Going rate for an ASP.NET developer?

Zan

php is a good language, but it is a scripting language that is interpreted at runtime. This is perfect for non enterprise apps... but it also means that it doesn't support n-tier / distributed architecture and a whole raft of other "Enterprise" business requirements, this is because a php page starts at the top and runs to the end, this makes it very difficult to stop half way through and run off to a different server in the network to do some processing.

lastly php is web only. .Net and Java are not limited to web only.

though in saying that I am seeing more and more php jobs being advertised, usually information portals for corporate front ends, which is all good as a means to get your foot in the enterprise door. but in reality all the good programming tasks happen a bit deeper in the Intranet and is done in compiled languages.

Also to those that quote google and yahoo as hiring php devs. yes they are. but they both hire more C# developers than they do php and more java than either.

dzy

Zan wrote: »

php is a good language, but it is a scripting language that is interpreted at runtime. This is perfect for non enterprise apps... but it also means that it doesn't support n-tier / distributed architecture and a whole raft of other "Enterprise" business requirements

Why does the fact that it is interpreted mean that it does not support a distributed architecture?

this is because a php page starts at the top and runs to the end, this makes it very difficult to stop half way through and run off to a different server in the network to do some processing.

I don't see why not. With PHP you can, for example, make a call to a web service and read the results. You can run some process and read the output of that process.

shortcorner

dzy wrote: »

Sorry for the late reply. I just took a look at your websites. In both cases, the functionality all seems to be there, but I think the layout is letting you down a little.

Perhaps the sites would be better served with a simpler, cleaner layout. I'd try to keep the page width smaller than 760px to avoid horizontal scrolling and the navigation menu more standard (eg. the downloads section on the Flynn Concrete site).

I'm bad with layout myself. But normally in a web development company you have a web designer take care of how the pages look and you can concentrate on the functionality.

What you are trying to prove with your portfolio is that you can create functional websites. Employers will be more concerned with this. So try to keep just a simple, clean layout.

Sorry for my delay, Thanks for the comments dzy

Hobbes

dzy wrote: »

Why does the fact that it is interpreted mean that it does not support a distributed architecture?

Depends on how it is interpreted I guess. For example jsp is slow running the first time but once compiled doesn't need to run again unless the code is updated. Does PHP work that way? If it had to compile each time then the more people hitting the server would be an issue.

I don't see why not. With PHP you can, for example, make a call to a web service

AFAIR PHP can consume and create web services.

IRLConor

Hobbes wrote: »

Does PHP work that way? If it had to compile each time then the more people hitting the server would be an issue.

Your bog standard PHP install doesn't cache the compiled versions of the scripts. There are both free, open source and proprietary, commercial opcode caches available if you need the speed boost.

PHP's compiler is pretty fast though, many sites don't bother with an opcode cache.

Draupnir

As a .NET developer working in a permanent contract for a company who build large scale enterprise web applications, I can honestly say that the main factor backing up our choice of language (c#) and the .NET framework is support, documentation and consistency.

Do to the open source nature of PHP and the great many 3rd party apps available for it, a professional company trying to support their own software could very quickly become dependant on 3rd party amatuer providers or worst case scenario, have no professional support/documentation on open source software.

With the .NET environment we safe development time in the short term and hours of heartache when troubleshooting issues in the long term.

Cantab.

Draupnir wrote: »

With the .NET environment we safe development time in the short term and hours of heartache when troubleshooting issues in the long term.

FUD

Ginger

Its like vi vs emacs, red vs blue, munster vs leinster, windows vs everyone else, apples vs oranges, me vs the doughnut and mods vs boardsies ad infinitum

Draupnir

Cantab. wrote: »

FUD

That is a very well constructed argument, but doesnt address the point that using technologies that are unsupported or badly documented can only add points of failure to enterprise software?

Do you disagree with that?

sobriquet

Draupnir wrote: »

using technologies that are unsupported or badly documented can only add points of failure to enterprise software

Yes, you're right, but how is this related to PHP specifically? I've never used it, no opinion either way, but I do know it's one of the most popular web programming languages going, in use by high profile sites (Yahoo, Facebook) and supported by at least one commercial operation (Zend).

You're claiming it's unsupported and badly/'unprofessionally' documented (due, apparently to it's open source nature), you back it up. Otherwise, FUD.

Oh, and because it appears to matter, I, too, am a permanently-contracted developer using C#/SQL Server all the live long day. Ain't life grand.

(Oh, ginger: Emacs.)

Ginger

He he.. i just use VS2008!

Only kiddin.. whats emacs?

Draupnir

sobriquet wrote: »

Yes, you're right, but how is this related to PHP specifically? I've never used it, no opinion either way, but I do know it's one of the most popular web programming languages going, in use by high profile sites (Yahoo, Facebook) and supported by at least one commercial operation (Zend).

You're claiming it's unsupported and badly/'unprofessionally' documented (due, apparently to it's open source nature), you back it up. Otherwise, FUD.

Oh, and because it appears to matter, I, too, am a permanently-contracted developer using C#/SQL Server all the live long day. Ain't life grand.

(Oh, ginger: Emacs.)

I agree that it is very popular among hobbyist and amateurs and some very high profile sites use it, but in my experience medium sized business avoid it simply because of its open source nature and the lack of a common environment from design to development to deployment.

The advantage for the MS .NET approach is the confidence provided by being able to rely on support and cooperation between each branch of a project and the fact that knowledge of any aspect of the project makes it easy to pick up and use other ones.

For me, more open source solutions such as PHP, Ruby etc. do not provide the same assurances or confidences in reliability or speed of development.

machalla

Ginger wrote: »

Only kiddin.. whats emacs?

Best explanation of the editor wars I've seen
http://xkcd.com/378/

IRLConor

Draupnir wrote: »

The advantage for the MS .NET approach is the confidence provided by being able to rely on support and cooperation between each branch of a project and the fact that knowledge of any aspect of the project makes it easy to pick up and use other ones.

For me, more open source solutions such as PHP, Ruby etc. do not provide the same assurances or confidences in reliability or speed of development.

That has everything to do with the development practices and nothing to do with the language/platform.

Yes, there are plenty of cowboy PHP operations out there and it will always be popular with the lower end of the scale due to its cheapness but that doesn't necessarily mean there's anything wrong with the technology.

There are plenty of things wrong with PHP, but its "enterprise-ness" is not one of them. That's a myth propagated by J2EE and .NET zealots from everything I've seen. I've never seriously played with .NET stuff before, but given the choice between developing J2EE stuff and PHP in my experience the PHP way has been the least painful for me as a developer.

(vim all the way! )

sobriquet

Draupnir wrote: »

I agree that it is very popular among hobbyist and amateurs and some very high profile sites use it, but in my experience medium sized business avoid it simply because of its open source nature and the lack of a common environment from design to development to deployment.

This frankly sounds like you're trolling. A language doesn't get to be one of the most popular in its' domain by being adopted only by amateurs and hobbyists on one end and high-end businesses on the other.

You've still not backed up your assertion. I don't care what your preference is, but given that this forum is frequented by students and neophytes I take issue with you saying that the development tools and methodologies that you happen to have settled on amount to the one true way to be a real programmer.

Draupnir

sobriquet wrote: »

This frankly sounds like you're trolling. A language doesn't get to be one of the most popular in its' domain by being adopted only by amateurs and hobbyists on one end and high-end businesses on the other.

You've still not backed up your assertion. I don't care what your preference is, but given that this forum is frequented by students and neophytes I take issue with you saying that the development tools and methodologies that you happen to have settled on amount to the one true way to be a real programmer.

You are totally misinterpreting what I am saying and I am not trolling at all. My opinion is that from design to development to deployment, Microsoft solutions via the .NET framework provides the most complete, well supported and well documented solution for enterprise applications.

As such, it makes it easier for younger developers starting out to get to grips with the programming side of things without the baggage of setup/maintenance issues. Are you trying to tell me you dont agree that a .NET web app is easier for an average developer to set up on a Windows Server 2003 box under IIS than it is to get a LAMP server up and running?

Granted, most reasonably professional companies should not leave the entire thing up to the dev guys, but the fact is that an average .NET developer is more equipped to do server setup or maintenance as well as site deployment and maintenance than I believe an average PHP developer is.

The root of my argument may lie in the fact that the vast majority of people are far more comfortable using a Windows OS than another one, but that just adds to the point I am making.

I am not trying to argue my own preference because my own preference is not for any one language but rather for the global application of standard patterns and metrics across all languages, this is something I work on daily and actively promote in my own job. I may well be a permanently contracted C# developer right now but my personal ambition is certainly not tied to that language.

You talk about the one true way to be a "real programmer", there is a very simple answer to how to be a "real programmer" and that in my belief, is that a "real programmer" can apply their skills and practices in problem solving, reasoning and software design to any language with very little upskilling time.

sobriquet

You said that PHP is avoided by businesses, due to being dependent on amateurs, and it being unprofessionally documented or supported. When I challenged that you should back this up, you didn't.

Draupnir wrote: »

Are you trying to tell me you dont agree that a .NET web app is easier for an average developer to set up on a Windows Server 2003 box under IIS than it is to get a LAMP server up and running?

I don't know; I've never tried to do either. Have you done both? If you have and you're experience is that this one is distinctly preferable to the other, then say that. It's entirely different to writing off without qualification a language that as far as I can see is very popular and widely deployed as only being for amateurs.

Draupnir wrote: »

my own preference is not for any one language... my personal ambition is certainly not tied to that language.

a "real programmer" can apply their skills and practices in problem solving, reasoning and software design to any language with very little upskilling time.

I agree (except about upskilling time, that's fungible), and thus this the product of a sane and reasonable mind.

Draupnir

I didnt say PHP was avoided by business because it is dependant on amateurs because that is not the case, I said I have experienced it is avoided by medium sized businesses because of a lack of support or documentation and the obvious pitfalls from that.

Every developer I know is an amateur who gets paid to do something they like anyway.

Also, I am not trying to dissuade or insult the PHP programming language, I have created a number of apps with it (not commercially) and believe it has its benefits when compared with classic ASP but I dont see any benefits or pros that it has to offer over .NET development, bar maybe cost, which is not something that influences my choice of platform.

Draupnir

sobriquet wrote: »

I don't know; I've never tried to do either. Have you done both? If you have and you're experience is that this one is distinctly preferable to the other, then say that.

To come back to this, yes I have done both and while neither is the most fun I have ever had with my clothes on, the .NET version of events is most often a lot less of a pain in the ass.

IRLConor

Draupnir wrote: »

it is avoided by medium sized businesses because of a lack of support or documentation and the obvious pitfalls from that.

Lack of documentation? Which PHP were you looking at?

I'd take www.php.net over the quagmire that is MSDN every day of the week!

Cantab.

A quick job search on efinancialcareers.com reveals 388 positions when the key-word 'PHP' is searched for. '.NET' returns 189 jobs and 'C#' returns 296 jobs.

It appears to me that banks etc. are quite happy to use PHP. I certainly wouldn't be touching Visual Studio or relying on MS cryptography libraries for anything serious. God only knows the kind of spying and "automatic updating" going on behind the scenes in VS

stevenmu

My own perspective, right or wrong (but mostly right I believe), is that yes .Net is favoured by business and particularly enterprise, but not because of professional support vs open source development, but for many different reasons instead.

The main one (or at least the reason why I favour .Net) is completion and integration. From a business perspective, MS products are prevelant, both on the desktop and in server applications, and .Net provides a one stop shop for developing solutions in an MS environment. Whether you want a simple desktop application, a client server application, a windows service, rich web (intranet or internet), web services, extending office application functionality, database functionality, and integrating enterprise level apps, mobile or embedded solutions, it's all done on .Net. And once you know .Net you can do pretty much anything that any business or enterprise could want. The scope of .Net is truly phenomenal.

Another plus is that the .Net languages encompass pretty much every modern development feature out there, making it ideal for teaching in colleges/courses. This means plenty of fresh meat developers with .Net knowledge, and every dev house loves to hire cheap newly qualified people. All else being equal, use a language/platform that you can hire cheap talent for.

A big plus in the eyes of management is that .Net is a Microsoft technology. MS have invested many many billions in .Net, it's not going anywhere, Microsoft's whole plan for the next ten years, if not beyond, centres on .Net. People who've worked with medium to large businesses and enterprise scale clients will understand how risk management factors into decisions and when it comes to that .Net is a sure win, or shoe in as Americans like to say.

I'll freely admit that I'm current;y gainfully employed as a consultant for a Microsoft partner who specialises in Microsoft technologies, but I'm a true geek in almost every sense of the word. My home PC triple boots Vista, XP and Linux, I've written code in assembly, C, C++, Cobol, Lisp, Prolog, Progress, Python, VB6, VBA, VBScript, OPL, Java, javascript, JScript, VB.Net, C# (I don't really count Mathlab or Logo as programming languages, but used them too), even a little bit of PHP . And probably others languages/platforms that I can't think of right now. and I'm doing stuff with .Net at the moment that blows my mind.

It's subtle until you get inside it, but MS have a huge play underway for the entire business software market. They did a great job of winning dominance in the OS market, but that is nothing compared to what they are doing now which is providing the complete business software solution

There are great opportunities available with many technologies right now, but specialising in MS technologies, specialising in .Net. is very much a win situation.

Cantab.

stevenmu wrote: »

A big plus in the eyes of management is that .Net is a Microsoft technology. MS have invested many many billions in .Net, it's not going anywhere, Microsoft's whole plan for the next ten years, if not beyond, centres on .Net.

I wonder do they consider what happens if they don't wish to upgrade to the latest MS system? At least with Perl, you know the script you wrote 20 years ago still works today.

stevenmu wrote: »

People who've worked with medium to large businesses and enterprise scale clients will understand how risk management factors into decisions and when it comes to that .Net is a sure win, or shoe in as Americans like to say.

The biggest risk is the human factor -- employ people who actually know what they're doing is the best way to avoid IT risks. What are MS going to do if you drop 100k cos your code wasn't written properly?

stevenmu wrote: »

I'll freely admit that I'm current;y gainfully employed as a consultant for a Microsoft partner who specialises in Microsoft technologies, but I'm a true geek in almost every sense of the word. My home PC triple boots Vista, XP and Linux, I've written code in assembly, C, C++, Cobol, Lisp, Prolog, Progress, Python, VB6, VBA, VBScript, OPL, Java, javascript, JScript, VB.Net, C# (I don't really count Mathlab or Logo as programming languages, but used them too), even a little bit of PHP . And probably others languages/platforms that I can't think of right now. and I'm doing stuff with .Net at the moment that blows my mind.

Fair play to ye.

stevenmu wrote: »

It's subtle until you get inside it, but MS have a huge play underway for the entire business software market. They did a great job of winning dominance in the OS market, but that is nothing compared to what they are doing now which is providing the complete business software solution

I still can't see Linux/non-MS platforms becoming extinct any time soon.

stevenmu wrote: »

There are great opportunities available with many technologies right now, but specialising in MS technologies, specialising in .Net. is very much a win situation.

That's a completely unqualified statement and is an example of the kind of "i love/i hate" garbage that leads to yet another thread being destroyed.

sobriquet

Draupnir wrote: »

I didnt say PHP was avoided by business because it is dependant on amateurs because that is not the case

Draupnir wrote: »

a professional company trying to support their own software could very quickly become dependant on 3rd party amatuer providers

Doesn't appear that way, and this:

Draupnir wrote: »

avoided by medium sized businesses because of a lack of support or documentation and the obvious pitfalls from that.

is still an unqualified statement. Take a look at this for example (netcraft confirms!) - that's a whole lot of Apache servers, and odds on they're running as part of some variant of the LAMP stack. A few amateurs and a couple of high profile sites do not lead to figures like that. Either it is, or there's a pile of commercial sites out there that can and do use PHP, and I find it hard to believe it's in spite of lack of support or documentation.

In the second graph though there's an interesting downturn in Apache vs an IIS upturn over the past couple of years, though Apache is regaining.

FWIW, I like .Net overall, it's grand (as is VS, and MSDN, sort of). Still on C# 1.1 though, so I'm looking forward to 21st century things like anonymous functions and generics in 3.0. Having a fire-and-forget development or deployment setup is great, the smoother the better, but the thing is, fire and forget never is for any non-trivial project. You'll inevitably hit all sorts of hairy edge cases, which end up being surprisingly frequent, and where you end up spending your time.

Ginger

Can this thread be locked.. its degenerating into a .NET vs PHP crud match

Zan

Cantab.

Unfortunately efinancials have a bug in their code that inflates the number of results for "Php" jobs.

as I've stated earlier. most small front end Apps are written in php efinancials includes the url of the application site in it's search results and that will be disproportionately inflated.

take this one for example.
http://jobs.efinancialcareers.com/job-4000000000282253.htm/keywordAny=php/

that aint no php job.. nor is mot of the others in the "php" search.

However, just to be clear... I am not trying to say that there aren't plenty of php jobs going in large corporations these days. php is a good language and it does what it is designed to do very well and I think that is demonstrated by the number of corporations that use php for their job applicant sites.
Just for me, those aren't enterprise applications.

Evil Phil

Ginger wrote: »

Can this thread be locked.. its degenerating into a .NET vs PHP crud match

These things generally do when the get to the third page. People can of course start a new thread if they want to.