[axiom255]

I can't work out whether this is a criticism of a corporate development culture (equally applicable to other tech stacks and legacy + reality of corporate world), or a "Microsoft is bad" argument, or possibly an ad hominem "only morons do MS, do you want to work with morons?" style argument...

Frankly I don't like the level of generalisation and apparent prejudice, and although I respect one's right to hold such an opinion, I think the conclusions of the article are wrong.

[djsumdog]

I think he's leaning towards "good .NET devs leave the .NET world," but yea it is ranty. The same could be said for Java (there are a lot of better technologies based on the JVM, such as Scala. But the learning curve can be challenging).

> this is a criticism of a corporate development culture

I feel like a more though out post could have arrived in this camp. This isn't a .NET isolation issue (although you could argue the Windows eco-system is shit to develop on -- but that's another rant), but more of an issue with companies that can't quickly move to new technologies and software stacks due to a huge burden of technical debt, insufficient integration tests and, the most challenging, a team of mostly mediocre developers who are afraid to, or refuse to, try new things.

[nikdaheratik]

I think the first one, corporate development culture, is pretty much the correct one. The difference between .Net and other environments is the ratio of corporate to everything else is so skewed that you have to either "think enterprise" or jump ship for something else.

All that being said, I'm sure if you have a well run IT department, you can get along just great with .Net even at smaller companies.