Cutting edge technologies for .NET web application? [closed]_问答_开发者

Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.

Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.

开发者_开发技巧

Closed 7 years ago.

Improve this question

If you would want to build the most expensive possible web application what would you use? Without buying Microsoft products except VS2010 and SQL Server database.

Does the value increase lie in the technologies that you use and in architectural patterns applied?

If so, what to use among .NET technologies in all application layers to increase the website value?

I am asking this because I have business opportunity and I have no money to invest thus I want to cover my partner's investment with technology contribution.

Thanks a lot.

IMHO I would not try to increase my website value by investing into expensive technologies :-) I think you should put the working hours together it tooks to build this website and multiply this with a factor, which corresponds to your value.

I think you would be on your way using ASP.NET MVC development (Possibly MVC3 with EF 4.0 as ORM) using VWD Express 2010 and Sql Server Express (If you are hosting on your own, else the hosting company will give you Sql Server Db) now then then move on to Sql Server 2008 and visual studio after you start making money and the website hits increase. It may also be possible to continue using the same if you think the performance is alright.

Of course this is a simplistic answer, Mariusz is right as well.

Bob Muglia of Team Silverlight posted a blog entry after Microsoft's PDC conference. In regards to rich web applications, Microsoft has dubbed Silverlight its technology of choice (i.e. to compete with Flash). However, with the emergence of HTML 5, Microsoft may be switching its decision.

What does this all mean? Silverlight / HTML5 are Microsoft's technologies of choice for rich web applications. This does not mean that ASP.NET (including MVC) loses its value, but as users' demand for richer, more interactive web applications continues to increase, I would invest more in the tools that will help me with SL and HTML 5.

And this does not change the value add of Visual Studio / SQL Server.

Cutting edges are the first thing to get blunted.

I would go further that Mariusz and say that actually, while there are marketing advantages just in being able to talk about the cutting-edge tech that you use, in terms of the long-term value (whether to a customer or an investor), the use of cutting-edge technology is something that has to be justified, as much as it is a selling point.

Firstly, some cutting-edge tech requires the use of someone else's software. Even if it's open-source you are now dependant upon that other supplier. If it's proprietary, you are even more dependant (the possibility of forking off a custom version that suits just you has gone - not something you'd want to do with any software, but at least there is the possibility if you have the source).

At the same time as that issue, if it's licensed for a fee, then this adds to the TCO of you system in a way that doesn't benefit you (i.e. if each installation has third-party software that costs X dollars to set up, that's X dollars you have to include in your price that you never get any value from as a vendor).

Secondly, today's cutting edge technology can be tomorrow's fish-and-chip wrapper*. Indeed, one can say with absolute certainty that some of it will, while some of it becomes a common part of many people's toolkits, and some of it finds a niche in which it remains important while never becoming a tech that a very large number of people use.

That's a safe prediction. The tricky prediction is which will do which. The factors affecting this are a mixture of technological, psychological, social, political and marketing factors in a competitive landscape where it's hard to judge which of the current players will dominate and there's nothing to say that something new will kill all of what's there.

Now, none of this means that you should shy away from the cutting edge. None of it means that you should shy away from using third-party tech (whether proprietary or open). It does mean that you should be sure you are getting value out of it. If you use what's been tried and tested for the last ten years, the chances of it still being just as reliable (and perhaps further improved) in five year's time is much greater than if you use something that is six-months old.

The way to turn cutting edge technologies into a competitive advantage is not to use them, but to use them to do something that you couldn't do, or couldn't do as well (reliably, cheaply, quickly, efficiently all count as "well") as you could otherwise. Even here, if you can think of a good way to turn older tech to the use that someone else is putting newer tech, you may be able to compete with a cheaper and more dependable product.

It is also important to stay aware of tech relevant to your field that you choose not to use - the flip-side of it being hard to predict what will survive and grow is that tech you decided not to use might become tech that you later do want, or even need, to use.

In the end, all technical decisions become both assets and liabilities to future development and the value to customers and investors. You can't expect the tech to sell itself, you can only make sound technical decisions, so that the people who sell the tech (whether that is someone else, or you in a different role) have an easier job when talking up the assets.

*In days of less heavily regulated hygiene practices, it used to be common in Britain and Ireland to wrap fish and chips in old newspapers. I'm not sure how well the idiom about today's news being tomorrow's fish and chips translates to readers in the rest of the world.