Is Whidbey the beginning of the end for the developer ?

Hi Everyone

I have just been getting up to speed on the forthcoming ASP.Net 2.0
(Whidbey) that Microsoft is releasing some time this year.

It all looks great but I was a bit concerned that it aims to reduce
the amount of code that needs to be written by the developer by 70%.

The new GridView control will be "far simpler to use, requires less
code, and provides far more power than the DataGrid Control".

After working extremely hard to get my Computer Science degree and
investing my own hard earnt money heavily in MSDN subscriptions and
programming books etc just to keep my skills up to date, I began to
wonder if it had all been worthwhile now that the forthcoming ASP.Net
2.0 (Whidbey) seems to be abstracting much of the techniques that I
had learnt to "hand code".

For instance, I was particularly pleased with my implementation of
Roles Based Forms Authentication that I had mastered in C# but now I
understand that it will all be wasted now that this functionality will
be covered by the new Membership classes.

I fully understand that by definition, IT is a constantly evolving
industry but it does make me worry that the very systems that we use
to improve business efficiency could one day make the role of the
qualified developer redundant.

The way things are going, the office junior will be able to do all the
stuff that the highly qualified and trained developer once did and the
developers will be ignored because the higher wages that they rightly
attract will no longer be justified.

Maybe this is what Microsoft are working towards or maybe I'm just a
Luddite.

Please accept my appologies for the cross-posting but it's just
something that I feel very stongly about and is of equal importance to
each group.

I think to some degree your concerns are justified, but remember that there
will always be a need to customize out of the box solutions. This is where
and why there will always be a need for developers.


"Fresh Air Rider" <Fresh_Air_Rider@Hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:556722cb.0501010857.1eb38850@posting.google.c om...
> Hi Everyone
>
> I have just been getting up to speed on the forthcoming ASP.Net 2.0
> (Whidbey) that Microsoft is releasing some time this year.
>
> It all looks great but I was a bit concerned that it aims to reduce
> the amount of code that needs to be written by the developer by 70%.
>
> The new GridView control will be "far simpler to use, requires less
> code, and provides far more power than the DataGrid Control".
>
> After working extremely hard to get my Computer Science degree and
> investing my own hard earnt money heavily in MSDN subscriptions and
> programming books etc just to keep my skills up to date, I began to
> wonder if it had all been worthwhile now that the forthcoming ASP.Net
> 2.0 (Whidbey) seems to be abstracting much of the techniques that I
> had learnt to "hand code".
>
> For instance, I was particularly pleased with my implementation of
> Roles Based Forms Authentication that I had mastered in C# but now I
> understand that it will all be wasted now that this functionality will
> be covered by the new Membership classes.
>
> I fully understand that by definition, IT is a constantly evolving
> industry but it does make me worry that the very systems that we use
> to improve business efficiency could one day make the role of the
> qualified developer redundant.
>
> The way things are going, the office junior will be able to do all the
> stuff that the highly qualified and trained developer once did and the
> developers will be ignored because the higher wages that they rightly
> attract will no longer be justified.
>
> Maybe this is what Microsoft are working towards or maybe I'm just a
> Luddite.
>
> Please accept my appologies for the cross-posting but it's just
> something that I feel very stongly about and is of equal importance to
> each group.

I think to some degree your concerns are justified, but remember that there
will always be a need to customize out of the box solutions. This is where
and why there will always be a need for developers.


"Fresh Air Rider" <Fresh_Air_Rider@Hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:556722cb.0501010857.1eb38850@posting.google.c om...
> Hi Everyone
>
> I have just been getting up to speed on the forthcoming ASP.Net 2.0
> (Whidbey) that Microsoft is releasing some time this year.
>
> It all looks great but I was a bit concerned that it aims to reduce
> the amount of code that needs to be written by the developer by 70%.
>
> The new GridView control will be "far simpler to use, requires less
> code, and provides far more power than the DataGrid Control".
>
> After working extremely hard to get my Computer Science degree and
> investing my own hard earnt money heavily in MSDN subscriptions and
> programming books etc just to keep my skills up to date, I began to
> wonder if it had all been worthwhile now that the forthcoming ASP.Net
> 2.0 (Whidbey) seems to be abstracting much of the techniques that I
> had learnt to "hand code".
>
> For instance, I was particularly pleased with my implementation of
> Roles Based Forms Authentication that I had mastered in C# but now I
> understand that it will all be wasted now that this functionality will
> be covered by the new Membership classes.
>
> I fully understand that by definition, IT is a constantly evolving
> industry but it does make me worry that the very systems that we use
> to improve business efficiency could one day make the role of the
> qualified developer redundant.
>
> The way things are going, the office junior will be able to do all the
> stuff that the highly qualified and trained developer once did and the
> developers will be ignored because the higher wages that they rightly
> attract will no longer be justified.
>
> Maybe this is what Microsoft are working towards or maybe I'm just a
> Luddite.
>
> Please accept my appologies for the cross-posting but it's just
> something that I feel very stongly about and is of equal importance to
> each group.

Fresh Air Rider wrote:
> I have just been getting up to speed on the forthcoming ASP.Net 2.0
> (Whidbey) that Microsoft is releasing some time this year.
>
> It all looks great but I was a bit concerned that it aims to reduce
> the amount of code that needs to be written by the developer by 70%.
>
> The new GridView control will be "far simpler to use, requires less
> code, and provides far more power than the DataGrid Control".
>
> After working extremely hard to get my Computer Science degree and
> investing my own hard earnt money heavily in MSDN subscriptions and
> programming books etc just to keep my skills up to date, I began to
> wonder if it had all been worthwhile now that the forthcoming ASP.Net
> 2.0 (Whidbey) seems to be abstracting much of the techniques that I
> had learnt to "hand code".

Programming is not 'typing code' but working out algorithms and create
programs which represent these algorithms in executable form. How that
is done, is up to the tools you use. So this will not change, the tools
you use will change, over time.

Do not feel offended, but I don't think you need a CS degree to write
ASP.NET gui's as it's fairly straightforward once you know the tricks
and pitfalls.

What is way more important is the layer stack right below the GUI: the
BL layer and the BL facade layer (or gui facade, depending on which way
you look at it). The vast majority of your application's code is in
there, or better: the vast majority of interesting code is in there.

> For instance, I was particularly pleased with my implementation of
> Roles Based Forms Authentication that I had mastered in C# but now I
> understand that it will all be wasted now that this functionality will
> be covered by the new Membership classes.

As with everything MS gives out: the more it is detailed and towards
'end user stuff' (i.e. the farther you get away from a 'framework'), the
more the following rule is applicable: "The Microsoft Way or Your Own
Way". Often there are situations in which the MS provided controls don't
work very well and you need own code or customize the provided controls.

Don't be fooled by the slick demos with drag-n-drop 'RAD'
'programming': professional software is often written in total different
ways than the demos show you. This is for a reason: demos are meant to
sell stuff, not to teach you best practises.

> I fully understand that by definition, IT is a constantly evolving
> industry but it does make me worry that the very systems that we use
> to improve business efficiency could one day make the role of the
> qualified developer redundant.

this will never be the case. Programming is not related to typing, but
to thinking.

> The way things are going, the office junior will be able to do all the
> stuff that the highly qualified and trained developer once did and the
> developers will be ignored because the higher wages that they rightly
> attract will no longer be justified.

no, the office monkey will do the dull gui-stuff while you will be
doing business logic components and the controller layers below the GUI,
which are not created by drag-n-drop clicketyclick.

Frans.

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Get LLBLGen Pro, productive O/R mapping for .NET: http://www.llblgen.com
My .NET blog: http://weblogs.asp.net/fbouma
Microsoft MVP (C#)
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fresh Air Rider wrote:
> I have just been getting up to speed on the forthcoming ASP.Net 2.0
> (Whidbey) that Microsoft is releasing some time this year.
>
> It all looks great but I was a bit concerned that it aims to reduce
> the amount of code that needs to be written by the developer by 70%.
>
> The new GridView control will be "far simpler to use, requires less
> code, and provides far more power than the DataGrid Control".
>
> After working extremely hard to get my Computer Science degree and
> investing my own hard earnt money heavily in MSDN subscriptions and
> programming books etc just to keep my skills up to date, I began to
> wonder if it had all been worthwhile now that the forthcoming ASP.Net
> 2.0 (Whidbey) seems to be abstracting much of the techniques that I
> had learnt to "hand code".

Programming is not 'typing code' but working out algorithms and create
programs which represent these algorithms in executable form. How that
is done, is up to the tools you use. So this will not change, the tools
you use will change, over time.

Do not feel offended, but I don't think you need a CS degree to write
ASP.NET gui's as it's fairly straightforward once you know the tricks
and pitfalls.

What is way more important is the layer stack right below the GUI: the
BL layer and the BL facade layer (or gui facade, depending on which way
you look at it). The vast majority of your application's code is in
there, or better: the vast majority of interesting code is in there.

> For instance, I was particularly pleased with my implementation of
> Roles Based Forms Authentication that I had mastered in C# but now I
> understand that it will all be wasted now that this functionality will
> be covered by the new Membership classes.

As with everything MS gives out: the more it is detailed and towards
'end user stuff' (i.e. the farther you get away from a 'framework'), the
more the following rule is applicable: "The Microsoft Way or Your Own
Way". Often there are situations in which the MS provided controls don't
work very well and you need own code or customize the provided controls.

Don't be fooled by the slick demos with drag-n-drop 'RAD'
'programming': professional software is often written in total different
ways than the demos show you. This is for a reason: demos are meant to
sell stuff, not to teach you best practises.

> I fully understand that by definition, IT is a constantly evolving
> industry but it does make me worry that the very systems that we use
> to improve business efficiency could one day make the role of the
> qualified developer redundant.

this will never be the case. Programming is not related to typing, but
to thinking.

> The way things are going, the office junior will be able to do all the
> stuff that the highly qualified and trained developer once did and the
> developers will be ignored because the higher wages that they rightly
> attract will no longer be justified.

no, the office monkey will do the dull gui-stuff while you will be
doing business logic components and the controller layers below the GUI,
which are not created by drag-n-drop clicketyclick.

Frans.

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Get LLBLGen Pro, productive O/R mapping for .NET: http://www.llblgen.com
My .NET blog: http://weblogs.asp.net/fbouma
Microsoft MVP (C#)
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi,

I have seen that this message is posted yesterday in

Microsoft.dotnet.general
Microsoft.dotnet.languages.csharp

To make you attent on it, not in the newsgroup
Microsoft.dotnet.languages.vb

However that is a very unknown little newsgroup, so sending to that has no
sense, while the answers will probably be the same as the answers you got
in the other newsgroups

Just my thought,

Cor

Hi,

I have seen that this message is posted yesterday in

Microsoft.dotnet.general
Microsoft.dotnet.languages.csharp

To make you attent on it, not in the newsgroup
Microsoft.dotnet.languages.vb

However that is a very unknown little newsgroup, so sending to that has no
sense, while the answers will probably be the same as the answers you got
in the other newsgroups

Just my thought,

Cor

Just a quick comment:

You mention several times that the business logic is where the work gets
done and that there is no RAD clickety-click for that code. I think what
you missed from the OP was that in Whidbey, there IS RAD for the business
and data layers. In Whidbey, the RAD and drag & drop is greatly improved
for the backend of an application as well as the front.




"Frans Bouma [C# MVP]" <perseus.usenetNOSPAM@xs4all.nl> wrote in message
news:uCO%23c2C8EHA.3076@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Fresh Air Rider wrote:
>> I have just been getting up to speed on the forthcoming ASP.Net 2.0
>> (Whidbey) that Microsoft is releasing some time this year.
>>
>> It all looks great but I was a bit concerned that it aims to reduce
>> the amount of code that needs to be written by the developer by 70%.
>>
>> The new GridView control will be "far simpler to use, requires less
>> code, and provides far more power than the DataGrid Control".
>>
>> After working extremely hard to get my Computer Science degree and
>> investing my own hard earnt money heavily in MSDN subscriptions and
>> programming books etc just to keep my skills up to date, I began to
>> wonder if it had all been worthwhile now that the forthcoming ASP.Net
>> 2.0 (Whidbey) seems to be abstracting much of the techniques that I
>> had learnt to "hand code".
>
> Programming is not 'typing code' but working out algorithms and create
> programs which represent these algorithms in executable form. How that is
> done, is up to the tools you use. So this will not change, the tools you
> use will change, over time.
>
> Do not feel offended, but I don't think you need a CS degree to write
> ASP.NET gui's as it's fairly straightforward once you know the tricks and
> pitfalls.
>
> What is way more important is the layer stack right below the GUI: the BL
> layer and the BL facade layer (or gui facade, depending on which way you
> look at it). The vast majority of your application's code is in there, or
> better: the vast majority of interesting code is in there.
>
>> For instance, I was particularly pleased with my implementation of
>> Roles Based Forms Authentication that I had mastered in C# but now I
>> understand that it will all be wasted now that this functionality will
>> be covered by the new Membership classes.
>
> As with everything MS gives out: the more it is detailed and towards 'end
> user stuff' (i.e. the farther you get away from a 'framework'), the more
> the following rule is applicable: "The Microsoft Way or Your Own Way".
> Often there are situations in which the MS provided controls don't work
> very well and you need own code or customize the provided controls.
>
> Don't be fooled by the slick demos with drag-n-drop 'RAD' 'programming':
> professional software is often written in total different ways than the
> demos show you. This is for a reason: demos are meant to sell stuff, not
> to teach you best practises.
>
>> I fully understand that by definition, IT is a constantly evolving
>> industry but it does make me worry that the very systems that we use
>> to improve business efficiency could one day make the role of the
>> qualified developer redundant.
>
> this will never be the case. Programming is not related to typing, but to
> thinking.
>
>> The way things are going, the office junior will be able to do all the
>> stuff that the highly qualified and trained developer once did and the
>> developers will be ignored because the higher wages that they rightly
>> attract will no longer be justified.
>
> no, the office monkey will do the dull gui-stuff while you will be doing
> business logic components and the controller layers below the GUI, which
> are not created by drag-n-drop clicketyclick.
>
> Frans.
>
> --
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Get LLBLGen Pro, productive O/R mapping for .NET: http://www.llblgen.com
> My .NET blog: http://weblogs.asp.net/fbouma
> Microsoft MVP (C#)
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------

Just a quick comment:

You mention several times that the business logic is where the work gets
done and that there is no RAD clickety-click for that code. I think what
you missed from the OP was that in Whidbey, there IS RAD for the business
and data layers. In Whidbey, the RAD and drag & drop is greatly improved
for the backend of an application as well as the front.




"Frans Bouma [C# MVP]" <perseus.usenetNOSPAM@xs4all.nl> wrote in message
news:uCO%23c2C8EHA.3076@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Fresh Air Rider wrote:
>> I have just been getting up to speed on the forthcoming ASP.Net 2.0
>> (Whidbey) that Microsoft is releasing some time this year.
>>
>> It all looks great but I was a bit concerned that it aims to reduce
>> the amount of code that needs to be written by the developer by 70%.
>>
>> The new GridView control will be "far simpler to use, requires less
>> code, and provides far more power than the DataGrid Control".
>>
>> After working extremely hard to get my Computer Science degree and
>> investing my own hard earnt money heavily in MSDN subscriptions and
>> programming books etc just to keep my skills up to date, I began to
>> wonder if it had all been worthwhile now that the forthcoming ASP.Net
>> 2.0 (Whidbey) seems to be abstracting much of the techniques that I
>> had learnt to "hand code".
>
> Programming is not 'typing code' but working out algorithms and create
> programs which represent these algorithms in executable form. How that is
> done, is up to the tools you use. So this will not change, the tools you
> use will change, over time.
>
> Do not feel offended, but I don't think you need a CS degree to write
> ASP.NET gui's as it's fairly straightforward once you know the tricks and
> pitfalls.
>
> What is way more important is the layer stack right below the GUI: the BL
> layer and the BL facade layer (or gui facade, depending on which way you
> look at it). The vast majority of your application's code is in there, or
> better: the vast majority of interesting code is in there.
>
>> For instance, I was particularly pleased with my implementation of
>> Roles Based Forms Authentication that I had mastered in C# but now I
>> understand that it will all be wasted now that this functionality will
>> be covered by the new Membership classes.
>
> As with everything MS gives out: the more it is detailed and towards 'end
> user stuff' (i.e. the farther you get away from a 'framework'), the more
> the following rule is applicable: "The Microsoft Way or Your Own Way".
> Often there are situations in which the MS provided controls don't work
> very well and you need own code or customize the provided controls.
>
> Don't be fooled by the slick demos with drag-n-drop 'RAD' 'programming':
> professional software is often written in total different ways than the
> demos show you. This is for a reason: demos are meant to sell stuff, not
> to teach you best practises.
>
>> I fully understand that by definition, IT is a constantly evolving
>> industry but it does make me worry that the very systems that we use
>> to improve business efficiency could one day make the role of the
>> qualified developer redundant.
>
> this will never be the case. Programming is not related to typing, but to
> thinking.
>
>> The way things are going, the office junior will be able to do all the
>> stuff that the highly qualified and trained developer once did and the
>> developers will be ignored because the higher wages that they rightly
>> attract will no longer be justified.
>
> no, the office monkey will do the dull gui-stuff while you will be doing
> business logic components and the controller layers below the GUI, which
> are not created by drag-n-drop clicketyclick.
>
> Frans.
>
> --
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Get LLBLGen Pro, productive O/R mapping for .NET: http://www.llblgen.com
> My .NET blog: http://weblogs.asp.net/fbouma
> Microsoft MVP (C#)
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------

Frans,

When you find some things in my message in this thread strange that it comes
from me.
Change Chmpagne in Wine in your formule from yesterday.

:-)

Cor