ASP.NET Reviews

My current use case for ASP.NET mainly involves APIs and websites.

The features in ASP.NET that I have found most valuable include the ease of development using Visual Studio, the vast library, NuGet libraries that are available, and a good ecosystem which makes it easy to find help.

Based on my extensive experience, the main benefits ASP.NET provides for my company include ease of use, the availability of resources in the market, and the developers' comfort level with it. The IDE support is also very good in terms of development and support of the existing software.

I think Microsoft can make ASP.NET better by catching up with other frameworks by adopting features that are very popular in those frameworks, such as minimal APIs and other innovations. They have introduced Blazor, which is their newer front-end development software framework, but unfortunately, Blazor is not well adopted in the market. However, I feel that they will catch up in the future as Blazor has a lot of potential.

In my opinion, there is not anything extra needed immediately for ASP.NET; the framework is self-sufficient and very mature at this stage. The problem lies with wider adoption, as some people are anti-Microsoft and prefer open-source alternatives such as React. Microsoft could potentially do a better job at marketing these solutions, but other than that, the tool has the potential to be used in any enterprise-level applications.

I would say the setup process for ASP.NET is relatively simple, but with the latest generation of user management or integration with OpenID, the documentation is not comprehensive in terms of what you can do with the latest libraries. They support many things and have decoupled themselves from their own identity servers, but still need to improve documentation considerably.

I have been working with ASP.NET for a very long time, around fifteen years.

I am very happy with the stability of ASP.NET framework; I would probably rate it a nine. We do not have any problems with stability, although we do have legacy software running on an older framework that is not .NET Core, which has not been upgraded for the last six or seven years and is still running very stably.

ASP.NET is highly scalable, and I would rate it an eight to nine in terms of scalability.

I would say the setup process for ASP.NET is relatively simple, but with the latest generation of user management or integration with OpenID, the documentation is not comprehensive in terms of what you can do with the latest libraries. They support many things and have decoupled themselves from their own identity servers, but still need to improve documentation considerably.

Our solution is deployed in a hybrid setup; we have some on-site on a private cloud and some on Azure.

Most of our costing comes from database licensing, as we use SQL Server, which has very costly licenses. On the Azure side, it is acceptable and configurable, so we are satisfied with that. However, the major part of the cost comes from licensing, especially with SQL Server licenses. The front-end tools for development, ASP.NET and Visual Studio, are open-licensed and open-sourced, so there is not much cost there. Microsoft mainly focuses on volume licenses for reporting and Office 365 and also SQL Server licenses.

Our solution is deployed in a hybrid setup; we have some on-site on a private cloud and some on Azure.

Most of our costing comes from database licensing, as we use SQL Server, which has very costly licenses. On the Azure side, it is acceptable and configurable, so we are satisfied with that. However, the major part of the cost comes from licensing, especially with SQL Server licenses. The front-end tools for development, ASP.NET and Visual Studio, are open-licensed and open-sourced, so there is not much cost there. Microsoft mainly focuses on volume licenses for reporting and Office 365 and also SQL Server licenses.

I do use Web APIs for creating RESTful services in ASP.NET; all of our APIs are REST, RESTful APIs.

I have not integrated popular client-side frameworks with ASP.NET; we have custom software that we develop and maintain.

I have used ASP.NET MVC architecture; that is what our legacy products use, but the latest ones do not use it as we use web services.

My feedback about ASP.NET modular frameworks is that it is one of the fastest frameworks available in the market, which helps in optimizing resources and makes the APIs respond faster.

My overall rating for this solution is nine.

Hybrid Cloud

Microsoft Azure

Our company uses Custom Vision, which is a computer vision platform by Microsoft that is part of Azure service.

The platform provides classification and object detection capabilities. This is the only solution we use because in Egypt, the law does not allow us to use cloud services for enterprises such as banks or mail, so we mainly build the model and deploy it on-premises.

It's a combination between .NET technology and Python packages, mainly open source and the .NET solution. When we have a model, we export it in a standard format called ONNX, and this model can be deployed on-premises.

It functions as an engine with web services. We build the model at the back end, and the interface operates through ASP.NET web services.

We implement web applications or develop our own products with functionality exposed through REST API implemented by ASP.NET.

We can integrate this with fingerprint devices and other systems, depending on our customer needs. When we have a solution, it can be integrated with other solutions. We provide the integration layer, mostly through REST API, sometimes hot folders, and sometimes offline queries and batches overnight. We have many ways to integrate with other systems, depending on our client.

Optimization occurs in several cases, either through handling the database or implementing caching techniques. We optimize our network round trip, minimize data, and cache data so whenever we have it, we don't need to query it unless it is updated.

It's a platform for creating models. Instead of building your model on-premises, you build in the cloud.

Custom Vision is part of Azure because payment is processed through Azure services. The product is accessed through customvision.ai rather than being called Azure AI Custom Vision.

It's important to focus on productivity. The more heavyweight the system becomes, the more we need to focus only on our core and repeated functionalities, making them easier for us. They have done a great job in this, but we still need more improvements.

What we need is for developers to complete tasks in less time. ChatGPT helps us significantly, but this is through an external tool.

If it were integrated into the system, providing self-revision and highlighting recommendations when code is written, automatically highlighting weaknesses and problems, that would be a great improvement.

The solution has been in use for more than 25 years.

Our experience has been very positive and we are satisfied with what we have.

We use Web API for our engines. If we have an engine to perform certain functionality, we don't have a user interface, so we expose it through Web API.

I am no longer using Microsoft Project. I changed my career path and don't require Microsoft Project for my current position.

I use Microsoft Office, including Microsoft PowerPoint, Word, and Excel.

The system is simple to use.

I am not qualified to make comparisons as my main experience is with ASP.NET. To make such judgments, someone who has tried both options would be needed.

I would rate this solution 9 out of 10.

On-premises

Microsoft Azure

My major use case for ASP.NET is because it is easy to use and suitable for almost all kinds of business applications. We don't use classic ASP.NET anymore. We always use it with ASP.NET version 8 or .NET Core, the ASP.NET Core, and within the Microsoft .NET Core framework for the server-side development which provides microservices for the UI such as React or Angular.

ASP.NET does have good support for Web APIs for creating RESTful services.

When developing anything with ASP.NET Web API, you have different types of integrations or frameworks available to support RESTful services or even to enable SOAP as well. When developing a Web API, it is more into SOA, which is Service-Oriented Architecture. Recently, most of our developments are into microservices, which ASP.NET heavily supports through the .NET Core Web API. It is lightweight, and you can plug and play with different libraries and packages which you can download through NuGet and inject into the system. This is very helpful when developing anything in your SOA.

ASP.NET helps a lot with asynchronous programming. It is not just ASP.NET; it is with the .NET framework where you have inbuilt asynchronous programming support. Dependency injection helps you load only the required packages into your server. It depends on how you develop your code, which Microsoft heavily supports to avoid mistakes. If the architecture is good and you do your architecture well, then features such as asynchronous programming, dependency injection, and others will help ensure your code runs flawlessly.

There are areas for improvement in ASP.NET, such as Blazor, which is a framework injected into it, and various new cloud-enabled services or mobile app features that currently do not have enough documentation. Although Microsoft provides good online documentation, there is a lack of people and usage, so there are insufficient troubleshooting guides. The industry is moving away from ASP.NET pages or Razor pages, such as Blazor pages, towards mainstream frameworks such as Angular, Vue, or React, where there is a lot of good documentation available. Microsoft must continuously improve the documentation across its tech stack, not just ASP.NET.

I have been using this ASP.NET solution for twenty years.

The stability of the product does have its issues. It doesn't matter whether it is Microsoft, AWS, or GCP; there are always potential glitches or latency issues. It all depends on the geographical location and how the cloud provider updates their software. I have faced numerous issues at times due to patching or updates, which can affect performance. However, I have never experienced prolonged outages for several hours or days. Overall, I would say around seventy-five percent of the time, there were no significant issues, but one needs to understand that cloud management is outside our control and should anticipate situations and establish disaster recovery plans.

There are no limitations to scaling the product, but if you are ready to spend, there are many scalable options available. Compared to three or four years ago, common resources have become much cheaper. However, enterprise-level resources can be costly, so wise usage is necessary. Understanding the resource required for your use case is vital to ensuring it fits your business needs.

Microsoft support is much better than that of other cloud providers or industry-standard software vendors. It all depends on how you plan your support and which support program you choose.

If I'm working with a rarely used resource on Microsoft Cloud, Azure, their support may not have the required technical expertise. In such cases, I would rate them average, around five or six. However, for commonly used resources such as web services or Kubernetes clusters, their support is top-notch, and I would rate them nine out of ten.

I have experience with Oracle and GCP, but compared to AWS, which provides good support, my comfort lies with Microsoft as I am a Microsoft tech stack person. Although AWS offers quick support and is currently the leading cloud provider, Microsoft is becoming very competitive with AWS. On that aspect, I would say that if not AWS, Microsoft is probably the best option.

The initial installation of ASP.NET is usually easy.

The modular framework MVC is always good and a standard practice, not just on ASP.NET. The Model-View-Controller framework has evolved a lot in the last few years with drastic evolution. The MVC pattern can be found in Angular or any kind of JavaScript-based UI packages. It is just a pattern adopted within ASP.NET, and within ASP.NET, you have to develop it to achieve the best of those frameworks. The current framework of Microsoft ASP.NET Core is built-in with many features to improve performance, such as dependency injection, which is a really good use case when you go with an enterprise-level application.

I do work on ASP.NET, Azure, and SQL solutions.

I have not integrated client-side frameworks with ASP.NET. On the client side, all the code goes with React or Angular, while ASP.NET is used for our server-side business integrations.

I did use ASP.NET MVC architecture a long time back. As I mentioned, recently for at least the last three to four years, we are not using classic ASP.NET. It is always going to be ASP.NET Core, the .NET Core framework.

The solution is affordable compared to other cloud platforms. The pricing is flexible on certain resources, and if identified well, you gain benefits in pricing. There are various packages, such as three-year and five-year options, that offer significant economic benefits.

My overall review rating for this solution is seven out of ten.

I am mainly developing backend solutions, microservices, and monolithic web backends with ASP.NET.

I tried Angular and Blazor; I worked with Angular a long time ago, but I worked with a small project using Blazor and .NET MVC quite a while ago. I think Blazor has a strong future with WebAssembly and related technologies, but I am not primarily a front-end developer.

ASP.NET has become an old term; now it is called .NET simply with the .NET 9 and .NET 10 versions.

I have been developing ASP.NET for years, and I have also been developing with Java for years.

The ability to customize ASP.NET is valuable, with a great community and the way the framework is built around customizable components, configurations, dependency injection, security, and excellent documentation. Entity Framework is a really good ORM compared to other ORMs such as Hibernate in Java or Liquibase, and it stands at a higher level as a very good ORM.

The data flow in ASP.NET MVC was easy to understand; we had the views, the views use models, and models get fetched from the controllers. It was straightforward for everyone on the project to work with, and we had standards in place; we followed the same flow, which really helped us maintain structure and organization in the codebase.

I would rate this ten out of ten. I work with Spring Framework, and comparing the three of them, I think .NET is ten out of ten with excellent support for web services.

With the Aspire project, the community is working well on third-party tools for integration, but as a framework, it is solid for almost all normal use cases. For some advanced use cases, I do not see an inconvenience or something that really needs to be improved; I think overall, it is complete and a well-rounded framework.

Regarding minor improvements for ASP.NET, the cache they have been working on in the latest version is noteworthy; the hybrid cache extensions demonstrate good work around cache, distributed cache, and memory. The ORM is solid, and the support for REST services is also solid for what we use quite often every day and even in some edge cases. I do not have in mind something that really bothered me while using .NET. The CLI support for running migrations and creating projects is good.

.NET is free and open source. One last thing that needs to be improved is the Azure developer experience, the AZD commands, and how to deploy Aspire applications using different methods, especially on Kubernetes.

Scalability depends on the developers who write code. If they write well and the framework provides the tools, I think scalability depends on your code and how you structure things. A framework may be a really good tool, but in the end, what scales is your code and how you structure things.

I did not have a chance to or a situation where I needed to talk to Microsoft technical support directly.

I have been developing applications, and at my previous job, we tried SonarQube. After reading many articles about the false positives that SonarQube generates, I am considering DeepSource for my current position at my new job.

I did not use it previously, but I had some experience with it at my previous work experience. We are establishing a new solution for a static code analysis tool, and I think we are going to pick DeepSource.

Setup is straightforward. You install the SDK and create your project depending on your project structure, whether it is monolithic or microservices. We almost always have the main solution, then the src and test folders. We have cross-service integration tests, unit tests, architecture tests, and similar components. We structure the tests and put tests next to the microservice if we are dealing with microservice architecture, so it really depends on what your application architecture overall is.

I would have to switch the framework. I do not have loyalty to a certain organization and framework; I just want a reliable tool because the framework is not a business, just a tool to build solutions for customers and earn money in the end. I just need a tool that I can rely on, and if .NET was not the right tool to do so, I would switch it off.

I have experience developing Java applications and .NET applications. I tried Azure and AWS, so I have quite a bit of experience.

I am mainly a .NET developer. I work as a consultant and also as a freelancer, but I am primarily a .NET developer.

The official documentation from Microsoft is very good.

Blazor was very easy to get started with. Since I am not a front-end developer, using Blazor I was able to deploy a beautiful UI to the customer in a small project with good components. I used another tool called MudBlazor, which is a framework built on top of Blazor components. MudBlazor is very good and easy to use, and I deployed multiple screens in a few days with a really good UI, so Blazor was a great framework to use.

I have used the ASP.NET MVC architecture.

ASP.NET is solid overall. I rate this review nine out of ten.

Public Cloud

Microsoft Azure

ASP.NET is easy to use and suitable for almost all kinds of business applications. We do not use classic ASP.NET anymore. We always use ASP.NET version 8 or .NET Core, which is ASP.NET Core, and within the Microsoft .NET Core framework for server-side development which provides microservices for the UI such as React or Angular.

On the client side, all code is developed with React or Angular, and ASP.NET is used for server-side business integrations.

The modular framework for optimization of resource use and performance is always valuable. This is a standard practice not just on ASP.NET. The Model-View-Controller framework has evolved significantly over the last few years. The MVC pattern can be found in Angular or any JavaScript-based UI packages. It is a pattern that has been adopted within ASP.NET, and within ASP.NET you have to develop it to achieve the best of that framework. The current framework of Microsoft ASP.NET Core is built-in with lots of features to improve performance that are directly available, such as dependency injection, which is really a valuable use case when you go with an enterprise-level application.

ASP.NET helps very much with asynchronous programming support to enhance application responsiveness and flexibility. ASP.NET has this capability with the help of .NET Framework where you have built-in asynchronous programming support. Dependency injection helps you to load only those required packages into your server. These practices need to be implemented, and they are supported heavily by Microsoft to help developers avoid mistakes. If the architecture is good, then features such as asynchronous programming and dependency injection will help ensure that your code is running flawlessly.

The installation of ASP.NET is usually easy.

There are indeed areas for improvement in ASP.NET. There are frameworks such as Blazor that have been injected into it, or there are lots of new things such as cloud-enabled services or mobile app functionality which do not yet have enough documentation on how to implement them, though Microsoft provides good online documentation. However, because of lack of people and lack of usage, it does not have enough troubleshooting guides. People do not go with ASP.NET pages or Razor pages or Blazor pages. The industry is going away from it. The industry is going with Angular, Vue, or React. Documentation is something that Microsoft must improve always, not just on ASP.NET, but across all Microsoft technology stacks.

I have been using this solution for 20 years.

ASP.NET usually remains stable, but I see some glitches or latency issues sometimes. This is always present whether it is Microsoft or AWS or GCP. Everything has equal resources available across all platforms. Internally, it is a computer or a server that is being hosted and provided to us. This depends on the geographical location where it has been deployed and the way they update their software. There will be an underlying operating system for any computing resource we are consuming. It all depends on the geographical location, network stability, and other factors. I have faced issues at times where cloud providers do their updates or patchwork and there might be some glitches. I have faced that in both clouds and not only here, but in Oracle as well. This all depends on the fact that we are not managing these resources. They are maintained by the cloud provider. So they say there is 99.99% uptime, which is true. But that 0.1% is what we are going to face always. However, they have never gone down for extended periods such as three hours, two hours, or a day. That never happened to me. I have done 20 plus integrations using the clouds in the last two years, maybe 15 to 20 percent of which are in AWS. I have faced issues in both, but in most cases, 75 percent of the time there were no issues or very negligible issues. It is all about your awareness of how cloud works. You are not physically in front of a system where you can control it. Somebody else is managing it for us. You need to anticipate such situations and take disaster recovery plans which are provided by the cloud provider. You need to go with a DR plan always.

ASP.NET is usually affordable to scale, but if you are ready to spend, there are lots of scalable options available. There are no limitations, but it is cheaper on those resources which are most commonly used now compared to three or four years back. Those resources such as AI or API Management, where you host as a gateway or those kinds of things, are critical or rarely used, or enterprise-level resources, and it is costly. You need to use it wisely. The scalable options are there, but it is costly. You need to understand whether you really require that. You need to understand that resource, what is your use case, and which one fits your bill and for your business case.

ASP.NET is affordable compared to other cloud platforms. I will always support Microsoft compared to other cloud platforms because of the way it has been priced. You have the flexibility on certain resources which, if you identify well, would get benefits in pricing, and there are lots of three-year packages and five-year packages where you get a lot of economical benefit as well. Microsoft support is much better than other cloud providers or other industry-standard software vendors at times. It all depends on how you plan that support. The support program itself requires you to choose what kind of support program you would need, and based on that, it will help you.

If I rate support from Microsoft from zero to 10 points, it depends. Everywhere there are pros and cons. If I am working on Microsoft Cloud Azure on a particular resource which is rarely used, the Microsoft support may not have that kind of technical expertise on their side as well. On such resources, I would say they are average, such as five or six. The most commonly used resources such as web services, Kubernetes clusters, or micro computing things are top-notch. They always have a very good support base, and out of 10, I would say nine.

Positive

I did use classic ASP.NET very long back. Recently for at least the last three or four years, we are not using classic ASP.NET. It is always going to be ASP.NET Core and the .NET Core framework.

I am a vendor. Our client will be using Azure, and we develop Azure for them as we have specialization in Azure Cloud. This is a service provider role where we provide services for clients.

The support for Web APIs for creating RESTful services is excellent. ASP.NET Web API is what I mentioned. If you develop anything with Web API, you have different types of integrations or frameworks available to support REST or even if you want to enable SOAP, you can do that as well. When we develop Web API, it is more into SOA, which is Service-Oriented Architecture. In recent times, what I have observed is that most developments are into microservices, which ASP.NET heavily supports. .NET Core Web API is lightweight, and you can plug and play with different libraries and packages which you can download through NuGet and inject into the system. That is very helpful when you develop anything on your SOA.

I rate this review at 7 out of 10.

I work as a solution architect and a technical architect, too. I use .NET and ASP.NET specifically for web development. Nowadays, it's not just ASP.NET. We mostly use microservices or service-oriented architecture, so the web development is in Angular or React, and we create APIs like microservices or SOA. Either way, its working depends upon the client. We mostly develop single-page applications, and the backend is Microsoft .NET Core. Now we are migrating to .NET 7.0, and I have mostly been using SQL Server in the backend. I have also been working using Azure DocumentDB for some of the NoSQL.

My client is a medium-sized enterprise.

Classic ASP.NET had features like session caching, which were immense considering other technologies in the market. However, since we moved to the .NET Core environment, we now have the freedom to deploy it into any environment like Linux or any other operating system. The framework provides in-built security and performance-related mechanisms. We just need to utilize the technical stacks available within Microsoft .NET to incorporate these basic requirements of any business server. We don't need to write much custom code.

The performance of the servers is easy to scale. If we are hosting with .NET and millions of users hit our server, it is very easy to scale out because of the platform, unlike any other technology stack. Nowadays, we use the cloud platform that Microsoft supports. It is seamless compared to Java or any other technology stack.

With the technical stacks, what happened is that Microsoft evolved in such a way that the features that are available in other technologies were gradually incorporated into .NET or C# for any Microsoft technical areas, whether it is Azure or any other tech stack. So it's gradually happening. We already have some Power Apps and so on. At this moment, Power Apps is restricted within Azure or any kind of Microsoft environment. Such things in the future should be .NET Core. It should be open source or deployable to any operating system so that the dependency can be removed. And with a click, we can get a solution ready for deployment.

I've used the solution for almost 18 years.

The solution has no issues with stability. It all depends on the way you set it up. Sometimes, the client may have a limited budget, so you have to restrict the environment as per that budget. When it comes to scalability, there is a situation where the client will sell the product to multiple customers, or the customer grows. You would need to increase the performance of your resources. In some situations, you might initially think that load balancing is unnecessary because of the lower number of customers. However, your application might grow, and you must incorporate a load balancer. In such situations, you must do a little more coding to accommodate that. In these situations, maintainability comes into the picture. However, since Azure provides resources in the cloud, you can easily scale up or down since it's all automated now.

The technical support is very good, though the documentation is not so great compared to the other technology stacks available. You would need to spend a little bit more time, but the moment you get that going, it will be seamless. Nonetheless, not everyone can answer my question when I interact with tech support. When they cannot answer me, they usually get their seniors instead, who can.

Positive

The initial setup is easy. Within .NET, we used to have deployment engines where you could create packages or setup files. Nowadays, those days are gone. It's all CI/CD pipelines, and Azure DevOps helps us to do so. We can have a progressive approach. For example, you can build each brand separately and put it into your relevant environment if you have multiple branches. Or you could create a branch, build it relevant to the environment, and progressively push it to higher environments.

Setting up the deployment environment and the CI/CD pipeline depends on the number of projects and systems you will set up. If it is one setup, the CI will happen once you commit your code and push it to the repository. It will build and deploy to your environment. That is the automation that Microsoft helps us with.

Maintaining the tool is not difficult, but it is not easy either. It all depends on how you design your system. Microsoft gives you the technology, but you must utilize it to write the code in a maintenance-free mode. All the same, the number of users depends on the size of the solution. If you have around 20 features or pages in your application, we have a full-time developer and a UI guy providing QA half the time, which would be sufficient to maintain the application at that level.

The solution is comparatively cheaper, and you don't have to pay anything for a developer license. When you put it into production, it costs you.

Azure DevOps is a very strong tool, committing to any available tools like Git or Vera. It competes with anybody in the market.

Microsoft gives you the technology, but you must utilize it to write the code in a maintenance-free mode. The way you write the code and the decoupling principles you apply, for example, the SOLID principles. You should ensure the solution is maintenance-free or scalable. Security-wise, you should not look into the system to check for vulnerabilities whenever you are deploying. Those things come as part of our design and development.

I would ask prospective users to start from the basics. Just travel 20 years back when ASP.NET started and what was the situation, then come back to the latest version so that they will understand the evolution. That is required because you may not know enough if you directly jump into the current version or technical stack. There are many legacy applications still running in the market. It doesn't matter that it's only on ASP.NET, but multiple technologies. It is very required to know what the market was earlier and how it has been evolving. And probably because they might be working on some migration project or maintaining the existing one while changing area by area on your system, a big system. That knowledge will be very, very helpful or handy when you are working on the latest stack. I rate ASP.NET a nine out of ten.

We mainly use ASP.NET for handling tasks like check and credit card processing in the financial services sector and in utilities billing, particularly for managing services like gas and electricity. 

The most valuable feature of ASP.NET is its visual side, which makes building Windows forms applications visually efficient. However, for web deployment, particularly with technologies like Blazor Server, the visual aspect is not as prominent, and some improvements are still needed in that area.

In addition to the visual aspect, there is a need for ASP.NET to provide a robust visual front end like there was in the past. This would prevent the need to explore low-code alternatives, which are becoming more popular.

I have been using ASP.NET for a long time, starting from 2005.

All six developers in our company have experience with ASP.NET.

I would rate their help as average, a five out of ten. Most of the time, you can find solutions by searching online because of ASP.NET's large user base and active community. However, when it comes to direct contact with Microsoft, it is not always exceptional because online resources are often sufficient.

Neutral

The main reason we chose ASP.NET is because of our historical shift to Microsoft products in the late '90s. We found more stability with Microsoft compared to other platforms like Borland. Microsoft's reliability and long-term presence in the industry were important factors for our decision, as we wanted to ensure continuity and avoid potential dead ends with smaller companies.

The initial setup is fairly simple.

The cost of ASP.NET and Microsoft development tools can vary. Microsoft offers a cost-effective option for software development houses with their direct access arrangement, where you pay around $400 a year to access all their current development tools. This can be a good value, especially if you have experience with .NET, although there may still be a learning curve for newcomers.

My advice to people who are considering using ASP.NET is that if your target audience primarily uses Windows machines, especially in financial institutions, ASP.NET and Microsoft technologies may be a lower-risk choice. However, consider productivity issues, especially as everything is moving towards browser-based solutions. Also, keep in mind cost considerations when evaluating software options. Overall, I would rate ASP.NET as an eight on a scale of one to ten. It has generally remained stable with no major syntax changes over the years. However, there have been two significant drawbacks, which are the abandonment of the VB6 methodology and the abandonment of Silverlight, both of which caused challenges and expenses when migrating applications. So, while ASP.NET is good, these two dead ends are a black mark on Microsoft's track record over the past 25 years.

On-premises

We are a company which has more strength with ASP.NET developers. Microsoft technologies are very easy to understand, integrate and adopt. And we have a working background on that. Our customer decided to use this because they want to develop those applications in ASP.NET.

The solution is easy to integrate and understand. It has a very good user interface and a lot of prebuilt tools, which require a lot less coding if we compare it to other solutions.

First, the price of the solution can be cheaper as different customers have different budgets. Second, more frequent updates regarding security would be better as online application security is always a concern. Third, I think there is always room for improvement in every product. 

There should be consistent customization related to security, features, and developers, making the solution more understandable and adaptable. The market is growing day by day and there are so many competitors in the market for Microsoft, hence customization is required.

I have been using the solution for five to six years.

It is a stable solution. I rate the stability a nine out of ten. 

It is a scalable solution. I rate the scalability a nine out of ten. Our clients are all enterprises.

The technical support team is good. I rate the support a nine out of ten.

Positive

The initial setup is easy if you have all the hardware and prerequisites. It depends on the deployment size because we have multiple modules and are following the CI/CD process. 

We plan our deployment in chunks and on whichever process is ready. So it is easy and doesn't take much time. We have a deployment team of five engineers who handle the deployment. Our developers provide maintenance and support whenever needed. We have two developers for the maintenance so that if one developer faces any emergency, the other one can take responsibility.

ASP.NET's price is reasonable. I rate the pricing a five out of ten.

ASP.NET is very easy to learn for people who are new to using the solution. The Microsoft languages and ASP.NET process and application building are very straightforward. I recommend that people learn the usage of the solution. I rate the overall solution a nine out of ten.

Public Cloud

Microsoft Azure

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.

Public Cloud