Counterpoint: in a lot of companies, especially larger companies, roles are designed to fit existing staff, rather than staff being selected for roles.
And yet the tolerance for bad decisions is much higher in bigger companies. Make a bad decision at large company and simple intertia will keep you going. Make a bad decision in a small company and you're out of business.
Even for personal use? If devs preferred Linux so much, I'd expect them to use it at least in their own time. But, what the stats say is that people use Win even more when it comes to personal devices, and Linux, not even a tenth of a percent. If anything, that looks like that dev don't prefer Linux. They use when the employer pushes it onto them, but not anywhere else.
The problem is thats how a lot of .net shop operate. I say this as .net developer.
.NET gets selected because a lot of non tech companies need to do software things, and they pick the stack fits in with their current WinTel stack. The main concerns is having replaceable talent to reliably do x. They're not trying to innovate. They are often doing something like sending out insurance quotes by email. They do this by having strict processes, and having developers stay in their lane. Expect rigid scrum, using dependencies only supported by Microsoft etc, Locked down Dev machines with visual studio only, ask for microsoft dev certs, and expect pre-approved enterprise design patterns up the wazoo. They don't want innovative developers, they want you to fit into the pre existing framework designed by an architect. Your skills can die in such an environment.
There are companies that use .NET that aren't like this, but you have to go out your way to find them.
> And .NET is the language of choice for "Enterprise". So that's what the majority of jobs are.
Disagree. I would argue Java is more of a choice for "Enterprise".
Also, would you please define the scope of "enterprise".
If you mean "enterprise" as someone who want consistent and predictable management and productivity, then sure .NET is "enterprisy", because instead of a dragon they want a fossil.
But if you mean "enterprise" as they want to sell their core product, and sometimes that pushes to high developmental velocity with multiple development team to tackle on a feature, then .NET is evolving fast enough that it is not so considered "enterprisy".
Heck, even Ruby on Rails would replace .NET for that, especially when you consider the e-commerce scene that is either Ruby or PHP (Wordpress).
Just look at C# and its incredible language revision every year.
> I would argue Java is more of a choice for "Enterprise".
.NET was literally created to replace the Java enterprise ecosystem. It never managed to completely displace it, but effectively gained around half of the enterprise market - and it will take more and more, after Oracle started pulling their usual boa-constrictor moves. C# is as "enterprisey" as they come, and it went full-opensource only once it became a requirement even in the enterprise.
It is mostly an Enterprise Development complaint... that said, it's how most .Net shops are in my experience. I really like C#, I've been working on a project with FastEndpoints and the .Net 10 RC since April and been pretty happy with it. That said, I don't have to implement 10 layers of indirection/interfaces/patterns to get the job done either. I have in other places.
But I would levy the same complaint with most Java[1] usage as well.
What's skills? Pumping out code ala startup? Sounds like a stable environment. Someone with a good eye will still be able to pick out flaws in the processes/architecture and learn a thing or two.
"The main concern is having replaceable talent to reliably do X" as in every other company?
I swear you guys make having a regular job sound like being under slavery. It's just a job. Some companies are boring, that's just part of the job, and being able to adapt to different environments is what makes a good sde imo.
Lots of places are not like this. I work at a large tech company, at its not like this at all.
My machine is not locked down. I can use vim or whatever ide/editor I want. We don't use scrum/safe, we're expected to contribute to the actual system design. etc If I have a choice, i'm not working at a place like that.
However if you work in dotnet at a traditional "enterprise", it is highly likely to be like this. I have a choice, so i'm not going to choose that.
Wanting replaceable talent drives the tech decisions to only use the "standard" microsoft stack. Other companies value picking the right tool, then teaching people. The best companies don't even care what language you use, and are happy to bring you up speed.
I've found a position that uses dotnet which does not have this culture which is good. But i can totally imagine not picking dotnet to avoid this culture.
reply