Years ago I gave up keeping up with most of it. Just way too difficult.

I've done some minimal playing with ASP.NET Core, but quickly found issues. Will still probably just play with it after RTM later this month.


>[reordered]
>
>>- Knockout? Really? It's pretty much fallen out of favor due to Angular.
>
>KO was pretty much 2way binding to VM and made following MVVM its party line. Today you hear more often MVP, with P sometimes implemented more along C "logic" patterns, sometimes more along VM "data" patterns, but mostly living client side.
>Mentioned for history or reading, not using ;-)
>
>>- I didn't mention Angular because it's one added thing to learn. Trying to grasp all the technologies at once increases the learning curve. I often see Angular implemented poorly.
>>- Moving things client side generally requires more and more vs server side. Again, not what beginner examples show.
>>It's not that I was pushing the "MS" view of things. It's that I was recommending a simplified beginner plan.
>
>Similar to me not arguing strongly for client side / SPA. Was mentioned to give a balanced picture, but with the "overkill" qualifier
>
>>- I identified the "current" Microsoft position because that's what the original question was about
>
>Following them at a safe distance IMO is a better approach, so I mentioned "moving target".
>
>>- How you would wear your architect hat is a valid direction. I always separate controller from data from view model. But, again, this increases the learning curve when you're new to ASP.NET MVC because beginner examples don't ever do things this way.
>
>Yes. But over time you develop a loosely coupled coding pattern to switch fwks / techniques better than having to do a total rewrite. Worth the effort IMO.
>
>
>>- Ruby On Rails "out of the box" is MVC. It's still widely used
>
>IMO RoR was great for the convention over configuration (esp. compared to first Y2K decade java server habits).
>Otherwise today the fwk I would ask the "Really?" you mentioned on KO ;-)
>I do have 2 books on RoR and ActiveRecord, but mostly use them to find if I missed out on something NOT doing it the RoR way.
>
>>BTW, your understanding the "current" Microsoft view is a bit dated.
>
>I am not in any "inner circle". But won a bet on Xamarin being bought - made after Android bridge was dropped ;-)
>Following some discussions as to what will be moved to core, what not - but MS is less important in my reading this decade.
>IMO C# still a better language than Java - with the exception of Javas option to have default implementation of a method in an interface - or is this pattern now available in C# as well ?
>
>I do try to keep up, but soooo many topics...
>
>regards
>
>thomas