Xamarin

[semaphore]

So let's look at that objectively.

R800 is equivalent to less than an hour to two hours of a dev's time, depending on level.


If you're sitting with a shop full of .net devs you have a choice:
a) Pay R800 and they get right to work in an IDE they know, using a language they know on a framework they know.
b) Pay/lose R800 for every hour they spend getting to know a new IDE, setting up the environment, getting to know a new language, searching for frameworks and coding much slower than they would otherwise.

Are you going to lose more than 12 hours per dev if you choose b, no, you're going to lose much, much more. And that is for one platform, and one dev.

What approach you choose is all up to you, and should depend on the available skill set. But trying to use the cost as a justification not to use it just doesn't make sense.

Nobody is disputing your reasoning, but to say cost doesn't make sense? Not sure how big your dev team is, but if we had to tool our developers with this package it would cost us 150K a year give or take. I can tell you exactly now what our CEO would say (we already all have vs ultimate) So instead we took the approach of learning the platforms involved (especially when there are alternatives out there). Not only did it enhance our skill set it also gave us exposure to new technologies. Like you said, we chose our approach and the cost was a justification for us, just because it doesnt matter you to is immaterial.

Your dev's work 12 hour days?

 

[Frikkenator]

Nobody is disputing your reasoning, but to say cost doesn't make sense? Not sure how big your dev team is, but if we had to tool our developers with this package it would cost us 150K a year give or take. I can tell you exactly now what our CEO would say (we already all have vs ultimate) So instead we took the approach of learning the platforms involved (especially when there are alternatives out there). Not only did it enhance our skill set it also gave us exposure to new technologies. Like you said, we chose our approach and the cost was a justification for us, just because it doesnt matter you to is immaterial.

Your dev's work 12 hour days?

R800pm x 12 = yearly cost.

Training your devs up most likely cost a lot more than R150k in lost productivity, it's just easier because nobody has to sign a cheque for R150k. That being said if it is too big of a hurdle then I suppose it is a valid course of action.

Your argument about new tech is valid, and can very well be justification itself in your case, but in our case most project work is split 70% back-end, 30% mobile. So training them up in tech they are going to use at most 30% of the time doesn't make sense.

On a completely different note, do you find VS Ultimate to be worth the price? We're also running it, but we've found that we don't actually use most of the features that sets it apart from Premium. There is a lot to be said for motivation devs derive from feeling they are equipped with the latest and greatest, so we'll probably keep it.

 

[semaphore]

R800pm x 12 = yearly cost.

Training your devs up most likely cost a lot more than R150k in lost productivity, it's just easier because nobody has to sign a cheque for R150k. That being said if it is too big of a hurdle then I suppose it is a valid course of action.

We did not lose any productivity, all our other projects were delivered way before their deadlines.

Your argument about new tech is valid, and can very well be justification itself in your case, but in our case most project work is split 70% back-end, 30% mobile. So training them up in tech they are going to use at most 30% of the time doesn't make sense.

Our backend is around 90%. We are currently in the processing of writing our new client facing app.

On a completely different note, do you find VS Ultimate to be worth the price? We're also running it, but we've found that we don't actually use most of the features that sets it apart from Premium. There is a lot to be said for motivation devs derive from feeling they are equipped with the latest and greatest, so we'll probably keep it.

We make use of intellitrace, does it justify the price difference? Unlikely. We just decided to go for the top of the range and get the perks with it, such as all the MSDN licensing. But we tossed SQL Server anyways. If it wasnt for some proprietary devices reliant on C# we would most likely toss .NET all together.

 

[MrGray]

So let's look at that objectively.

R800 is equivalent to less than an hour to two hours of a dev's time, depending on level.

If you're sitting with a shop full of .net devs you have a choice:
a) Pay R800 and they get right to work in an IDE they know, using a language they know on a framework they know.
b) Pay/lose R800 for every hour they spend getting to know a new IDE, setting up the environment, getting to know a new language, searching for frameworks and coding much slower than they would otherwise.

Are you going to lose more than 12 hours per dev if you choose b, no, you're going to lose much, much more. And that is for one platform, and one dev.

What approach you choose is all up to you, and should depend on the available skill set. But trying to use the cost as a justification not to use it just doesn't make sense.

Sure, but you're assuming there is no learning curve with Xamarin. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think merely purchasing Xamarin gives you the instant out of the box ability to create perfect Android/IOS apps.

 

[Frikkenator]

Sure, but you're assuming there is no learning curve with Xamarin. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think merely purchasing Xamarin gives you the instant out of the box ability to create perfect Android/IOS apps.

Not at all, but that learning curve is present with or without it, so it doesn't really make any difference.

 

[MrGray]

Not at all, but that learning curve is present with or without it, so it doesn't really make any difference.

Which goes against your objective analysis, the basis of which was that the cost is made up by time saved vs re-skilling on another platform.

 

[Frikkenator]

Which goes against your objective analysis, the basis of which was that the cost is made up by time saved vs re-skilling on another platform.

No matter what approach you decide on, learning about the platform you're building for (in this case Android/iOS) will be required, whether you have skilled Java devs, skilled .NET devs or skilled HTML devs. That requirement is across the board and thus cancels itself out.

A skilled Java dev also doesn't have the "instant out of the box ability to create perfect Android apps", even though the native language is Java.

I'm arguing that the additional up/cross-skilling by having them learn a new language and framework (and all of this on a new platform) alone, may or may not be more costly depending on the available skill set.