Comments on: To (ASP.NET)MVC or not to MVC (or, ASP.NET MVC Hyperlink Acupuncture) http://www.thefreakparade.com/2008/07/to-aspnetmvc-or-not-to-mvc-or-aspnet-mvc-hyperlink-acupuncture/ Strange noises from the mind of Nathan Stults... Wed, 07 Jan 2009 16:39:09 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6 By: Dan Hounshell http://www.thefreakparade.com/2008/07/to-aspnetmvc-or-not-to-mvc-or-aspnet-mvc-hyperlink-acupuncture/#comment-371 Dan Hounshell Fri, 17 Oct 2008 03:03:51 +0000 http://www.thefreakparade.com/2008/07/29/to-aspnetmvc-or-not-to-mvc-or-aspnet-mvc-hyperlink-acupuncture/#comment-371 Thanks for the mention about the <a href="http://aspdotnetmvc.com">aspdotnetmvc.com</a> site. I'm the person who built and maintains the site and I agree that there is way too much information in the main feed, primarily because of all the stuff picked up in the Buzz section (pulling from <a href="http://forums.asp.net">forums.asp.net</a>, twitter, friendfeed, digg, dotnetkicks, etc). That section is not manually culled so it tends to overpower the rest. I would suggest subscribing to the individual sections minus the Buzz (blogs, news, video, and InAction) instead of the entire aggregate to lessen the noise. Actually now that I think about it I should probably put another aggregate feed together for everything except the Buzz for those who don't want to drink from the firehose. Thanks for the mention about the aspdotnetmvc.com site. I'm the person who built and maintains the site and I agree that there is way too much information in the main feed, primarily because of all the stuff picked up in the Buzz section (pulling from forums.asp.net, twitter, friendfeed, digg, dotnetkicks, etc). That section is not manually culled so it tends to overpower the rest. I would suggest subscribing to the individual sections minus the Buzz (blogs, news, video, and InAction) instead of the entire aggregate to lessen the noise. Actually now that I think about it I should probably put another aggregate feed together for everything except the Buzz for those who don't want to drink from the firehose.

]]> By: eibrahim http://www.thefreakparade.com/2008/07/to-aspnetmvc-or-not-to-mvc-or-aspnet-mvc-hyperlink-acupuncture/#comment-344 eibrahim Fri, 12 Sep 2008 01:30:29 +0000 http://www.thefreakparade.com/2008/07/29/to-aspnetmvc-or-not-to-mvc-or-aspnet-mvc-hyperlink-acupuncture/#comment-344 I think this might help <a href="http://www.emadibrahim.com/2008/09/07/deciding-between-aspnet-mvc-and-webforms/">http://www.emadibrahim.com/2008/09/07/deciding-...</a><br><br>I would like to hear your opinion on it too. Should I add more questions? Does it even make sense? I think this might help http://www.emadibrahim.com/2008/09/07/deciding-...

I would like to hear your opinion on it too. Should I add more questions? Does it even make sense?

]]> By: Deependra Solanky http://www.thefreakparade.com/2008/07/to-aspnetmvc-or-not-to-mvc-or-aspnet-mvc-hyperlink-acupuncture/#comment-231 Deependra Solanky Fri, 01 Aug 2008 06:12:06 +0000 http://www.thefreakparade.com/2008/07/29/to-aspnetmvc-or-not-to-mvc-or-aspnet-mvc-hyperlink-acupuncture/#comment-231 Very nice article, Nathan. There are a lot of useful links in this especially for newbies in ASP.NET MVC like me. Thanks for posting. Very nice article, Nathan. There are a lot of useful links in this especially for newbies in ASP.NET MVC like me.
Thanks for posting.

]]> By: Nathan http://www.thefreakparade.com/2008/07/to-aspnetmvc-or-not-to-mvc-or-aspnet-mvc-hyperlink-acupuncture/#comment-233 Nathan Wed, 30 Jul 2008 22:56:32 +0000 http://www.thefreakparade.com/2008/07/29/to-aspnetmvc-or-not-to-mvc-or-aspnet-mvc-hyperlink-acupuncture/#comment-233 Harry, not a tweeter. I opened an account once, but the only thing it really did for my was disrupt my ability to concentrate even more than my RSS reader and e-mail already manage to do :) So are you guys working on some MVC stuff over there at DX? Harry, not a tweeter. I opened an account once, but the only thing it really did for my was disrupt my ability to concentrate even more than my RSS reader and e-mail already manage to do :) So are you guys working on some MVC stuff over there at DX?

]]> By: Mehul Harry http://www.thefreakparade.com/2008/07/to-aspnetmvc-or-not-to-mvc-or-aspnet-mvc-hyperlink-acupuncture/#comment-237 Mehul Harry Wed, 30 Jul 2008 22:48:56 +0000 http://www.thefreakparade.com/2008/07/29/to-aspnetmvc-or-not-to-mvc-or-aspnet-mvc-hyperlink-acupuncture/#comment-237 Nathan, good post. Lot's of links which I'll have to check out later. Are you on twitter? http://twitter.com/mehulharry Nathan, good post. Lot’s of links which I’ll have to check out later. Are you on twitter? http://twitter.com/mehulharry

]]> By: ASP.NET MVC Archived Blog Posts, Page 1 http://www.thefreakparade.com/2008/07/to-aspnetmvc-or-not-to-mvc-or-aspnet-mvc-hyperlink-acupuncture/#comment-236 ASP.NET MVC Archived Blog Posts, Page 1 Tue, 29 Jul 2008 20:00:18 +0000 http://www.thefreakparade.com/2008/07/29/to-aspnetmvc-or-not-to-mvc-or-aspnet-mvc-hyperlink-acupuncture/#comment-236 [...] to VoteTo (ASP.NET)MVC or not to MVC (or, ASP.NET MVC Hyperlink Acupuncture) (7/29/2008)Tuesday, July 29, 2008 from hsidev.wordpress.comThe open source framework Castle Monorail has an [...] [...] to VoteTo (ASP.NET)MVC or not to MVC (or, ASP.NET MVC Hyperlink Acupuncture) (7/29/2008)Tuesday, July 29, 2008 from hsidev.wordpress.comThe open source framework Castle Monorail has an [...]

]]> By: Jesse Ezell http://www.thefreakparade.com/2008/07/to-aspnetmvc-or-not-to-mvc-or-aspnet-mvc-hyperlink-acupuncture/#comment-232 Jesse Ezell Tue, 29 Jul 2008 19:31:04 +0000 http://www.thefreakparade.com/2008/07/29/to-aspnetmvc-or-not-to-mvc-or-aspnet-mvc-hyperlink-acupuncture/#comment-232 I think you are right on with that. I think you are right on with that.

]]> By: Nathan http://www.thefreakparade.com/2008/07/to-aspnetmvc-or-not-to-mvc-or-aspnet-mvc-hyperlink-acupuncture/#comment-234 Nathan Tue, 29 Jul 2008 19:27:28 +0000 http://www.thefreakparade.com/2008/07/29/to-aspnetmvc-or-not-to-mvc-or-aspnet-mvc-hyperlink-acupuncture/#comment-234 Jesse, those are good points. I think ASP.NET MVC and MVC in general is about more than just control, although that plays a big role. Testability, built in support for IoC containers, a formalized separation of concerns, the tremendous weight loss achieved by dumping View State are also important considerations. I would almost say that if you want to realize an architecture for your app that DOES cleanly and intelligently keep business logic or data access out of your business layers you're developers need *more* experience and discipline if they are using ASP.NET WebForms than if they are using MVC, because in WebForms it is extremely easy for business logic and data access concerns to start creeping into bed with the view logic if you aren't very careful. I also tend to believe that the abstraction of Web Forms won't keep you safe from HTML - unless you're building some intranet app that is little more than scaffolding over a database - I've spent as much time tweaking HTML tags using classic ASP.NET as writing server side code, and even more time than that worrying about the ID's that were generate :) ). Not to say ASP.NET WebForms don't have their merits or that the abstraction isn't useful in many cases, just that there may be more to consider than just if (ControlFreak) MVC else (ClassicAspNet). Jesse, those are good points. I think ASP.NET MVC and MVC in general is about more than just control, although that plays a big role. Testability, built in support for IoC containers, a formalized separation of concerns, the tremendous weight loss achieved by dumping View State are also important considerations. I would almost say that if you want to realize an architecture for your app that DOES cleanly and intelligently keep business logic or data access out of your business layers you’re developers need *more* experience and discipline if they are using ASP.NET WebForms than if they are using MVC, because in WebForms it is extremely easy for business logic and data access concerns to start creeping into bed with the view logic if you aren’t very careful. I also tend to believe that the abstraction of Web Forms won’t keep you safe from HTML - unless you’re building some intranet app that is little more than scaffolding over a database - I’ve spent as much time tweaking HTML tags using classic ASP.NET as writing server side code, and even more time than that worrying about the ID’s that were generate :) ). Not to say ASP.NET WebForms don’t have their merits or that the abstraction isn’t useful in many cases, just that there may be more to consider than just if (ControlFreak) MVC else (ClassicAspNet).

]]> By: Jesse Ezell http://www.thefreakparade.com/2008/07/to-aspnetmvc-or-not-to-mvc-or-aspnet-mvc-hyperlink-acupuncture/#comment-235 Jesse Ezell Tue, 29 Jul 2008 19:09:10 +0000 http://www.thefreakparade.com/2008/07/29/to-aspnetmvc-or-not-to-mvc-or-aspnet-mvc-hyperlink-acupuncture/#comment-235 It depends on the quality of your developers, and how much time you want to spend dealing with customization. Web Forms is a big abstraction and is great when you want to just knock code out, but starts to fall short when you want complete control. When you want complete control, you could care less if you don't have 3rd party controls, because you are creating everything from the ground up anyway. All that abstraction just creates more hoops to jump through because you aren't taking advantage of anything it enables. MVC is really for the teams that want entire control of their application's output, so you shouldn't use it unless you dislike having a lot of controls in there doing magic that you have no control over. If you are really planning on doing a lot of custom CSS / AJAX work and are very comfortable with the inner workings of the web, you might find the freedom MVC gives to be pretty liberating... but don't do it unless you plan on and enjoy thinking about details like the individual HTML tags that get generated and what their IDs are. It depends on the quality of your developers, and how much time you want to spend dealing with customization. Web Forms is a big abstraction and is great when you want to just knock code out, but starts to fall short when you want complete control. When you want complete control, you could care less if you don’t have 3rd party controls, because you are creating everything from the ground up anyway. All that abstraction just creates more hoops to jump through because you aren’t taking advantage of anything it enables.

MVC is really for the teams that want entire control of their application’s output, so you shouldn’t use it unless you dislike having a lot of controls in there doing magic that you have no control over. If you are really planning on doing a lot of custom CSS / AJAX work and are very comfortable with the inner workings of the web, you might find the freedom MVC gives to be pretty liberating… but don’t do it unless you plan on and enjoy thinking about details like the individual HTML tags that get generated and what their IDs are.

]]>