.Net CMS
Out of context: Reply #8
- Started
- Last post
- 11 Responses
- 3030
I used to work with developers that didn't pay attention to the HTML generated on the output by .NET and it was version 2.0.
Other designers and I were creating html valid templates and after integration with the .NET (and custom-written CMS), the layout and html looked like massive piece of junk. It was very frustrating. Using controls like ASP:GridVIew or ASP:DataList was very convenient for DEV guys because of data-binding but not for us (Auto-generated tables with UL's or DL's)
Then I suggested to use ASP:Repeater control which basically uses given HTML as a template and adds nothing more. The whole effort paid off at the end, despite the fact that DEV guys had to spend a little bit more time. Then, we didn't have to re-write the CSS.
Regarding M$ - they have improved the controls that I mentioned above, so HTML is not the mess, also they include jQuery in Visual Studio 2010 as a default JS library.
I think that lazyness of developers, lack of time dedicated for the project development (or both) damaged the reputation of the .NET.
PHP has the advantage over the .NET beacuse of the hosting. Well, it used to be the key point in that discussion, but nowdays ASP.NET hosting is not a luxury. Hosting companies offer Windows and Linux packages, with PHP also available on Windows.
To be honest, I find difficult to get good and affordable RoR hosting (please don't mention MT).