Comments on: This Week in Fail

By: Steve

Steve — Thu, 26 Aug 2010 17:59:12 +0000

So, after Ayende’s walk through of Light Switch, I guess it’s actually worse than many people feared…so was it still a “fail” since they jumped the gun but were right all along?

By: Ryan Riley

Ryan Riley — Sat, 14 Aug 2010 05:33:47 +0000

I’m very amused by all this. I’m involved in several non-MS groups of people using Ruby, Python and PHP. Despite what many of you might call “the ALT.NET way”, there are numerous beginners and experienced devs all learning and becoming productive using good patterns and practices (similar to what ALT.NET does). Tools like LIghtSwitch are not just cause for weeping in the ALT.NET world; they are a cause for laughter in other communities.

I would ask a different question: Why are other communities able to get beginners (to programming) up to speed in a half-hour (with a real language and text editor) while MS can’t get deliver a simple tool that everyone can agree is good?

Ryan

By: Kevin S. Goff

Kevin S. Goff — Sat, 14 Aug 2010 02:48:41 +0000

Rod, good observations from someone who is neither shill nor basher for what comes out of Redmond. I think everyone should adopt a “wait and see attitude”. It’s easy to quickly jump to defend one’s craft.

I wouldn’t be surprised if LS gets used to (among other things) build throw-away prototypes, which CAN be a valuable part of the process in some companies.

(Having said that, with tools like this, and other tools from MS like PowerPivot, it’s just as important for good public knowledge on what these tools AREN’T for).

By: pete w

pete w — Wed, 11 Aug 2010 14:45:10 +0000

I gotta tell you, when you are coming up to speed in the microsoft eco-system coming from unix, and you get that feeling of being burnt by poorly made oversimplified wizards and code generators, that burnt feeling is hard to forget. Even though I havent tried lightswitch or Microsoft.Data, the familiar elements are all there and they make me cringe.

Microsoft has a serious reputation of fail that they must overcome in the “beginner” dept.

By: Simon Munro

Simon Munro — Wed, 11 Aug 2010 09:49:09 +0000

I was shocked at the conduct of the ‘community leaders’. Their assumption that their way is the only one and denying Microsoft the oppurtunity to develop and sell products was not representative of the broader .net community.
I can’t help thinking that they should move permanently over to rails if it is that awesome (which it may be) and leave the commercially driven .net world to millions of satisfied developers.
However, maybe their actions are not sinister, merely and outlet for frustations that they feel. But I am beginning to belive that they are not ‘elite’ developers but ‘organic developers’ – people who have a different style, which may be correct but is not universally applicable.

I tried to stretch that comparison here… http://bit.ly/cKU5y1

By: Craig Berntson

Craig Berntson — Tue, 10 Aug 2010 23:36:46 +0000

Here, here, Rod! I had the same feeling, but didn’t put it into words. I, for one, plan to look at LightSwitch and give it the “professional devleoper” look-see. I’m even doing a session on it at Utah Code Camp.

My take is that it fills a market gap that is missing. FoxPro has not been an “end-user” tool for 10 years. Access is moving towards being a tool for SharePoint. There’s nothing there to fill the missing gap.

Another way to look at this as professionals is that it will drive us more business. There are thousands of business people who don’t have the budget for the “professional” app. They will turn to LightSwitch and at some point will need something that they can’t do. That’s where we come in. Whether that app can be easily extended or will need to be completely rewritten depends on the customer needs.

I look at LightSwitch as a business opportunity, not as the dooms day app that many “professional” developers state.

By: Rob

Rob — Tue, 10 Aug 2010 17:24:00 +0000

Experience and wisdom from similar tools in the past are what guides these decisions. And the chance is 99% that they’ll be right again. I agree with them, but I’d *love* to be wrong, but I just don’t see it happening.

You don’t have to bite into a shit sandwich to verify that it tastes like shit. Sometimes things are very obvious what they are from how they look.

And isn’t the Fail meme dead yet? It’s as bad as saying something “sucks” and it being an objective opinion.

By: mendicant

mendicant — Tue, 10 Aug 2010 17:17:16 +0000

For small apps, I can see where you’re coming from John. However, my experience seems to lend me to the fact that any USEFUL app, no matter how small always ends up growing into something larger. And once it gets larger it inevitably gets turned over to the dev group.

So now I have two questions:

1) How easy will it be for the dev group to load this up and start improving/fixing/adding on to this app using best practices. This is not likely to be Jr’s using this. It’s going to be the technical engineers, the BAs and those types. Hence the immediate comparison to Access.

2) How many dev shops will even notice if it doesn’t use best practices? Or even care? We might be blowing this out of proportion because most people won’t care. And that’s even more scary than all of this, cause it’ll just breed more.

Of course, if it comes out and it addresses these concerns, I’ll be eating crow. But history and odds are on the same side as the people complaining.

By: Steve

Steve — Tue, 10 Aug 2010 16:47:10 +0000

@John,

You do make a good point. Also, there are a heck of a lot of .NET devs who are simply drag and drop programmers already. I’m sure there are people here who work in a small shop who can profess that all the devs they know are good, but anyone who works in a large organization knows full well that most .NET developers just aren’t all that good.

I’ve seen enough code done by “professionals” that would make your eyes bleed.

This tool wasn’t designed to replace the likes of Ayende, Jeremy Miller, etc., it was designed to replace those on the lower 50 percentile of the skill curve.

Still, I think it’s a horrible idea, but I know quite a few fellow managers who are going to love it.

By: John V. Petersen

John V. Petersen — Tue, 10 Aug 2010 15:16:01 +0000

Paul Batum said
**
To me, the concept of a professional quality application built by people with no development skills is an oxymoron.
**

Is that to say that people WITH dev experience necessarily build professional quality applications? What is the definition of “professional quality”.

IMO, people with a decent understanding of their business and who can think logically, can build something that is fairly decent. In that context, it’s all about the tooling. That said, can their be a major value add with a professional SW developer? Yes…but not all situations can afford a professional SW developer.

Another example: I am an extremely good painter (house painting that is). I am not a “professional painter”. Yet…I know what it takes to do the job correctly. I know what the required prep is. That said, could a pro come in and do a better job. Probably. However, I would bet that I am better than some professed professionals. For me, there is no value add in having a pro come out to paint a room or hallway.

When I started developing, I was not a pro. Being a pro just means you get paid for what you do. It’s not a measure of quality per se.

IMO, true professional don’t nay say something without giving things a through review. At the same time, true pros don’t go head over heels on something without the necessary review.