Microsoft's .Net is an open source, freeware application infrastructure.
N/A
React
Score 9.3 out of 10
N/A
React is a JavaScript library for building user interfaces. React enables users to create interactive UIs. Design simple views for each state in an application, and React will update and render just the right components when data changes. React is available free and open source under the MIT license.
N/A
Pricing
.NET
React
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
.NET
React
Free Trial
No
No
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
—
—
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
.NET
React
Considered Both Products
.NET
Verified User
Anonymous
Chose .NET
.NET is equivalent to Java, a byte-code compiled, just-in-time native compiled, garbage collected language and runtime, with performance and features that are basically equivalent. .NET worked for us because it gave us a native-ish Windows user interface, as opposed to the …
Compared to PHP, .Net has a far better-standardized framework from which to pick and choose libraries from. It is also a more mature language, even though PHP has been out a bit longer. The ability to create desktop apps using .Net is another benefit compared to PHP. If a very …
If it was up to me, I'd rather use something like Node.JS hands down. Things are simpler, there is no gigantic convoluted class hierarchy to learn like there is with .NET. Also Node is really fast and lightweight. I find .NET these days to be a totally solid product and it …
.Net is multi-platform and integrates many languages which makes it a one stop universal platform for everything. It further allows for easy collaboration and interfaces with Git for version control. It also has a very elaborate variety of extensions making the possibilities …
Java is confusing sometimes and has poor IDEs. Now it is no more open source, so it does not worth [starting] a project with Java. The new .NET Core is available for Linux and MacOS too, so it would not be a problem to plan a migration. Moreover[,] the performances are really …
I have used Java and .NET seems to be a more solid development ecosystem As time has gone on they have improved their cross-platform capabilities and deeply improved their support for the open-source community.
The .NET platform has a much longer and broader history than Laravel, so we chose to go with it as the support will be far superior. Additionally, Laravel is tied to PHP, while you can use multiple different languages in .NET. The additional flexibility that .NET provides in …
Both Java and .NET are similar. They provide nearly the same capabilities so long as you know how to use the differences in the way they structure in how they handle objects. The benefit to using the .NET framework is the ability to use all of the features of the Visual Studio …
Java vs .NET these days is more of a preference than anything else; you pick and choose whichever works best for you. Both have active and vibrant community support, and both have good development tools to work with. The benefit that .NET has over Java is that you can get …
We are currently moving away from Visual LANSA as it does not do well on the web. Developers are hard to find for this language while .NET developers are readily available and very knowledgeable.
By switching to .NET, our development time has been cut down and has become more …
.Net platform is our primary option for developing newer solutions because of a lot of reasons, but in the past years, we have received a few requests in which we had to use Java SE. We had no big problem to use Java. Still, the productivity difference and the offer of …
We have worked with Java in the past but their library, functions, features out the box are not as helpful as those provided by .NET. Additionally, these features can be harder to implement depending on your business and it's harder to find these skills/resources from the …
Microsoft .NET has been the choice of development here for a long time and was chosen for its portability, ease of development and more. We have been very successful in developing custom applications in Microsoft .NET. This back end of Microsoft .NET applications has made it …
We evaluated Java as a platform for custom development. There were many advantages to using Java like - Java is portable, so you can choose whatever operating system you need to build your app or website. Object-relational support is better, and Java calls the database less …
TFS and GIT used as source control. It really works seamlessly with MS builds, Jenkins, Jfrog and CARA. It provides a complete DevOps process. Splunk and EL are tools used for logging, tracking, and tracing purposes. ServiceNow creates a domain to contain all information and …
There really isn't anything like .NET. I have tried using Eclipse to develop applications in Java, and have tried using Qt Creator to develop C++ applications. I found Microsoft's Visual Studio suites far easier to use.
.NET is built by Microsoft and mainly uses C#. It is great if you work a lot with Windows or Azure. Java runs on the JVM (Java Virtual Machine) and has been around longer. It is known for being reliable and widely used in large systems. Overall .Net works very well for us in a …
This was very difficult because flutter is extremely easy to use and if you have React in the background, it makes it even easier. What makes Flutter a little better is the response, the components are rendered before the loading and that gives the user a better experience. The …
I have also used Angular before coming to React. Web apps created with React are much faster than Angular because React is based on virtual DOM which reloads only those components of the web page that change and everything else remains the same. Angular's learning curve is also …
I have also used Vue, Angular, and Ember for various projects. Out of the three, I am most intrigued by Vue. It takes a more beginner-friendly approach than React and changes some of the abstractions it uses to be more transparent to the user. It also comes with a lot more …
There are other options for building SPAs, and the two most common aside from React are Vue and Angular. React has been the leader of the pack for a while and has been an innovator. Angular is good for companies that want an opinionated framework so that it standardizes …
Like most people, I started in serious client-side web development with the introduction of jQuery, the first robust library for cross-browser DOM manipulation. React provides a much closer WYSIWYG translation from the declarative JSX template to HTML elements compared to using …
While this is a widely contested debate with various blog posts and benchmarks all over the place, its really a personal choice to determine what works for the team. Coming from a Angular 1.x background, I decided to try a new framework when Angular 2.x was announced and at …
When choosing a front-end framework, you have a ton of choices. There are numerous articles that will try to convince you this way or that about which one is better. I have used Blaze as a UI layer for Meteor Application development quite extensively and have found it to …
If you need to build anything from a quick-and-dirty GUI utility to a full-fledged desktop application, .NET is the way to go. It doesn't require extensive knowledge of the languages as Visual Studio is extremely helpful in its autocomplete, refactoring, and prompts, and lets you build out your solution easily without worrying about the details of [the] setup and boilerplate.
React is a JavaScript user interface construction library that works well for:
Developing web apps with dynamic and complicated user interfaces.
creating reusable UI elements that may be used in other applications.
creating single-page applications with dynamic content updates that don't require a page reload.
The Virtual DOM's effective updating mechanism allows it to handle large volumes of data updates.
React, on the other hand, might be less suitable for:
Websites that are simple, stagnant, and have no interaction. Other libraries or simple HTML, CSS, and JavaScript may be a better fit in such circumstances.
Web sockets may be a better choice for applications that need real-time updates, such as chat or gaming apps.
When creating mobile apps, React Native is a better option.
Server side rendering only, as React is designed to run on the client side.
Solid backing by large organization (Facebook) thats committed to keeping the development on the project. In my mind, this is the number one priority for any library because without this: time is wasted on getting up-to speed on a library that you will never use, have a codebase with a library thats hard to maintain because few years down the lane, hiring devs to maintain an unsupported library is very difficult.
As with any libraries, open source community's support is critical for success of any framework because this allows for more pre-built components that could be used right out-of-box => makes Development using React a breeze.
React's Stateful and Stateless components make organizing your code a breeze. These components would also allow for writing clean Unit Tests on the logic.
React's component lifecycle. It offers a variety of lifecycle methods, that allows for handling different scenarios of loading and manipulating data in the UI.
I found React's documentation very well maintained with plenty of examples explaining each feature.
Responsiveness is a very important criteria in selecting a UI and React is very responsive. It does some neat optimizations on re-rendering using virtual DOM and would only re-render parts of the DOM that changed. These optimizations makes React Applications feel really fast.
React Native would allow for building applications that span across web and mobile interfaces (iOS and Android). This makes learning React even more enticing, because using a single library, you could build applications that span across Web, iOS and Android.
create-react-app is an effort by Facebook (creators of React) that makes getting started with React really easy. It does all the heavy lifting of configurations for you and allow you to focus on just development.
Small footprint, minified React + React DOM is under 150Kb, that makes loading UI's with react really fast.
React + Enzyme (backed by Airbnb) + Sinon + Mocha + Chai makes unit testing the UI components fun and improves the overall maintainability of the project.
.NET is heavily Microsoft Windows oriented, and while .NET core tried to resolve that with MacOS and Linux support, .NET Core is still waiting for wider adoption.
While free for small projects, additional features for big projects can be a little expensive.
Can be resource-heavy upon deployment. We continuously have our more senior staff optimize the code of our junior developers for performance. Other languages are a little bit more forgiving in comparison.
React's state management can get hairy if you have a deeply nested component and need to pass things up or down the tree very far. This is where libraries like Redux come in, however.
The progressive nature of its development and change cycles can leave information outdated online faster than other frameworks. This can make finding help or documentation on 3rd party sites frustrating.
The learning curve on "thinking in React" can be slightly higher than other more familiar patterns of web development.
Building an app in it can be cumbersome to set up with webpack, but things like Create React App can get you going in a jiffy.
.NET frameworks are fantastic overall. There are no limitations to what you can accomplish with it. The most important part is that you'll have access to developer community support and that .NET is always being improved every month. Be it in web applications, back-end servers, or integrations, .NET enables developers to do it all.
There are a few things that may take some getting used to when coming to a modern JS frontend. Tools like Babel and Webpack (or abstractions that hide their details from you) are often a starting point and JSX can be confusing at first. But assuming the developer is already familiar with modern frontend tools, React is a very natural fit and makes creating user interfaces a joy.
As Microsoft Gold Partners, we do have access to a lot of additional information and support from Microsoft. Still, the availability of "open and free" documentation, community, and enthusiasts of the platform is vast. Added to that, the quality of resources provided for all the Microsoft ecosystem is very impressive.
Since it's open-source and very popular, the community support for React and related tools and libraries is excellent. There are a lot of people using the same tools, and so issues tend to get fixed quickly and "recipes" are easy to come by. And since it's backed by Facebook, they have a dedicated engineering team working on the progression of React.
If it was up to me, I'd rather use something like Node.js hands down. Things are simpler, there is no gigantic convoluted class hierarchy to learn like there is with .NET. Also Node is really fast and lightweight. I find .NET these days to be a totally solid product and it certainly has its place - but it seems a bit dated and boring to me now.
There are other options for building SPAs, and the two most common aside from React are Vue and Angular. React has been the leader of the pack for a while and has been an innovator. Angular is good for companies that want an opinionated framework so that it standardizes practices. However, Angular is known to be more difficult to work with and unnecessarily complex. Vue is seen as taking the best from React and Angular, and it is built for incremental upgrades. Vue has a passionate and growing user base, but it hasn't quite caught React in popularity.
We are slowly switching from a dying programming language to .NET because it was too expensive to hire developers for the old programming language. There are way more .NET developers around and an amazing community which has allowed us to keep our costs low.
Our development time has been greatly reduced because now we're not developing applications for each OS platform. We do it once and deploy accordingly.
.NET Core has been a big mindshift in terms of how to program. The learning curve has been quite high for existing .NET developers.
Since we're still in the conversion cycle, all the data is not in. But React has had a positive impact on Developer productivity and the ability to produce efficient, highly flexible UX. This in turn, enhances our customer experience, which is generally the most important component of our ROI.
Conversion has been difficult since it requires a change of mindset. Most developers have adapted quite well, but the process has been lengthy, and 2 years in, we are still not fully converted. This essentially is a temporary negative impact on ROI.