Related
I am looking to start developing a relatively simple web application that will pull data from various sources and normalizing it. A user can also enter the data directly into the site. I anticipate hitting scale, if successful. Is it worth putting in the time now to use scalable or distributed technologies or just start with a LAMP stack? Framework or not? Any thoughts, suggestions, or comments would help.
Disregard my vague description of the idea, I'd love to share once I get further along.
Later. I can't remember who said it (might have been SO's Jeff Atwood) but it rings true: your first problem is getting other people to care about your work. Worry about scale when they do.
Definitely go with a well structured framework for your own sanity though. Even if it doesn't end up with thousands of users, you'll want to add features as time goes on. Maintaining an expanding codebase without good structure quickly becomes fairly horrible (been there, done that, lost the client).
btw, if you're tempted to write your own framework, be aware that it is a lot of work. My company has an in-house one we're quite proud of, but it's taken 3-4 years to mature.
Is it worth putting in the time now to use scalable or distributed technologies or just start with a LAMP stack?
A LAMP stack is scalable. Apache provides many, many alternatives.
Framework or not?
Always use the highest-powered framework you can find. Write as little code as possible. Get something in front of people as soon as you can.
Focus on what's important: Get something to work.
If you don't have something that works, scalability doesn't matter, does it?
Then read up on optimization. http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?RulesOfOptimization is very helpful.
Rule 1. Don't.
Rule 2. Don't yet.
Rule 3. Profile before Optimizing.
Until you have a working application, you don't know what -- specific -- thing limits your scalability.
Don't assume. Measure.
That means build something that people actually use. Scale comes later.
Absolutely do it later. Scaling pains is a good problem to have, it means people like your project enough to stress the hardware it's running on.
The last company I worked at started fairly small with PHP and the very very first versions of CakePHP that came out (when it was still in beta). Some of the code was dirty, the admin tool was a mess (code-wise), and sure it could have been done better from the start. But do you know what? They got it out the door before their competitors did, and became extremely successful.
When I came on board they were starting to hit the limits of their current potential scalability, and that is when they decided to start looking at CDN's, lighttpd caching techniques, and other ways to clean up the code and make things run smoother when under heavy load. I don't work for them anymore but it was a good experience in growing an architecture beyond what it was originally scoped at.
I can tell you right now if they had tried to do the scalability and optimizations before selling content and getting a website live - they would never have grown to the size they are now. The company is www.beatport.com if you're interested in who I'm talking about (To re-iterate, I'm not trying to advertise them as I am no longer affiliated with them, but it stands as a good case study and it's easier for people to understand what I'm talking about when they see their website).
Personally, after working with Ruby and Rails (and understanding the separation!) for a couple of years, and having experience with PHP at Beatport - I can confidently say that I never want to work with PHP code again =p
Funny to ask "scale now or later?" and label it "ruby on rails".
Actually, Ruby on Rails was created by David Heinemeier Hansson, who has a whole chapter in his book labeled "Scale later" :))
http://gettingreal.37signals.com/ch04_Scale_Later.php
I agree with the earlier respondents -- make it useful, make it work and get people motivated to use it first. I also agree that you should pick off-the shelf components (of which there are many) rather than roll your own, as much as possible. At the same time, make sure that you choose components for your infrastructure that you know to be scalable so that you can go there when you need to, without having to re-write major chunks of your application.
As the Product Manager for Berkeley DB, I've seen countess cases of developers who decided "Oh, we'll just write that to a flat file" or "I can write my own simple B-tree function" or "Database XYZ is 'good enough', I don't have to worry about concurrency or scalability until later". The problem with that approach is that a) you're re-inventing the wheel (and forgoing what others have learned the hard way already) and b) you're ignoring the fact that you'll have to deal with scalability at some point and going with a 'good enough' solution.
Good luck in your implementation.
I have just started looking into .net MVC and I really like it.
There are a few developers within our team who think the same. But before we are allowed to use it for any project we need to get the approval of management.
What would be the best way to convince management(which know little about programming) that this would worth while and it could have some cost benefit?
My belief is that it will force us to write better more accessible sites which are a lot more testable than web forms. Which in return would mean less bugs and higher customer satisfaction. But I have no evidence of this.
EDIT:
We have a team meeting in 4 days, this is where I will be making my pitch to the team and management.That gives me two weeks to learn more on MVC and do a presentation.
Ok, I'm a manager. I've been one for more than 10 years. Luckily, I've been able to stay very current with my technology passions, so I think I can speak from both sides of the fence.
Managers are going to be concerned with three things here: risk, cost, and the status quo. So, when you present your plan, you're going to need to address each of these:
Risk:
Explain to them that the risk here is very low.
MVC2 is just an extension of MVC, both of which has full source code available (management speak: if we find a problem, we don't need support. We can fix it ourselves).
There's a ton of community support. (management speak: I can go online and get answers to any questions I have in a matter of minutes).
Heavy-hitters at Microsoft are pushing this (management speak: Microsoft is encouraging their developers to use this technology).
Cost
Talk about the fact that the technology is free, with a ton of community support.
Be ready to talk about ramp-up costs for any developers that don't have MVC experience. They're going to be less productive at first. Let your manager know that the developers will come up to speed quickly, and that MVC provides more efficient coding approach than traditional web forms.
Be ready to talk about costs and risks associated with ongoing maintenance. If you've already got a ton of web forms out in the wild, this will present a second skillset that developers will need to maintain. Find ways to convince management that it will be possible to maintain this skillset.
Status Quo
Many people become managers because they want a level of security and control in their life. If this is the case with your manager, they'll be interested in maintaining a comfortable status quo, and not making significant changes. If that's true here, you need to make the case that this really isn't a major change from what's being done today. Assure them that you have a back-out strategy. Talk about how this is really a proof-of-concept for MVC use in your organization, and that management will have an opportunity to review the success of the project prior to you ever suggesting MVC become a standard.
Really what it comes down to is the fact that ASP.NET MVC forces developers to write better, more scalable, and easier to test code. It moves them away from the crapshoot that webforms often can be, and in a direction oriented toward quality architecture and good clean code that follows more rigid conventions.
One definite drawback of MVC is that the View structure required by the webforms view engine (default) encourages you to write spaghetti code in the views that is, at times, a nightmare to maintain. Given this fact, you might even want to pitch them with the new Razor View Engine that was recently announced. With it you can write some extremely clean view code that even the non-developers at your company could manipulate without bringing mass death and destruction to your application. Compared to the markup in the webforms view engine, Razor's markup is pretty much beautiful.
Also, check out this really solid blog post by my buddy Matt Hidinger which does a great job of breaking down why MVC is so awesome.
When you speak to management just be sure to emphasize the all good points mentioned so far, and then compare them to all the bad that webforms is/can be. Be practical and realistic; if you have enough people on your team that are ready to jump on board with MVC then it's pretty much the best possible decision you can make, in my opinion, anyway. You may even want to take a moment to show them some of the great sites that use it- like Stack Overflow.
Personally, I have launched about 15 separate sites built with ASP.NET MVC and as such I feel I have a pretty solid understanding of it. I can wholeheartedly tell you, from my experience, MVC is the best thing that ever happened to ASP.NET.
It really depends on what you're comparing it to, but assuming it's an alternative to webforms, a few items to mention:
better testability
more control over output, which can help target other devices
leverage existing knowledge of .net
MVC framework encourages you to write more structured, testable and, as a result, more maintainable code. As the biggest costs in development are in the debugging and maintenance, those benefits alone should be a good validation. That said, it's still possible to code crap in MVC and that shouldn't be overlooked. If your company has a lot of expertise in another development framework then you really need to address the deficiencies in that and how MVC can rectify those deficiencies.
I would start by looking up blog sites that support MVC and compiling some of the advantageous features of MVC. I would start with Scott Guthrie's initial blog post regarding MVC - it outlines some great features - http://weblogs.asp.net/scottgu/archive/2007/10/14/asp-net-mvc-framework.aspx
If you are looking at trying to bring MVC in and need to convince management of the value, your best approach is too show how it can reduce long term support costs. Having an application that has well developed unit tests with decent code coverage can ensure quality over the life cycle of the application because you can higher level of confidence that changes you introduce have not broken pieces of the application. This doesn't negate the need to test the application, but you will find breaking changes faster. An approach utilizing MVC over MVC is a much more flexible platform for this testing.
There are many studies you can utilize that show the long terms support/maintenance costs of an application are often greater than the initial development costs. Stephen McConnell's Code First has a good discussion of this.
Good luck!
As opposed to what? Management would rather you wrote poorly-designed code? I'm surprised it's even an issue, in that whatever else they're asking you to do, by the current state of the industry, is self-evidently the wrong decision. If they know what MVC is, I can't see how any reasonable person would want you not to use it.
Sell it as an ASP.NET component, only made by Microsoft to incorporate some of the newer web 2.0 technologies moving forward. Tell them it will enhance maintainability while reducing development time. Tell them it uses existing infrastructure, and is more performant. Tell them it uses existing investments in training and software. Tell them it is more efficient, and makes it easier to fix issues and build enhancements. Tell them they'll get more out of their development team without allocating more resources.
Another slightly non-technical question, but I couldn't decide whether to ask here or on Server Fault...
I can't say I'm an MVC guru yet, but I've built several LOB applications so far in ASP.NET and WPF/Silverlight and am currently working on one in MVC 2, so I do know my way around for the most part. My concern is more about the accounting side of things.
It's easy to go wrong; for instance, I once got hired to fix a situation where reports on old transaction records were being calculated using new taxes. Obviously I know now to avoid that particular problem, but there's all sorts of other things as well, especially when international billing becomes involved.
There are packages like Magento and OSCommerce (the latter of which I've used with pretty good success) for PHP, but that's the thing -- they rely on the LAMP stack. Integrating it with the rest of the website could prove to be a real pain, especially if I end up having to host it on a separate Linux machine -- which I probably will. Juggling user accounts and styling and all that would be a killer.
A lot of the MVC tutorials out there are tutorials in building e-commerce sites -- which is pretty cool, but they're still just tutorials, and I doubt they cover all the issues.
Anyone have any experience in this area?
Edit: Commerce Server, at $7,000 per CPU, is out of the question for me, unfortunately.
Edit 2: Wait, it looks like Commerce Server's also available on TechNet... not sure if it's a commercial license though.
Actually, Google Checkout and Checkout by Amazon should work for me. Interestingly, they're practically identical services.
This question contains a lot of background information, to make sure you fully understand why we are looking at these technologies.
The question is basically this:
For a large, spreadsheet-type, module that we need to develop for our webmodule for our application, are there any pitfalls we should know about if we decide to use Silverlight for it?
Issues we already know, and don't need any discussion/reminders about:
We're aware of the problems around using a plugin-type solution, which may or may not be installed on the users machine (and in some cases, probably can't be installed). These risks needs to be mitigated, but we're aware of them. Please don't get hung up on this.
We're a .NET company, so while ruby on rails and lots of other different platforms and architectures are good for this solution, they are not in the scope of the decision here. We have lots of code already written in .NET that we need to take advantage of, otherwise the project will never be finished regardless of platform.
Background
We have a web module for our application with employee-related information and some input forms. Our Windows desktop application is mostly a department leader type of application, to manage employees, but the web module contains mostly employee-centric functions. The web module contains mostly report-type webpages, to list information from the system, or input-forms.
The module we need to add now is more of a heavy spreadsheet type application. You change something one place, and something changes somewhere else, like sums, what is enabled/disabled, etc.
We know we can manage all of that with AJAX, but another issue here is that the application will potentially load a lot of database data in order to put the data in front of the user, and with a AJAXy solution, we're afraid that the request/response method here will have to reload quite a lot of information on every request, even to respond to seemingly easy questions.
A way to mitigate that would basically be to load information into a Session-object or similar, but that's a big no-no, so we'd rather not do that. This is a multi-user module, and some of the data is rather static, but some of the data is also going to have to be refreshed from time to time, so if 10 users loads a lot of data into the session, that's going to be a pretty big memory-hit.
We will be using ASP.NET (MVC) for this if we choose to go this route, that is, developing the module in pure HTML and similar technologies.
Then we looked at Silverlight, and would then load all the information down into the Silverlight application on the client. It would hold the current state, and would only need to touch the database to refresh some of the information, some of the time, instead, as we think the request/response model with ASP.NET (MVC) would work, on every little request.
But, since we have only done minor things with Silverlight, we're not that experienced with it, and we're afraid that some assumptions we might have, stated or unconcious, turns out to be wrong or flawed, which will make this project impossible or very hard to manage at some point.
For instance, just to take an example, is there a limit to how much memory the Silverlight application is allowed to load (I know, if I have to ask I can probably not afford it), for instance if there is a limit on 10MB, then that would be nice to know about before we're midway and start to load the really heavy data.
To make it simpler to give examples, let's just assume we're building a spreadsheet, that has so much data, that for the simple "changed a number here, what else changed", too much data from the database has to be loaded for a proper request/response model to be used, and if we move the entire thing to Silverlight, what will make that project hard or impossible?
Knowing about such things would at least give us the ability to consider if the price is acceptable.
In short, why should we not use Silverlight for this and instead go for ASP.NET (MVC)?
And again, "use Ruby on Rails instead", is not really an answer here. The options are ASP.NET (MVC) which we have experience with, or Silverlight which we don't but can gain.
Of course, if Ruby on rails, given that we'd have to start pretty much from scratch infrastructure-wise, and have to learn a new programming language, and framework, and download and learn a new IDE/tool, if it would still allow us to cut the development time in half, then please give us some information about how that might work, but I daresay that won't really happen here.
You should know that Silverlight (version 3.0) does not support any printing whatsoever, which to me sounds like a whopper of a showstopper for you (sorry, I couldn't resist). The good news is that full printing support has been added in version 4, but that is still in beta. Rumours say it should be out before the summer if everything works out according to plan, so if that fits with your roadmap I would use SL4 right from the start.
There are no memory limitations in Silverlight, but for the local storage (IsolatedStorage) mechanism there is a default limit of 1MB. But you can easily get around that by asking the users permission to increase the local storage space when he/she starts up the application. More on that here: Silverlight Tip of the Day #20 – How to Increase your Isolated Storage Quota.
(Edit)
Aside from the missing printing functionality that will be fixed in SL4 I cannot see any problems with your scenario. I would easily take the Silverlight route if I were you, especially since you already have extensive knowledge of .NET/C#.
For a rich interface as you've described, I would definately go with Silverlight or Flash rather than a html/javascript/ajax solution.
These technologies make for much better and consistent interfaces across platforms, you can buy in various components to speed things up and support things like copy-n-paste and code in a more structured way.
Another element is skills, if you have the skills to achieve it in a particular technology, then go with that.
To the answer you question the best way I can; you should not use silverlight if you decide to use flash.
HTH
I want to learn a framework that promotes good programming practices and is respected by the programming community.
However, I also want a framework that I can use for a day job.
Which one would you recommend?
This question comes from my experience of learning the basics of Django because it was highly acclaimed by developers on Stack Overflow and Hacker News. However.. there's hardly any jobs in my area (NYC) that are asking for Django developers.
As a long-time ASP.NET guy, I've recently gone through a similar decision process to figure out what other web frameworks I should try. Here's what I learned so far which may apply to your case too:
framework/platofrm choices (and hence job opportunities) are highly regional-- the Bay Area job market differs alot from what you'll find in NYC, Chicago, Montreal, or London. Look at local job listings (craigslist and indeed are good places to start) to get a good sense at what's in demand.
similarly, usage varies alot based on the size and type of company. if you want to get a job in a large company, Spring MVC and ASP.NET MVC may be your best bets. In small companies, DJango and (especially) Rails seem to be on the rise.
usage also sometimes varies by industry. for example, many HR apps seem be to .NET based, while financial/banking apps seem to favor Java. if you want to work in a particular industry, check out what up-and-coming companies in that industry are using.
when investing your scarce time in learning something new, favor technologies which are on the upswing of the adoption curve (e.g. Rails) rather than frameworks with wider adoption which may not be growing as fast. Also be wary of very early or niche frameworks which may not ever gain wide adoption.
the one common thread between most (or almost all) frameworks gaining in popularity is that they're MVC frameworks and rely heavily on a solid understanding of REST. Learning those concepts in depth is a good idea.
before deciding to invest a lot of time in one framework, gain a basic understanding of several of them, so you can get a reasonable sense of what you like and don't about each-- and so if you end up applying for a job using a framework you haven't learned, at least you'll be able to talk intelligently about it.
If you focus on what you enjoy, you'll be more motivated to learn it. For example, personally I found Rails (regarless of employment opportunities) more interesting than Spring or Django, so I decided to focus on Rails first. Others may have different impressions-- follow your programmer instincts. That said, there are often few jobs using technologies you find fascinating, so try to strike the right balance: technology you like that many companies are actually hiring people to use!
once you answer the basic "what framework" question, there are many more questions lurking, including picking a javascript framework, validation framework, an ORM, etc. Don't worry too much about those choices yet-- when starting, just pick the default implementation for your framework. But as you get more advanced, the same argument about frameworks also hold for those other things-- e.g. it's useful to know a few ORMs.
Personally, I decided on this approach:
continue building stuff in what I knew best (ASP.NET) but transition all work to ASP.NET MVC, where I can better understand MVC and REST concepts which apply cross-platform
learn JQuery (again, platform neutral)
blow off the ORM choice alltogether for now-- too many other things to worry about
build a few projects in Rails, which is the framework I see used most in the newer SF-Bay-Area startups I've been looking at
learn the basics (e.g. read a book or two, try a few samples) about Python/Django, Java/Spring, and Groovy/Grails.
I've encountered real projects at cool, small companies using Django, Ruby on Rails and (eiuw!) even Zope. .NET is for teletubbies - I've only ever heard of it being used by big corporations that don't know better.
I would say that knowing two or three is better than knowing one that is widely used because you will gain a better understanding of how it works as a concept. For instance if you've only used Java, there is something probably missing in your understanding of OOP, because you're pigeon-holed into thinking about it in one way. If you already know Django though you Spring would probably be a good compliment to that.
i'd probably say ASP.NET MVC. I always see lots of .NET jobs around and this seems to be a solid framework which i think in fact powers all the stackoverflow family. As a PHP developer i must also make a mention of Zend Framework which is used by a number of big sites including bbc.co.uk and is now frequently mentioned in advertisements for PHP jobs.
I want to learn a framework that promotes good programming practices and is respected by the programming community. However, I also want a framework that I can use for a day job.
Sorry to be the bearer of bad news here, but those two desires tend to conflict. IMHO most business managers tend to go for (ugly) rapid development on top of CRMs or other higher-level 3rd party codebases. Building elegant websites from the ground up mostly happens in startups, or true web companies where the website is the sole product. There are not that many of those companies; and many of those that seem to fit are actually a mess on the inside, i.e. due to time pressure, messy legacy code and many other reasons you often don't get to write according to "good programming practices" anyway.
I agree with Kaleb Brasee that Java and .NET are the two main platforms when job availability is a priority.
Every job market is unique, so look at job openings in your area, or call a handful of recruiters and ask what they see a need for / could easily place you in a junior position for. What I'm seeing is that Microsoft Sharepoint is in demand, and a few other regional CMS'es are in demand (in Denmark I see Sitecore regularly).
I think ASP.NET MVC 2.0 together with MVC Areas and ASP.NET Dynamic Data will have a good story, a good solution, for many of those bosses who want rapid development. And I think the resulting code could be quite okay, or at least not bad compared to many of the "CMS beaten into something else" sites that exist. But this is a brand new thing for the .NET platform, and it will need to be sold to the decision makers first...
Bottom line: If you want job security first and foremost, then look at large CMS's like Sharepoint, and work on other technologies in your spare time. Optionally you could take a job at a startup / a web company later; but look before you leap.
Have you tried Spring MVC? Many companies do use Java for web-apps (or .NET) and web service based applications.
Since you mentioned Ruby on Rails, you might want to learn Ruby on Rails. It has got some good programming practices in it and a very well thought architecture. The Ruby community itself have also (in my personal opinion) created very innovative frameworks and highly favor testing and quality. You can see this by the innovative testing framework like Cucumber, webrat, shoulda, coulda, rspec, test/spec. Many startups also uses Rails as their platform, so it should be easier for you to get a job. You can start looking at Working With Rails and 37signals job board. So there is a good ecosystem inside Rails and Ruby community.
But the downside of Rails compare to Django is mainly there are too much magic (less explicit) and the docs is not as good as Django. If you want to get a Django job, try looking at several news site because Django grew up from a newspaper site so it is adopted alot in news based sites.
I would recommend ASP.NET MVC, Ruby on Rails, or Python/Django, they all seem to be popular and successful, and based on the MVC paradigm which is definitely the right tool for the job when it comes to the web.
.NET and Java are by far the 2 largest platforms used by employers, and hence the most in-demand when searching for a job. Java has a few popular frameworks, with JSF, Spring MVC and Struts all seeming to be about equal in demand. I don't use .NET, but from what I've seen, ASP.NET and ASP.NET MVC are the major ones.
I would say that most of the frameworks mentioned here promotes good practices. But that doesn't neccesarily mean that the companies using those frameworks are actually following those good practices! In fact most probably aren't. So don't expect too much.
You see, places like Stack Overflow, Hacker News etc. are a great way to connect with people who really care about their craft. Sadly this is a minority. There are millions of programmers in the world. Most of them suck. The code they write sucks. They don't care. They are not interested in improving their skills. They just want to learn the bare minimum required to collect their paycheck, go home, feed the dog, spend some time with the family, watch some TV, go too bed and do it all over again the next day.
Okay that was a bit harsh :) What I'm getting at is that you are probably better off asking this question to some of the managers at the companies where you would like to work. My guess is that most of them will answer .NET or Java. If you are up for a laugh ask them why they chose that particular technology over something else, and see how many buzzwords they throw at you ;)