.NET 10

For us, every .NET upgrade since .NET 5 has gone surprisingly smoothly and reduced CPU/RAM usage by 10–15%.

We were even able to downgrade our cloud servers to smaller instances, literally.

I wish .NET was more popular among startups, if only C# could get rid of the "enterpisey" stigma.

.Net is also good as a platform for other languages. I recently started working with RemObjects, and you can compile languages like Java, Swift, Go and more (VB, Pascal) to .Net. Then, the whole framework and ecosystem is available. I'm liking it a lot.

They have customers who are startups and the 'got to have tools' folk like having lots of languages since they can onboard people who know anything-not-C# and benefit from the .Net library.

> they can onboard people who know anything-not-C# and benefit from the .Net library

I don't get this mindset. I'd much rather have the new guy spend a few months getting used to a new language, than have an organization where everyone uses different languages. It's a nightmare a few years down the road when you have 20 different projects in 15 different languages and the people who built them are mostly gone.

People are way too lenient with this stuff IMO. The goal of an organization should be to have one solution to each problem. For example we use .NET for backend and React for frontend. You don't need anything else. People love to talk about the right tool for the job, it's all BS. You can make pretty much any kind of website using react and pretty much any kind of backend using C#. The only reason to choose anything else is preference.

And sure maybe you have some data science people who need python, thats fine. Just don't have one guy using Py, another using R and yet others using Matlab. That's just asking for trouble. Pick one, stick to it. If you're going to make a change then migrate everything. If it's not worth that then the new tool probably isn't such a big deal after all.

Do you also make everyone wear the same clothes, drive the same vehicle, order the same food

> Do you also make everyone drive the same vehicle

Good analogy. If, say, your organisation maintains a fleet of cars - it needs to keep them on the road, get them serviced, replace parts, refresh individual cars regularly etc.

How many different makes and models do you support? A small org might decide that it only makes sense to support one. A larger org might have the resources for 3 or 4, so that there is 1 or 2 "general purpose" models, and then other ones suited to specialised tasks.

But different tasks require cars, other tasks require trucks, vans, bicycles, motorcycles..

Yeah, .NET is a truck and React is a bicycle. Nobody sad you can't use different tools for different tasks.

I'm saying use one tool for one task. One type of truck. One type of bicycle. Maybe some companies need both a small and a large truck. That's all fine as long as you actually need it.

Just don't let every dev choose their own because you're gonna have a hell of a time maintaining that fleet.

>> Yeah, .NET is a truck and React is a bicycle

I'm not a car guy but I most certainly a bicycle lover, so I will jump on you and say you often need more than one type of bicycle. Joan commutes to work? she wants a city ebike. Dan rides at the bike park? He wants a DH bike. Randy ride centuries on the weekend on his TDF road bike and Sally rides with her kids on a mountain bike.

So yeah, we can pick one bike type and force everyone to ride it, and the results will suck & everyone hate it. Your job can be to continually force everyone to follow this policy or you can stop and we'll get a lot of variation. THis is how it happens.

Eh, no, you don't hire those employees. You're stretching this analogy in some odd ways.