MVC more or less a requirement in most .NET jobs these days?

mrcheez

I've dabbled in MVC, but most dev is still in WebForms as we need to maintain/build-upon tens of existing websites so rarely get a chance to start a new project. I'd like to try MVC for the next project, although then there's the issue of time involved in learning the new architecture, which would cause undesirable delay in the project's development, so probably wouldn't be workable (not to mention the other staff not being able to maintain the code should I leave)

So, to add to the original question, would companies that "require" MVC experience accept someone who has several years WebForms and has the capacity to learn new technologies rapidly, or would u recommend I develop an MVC project in my own spare time first?

John_Mc

mrcheez wrote: »

I've dabbled in MVC, but most dev is still in WebForms as we need to maintain/build-upon tens of existing websites so rarely get a chance to start a new project. I'd like to try MVC for the next project, although then there's the issue of time involved in learning the new architecture, which would cause undesirable delay in the project's development, so probably wouldn't be workable (not to mention the other staff not being able to maintain the code should I leave)

So, to add to the original question, would companies that "require" MVC experience accept someone who has several years WebForms and has the capacity to learn new technologies rapidly, or would u recommend I develop an MVC project in my own spare time first?

I would definitely learn MVC in your spare time first. It's a lot different to WebForms. In a good way of course!

If you were to start a new job only doing MVC then you'd be putting yourself under a lot of pressure to get up to speed fast.

COYW

No harm in learning MVC or any other design pattern for that matter. From personal experience, MVC tends to take a battering and a half when people get their industrial gloves on it though.

ChRoMe

COYW wrote: »

No harm in learning MVC or any other design pattern for that matter. From personal experience, MVC tends to take a battering and a half when people get their industrial gloves on it though.

Its infinitely preferable to WebForms in my view.

Creamy Goodness

ChRoMe wrote: »

Its infinitely preferable to WebForms in my view.

Also MVC pattern would be transferable to any other language/platform.

COYW

ChRoMe wrote: »

Its infinitely preferable to WebForms in my view.

No, i'm not arguing that. The only issue I see with it is the learning curve and the cost that results.

mrcheez

COYW wrote: »

From personal experience, MVC tends to take a battering and a half when people get their industrial gloves on it though.

You mean that in general people don't follow the pattern correctly?

COYW

mrcheez wrote: »

You mean that in general people don't follow the pattern correctly?

Yes, it is a wonderfully powerful pattern when it is implemented correctly. As I said, the biggest challenge with MVC is the learning curve. Companies are not willing to allocate the time, and money as a result, to allow people to grasp the pattern fully and you tend to end up with partial implementations, which can be very tricky to work with as the project grows. That is from my personal experience.

mrcheez

Even more reason why I should implement a project in my own spare time to do everything correctly from ground up. Any open source projects I can look at that implement the pattern correctly, or recommend a tutorial?

ChRoMe

mrcheez wrote: »

Even more reason why I should implement a project in my own spare time to do everything correctly from ground up. Any open source projects I can look at that implement the pattern correctly, or recommend a tutorial?

Any of the official microsoft ones, I don't really understand whats being said here about the learning curve, its one of the simplest patterns going.

Its pretty hard to f|_|ck up.

ChRoMe

Creamy Goodness wrote: »

Also MVC pattern would be transferable to any other language/platform.

So are webforms , Tapestry is a Java framework that uses the same pattern.

Creamy Goodness

ChRoMe wrote: »

So are webforms , Tapestry is a Java framework that uses the same pattern.

ah I wasn't aware, I'm a C/objective-c guy

ChRoMe

Creamy Goodness wrote: »

ah I wasn't aware, I'm a C guy

Sorry for your troubles. I'd rather stick hot pins in my eyes than write C/C++ professionally.

John_Mc

ChRoMe wrote: »

Any of the official microsoft ones, I don't really understand whats being said here about the learning curve, its one of the simplest patterns going.

Its pretty hard to f|_|ck up.

Coming from the Webforms world it is a big change though. For example, there's no view state or ability to access controls on the form, and no page lifecycle (booyaa!).

It's not hard and it is a lovely pattern/framework, but you need to mess around with it for a while to get a handle on it. Not many companies are going to pay you to do this.

mrcheez

Actually back to the original question, are there many jobs requiring WebForms rather than MVC?

ChRoMe

mrcheez wrote: »

Actually back to the original question, are there many jobs requiring WebForms rather than MVC?

Generally MVC is considered more modern so I'd expect new projects (which is a lot better to work on rather than legacy stuff) would be using MVC.

You should really search the job sites in your area to get a more precise breakdown.

pyroger101

I am a .net recruiter and to be honest its a mix depending on the client/role.

If it is a contract it is essential. If it is a senior perm role it is usually essential too.

If you are not getting exposure to this at work try and work on a few personal projects and build up your experience of it there. Maybe then when you become confident with it you can be the one to introduce it to the business. That would be a great success story!

Some companies dont want to know about mvc to be honest, "dont fix what is not broken" however a lot of the skilled candidates I deal with that have mvc experience do not want to step back into webform land. This may become a problem for employers in the future.

Everyone is moving forward towards MVC and I think you should jump at any opportunity you have to work with it in or outside of the office.

ChRoMe

pyroger101 wrote: »

Some companies dont want to know about mvc to be honest, "dont fix what is not broken"

Well at least its easy to identify who are the companies with a bad working environment!

John_Mc

That's true Chrome. Companies still hanging onto Webforms with no plans to move to newer technologies should be avoided at all costs!

mrcheez

pyroger101 wrote: »

Some companies dont want to know about mvc to be honest, "dont fix what is not broken" however a lot of the skilled candidates I deal with that have mvc experience do not want to step back into webform land. This may become a problem for employers in the future.

Everyone is moving forward towards MVC and I think you should jump at any opportunity you have to work with it in or outside of the office.

Handy thanks. The company I work for are open to developing in MVC but the problem is time vs cost: as we are all familiar with WebForms we can build/deliver projects faster without time being spent on learning a new architecture. But, as you say, if I can approach the next project with the knowledge to take on the project through MVC then that is fine and I can train up the others (also building up my own skill base and not become redundant - which is the main reason!).

Actually I think it will be beneficial if I know BOTH WebForms and MVC as I'm sure there are plenty of legacy applications in software houses that work primarily with MVC.

ChRoMe

John_Mc wrote: »

That's true Chrome. Companies still hanging onto Webforms with no plans to move to newer technologies should be avoided at all costs!

I think what would concern me most about it, is that its usually a good indicator of other toxic work practices.

DublinWriter

ChRoMe wrote: »

I think what would concern me most about it, is that its usually a good indicator of other toxic work practices.

The opposite can also be true.

MVC can be complete overkill for basic CRUD functionality.

Many IT Departments like to jump on the latest IT fashion bandwagon and in doing so over-complicate already working systems.

MVC is a sound methodology, but horses for courses.

ChRoMe

DublinWriter wrote: »

The opposite can also be true.

MVC can be complete overkill for basic CRUD functionality.

Many IT Departments like to jump on the latest IT fashion bandwagon and in doing so over-complicate already working systems.

MVC is a sound methodology, but horses for courses.

Heh, I'd consider MVC less overhead than the webforms component model tbh. The "if it isint broke don't fix it" is frankly inexcusable because its stopping even an investigation in to other techniques.

If you do a valid investigation and decide the effort/benefit ratio doesn't justify the cost fine, if you don't bother to investigate because basically you can't be arsed, that's appalling.

John_Mc

DublinWriter wrote: »

The opposite can also be true.

MVC can be complete overkill for basic CRUD functionality.

Many IT Departments like to jump on the latest IT fashion bandwagon and in doing so over-complicate already working systems.

MVC is a sound methodology, but horses for courses.

I don't agree with this at all. VS2012 gives you reasonably complete boiler plate code for the controller actions necessary for CRUD, the model binding will handle the serialisation automatically for you. The scaffolding will also automatically create a view for your model if it's strongly typed.

You can and probably will change it but when you combine with Entity Framework code-first then you can be up and running with CRUD in just a few minutes. Where's the overkill?

The markup is so much cleaner and more controllable than web forms that you're guaranteed to have less problems with cross browser compatibility than you would with Web forms.

DublinWriter

John_Mc wrote: »

I don't agree with this at all. VS2012 gives you reasonably complete boiler plate code for the controller actions necessary for CRUD, the model binding will handle the serialisation automatically for you. The scaffolding will also automatically create a view for your model if it's strongly typed.

You can and probably will change it but when you combine with Entity Framework code-first then you can be up and running with CRUD in just a few minutes. Where's the overkill?

By serialisation, do you mean the automatic generation of primary keys?

Colonel Panic

No, he means that the framework is smart enough to pull Model data to and from forms without the need for reams of boilerplate code. It's just there waiting for you to use in Controller action methods.

You can churn out CRUD stuff in MVC really quickly, fine tune it if you like or just do everything from scratch.