ASP.NET Reviews

I have found the entity framework to be a valuable feature. The authentication layer is amazing as well.

ASP.NET has a vibrant community, and as a result, we haven't had the need to contact technical support.

I've been working with it for about nine years.

The stability has improved a lot in the last five years, and I would give it a rating of eight out of ten.

ASP.NET is a scalable solution, and I would rate scalability at eight out of ten. We have approximately 1400 developers who use this solution in our company.

I would give the initial setup a rating of nine out of ten because some modularity is present with the tools provided. We deploy the solution both on the cloud and on-premises. The deployment can take a few hours, and one person can handle the process.

We have seen an ROI of about 40%.

On a scale from one to ten, with one being cost efficient and 10 being the most expensive, I would rate ASP.NET's pricing at six.

There used to be IAF, which you could spin on a Windows machine. However, that sort of setup does not exist for Linux machines. Because customers still prefer a Windows underlying infrastructure, it can get expensive.

My advice would be to go for ASP.NET in production. The solution has been out there for over two decades, and they know what they're doing. It's also modular and robust. I would absolutely recommend ASP.NET and rate it at eight on a scale from one to ten.

I am responsible for maintaining the backend API for a website built with React, which supports the front end and I use ASP.NET.

ASP.NET is a great and versatile platform for developing APIs that has helped our organization. It has a robust ecosystem with many tools and SDKs that are tailored to it. It's also easy to set up and run APIs. We also use it with Microsoft Azure, which makes it easy to develop and integrate with Microsoft Azure's Cloud Services. Additionally, Azure Functions are similar to Amazon AWS Lambda functions, it easy to switch between different tooling and environments. It's easier to integrate with Microsoft Azure compared to other platforms.

One of the most valuable features in ASP.NET is thread management with asynchronous processing. I've been implementing this for a few years and it has proven to be extremely helpful, especially when using a tool that wouldn't have worked without it. It's definitely a fundamental aspect of the platform.

The caching could improve in ASP.NET. I don't often run into limitations with ASP.NET. More often, it's the other tools we use that slow us down.

I have been using ASP.NET for approximately 10 years.

ASP.NET is a relatively stable framework. Occasionally, you may come across bugs or issues, but the ecosystem surrounding it is strong. There are many users within the community who can help troubleshoot and resolve problems, as they have likely encountered similar issues before. The community is a great resource for resolving any integration issues that may arise.

Our tool is available for the general public to use and we're currently expanding.  I would estimate that we have at least a few hundred thousand users per week.

We have plans to increase our usage.

We haven't encountered any scalability issues using ASP.NET. We've designed it in a way that minimizes potential bottlenecks and utilizing Microsoft Azure functions with ASP.NET has proven to be a robust solution. The only dependencies we have encountered have been minor.

I haven't personally needed to use technical support for ASP.NET recently, but at my previous job, we were able to get in touch with support which was decent. There is a lot of online support available and I've seen a lot of responses from Microsoft-run support and volunteers. In the past, we've had individuals from Microsoft who are involved in the software come and help with difficult questions. In my experience, the technical support for ASP.NET has been good.

ASP.NET is a widely used tool when working with C#, so it's been my primary choice. I haven't recently used any other tools.

The initial setup of ASP.NET was complex in general, but compared to other cloud deployment projects I have done, it was relatively easy, particularly when it came to integrating with Microsoft Azure. Other projects involving Kubernetes, have been much more complicated in comparison. This project was less difficult than others.

It took a few weeks to get the infrastructure set up from scratch and gather information. There were changing requirements, it's hard to compare, but it took two to three weeks to get an initial setup. Since then, we've been adding to it as we go. It's not difficult to set up and deploy new things as everything is template-driven and it's easy to work with Microsoft Azure to define and export templates.

We did all the deployment of the solution in-house with four developers.

We have received a return on investment using ASP.NET.

ASP.NET is generally considered a reliable framework and it's widely used when working with C#. Additionally, at my current company, the decision was made to standardize one framework across the development department for ease of maintenance and team switching.

There were four developers that are involved in the deployment and maintenance of the website. We have internal resources for support, but the actual management and maintenance are done by only four developers.

The main piece of advice I would give is to make use of asynchronous processing. It's becoming increasingly common, but it's important to understand its limitations. It's particularly useful when dealing with an application that has a lot of active users. For older code bases or companies that may not be as familiar with it, it's essential to understand and make use of asynchronous processing.

It's a great solution for larger companies, as the costs aren't as significant. However, for startups, there may be more cost-effective alternatives. It depends on the specific needs of the company. However, for an enterprise or large institution, it's a great choice because it's an actively updated framework, now cross-platform, and it's widely used and supported by a large community of developers. It's reliable, stable, and active. For all the reasons in the review, it makes this solution a go-to framework.

It's a reliable and robust framework, but it depends on the specific use case. For backend development, it's a mature and current solution, but for front-end development, there may be better options available in my opinion.

I rate ASP.NET a nine out of ten.

We use ASP.NET for e-commerce, attendance modules, and school management.

It is easy to install ASP.NET on your laptop.

ASP.NET is a very slow tool, and it should be faster.

I have been using ASP.NET for three years.

ASP.NET is a stable solution.

Around 150 users are using the solution in our organization.

The solution’s technical support could be faster.

Neutral

The solution’s initial setup is easy.

ASP.NET is not an expensive solution.

Overall, I rate ASP.NET an eight out of ten.

Our primary use case is to develop food and geolocation applications. 

The language is easy to learn, understand and develop. There is good documentation available.

There should be more Python capabilities available.   

I have been using the solution for twenty years. 

I would rate stability a ten out of ten. 

The solution is scalable. 

I would rate technical support an eight out of ten. 

The initial setup is easy because I use container services. 

The language is free to use. The pricing wouldn't be a problem for the paid version.  

I have used Python to improve my applications, but I have used ASP.NET for all applications. 

I will continue to use this solution in the future because I am a developer, and I like the language.  

I think developers are going to keep the solution relevant forever. I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

Our company used the solution to provide web services, pages, and registration forms for our client's job portal. 

The solution's framework supports storing all client-side and server-side code in one place. 

The solution is very user-friendly.

Scripted languages like AngularJS and Node.js are much faster than using ASP on the client side. 

We created server-side code in ASP based on client-side code but questions that hit the server took time to render as they searched the data. Node.js includes client-assisting languages that speed up the process. 

I used the solution for nine years at my prior place of employment. 

The solution is more stable than others because there are various security protocols that can be implemented to restrict users. 

The solution is easy to scale. 

Our company had more than 100 users with no issues. 

I did not need to contact support. 

The initial setup was easy. 

We pre-wrote code and identified functionality so that any deployment only took about fifteen minutes.

The solution requires a licensing fee but is worth the investment. 

The solution provides a good framework for creating commands and portals for user log-ins. It can perform many functions such as special credentials or authorizations that are specific to each user. 

I rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

Throughout the last five or six years, I've been jumping on and off on projects, sometimes working on Xamarin, and other times working on ASP.NET.

Currently, I'm working on a project that uses ASP.NET (with .NET Core) quite extensively. This project is intended to help a business internally maintain an inventory of their commodities, assets, and so on. It's essentially an inventory-based evolution developed on ASP.NET.

In total, we have around 30 users working with ASP.NET in my company.

The developer support for ASP.NET is a big positive. It's actually very good, and since there are so many people who use ASP.NET, it's easy to get responses to questions about ASP.NET in the broader community.

Sometimes it can be really difficult to debug using ASP.NET. When there's an issue, trying to find out the cause is not always easy, so debugging is the top area for improvement, in my opinion.

I've been using ASP.NET for almost six years.

It's definitely stable.

I would say ASP.NET is scalable, and we have about 30 users on it at the moment.

The technical support is very good. Since the community is so large, it's easy to get responses for your questions.

I don't recall any technology that can be a complete comparison for ASP.NET.

The setup is easy and it takes only about one hour for deployment.

I think ASP.NET, in deployment, is something that's quite costly when you're on a cloud provider such as Azure, and you have to pay the server cost. On average, it can cost approximately $1,000 per month to host a good site with a few databases. So you can easily burn $1,000 per month for utilizing the different resources that are required to publish your application onto the web.

But in terms of the technology, it is free.

My advice to others is that they should be very focused around the usage of the servers, because people really don't worry much about the time, the kind of connections that are being made, etc., and when they go to the cloud, it gets very expensive. So I think it's really important that you think about pricing from day one, when you start developing the solution.

I would rate ASP.NET a nine out of ten.

Our use cases depend on the specific requirements. For example, to get data from Jira to process and build reports using Power BI.

I like a feature in the recent release. So, I like the features around logging and pipelines provided by the recent .NET Framework.

I'd like to be able to run any application from a specific point instead of compiling all the code. For example, if I want to test function A, I should be able to test it even if my other functions aren't working. Like in SQL, you provide parameters to the function, and it executes. I'd like to see something similar in ASP.NET.

I have been using it for five years. 

It's a pretty stable solution. I would rate the stability an eight out of ten.

I will rate the scalability a nine out of ten. 

The support is good. 

I have experience with desktop technical solutions, web applications, and Windows applications using VPN.

I would rate my experience with the initial setup a seven out of ten, where one is difficult and ten is easy.

It is deployed both on cloud and on premises. The deployment time depends. If you're deploying to the cloud, it's typically faster. If you're doing it on-premises, it will take some more time.

The pricing is somewhere in the middle. Not too expensive, but not the cheapest either.

It's a pretty stable and scalable tool, and it has very good support. If you find an issue, you can just Google it and find a solution easily online because there's a large community using it. It's pretty easy to learn, and you can usually find help if you encounter any issues.

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten.

The solution has good scalability.

The solution's initial setup is intermediate, and it could be improved.

I have been using ASP.NET for two years.

I rate ASP.NET an eight out of ten for stability.

I rate ASP.NET a nine out of ten for scalability.

I rate ASP.NET a seven out of ten for the ease of its initial setup.

We all deploy our applications in Git and raise one PR, and we need to deploy it in Jenkins, where we need to test the application. So, it takes one or two minutes because we are in the pipeline. A lot of users are using it, and they also have their changes. We need first to confirm if they are testing anything or not. After that, we can deploy changes and PR. Doing a whole task might take three to seven days, based on the availability of other users and employees.

I have done some UI changes and modifications because the response was not coming from the back end of data for some internal applications. I have also done some filtration from the front end.

Overall, I rate ASP.NET eight and a half out of ten.