Morgan,

Just to be clear, this idea of using two different languages is not something I usually recommend. These decisions are usually made before the company hires me to help design their systems. I need to work within these requirements. My point in this thread is just to point out that many large size companies are making these decisions and why they do this.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with using C# for the UI development. When my company is incharge of end-to-end development of a project, we write it using C#. That is my language of choice. However, as being a consultant that works with many different clients, I am proficient in both C# and VB.NET because the needs demand this. I think any consultant that plans on working will different clients will need to be comfortable with both C# and VB.NET.

>Cathi,
>
> I really appreciate your input here. I have developed with tons of languages, and always like to add to my arsenal of weapons when approaching a problem. Whether it is a web scripting language, or a full fledge programming language, my philosophy has always been "The right tool for the right job", where I had to change operating systems, or use different languages.
>
> One thing about this that kind of concerns me is how Microsoft seems to be pushing the direction of UI(VB.NET) and middle-tier, back-end (C#) is that if large companies get into the practice, and people follow, it will be much more difficult to create applications for smaller developers, or if you are a developer you will have to promote yourself as a "back-end" or a "UI" developer.
>
> Now, it is totally different for a company if they have a project and need it done yesterday (like most companies), then whatever skills you have you can throw at the project, whether they are VB programmers using VB.NET, or C++ or Java programmers and use C#. .NET makes tht possible, and I can see huge benefits from that. But, in an "ideal" situation which I know is dicated by the situation, company etc., I would still think you would want some consistency through out the engineering team, I mean I have worked in shops and walk developers go to battle w/ the old "linux" vs. "windows" argument, and now it will be "VB.NET" or "C#" even within the Windows faction.
>
> IMHO, I think the pluses of having one language, out weight the minuses, unless it is a very time constrainted project, where you just bring in any contractor that you can.
>
>Thanks for your input on this though, Cathi. It was very interesting, to hear from someone who is recommending these approaches to large corporations.
>
>Morgan
>
>
>>Morgan (and Tom),
>>
>>The context of the environment and the philosophy of the companies I work with play a major role in the recommendations that I make. It is my job to point out the pluses and minuses of different options that they can make and what I would recommend, but I don't have a hard fast rule to go by. As a consultant and designer of systems, I need to make sure that the companies will be comfortable with the decisions they make for future needs of the app and for maintenance. One language does not always fit every situation based on the context of the environment of the company. I appreciate the fact that Microsoft gives companies chooses to best fits their needs. However, Microsoft has a responsibility to continually state the future directions of the languages so that decision makers can make the best long-term decisions for their projects. I don't think Microsoft will ever come out with something that states when to use one language over another but instead continue to state the
>future
>> enhancements that the languages will incorporate and leave the decisions in choosing the correct language(s) for each application to the decision makers that best know the context of each environment.
>>