With all due respect, you obviously know nothing about the Microsoft stack. These people were not using VB6. How do I know? From the article:
new projects chose a base technology stack of C#, ASP.NET MVC
ASP.NET MVC is not an "old-school" framework. It was first released in 2009!! That's four years newer than Ruby on Rails. It's ridiculously actively developed as well as being open source. It's currently in version 5 which was released October 17, 2013 which was... OMG 8 days ago.
I continue to be shocked at how little most HN developers know about the Microsoft stack and how much innovative work has been done since they last looked at it in 1998.
Ha, I worked a lot with ASP.NET MVC 2 & 3! By old-school, I was referring more to the lockin of the MSFT stack than the specificity of a particular library.
(When we moved over to a Python-based solution, we ported from MVC 3/SqlLinq/MS SQL Sever stack)
EDIT: Oh, and were had a lot of good stuff going on using ServiceStack....loved that set of libraries.
With all due respect, you obviously know nothing about the Microsoft stack. These people were not using VB6. How do I know? From the article:
new projects chose a base technology stack of C#, ASP.NET MVC
ASP.NET MVC is not an "old-school" framework. It was first released in 2009!! That's four years newer than Ruby on Rails. It's ridiculously actively developed as well as being open source. It's currently in version 5 which was released October 17, 2013 which was... OMG 8 days ago.
I continue to be shocked at how little most HN developers know about the Microsoft stack and how much innovative work has been done since they last looked at it in 1998.