|
Tomaž Štih wrote: p.s. Don't use web developers. They have radically different mindset, they work with gazillion of frameworks, don't know strong typing, storyboard their life, and inject'n'pattern everything that moves. That's all very nice, and cool too, but you don't use a wrench to cut hair. And beware of "standard control" freaks. They don't innovate and their software looks like living DevExpress mutant from the 90ties, with 20 switchable fluorescent control skins that scare the sh*t out of you, and without any catchy innovative approach that makes your app stand out. You'll recognize them by bloated data-modeling and raping you with screen wireframes.
Sorry, but I couldn't disagree with you more. WPF lends itself well to multi-tiered architecture, but UWP is even better. As a matter of fact, following Microsoft's development guidelines for UWP provides a VERY rich and consistent user interface paradigm (something that iOS, but no so much Android thrives upon) which will become very natural in the future, especially since the Win32 versions of Office are about to become extinct. Web development of SPA and ASP.Net MVC is not much different than UWP development. With UWP now being run from DotNet Core, you can even use that back end and put it in the app and have a distributed app that is self contained and can work offline, simply syncing with servers as networking becomes available. You CANNOT do that easily with Web, and hardly anybody does it with mobile. UWP is far more powerful than any other framework out there. Also, with WebAssembly starting to take off, the days of Javascript/Bootstrap/Angular hell are numbered, and those same skills will be directly applicable to UWP as much a WebAssembly.
And those "dinosaur" C++ developers have a VERY good platform with UWP to continue their careers as UWP has a very good support for COM objects interacting with the new Windows API from C++.
|
|
|
|
|
Sharp Ninja wrote: Also, with WebAssembly starting to take off, the days of Javascript/Bootstrap/Angular hell are numbered
This made my day! JavaScript is an abomination. 
|
|
|
|
|
I found your job posting on ZipRecruiter. I think the primary turnoff (for me anyway) is that the position is "temporary". How temporary is it?
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
|
If this is true that it is a temp, no decent experienced developers would ever apply. Those that can't find work anywhere would apply, but they are not going to qualify for the job.
|
|
|
|
|
Talk to me in four months.
|
|
|
|
|
I don't know about windows, I work on iOS and Android apps, but one day out of sheer curiosity, I have tried to replicate an HTML5/CSS3/JavaScript(with addons) UI with native elements. Result: disaster, the HTML5/CSS3/Javascript combination happens to be the best and fastest UI platform.
Even microsoft tried at one point WinJS I think.
throughout my life, my two greatest assets have been mental stability and being, like, really smart.
modified 20-Oct-19 21:02pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Stable Genius wrote: I don't know about windows, I work on iOS and Android apps, but one day out of sheer curiosity, I have tried to replicate an HTML5/CSS3/JavaScript(with addons) UI with native elements. Result: disaster, the HTML5/CSS3/Javascript combination happens to be the best and fastest UI platform.
iOS and Android apps are not as fully baked as UWP is. Neither uses XAML (unless you are using Xamarin Forms) and that's a BIG disadvantage for them. The AXML paradigm for Android is horrible. XAML is much more natural for web developers. The biggest hurdle is wrapping your brain around styling with XAML, but once you get it, CSS sucks.
Now, if someone doesn't WANT to learn a typed language such as C# or C++, then that's not a fault of the platform, but of the developer. Personally, I HATE Javascript development, but I do it when I have to.
|
|
|
|
|
We are a dying breed. I have been a Desktop Programmer since 1978. Most Guys like me are settled and have found our own niche (Wives, children, grandchildren, homes, mortgages, favorite bars, etc.)
"Developer" is the term du Jour, to guys like me. Don't use it.
Also, consider allowing a candidate to work remotely. Even then expect to pay more, we know how "rare" we are becoming. Supply and Demand - Adam Smith had it right, it's not just a theory, it's a fact. I get contacted by "head hunters" two to three times a week.
I am currently upgrading my package from VB6 to C#, so my current clients have a fighting chance of finding someone to maintain my code after I am gone. Yes, I do expect my software to outlive me. 
It's a random chance Universe and we are all out there riding waves of Probability.
"Newer" is NOT automatically better, only Different. (And more complex and bug ridden when it comes to all of the "boutique" languages / frameworks out there)
|
|
|
|
|
Windows Desktop
Universal Windows Platform
Xamarin
You're looking for a mobile developer on two platforms who also knows the Win32/64 API. You're looking for three different detailed skill sets.
|
|
|
|
|
Did you not see the word "OR"?
|
|
|
|
|
I've been saying that's where the money is ... but they laughed.
One platform; multiple devices.
(It actually works).
"(I) am amazed to see myself here rather than there ... now rather than then".
― Blaise Pascal
|
|
|
|
|
I'd be someone that would be "close" to hitting the reqs, in that I can develop WinForms C#, but alas I had decided a while back to stop chasing all of Micro$oft's API updates. Perhaps a lot of other Windows hackers like Yours Truly have decided the same. I do know that in the good old days, I did not have to have "paid experience" in every single requirement to get a gig; as long as I had the main one, the client would let me learn what I needed to on the job. But clients have gotten used to not having to do that anymore, so I have "early retired".
|
|
|
|
|
I'm curious as to what ORM you use and why.
For personal projects I use Linq to SQL and I love it. It's simple and works all the time. At work we're using Entity Framework and I detest it. It ALWAYS results in compilation errors and almost always generates entities wrong in some way.
I'v heard of some folks here using their home rolled ORM's. For those of you, what ORM would yo say it most resembles?
If it's not broken, fix it until it is.
Everything makes sense in someone's mind.
Ya can't fix stupid.
modified 12-Apr-18 12:40pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Linq2SQL. And yes, my experiences with EF are similar. What's worse though is that a lot of the time, an ORM isn't necessary. Take a server-side query that is converted to JSON for displaying data on the client-side browser. Why go through an ORM? Yet I see people using EF to load the query into a model, then serialize the model into JSON, then return it to the client. Why go through that extra step?
Or similarly, on a thick client, it's easy enough to data bind directly to a DataTable, even if it's only one row where you want to display the data in discrete fields rather than a grid, and you can wire up the events to track changes and persist the data for a responsive UI with little effort.
|
|
|
|
|
I agree.
But I find models useful when you need things like property change notification. They're also useful for representing a single data item. Passing a while DataTable around works but seems rather bulky to me.
Probably 6 one way, half dozen the other.
Thanks
If it's not broken, fix it until it is.
Everything makes sense in someone's mind.
Ya can't fix stupid.
|
|
|
|
|
Right, I haven't yet encountered a database access situation that couldn't easily be dealt with by using DataReaders, DataTables, DataViews, DataRows, etc.
Microsoft even provides DataAdapters (ptui) for Bob's sake!
ORMs are definitely a solution looking for a problem.
|
|
|
|
|
But wait... it's a shiny new UI tool with cool graphics... so we NEED it.
If it's not broken, fix it until it is.
Everything makes sense in someone's mind.
Ya can't fix stupid.
|
|
|
|
|
The reason we have ORMs now is because we can't use FPSE to connect our ASP pages to their MSAccess databases
Director of Transmogrification Services
Shinobi of Query Language
Master of Yoda Conditional
|
|
|
|
|
Were I to use one it would be one I created.
Third choice would be one from Microsoft, never from a third-party.
modified 12-Apr-18 13:25pm.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kevin Marois wrote: I'm curious as to what ORM you use and why.
I'm curious as to why you are curious
|
|
|
|
|
Like I said, I really like Linq to Sql, but it's an older technology. Got me thinking about what ppl are using these days.
If it's not broken, fix it until it is.
Everything makes sense in someone's mind.
Ya can't fix stupid.
|
|
|
|
|
Just beginning with NHibernate, at first I was very skeptical, but now I am a bit milder. It was not my choice of course but imposed by management. Clearly this is not an ORM to use if you are in a hurry due to it's complexity ...
|
|
|
|
|
RickZeeland wrote: Clearly this is not an ORM to use if you are in a hurry due to it's complexity
Kind of contradicting the purpose, isn't it?
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
