Defending .NET

Scott Bellware seems to have been a little put out with a recent article in Computerworld:
Puccini (no more need for first names here, I reserve that respect for people who can pee without getting any on themselves) opens with a salvo that I expect from some of the dullard banter I occasionally overhear between not-so-recently canned Java developers in the coffee shops around town: “Should developers with years invested in writing Windows-based code blindly commit to .Net? Definitely not, because .Net is inferior to Java 2 Enterprise Edition (J2EE) for Web application development.”
[Scott Bellware]


And then he gets really nasty. Now, I don't normally condone ad-hominem attacks on people who annoy us, but in this case, I might make an exception. The article Bellware discusses does seem to betray a boundless ignorance of .NET and Microsoft development in general. And Bellware's response is quite funny to boot.

Put more seriously, I do share Bellware's dismay that magazines like Computerworld publish such drivel. Yes, it's an opinion column, not "hard" journalism. But that doesn't mean that allowing someone to write a bunch of stuff that's simply not true is acceptable form for a publisher. To be fair, I don't read Computerworld regularly, so I can't say whether this is an anomaly, or a regular occurrence. But I hope for the sake of their readers that they provide a more balanced discussion of technology than this column suggests.

1 Comment

  • I see many similar slams against Java by .NET and VB folks. There is also the Linux vs Windows vs Mac OS diatribes. I think the problem is that developers have to spend huge amounts of time to come up to speed and be productive in some technology. They then criticize any other similar technology because they fear having to go through all of that again. I've gone through at least four such shifts and have been exploring yet another and I am tired of it. So if I could increase the job marketplace for my current technology I would certainly do so even if it meant spreading FUD.

Comments have been disabled for this content.