.NET observations

[David Mark]

After spending the better part of yesterday cleaning up a .NET site, I have
to wonder why anyone would want to use it to build anything. This site was
built by a large consulting company, with a big, glossy Web site, filled
with fawning testimonials and no doubt they charged the poor client a
fortune (though they likely won't get another dime out of them when I am
through!)

The front page of this site had nearly 600 HTML validation errors (and they
had the balls to call it XHTML transitional!) It had 2 very simple forms:
email referral and search, each with one textbox. Interestingly enough, the
forms turned out to be one very large form, spanning the entire page. Even
stranger, they wouldn't work at all without client-side scripting enabled
and curiouser still, the submission buttons had script events bound to them
with "javascript:" prefixes inside. And if that wasn't bad enough, this
ridiculous architecture managed to mix them up so that email referrals went
to the search page and searches tried to send email to the query, resulting
in prompts to "enter a valid email address."

This platform seems to exist solely to shield developers from HTML tags,
just as VB and data-bound grids exist to shield "programmers" from coding.
If you can't do the work, why not find another career? I for one am tired
of deplorable Windows apps and Web sites that can't do anything right
(especially the latter.)

And I am not trolling here as I stopped reading posts by Microsoftian stiffs
a long time ago. They complain, they cry, they whine, they make feeble
stabs at flaming, but they never listen or learn anything. I know because I
still encounter VB projects occasionally and once in a great while I peruse
the newsgroups (mostly for laughs.) The same dead-enders are still in there
years after .NET killed VB. They still don't have a clue about event-based
programming and clearly they never will. I just wonder how many of those
zombies have migrated to this .NET BS (probably not nearly as many as have
migrated to CompUSA!) Certainly the bums who made the site in question
haven't a clue about HTML, email, JavaScript or anything else Web-related.
That sounds about right. And now the squealing starts... Clue: I can't
hear you.

[Chris]

You should get out more. :-)

"David Mark" <dm******@hotmail.comwrote in message
news:45***********************@roadrunner.com...

After spending the better part of yesterday cleaning up a .NET site, I
have to wonder why anyone would want to use it to build anything. This
site was built by a large consulting company, with a big, glossy Web site,
filled with fawning testimonials and no doubt they charged the poor client
a fortune (though they likely won't get another dime out of them when I am
through!)

The front page of this site had nearly 600 HTML validation errors (and
they had the balls to call it XHTML transitional!) It had 2 very simple
forms: email referral and search, each with one textbox. Interestingly
enough, the forms turned out to be one very large form, spanning the
entire page. Even stranger, they wouldn't work at all without client-side
scripting enabled and curiouser still, the submission buttons had script
events bound to them with "javascript:" prefixes inside. And if that
wasn't bad enough, this ridiculous architecture managed to mix them up so
that email referrals went to the search page and searches tried to send
email to the query, resulting in prompts to "enter a valid email address."

This platform seems to exist solely to shield developers from HTML tags,
just as VB and data-bound grids exist to shield "programmers" from coding.
If you can't do the work, why not find another career? I for one am tired
of deplorable Windows apps and Web sites that can't do anything right
(especially the latter.)

And I am not trolling here as I stopped reading posts by Microsoftian
stiffs a long time ago. They complain, they cry, they whine, they make
feeble stabs at flaming, but they never listen or learn anything. I know
because I still encounter VB projects occasionally and once in a great
while I peruse the newsgroups (mostly for laughs.) The same dead-enders
are still in there years after .NET killed VB. They still don't have a
clue about event-based programming and clearly they never will. I just
wonder how many of those zombies have migrated to this .NET BS (probably
not nearly as many as have migrated to CompUSA!) Certainly the bums who
made the site in question haven't a clue about HTML, email, JavaScript or
anything else Web-related. That sounds about right. And now the squealing
starts... Clue: I can't hear you.

[Mark Rae]

"David Mark" <dm******@hotmail.comwrote in message
news:45***********************@roadrunner.com...

<snip>

Do you want a medal...?

[Laurent Bugnion [MVP]]

Hi,

David Mark wrote:

That sounds about right. And now the squealing starts... Clue: I can't
hear you.

Doesn't that make you, like, the worst troll ever? ;-)

Greetings,
Laurent
--
Laurent Bugnion [MVP ASP.NET]
Software engineering: http://www.galasoft-LB.ch
PhotoAlbum: http://www.galasoft-LB.ch/pictures
Support children in Calcutta: http://www.calcutta-espoir.ch

[Thomas Hansen]

On Feb 3, 12:38 pm, "David Mark" <[e-mail]:

After spending...

[plonk]!!

..t

--
http://ajaxwidgets.com
Free ASP.NET Ajax Widgets NOW!

[=?Utf-8?B?UGV0ZXIgQnJvbWJlcmcgW0MjIE1WUF0=?=]

David,
why even bother coming here to educate us poor .NET morons?
Sorry, dood.
--
Site: http://www.eggheadcafe.com
UnBlog: http://petesbloggerama.blogspot.com
Short urls & more: http://ittyurl.net


"David Mark" wrote:

After spending the better part of yesterday cleaning up a .NET site, I have
to wonder why anyone would want to use it to build anything. This site was
built by a large consulting company, with a big, glossy Web site, filled
with fawning testimonials and no doubt they charged the poor client a
fortune (though they likely won't get another dime out of them when I am
through!)

The front page of this site had nearly 600 HTML validation errors (and they
had the balls to call it XHTML transitional!) It had 2 very simple forms:
email referral and search, each with one textbox. Interestingly enough, the
forms turned out to be one very large form, spanning the entire page. Even
stranger, they wouldn't work at all without client-side scripting enabled
and curiouser still, the submission buttons had script events bound to them
with "javascript:" prefixes inside. And if that wasn't bad enough, this
ridiculous architecture managed to mix them up so that email referrals went
to the search page and searches tried to send email to the query, resulting
in prompts to "enter a valid email address."

This platform seems to exist solely to shield developers from HTML tags,
just as VB and data-bound grids exist to shield "programmers" from coding.
If you can't do the work, why not find another career? I for one am tired
of deplorable Windows apps and Web sites that can't do anything right
(especially the latter.)

And I am not trolling here as I stopped reading posts by Microsoftian stiffs
a long time ago. They complain, they cry, they whine, they make feeble
stabs at flaming, but they never listen or learn anything. I know because I
still encounter VB projects occasionally and once in a great while I peruse
the newsgroups (mostly for laughs.) The same dead-enders are still in there
years after .NET killed VB. They still don't have a clue about event-based
programming and clearly they never will. I just wonder how many of those
zombies have migrated to this .NET BS (probably not nearly as many as have
migrated to CompUSA!) Certainly the bums who made the site in question
haven't a clue about HTML, email, JavaScript or anything else Web-related.
That sounds about right. And now the squealing starts... Clue: I can't
hear you.

[John Timney \(MVP\)]

Troll!

Regards

John Timney (MVP)
http://www.johntimney.com
http://www.johntimney.com/blog
"David Mark" <dm******@hotmail.comwrote in message
news:45***********************@roadrunner.com...

After spending the better part of yesterday cleaning up a .NET site, I
have to wonder why anyone would want to use it to build anything. This
site was built by a large consulting company, with a big, glossy Web site,
filled with fawning testimonials and no doubt they charged the poor client
a fortune (though they likely won't get another dime out of them when I am
through!)

The front page of this site had nearly 600 HTML validation errors (and
they had the balls to call it XHTML transitional!) It had 2 very simple
forms: email referral and search, each with one textbox. Interestingly
enough, the forms turned out to be one very large form, spanning the
entire page. Even stranger, they wouldn't work at all without client-side
scripting enabled and curiouser still, the submission buttons had script
events bound to them with "javascript:" prefixes inside. And if that
wasn't bad enough, this ridiculous architecture managed to mix them up so
that email referrals went to the search page and searches tried to send
email to the query, resulting in prompts to "enter a valid email address."

This platform seems to exist solely to shield developers from HTML tags,
just as VB and data-bound grids exist to shield "programmers" from coding.
If you can't do the work, why not find another career? I for one am tired
of deplorable Windows apps and Web sites that can't do anything right
(especially the latter.)

And I am not trolling here as I stopped reading posts by Microsoftian
stiffs a long time ago. They complain, they cry, they whine, they make
feeble stabs at flaming, but they never listen or learn anything. I know
because I still encounter VB projects occasionally and once in a great
while I peruse the newsgroups (mostly for laughs.) The same dead-enders
are still in there years after .NET killed VB. They still don't have a
clue about event-based programming and clearly they never will. I just
wonder how many of those zombies have migrated to this .NET BS (probably
not nearly as many as have migrated to CompUSA!) Certainly the bums who
made the site in question haven't a clue about HTML, email, JavaScript or
anything else Web-related. That sounds about right. And now the squealing
starts... Clue: I can't hear you.

[Aidy]

<snip>

Interesting. No wait, the other thing: tedious.

[=?Utf-8?B?U01Ib2Zm?=]

"David Mark" wrote:

After spending the better part of yesterday cleaning up a .NET site, I have

One word: decaf.

Ok a couple more, thanks that was the best read all day!