|
That's not good.
It could mean that the company is being "streamlined", to make it more attractive to investors.
Make sure your CV is up to date.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Fascinating science: [^], [^].
Black-out. Lights fade in, but the scene is still dark. A man and a woman sit at opposite ends of a dining table, both look grim, and tense. You see neither of them move their lips, or vary their facial expression, but these words are heard:
Man "But, I thought we had everything going for us ..."
Woman "It's hard to explain ..."
Man "Is there ... somebody else ?"
Woman "No, oh no ... it's just that ... well ... your microbiome sucks."
Man "That's really hurtful, you know ... didn't I become a vegan just for you, don't I have spirulina every morning because ... of you ?"
Woman "I wish ... how I wish ... I could put it some other way that would make you feel better about it !"
Fade to black. Fade in of a brilliantly sunlit tropical beach; a man and woman walk hand-in-hand into a calm emerald sea. Sound of waves, occasional sea-bird cries. Voice over by a deep, soothing, male voice:
"It can seem hopeless ... I know ... I've been there ..."
"You try and change and ... it just doesn't work ... and you feel like you've made yourself into somebody you aren't ..."
"The guilt, the anger, the grief ... I've been there."
Fade in background track of inspirational music: man and woman slowly turn and face the camera, their backs to the sea. The male voice shifts into a more powerful, assertively optimistic tone:
"But, now there is hope ! ... there is ... Microptimal !"
"A unique patent-pending process of microbiomial transplant and personality adjustment !"
"You can BE compatible, not just TRY to be compatible !"
The man and the woman lift their hands, and wave, as the camera pans in for a close-up. They kiss.
« There is only one difference between a madman and me. The madman thinks he is sane. I know I am mad. » Salvador Dali
|
|
|
|
|
Stop bugging us with this!
- I would love to change the world, but they won’t give me the source code.
|
|
|
|
|
So this is what viral marketing is all about!
|
|
|
|
|
That's a strange way to market yogurt...
|
|
|
|
|
I think you're about ready to release your email spam campaign, Bill. Good work!
Will Rogers never met me.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Folks,
I'm about to kick off a very interesting project for the Department of Public Works. It's interesting because I'm doing it pro bono, I've not done ASP.NET before, and I get to architect the thing any way I want, which means small baby steps in my spare time. The benefits will eventually be, besides having ASP.NET experience, putting something together that apparently lots of municipalities could use and the potentially turning "free" into something lucrative. We won't discuss the down sides.
Anyways, there's a lot of tech options out there for ASP.NET / Razor / MVC / Whatever coupled with jWhatever etc, etc. I am though seriously considering using DevExpress web controls, though possibly Telerik's which look pretty darn cool.
While I'm starting with a basic concept -- an admin screen for filling in things like equipment, labor rates, materials and costs, and putting together a form where people can create a project estimate, this will need to eventually include tracking the actual project costs, for large projects splitting them into phases, etc.
So what do you all suggest as the technology stack, staying within the boundaries of .NET and C#, for putting together a snazzy web site with the least effort?
(And no, I do NOT want to do this in Ruby on Rails, I'm feeling quite done with duck-typed languages and crappy 3rd party open source components.)
[edit] BTW, I came across this by subscribing to http://www.codeforamerica.org/[^] and responding to a request somebody made on one of the forums. [/edit]
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
|
PIEBALDconsult wrote: Salt/Lime/Tequila.
you forgot the loop sequence.
|
|
|
|
|
It depends on the likely size/scope.
I would go with:-
Small proof of concept: Lightswitch
Small/medium : ASP.NET + Razor + MVC on SQL Server back end
Large: Azure + CQRS
Also - document it very well. The most important thing with any pro-bono work is that you can hand it over to someone else to maintain.
|
|
|
|
|
Duncan Edwards Jones wrote: Small/medium : ASP.NET + Razor + MVC on SQL Server back end
We're definitely in the small/medium category, as far as I can predict. Thanks for the feedback!
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
The follow on from that is make sure to make as much use of common frameworks (EF, Unity etc.) as you can - only write the code yourself that only you can write
|
|
|
|
|
I would go with MCV/Razor (you may also add Web API support to enable access from different clients) - this kind of VS project already makes use of jQuery, bootstrap and modernizr...
I worked both with DevExpress and Telerik. Telerik looks cooler and easier to utilize and config (including look), but DevExpress performs slightly better...
VS will create you a basic project, with modern look and login/register pages - if you interested...
(If you think to do it public you may find others to join in...at the end you can share with them the prize )
I'm not questioning your powers of observation; I'm merely remarking upon the paradox of asking a masked man who he is. (V)
|
|
|
|
|
Kornfeld Eliyahu Peter wrote: If you think to do it public you may find others to join in...at the end you can share with them the prize
Indeed, that is the intention!
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
I'm waiting...
I'm not questioning your powers of observation; I'm merely remarking upon the paradox of asking a masked man who he is. (V)
|
|
|
|
|
Kornfeld Eliyahu Peter wrote: I'm waiting...
Is that an offer to participate?
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
A kind of...I have to see in more details what we talking about...I may be able or unable to help...I can't know, but I always ready to help...
I'm not questioning your powers of observation; I'm merely remarking upon the paradox of asking a masked man who he is. (V)
|
|
|
|
|
Kornfeld Eliyahu Peter wrote: I have to see in more details what we talking about
Well, this is certainly an "on-the-fly" design, but I intend to put some initial planning documentation together. I'll send you a direct email (I have your email address) with a writeup in a day or two. I'd like to have some sort of bare-bones scaffolding in place by middle of next week, which should be interesting for me to ramp up on ASP.NET/Razor in the most efficient way possible.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Marc,
I've been doing web stuff for several years now, having moved from desktop dev (MFC, WinForms, WPF, Silverlight) to ASP.NET web stuff.
Here's my preferred web stack:
- Bootstrap. CSS framework. It's a consistent style for your whole site. Makes it easy to build responsive sites that work well across all screen sizes. It makes it easy to do things like modal dialog boxes, gives you a consistent appearance across your whole site, and gives you some nice common web components such as drop-downs and navbars[^].
- jQuery - DOM manipulation framework, helps you do HTML manipulation consistently across all browsers. It's required by Bootstrap and still quite handy when you need to manipulate HTML elements by hand.
$("#someHtmlElement").text("some new text here!"); - KnockoutJS - Databinding and MVVM pattern. It lets you do things like this:
var myViewModel = {
foo: 42
};
ko.applyBindings(myViewModel);
<label data-bind="text: foo"></label> - ASP.NET MVC and ASP.NET WebAPI - MVC (with Razor) for server-rendering your HTML, and WebAPI for fetching data asynchronously.
I personally stay away from things like UI control frameworks. I find them to be vestiges of the desktop world that really aren't necessary in the web stack. There are some decent ones out there, such as Telerik's Kendo UI[^], but it's not really necessary.
One more thing. The hot new sexy thing everyone's worked up about is Google's AngularJS[^]. I've used this now on my last 2 web projects. Like Knockout, it provides data binding. Additionally, it's a full fledged MVC framework in JavaScript, providing client-side routing, data binding, seperation of concerns between view (HTML), presentation logic (controllers in JavaScript), and data services (data fetching AJAX calls). Use it if you're building a dynamic web app; e.g. where the UI changes often and shows live data without having to do server postback/page refreshes.
modified 22-Oct-14 14:45pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Judah Himango wrote: There are some decent ones out there, such as Telerik's Kendo UI[^], but it's not really necessary.
Yes, I've been watching what's going on there.
Judah Himango wrote: The hot new sexy thing everyone's worked up about is Google's AngularJS[^]. I've used this now on my last 2 web projects.
Yup, I'm looking at that. What ever happened to node.js? I see no one has been suggesting that?
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
NodeJS is JavaScript on the server, e.g. a replacement for things like ASP.NET, Ruby on Rails, etc. I personally don't want JavaScript on the server.
In fact, if I can tell you a dirty little secret, when on the client, I prefer TypeScript (or even CoffeeScript[^]) over raw JS. JS is missing a lot of things to make it a nice language for large apps. Languages like TypeScript and CoffeeScript help it in that regard while still compiling to plain ol' JS that runs in everybody's browser.
|
|
|
|
|
Judah Himango wrote: NodeJS is JavaScript on the server, e.g. a replacement for things like ASP.NET
Ah! That helps.
Judah Himango wrote: personally don't want JavaScript on the server.
Agreed.
Judah Himango wrote: I prefer TypeScript (or even CoffeeScript[^]) over raw JS.
I will check those out.
Thank you!
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
Cool. I know you're a C# guy, so TypeScript will make you feel right at home. Try it out in your browser[^].
TypeScript is created by Anders Heijlsberg, the creator of C#. Built into Visual Studio these days, so you can just Add New Item->TypeScript file, then start writing things like:
class MyAwesomeClass {
constructor(firstArg: string, someOtherArg: number) {
}
someFunc(answer: number): string {
return "The answer is: " + answer;
}
}
|
|
|
|
|
Marc Clifton wrote: What ever happened to node.js I had the feeling you are not a fan of JavaScript, so why use JavaScript on the server too...
node.js is for writing server side code (like ASP.NET code behind) in JavaScript...It has good features, but it is not for everyone and for sure not for a site you talked about...
I'm not questioning your powers of observation; I'm merely remarking upon the paradox of asking a masked man who he is. (V)
|
|
|
|
|
for jQuery and KnockoutJS
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|