Ashish-KamatSenior Manager at a tech services company
Umang KathiyaraCo-Founder / Solution Architect / Project Manager (Mobile & Web Apps Development) at PRAXINFO
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"A great solution for creating program solutions in a framework for Microsoft Windows quickly and easily."
"The most valuable features are the Domain Controller and the WBFS Manager."
"The most valuable feature is the financial accounting."
"When it comes to the user interface, the context is better than other tools because it is easier to use."
"The .NET framework is a mature platform that is very helpful and saves time during the software development process."
"As we are a software company, we find that accessing resources using this technology is easier compared to the others."
"I'd rate the solution as highly stable."
"Ease of use, the richness of the libraries and basically very good development tools."
"It offers good support for various types of classes, along with many open source libraries that we can readily utilize in our application development process. This gives us a lot of options when it comes to custom development solutions, without having to worry about licensing or other programming-related issues."
"It would be nice if the framework were able to work with additional environments and systems like Linux."
"Better integration with other tools to make the operation faster would be an improvement."
"This solution should include Power BI so that we don't have to use any third-party tools."
"They should have more training materials available that are specific to .NET. We spend a lot of money training our engineers."
"If Microsoft would provide a monthly subscription at a cost that a developer can afford then it would be really helpful."
"In the next release, I am looking for more advanced technologies such as socket communication and enhanced features like realtime chat with the clients."
"The pricing is a bit expensive."
"The .NET open source community could be larger."
"In terms of improvement, it doesn't support concurrent processing. When we want to process anything on a concurrent basis, we have to divide it into a number of things, like a queue, or we have to run it using Cron jobs. We would like to have the capability to run any thread or process in parallel."
"The product and support for this solution are free for everyone."
"The pricing could be cheaper."
"There is a Community Edition that can be used free of charge, but the licensing cost for the Enterprise version is quite high."
"If you want to develop an enterprise-level application, you have to purchase the enterprise-level development license."
"The Microsoft .NET Framework is free of charge, without licensing cost."
"The Zend PHP engine is open source technology, so there's no need for us to worry about licensing or other costs."
Microsoft .NET Framework is ranked 2nd in Application Infrastructure with 12 reviews while Zend PHP Engine is ranked 13th in Application Infrastructure with 1 review. Microsoft .NET Framework is rated 8.6, while Zend PHP Engine is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of Microsoft .NET Framework writes "Has improved our efficiency in the time it takes to program a solution". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Zend PHP Engine writes "Offers an easy way to develop both big and small Web-ready applications at low to zero cost". Microsoft .NET Framework is most compared with Magic xpa Application Platform, JBoss Enterprise Application Platform, Apache Web Server, SAP NetWeaver Enterprise Portal and IBM BPM, whereas Zend PHP Engine is most compared with Apache Web Server, WebLogic Suite, JBoss Enterprise Application Platform and NGINX Plus.
See our list of best Application Infrastructure vendors.
We monitor all Application Infrastructure reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.