy, I will not do that again") and 2 weeks later I saw the same thing in another sql statement.
@Some Idiot said:
I may just want them to work nicely in Firefox, Safari, Konqueror and Opera as well as IE. VS.NET doesn't make that easy.
VS.NET doesn't make it easier, but does Eclypse? VS.NET makes it easier to use IE, I admit, but to achieve compatibility with ALL browsers including the ones on mobile phones you have to understand what is going on and how to design stuff. The key is the understanding and experience. If you believe that someone with less than a year experience will be able to create a web site looking about the same on all these browsers and making heavy use of CSS and JavaScript then you better go to a doctor to check yourself :) Hey, just joking.
Take a look at the pricing for activewidgets.com for example and see what's the difference between the version supporting IE and FireFox and the one supporting IE,FF,Opera and Konqueror. If my memory serves it was about $400 vs $1600... (sorry just checked - they have a new version and changed the licensing etc so now it's $400 vs $2400 but the latest has a site license included not just a single developer... oh well)