A somewhat less biases comparison of MVP and MVC

Posted by Eric Polerecky in ASP.NET, WebForms, mvcMay 20th, 2009 | 5 responses

What is it called?

First off; what are we calling “Classic ASP.NET Development using Webforms and the MVP Pattern” today? I’d like to suggest we stick with a discussion of the patterns and the surrounding technology.

Component based development using the MVP pattern…or MVP for short :)

and

Non-Component based development using the MVC pattern…or MVC for short :)

And I am aware that there are companies working on MVC components/html helpers…so what else are we going to call it? Then again you might be write…what % of “Webforms” developers are using the MVP pattern? 5%?…hmmm…anyway I am sticking with MVC and MVP until I read something better on stackoverflow.com

Don’t be such an ass

Here is the document that I presented to a client when they asked for…well a comparison of “Classic ASP.NET Development using Webforms” and “MVC”

Introduction

In the .NET world the MVC pattern is relatively new but it has been the staple development architecture for Java and Ruby for over a decade. Most of the current the debate between what technology is “better” is argued from a developer’s point of view. While the technical underpinnings of a technology can often translate to the projects success; I feel that both WebForms and MVC are mature enough that most projects will do fine with either.

 

ASP.NET WebForms

Through the abstraction of HTML, CSS, and JavaScript; ASP.NET WebForms attempts to recreate the experience of developing a desktop application. The entire HTTP protocol is successfully abstracted away and developers are present with a faux statefulness that mimics desktop applications. Development teams are able to use a WYSIWIG style of development.

 

ASP.NET MVC

Out of the box ASP.NET MVC forces developers to understand HTML, CSS, and JavaScript. There is little to no abstraction which can be a double edged sword. On one hand your development team has access to the raw power of the markup & languages that make up the web. On the other; if your development team is not experienced with HTML, CSS, and JavaScript there might be a learning curve.

 

Decision Matrix

Number

Topic

ASP WebForms

ASP.NET MVC

1

Size, Extensibility, Maintainability

Your project is small and your team is not experienced with MVC

Your project is large (experience with MVC not required)

2

3rd Party Components

Your project requires many specific 3rd party vendor components

Your project is not bound to 3rd party vendor components (The UI can still be very rich)

3

Open Source

Your project team is not comfortable with open-source libraries

Your project team is comfortable with open-source libraries (especially jQuery)

4

Extensibility, Maintainability

Your customers requirements will not change during development

Your customers requirements may change during development

5

Extensibility, Maintainability

Your project will never be "extended" or have a feature "added"

Your project maybe be "extended" or have features "added"

6

Testability

Unit testing is not required for this project

Unit testing is required for this project

7

Extensibility, Maintainability

 

Your project is limited in maintenance hours

8

Compliance

There is little to no concern with regard to HTML compliance

HTML markup compliance (compliance, screen readers, etc)

 

Notes

  1. The convention built into the MVC framework helps enforce a separation of concerns design pattern what helps developers built applications that are inherently more extensible and maintainable.

  2. If your project/company has an existing large investment in 3rd party components you should consider sticking with whatever framework the components are developed for (Webforms or MVC)

  3. component suites are available for both frameworks but many developers have found that jQuery, and to a less extent other open source frameworks, is a better solution for building rich UI

  4. The convention built into the MVC framework helps enforce a separation of concerns design pattern what helps developers built applications that are inherently loosely coupled.

  5. See note #4

  6. ….

  7. ….

  8. ….

 

 

 

Related posts:

  1. A completely biased comparison of ASP.NET MVC and Webforms



5 Responses to “A somewhat less biases comparison of MVP and MVC”

  1. Jeff Behnke says:
    May 21, 2009 at 12:52 am

    The phrase “your developers don’t need to know [some technology] because of [our technology]” is a prime indication of where, specifically, developers will create the most bugs and where the application won’t work as designed. My problem is not running across technology that I don’t want to know or need to know…my problem generally results from companies trying to glue shit together in ways that it shouldn’t be glued together. I never once used an asp.net form. I always choose to glue stuff together myself instead, so then if it doesn’t work, I know why :)

    Reply
  2. Eric Polerecky says:
    May 22, 2009 at 9:59 am

    If I am following you right….then I agree!

    ASP.NET taught developers they don’t need to know the basic underpinnings of the internet. How huge are your balls to be able to suggest you can write an entire abstraction layer on of http/css/html/js AND that we will do it so well that the developers will need NO convention!

    The complete lack of convention in ASP.NET drives me nuts!

    Crap…code red gotta go…Damn bomb threats interrupting my blogging….

    Reply
  3. Jeff Behnke says:
    May 22, 2009 at 5:28 pm

    Bomb threats?! WTF do you work again?

    Reply
  4. Eric Polerecky says:
    May 23, 2009 at 12:39 am

    um…technically I was in a government building….

    Reply
  5. ASP.NET MVC Archived Blog Posts, Page 1 says:
    May 26, 2009 at 12:23 am

    [...] to VoteA somewhat less biases comparison of MVP and MVC (5/20/2009)Wednesday, May 20, 2009 from Eric PolereckyWhat is it called? First off; what are we calling [...]

    Reply

Leave a Reply