Yesterday I needed to reference the syntax for getting the string representation of a .NET DateTime object in a specific format. Google and MSDN (Microsoft Developer Network)’s own search brought me to this page. This page and the next few I found on the topic where less then helpful. These pages highlight two issues I have with MSDN’s documentation.

First, while MSDN’s documentation is excellent and thorough as an encyclopedic work, it fails as a quick reference. It’s often hard to find the nugget of info you need, especially if you are in a hurry. For example – on the page I reference above – instead of providing some simple examples demonstrating the concept – you need to scroll through about 80 lines of code. I’m happy to do that, but I’d appreciate some quick examples at the top for when I’m in a hurry. It would make my life a little easier.

Second, the default .NET version that MSDN shows documentation for is the latest .NET version, 3.5. I respect Microsoft’s desire to push and promote the latest version of its framework, but not taking developers to the most common – and the version of documentation they are most likely looking for – does not seem the best strategy, or even a good strategy. It’s annoying because it requires extra clicks and effort to get to the version of info you are actually looking for. It’s double annoying because .NET 3.5 is still a new technology and not yet widely adopted; 2.0 seems to the de facto standard.

I think that MSDN will get better in time, especially with the feedback system that was implemented sometime ago. Microsoft seems more open to input these days and I hope the .NET community can encourage MSDN to evolve.

We are a .NET shop and I’m constantly at a loss for why there aren’t more .NET open-source projects. I’m disappointed that the only open-source .NET application that has gained any attention has been DotNetNuke.

Why hasn’t the .NET community churned out more .NET based open-source projects? I fully understand the strength of the other web software tools / development environments outside of .NET but rather then discussing the pros and cons I want to better understand why there is a void.

Microsoft, perhaps you should sponsor a .NET open-source challenge? Common, you put your name and money behind it and we’ll organize the show. Even ex-Microsoft evangelist / employee Robert Scoble is using WordPress (a non-.NET based blog tool).

In the past we’ve had great success pulling in resumes for web developers and asp.net programmers. It seems as if in the last 6-8 months the pool of resumes has dried up. At first I thought maybe our job posting was poorly writen, but after talking with several area competitors it seems we’re not the only ones. Which leads me to wonder where have all the web developers gone?

Have the post dot com bust web developers taken jobs elsewhere? Has the surge in Indian off-shore programming scared developers away?

One of my biggest pet peves in .NET, specifically .NET 1.1, is the enter key when it pertains to a web form. Back in the old days, ASP web developers with round sunglasses and lava lamps cluttering their desks had the ability to use multiple form tags on the web page. When users would enter misspelled text into a INPUT box and pierce the enter key with 3 fingers, that form would submit its information to its ACTION destination.

Since Bill Gates invented DataSets, ViewStates, and PostBacks, he removed the need for multiple forms on a page. In .NET 1.1, developers admiring their Thundercats collection and listening to A-HA, tried to have a search box in their page header and a sign-up form below only to wave their fist in the air in vexation. When a user would hit the enter key in the sign-up form, it activated the search button in the page header. What to do? WHAT TO DO!?

Enter ASP.NET 2.0.

Very early in my trek using 2.0, I learned of the DefaultButton attribute in the FORM tag. You can now specify which form button is activated when a user hits the enter key. This is accomplished by a javascript function that gets rendered when the page loads called “WebForm_AutoFocus.” This is great and all but how does this help when I’m trying to mimic multiple web forms?

While coding an ASP:PANEL in Visual Studio Express, I noticed Intellisense give me the option to place a DefaultButton attribute in the panel. WHAT!?! If you incapsalate form sections of your web page with ASP:PANEL’s, you can pay homage to those ASP coders of the past and imitate multiple web forms.

Just keep your users from disabling Javascript…

Microsoft’s next version of Visual Studio – codenamed “Orcas” – has great potential to strengthen Microsoft as the premier provider of IDEs for its own proprietary ASP.NET Framework. But to avoid stagnation – and loss of market share – here are two things Microsoft needs to improve in the next Visual Studio. I have used both Visual Web Developer and the complete 2005 Standard Edition.

First, Visual Studio needs complete and bug-free FTP/remote editing capabilities. Although I have not read Microsoft’s documentation on Visual Studio’s remote editing features - indeed, I shouldn’t need to in order to get it to work - attempts at setting it up have caused Visual Studio to freeze, become buggy, and have even forced me to restart Windows.

Second, Visual Studio could greatly improve as a complete Web-focused IDE by offering the same auto-completion and code-assisting features it offers to VB and C-Sharp for JavaScript (or “Jscript”). Besides low-level syntax highlighting, Visual Studio offers very little to those coding JavaScript.

I have yet to find a JavaScript editor I feel comfortable with - and the apparent lack of other strong JavaScript editors suggests to me that this could be a great opportunity for Visual Studio – especially with the current AJAX craze.

These and other shortcomings are severe enough for me to stay away from Visual Studio despite its attempts to make coding easier. Unless Visual Studio improves, I’ll happily continue to code ASP.NET pages in Dreamweaver.