Google Trends: LINQ vs. XSLT in Redmond, WA > And The Winner Is?

By M. David Peterson
June 22, 2008 | Comments: 4
linq-vs-xslt_in-redmond.png
Now here's something interesting: Turns out that if you use Google Trends to compare the amount of interest in LINQ vs. XSLT, when you look at the most active cities, Redmond, WA tops the list and XSLT finds ~1.5 times as much interest than does LINQ over the course of the last 4 1/2 years.

What about LINQ vs. XQuery?

linq-vs-xslt_in-redmond.png

I'm glad you asked :) It turns out that as far as Redmond, WA is concerned, LINQ is around 3 times as popular as is XQuery, which really isn't surprising given the two are somewhat comparable in both syntax and purpose.

Hey Microsoft: When you going to be done with that XSLT 2.0 processor of yours? ;-) Seems to me that, if nothing else, your own employees would appreciate the effort.

Just food for thought. ;-)


You might also be interested in:


4 Comments

Those charts are fun, but Linq in that query is an umbrella term for a set of extensions in .net for working with more than just xml. I don't think the XQuery vs. Linq comparison is valid.

Run trends for: LINQ to XML, XQuery and it turns out XQuery's much more popular in Redmond for working with XML.

@pete,

>> LINQ to XML, XQuery and it turns out XQuery's much more popular in Redmond for working with XML.

The problem I see with these comparisons is that when people first hear of LINQ they hear about it in its singular sense. While LINQ-to-* is a more accurate way to drill down into the specifics, I'm more apt to believe that most people will search for LINQ, find themselves at MSDN, and then drill down into the specifics technologies they have interest in.

I do recognize your point. I just don't think people are likely to drill down to the specific technology they have interest in when they use Google for their initial "What is ..." query, e.g. "What is LINQ" or "What is XSLT" as opposed to "How do I use LINQ to query XML" and "How do I use XSLT to transform XML".

I agree. I just believe that more people would look at linq initially with the goal of working with sql, as opposed to xml. http://tinyurl.com/6n8vog If that's the case, comparing trends for linq vs. xquery as a gauge of popularity doesn't seem fair to me. Plus, I'm a huge fan of XQuery, so I feel compelled to step up for my favorite tech on general principle. :)

@pete,

>> I agree. I just believe that more people would look at linq initially with the goal of working with sql, as opposed to xml.

Fair enough. I can certainly both see and agree with your point.

>> http://tinyurl.com/6n8vog

And that certainly helps back things up :)

>> If that's the case, comparing trends for linq vs. xquery as a gauge of popularity doesn't seem fair to me. Plus, I'm a huge fan of XQuery, so I feel compelled to step up for my favorite tech on general principle. :)

Oh, I'm also a big fan of XQuery. If anything my promotion of XSLT comes from the general tendency for people to write off XSLT as too hard and see LINQ or XQuery as some sort of "replacement." So this is more of a "Don't write of XSLT" post than anything else.

Popular Topics

Archives

Or, visit our complete archives.

Recommended for You

Got a Question?