I just got VS.net, and I would LIKE to be able to write some programs to take advantage of all these cool libraries. But if no one in the world is gonna have .NET installed, what's the point? Will .NET be shoved into the publics face? Will it be on Windows Update? Or in SP1? Does anyone have any details on any aggressive .NET spreading?
How quickly will the .NET Framework spread to the public?
- Thread starter ThatWasFat
- Start date
I don't know about other s but to me .NET is a complete nonsense....
Who would like to put their apps and data on a close source single company owned solution... not me,
and not many others... I for the .NET initiative to succeed there must servers that can run ther server
side part of the "protocol"... I'm not seeing many people whilling to put their data on Windows servers,
heck most servers are either IBM mainframes or *nix solutions....
And from what I've seen C# is just C with java parts added to it... no big thing.
Who would like to put their apps and data on a close source single company owned solution... not me,
and not many others... I for the .NET initiative to succeed there must servers that can run ther server
side part of the "protocol"... I'm not seeing many people whilling to put their data on Windows servers,
heck most servers are either IBM mainframes or *nix solutions....
And from what I've seen C# is just C with java parts added to it... no big thing.
thornc there is work being done to make .NET stuff available for linux. Its called Mono. Its being worked on by the Gnome creator. So this will be a cross platform type of thing. Atleast for a while.
As far as .Net goes though, Im not willing to even think about it much until Microsoft cleans up their security act a bit. There has been a virus released for .Net already (atleast one but I think more) and that is a bad sign.
As far as .Net goes though, Im not willing to even think about it much until Microsoft cleans up their security act a bit. There has been a virus released for .Net already (atleast one but I think more) and that is a bad sign.
<< thornc there is work being done to make .NET stuff available for linux. Its called Mono. Its being worked on by the Gnome creator. So this will be a cross platform type of thing. Atleast for a while. >>
It you still be proprietary, just like smb and samba. The samba team plays catch up to what microsoft does! So what happens
when microsoft decides to improve the protocol and doesn't release information on the new version???
And this doesn't rule out the other issues... why the hell would I want my data to be on some server nobody knows where?!?
This might work for a corporation where they want tight control, but those won't run windows servers (well they could, but
I doubt it...) but mainframes...
<<
<< thornc there is work being done to make .NET stuff available for linux. Its called Mono. Its being worked on by the Gnome creator. So this will be a cross platform type of thing. Atleast for a while. >>
It you still be proprietary, just like smb and samba. The samba team plays catch up to what microsoft does! So what happens
when microsoft decides to improve the protocol and doesn't release information on the new version??? >>
Thats why I said "Atleast for a while."
<< And this doesn't rule out the other issues... why the hell would I want my data to be on some server nobody knows where?!?
This might work for a corporation where they want tight control, but those won't run windows servers (well they could, but
I doubt it...) but mainframes... >>
I agree with a lot of what you said on this topic. I just wanted to point out that there is some Linux .NET stuff floating around. And I cant think of any company I know of that is rich enough for a main frame that is totally windowless on the server side...
<< I agree with a lot of what you said on this topic. I just wanted to point out that there is some Linux .NET stuff floating around. >>
As in many subjects... we seem to think in a similar way.
<< And I cant think of any company I know of that is rich enough for a main frame that is totally windowless on the server side... >>
Well, I know that, for instance my university has been using unix on alphas for ages now (ftp, email, www you name it) but with
the recent developments they have now set up a new system architecture where Active Directory plays a major role on the security
side (hicks) and everything else is handled by unix/linux servers...
And from what I've seen here in europe, not many windows system go into the server side... big teleco companys
use sap over oracle in platforms unix/linux. Last year I got to talk with a chief developer at a new teleco involved in umts
and their backbones where going to be linux, with mysql/postgres database access by java... so if these guys with lots of
money behind them don't even want to hear about microsoft, I don't think there are many others that will
Ok, Im in the US so my world view is smaller than yours 
I know outside of North America other OSes get a lot of respect, and thats a good thing. Unfortunately, I see .NET being HUGE, like the rest of MS, in about 3 years or so.
I know outside of North America other OSes get a lot of respect, and thats a good thing. Unfortunately, I see .NET being HUGE, like the rest of MS, in about 3 years or so.
Nothinman
Elite Member
- Sep 14, 2001
- 30,672
- 0
- 0
thornc .NET is like java, atleast MS hopes so. As long as a machine has a CLR it can run the bytecode, this includes the FreeBSD MS is releasing and Mono for Linux. I believe it's even submitted to become an ISO standard, of course that takes a long time to happen.
I have VS.NET and I don't like the interface too much, but over all it's a good IDE. If I was doing a win32 program I would stick to regular PE executables for now, although I wouldn't put it past MS to put the .NET runtimes in with XP SP1, Win2K SP3, IE 6.1, etc.
why the hell would I want my data to be on some server nobody knows where?!?
WTF are you talking about? .NET has nothing to do with Internet based applications and data storage, except maybe that the software that does it will be compiled in .Net.
Unfortunately, I see .NET being HUGE, like the rest of MS, in about 3 years or so.
Probably a lot sooner than that, MS is pushing this hard and a lot of MS developers really like it, so the .NET runtimes should become common pretty quickly.
I have VS.NET and I don't like the interface too much, but over all it's a good IDE. If I was doing a win32 program I would stick to regular PE executables for now, although I wouldn't put it past MS to put the .NET runtimes in with XP SP1, Win2K SP3, IE 6.1, etc.
why the hell would I want my data to be on some server nobody knows where?!?
WTF are you talking about? .NET has nothing to do with Internet based applications and data storage, except maybe that the software that does it will be compiled in .Net.
Unfortunately, I see .NET being HUGE, like the rest of MS, in about 3 years or so.
Probably a lot sooner than that, MS is pushing this hard and a lot of MS developers really like it, so the .NET runtimes should become common pretty quickly.
n0cmonkey,
I don't think you're exactly wrong, but you've also fallen prey to the M$ FUD machine.
I think it's inaccurate to call Mono .Net for Linux (or *nix). Mono is an independent implementation of the ECMA standard CLS (language) + CLR (runtime).
Since M$ .Net is a proprietary superset of the standard language and libraries, nobody really expects Mono to be a fully cross-compatible runtime.
Look at Java, which is a de facto standard, and yet there are still platform-specific issues with many applications. And in the case of Java, the canonical JVM is more or less a unified codebase. Sun maintains 3 official platform releases (Solaris, W32 and Linux) and licenses the source to other organizations for porting. Of course, some companies have implemented their own JVMs as well. The point is that even when there is a unified codebase, cross-platform deployment is still imperfect.
I have very low expectation that Mono will be highly compatible with Microsoft's .Net framework, since the UI will be platform-specific native-code. If you're writing non-UI apps, then the independently developed runtimes may be very similar.
Even then, there are many libraries that M$ has not submitted to ECMA. If your VStudio .Net application uses *any* proprietary classes, then how's it going to run on Mono?
Here's a summary of what I'm referring to.
I think the essential misconception is people believe Ximian's Miguel de Icaza has sold out to implement open-source .Net for *nix
From what I've seen him write, he's embracing and extending a standardized technology (CLS + CLR) to create a state-of-the-art development environment for *nix. Right now, *nix is very competive for networking servers, and W32 owns the desktop. There really isn't a standard yet for application services (middleware), where J2EE and .Net are battling each other in the commercial space. Mono will fit into the same middleware arena for open-source advocates.
Look at this way, while Java has enjoyed measurable success, it hasn't really been adopted by the open source community as a development environment. de Icaza wants Mono to fit in where Java could, but hasn't.
I don't think you're exactly wrong, but you've also fallen prey to the M$ FUD machine.
I think it's inaccurate to call Mono .Net for Linux (or *nix). Mono is an independent implementation of the ECMA standard CLS (language) + CLR (runtime).
Since M$ .Net is a proprietary superset of the standard language and libraries, nobody really expects Mono to be a fully cross-compatible runtime.
Look at Java, which is a de facto standard, and yet there are still platform-specific issues with many applications. And in the case of Java, the canonical JVM is more or less a unified codebase. Sun maintains 3 official platform releases (Solaris, W32 and Linux) and licenses the source to other organizations for porting. Of course, some companies have implemented their own JVMs as well. The point is that even when there is a unified codebase, cross-platform deployment is still imperfect.
I have very low expectation that Mono will be highly compatible with Microsoft's .Net framework, since the UI will be platform-specific native-code. If you're writing non-UI apps, then the independently developed runtimes may be very similar.
Even then, there are many libraries that M$ has not submitted to ECMA. If your VStudio .Net application uses *any* proprietary classes, then how's it going to run on Mono?
Here's a summary of what I'm referring to.
I think the essential misconception is people believe Ximian's Miguel de Icaza has sold out to implement open-source .Net for *nix
From what I've seen him write, he's embracing and extending a standardized technology (CLS + CLR) to create a state-of-the-art development environment for *nix. Right now, *nix is very competive for networking servers, and W32 owns the desktop. There really isn't a standard yet for application services (middleware), where J2EE and .Net are battling each other in the commercial space. Mono will fit into the same middleware arena for open-source advocates.
Look at this way, while Java has enjoyed measurable success, it hasn't really been adopted by the open source community as a development environment. de Icaza wants Mono to fit in where Java could, but hasn't.
<< I don't know about other s but to me .NET is a complete nonsense....
Who would like to put their apps and data on a close source single company owned solution... not me,
and not many others... I for the .NET initiative to succeed there must servers that can run ther server
side part of the "protocol"... I'm not seeing many people whilling to put their data on Windows servers,
heck most servers are either IBM mainframes or *nix solutions....q]
You don't think many people are using Microsoft's products? Why wouldn't you trust your code to Microsoft? Its not like they'll be going bankrupt. It is true that they have a history of new releases breaking code, but wouldn't this be possible for any language?
This is the way I see .Net unfolding. ASP.Net is so much better than competing technologies it will be adopted quickly by people already using ASP. I think some Coldfusion/Java people will switch ove too. I think a big percentage of Web Services will be written in .Net, but I'm not sure how big Web Services will be. .Net on the desktop will take a while. The .Net runtime will be included in the next version of Office, Windows, etc. I'm not sure if it will be a Windows Update, because it is pretty big. But if you develop your app in .Net, you can distibute the runtime with your app, like you do now for VB.
I will be shifting my VB evelopment to VB.Net in about 4 months. I write client-server software for small and medium sized businesses. The two main improvments I see in VB.Net compared to VB are real error handling and the IDE. The one big step backwards is that you can't change the app while its running in the IDE like you can with VB.
Please don't flame me for my support of VB and Microsoft. For the software I write, it is the only combination that is viable
Please explain to us how ASP.Net is "so much better" than competing technologies. Unless you only mean that it's better than VBScript/ASP.
I think .Net is great for Windows developers. For one, many will quickly discover that C# is a much more productive than C++/MFC.
However, I haven't seen much explanation from the M$ loving cheerleaders on AT who hype up .Net (some of them hang out in ATOT). At least I (being a Java developer) have evaluated .Net and can see what some of its benefits are, relative to the competition.
But don't just read me some of the PR/marketing catch-phrases in the ads I see every month in Dr. Dobb's.
In short, why would I switch over to a hyped-up product that in many ways imitates industry-standard Java technologies, and locks me into one vendor with a questionable track record for server-side development?
I think .Net is great for Windows developers. For one, many will quickly discover that C# is a much more productive than C++/MFC.
However, I haven't seen much explanation from the M$ loving cheerleaders on AT who hype up .Net (some of them hang out in ATOT). At least I (being a Java developer) have evaluated .Net and can see what some of its benefits are, relative to the competition.
But don't just read me some of the PR/marketing catch-phrases in the ads I see every month in Dr. Dobb's.
In short, why would I switch over to a hyped-up product that in many ways imitates industry-standard Java technologies, and locks me into one vendor with a questionable track record for server-side development?
<< thornc .NET is like java, atleast MS hopes so. As long as a machine has a CLR it can run the bytecode, this includes the FreeBSD MS is releasing and Mono for Linux. I believe it's even submitted to become an ISO standard, of course that takes a long time to happen.
I have VS.NET and I don't like the interface too much, but over all it's a good IDE. If I was doing a win32 program I would stick to regular PE executables for now, although I wouldn't put it past MS to put the .NET runtimes in with XP SP1, Win2K SP3, IE 6.1, etc. >>
That would definitely make my 3yr estimate wrong.
<< why the hell would I want my data to be on some server nobody knows where?!?
WTF are you talking about? .NET has nothing to do with Internet based applications and data storage, except maybe that the software that does it will be compiled in .Net. >>
I think the .NET and the passport things are getting mixed up a bit.
<< Unfortunately, I see .NET being HUGE, like the rest of MS, in about 3 years or so.
Probably a lot sooner than that, MS is pushing this hard and a lot of MS developers really like it, so the .NET runtimes should become common pretty quickly. >>
If the next sp and whatnot include .NET stuff it could be much quicker. But I was thinking 3 years for it to be everywhere.
<< n0cmonkey,
I don't think you're exactly wrong, but you've also fallen prey to the M$ FUD machine. >>
I disagree, I have not falled to the Microsoft "FUD Machine", although my understand of .NET is quite simplisitc.
<< You don't think many people are using Microsoft's products? >>
Outside of the US it is much more accepted to use non-MS products.
<< Why wouldn't you trust your code to Microsoft? Its not like they'll be going bankrupt. It is true that they have a history of new releases breaking code, but wouldn't this be possible for any language? >>
Do you want me to link Microsoft vulnerabilities? What about the viruses that have been released into the wild for UNRELEASED platforms?
<< Please don't flame me for my support of VB and Microsoft. For the software I write, it is the only combination that is viable >>
Did you really need to include that? I wouldnt flame you for making a little bling-bling (thats what the kids say right?). I do think your estimation that this is the only "viable" solution is incorrect though. Of course, I dont know exactly what you write so I may be wrong.
<< Please don't flame me for my support of VB and Microsoft. For the software I write, it is the only combination that is viable >>
I would we flame you for that... I also use Microsoft products in many things. Not because I like to, but because there aren't
any alternatives. I like the win32 api very much and I pray that something similar will eventually come to open source...
Nothinman
C# is supposed to be like java, welll at least the code looks the same. At least for me a low-level C programmer.
And I know that .NET isn't directly with Internet based applications and data storage, but it is a step in this direction...
I just don't understand why the hell do we need yet another language/framework to do something that is being done
by others already...
I don't flame me for this, but what I think is that MS and uncle Bill have some kind of problems because the only language
they could come up with was Basic! Everything else they took from someone else and modified no to be fully compatible with
the original in the first place. Lets see Visual C/C++,Visual J,RPC,pipes,etc ... so now they thinking lets make us something new
a puch it down the throats of others...C#/.NET its ours we'll make the rules and we'll change them when it suits us...
(Sorry for this, I'm having a bad day trying to set-up a wireless nic card on a windows NT machine... the dam thing works
perfectly in any other OS including linux but in NT no go!!!)
edit: dam took to long to write this, well said manly....
I did mean that ASP.Net was a big improvment over ASP, which I don't think anyone will argue with. I really don't know anything about .Net's advantages over Java, because I don't know a lot about Java. The obvious advantage is that .Net code will run better on Windows (better, faster UI's). It is also very closely coupled with SQL Server (especially the next version of SQL Server) so I would imagine that database calls will be faster. I think the IDE will be at least as good as anythng available for Java. You can use about 20 different languages with .Net (I'm not sure how big a deal this is, but if you are porting a large legacy Cobol app, it would probably be nice to have some Cobol.Net modules.)
What are some of Java's weaknesses? Where is Java strong where .Net is not? Other than paltform independance.
What are some of Java's weaknesses? Where is Java strong where .Net is not? Other than paltform independance.
Nothinman
Elite Member
- Sep 14, 2001
- 30,672
- 0
- 0
I think the .NET and the passport things are getting mixed up a bit.
MS has been extremely vague about .NET and it's caused a lot of confusion as to what it really entails.
But I was thinking 3 years for it to be everywhere.
It will never be everywhere, even in the Windows world, because so many companies won't drop old deprecated software/hardware. I doubt there will be .NET runtimes for Win95 and I guarantee people will still be running it =)
C# is supposed to be like java, welll at least the code looks the same. At least for me a low-level C programmer.
And I know that .NET isn't directly with Internet based applications and data storage, but it is a step in this direction...
What I meant is that with VS.NET you can compile any language (although I think it's currently only VB, C++ and C#) so that it runs in the JIT compiler with the CLR.
I just don't understand why the hell do we need yet another language/framework to do something that is being done
by others already...
Because MS doesn't own it...
MS has a humongous number of developers under their command, of course they're going to push them to more products with their name on it.
The obvious advantage is that .Net code will run better on Windows (better, faster UI's). It is also very closely coupled with SQL Server (especially the next version of SQL Server) so I would imagine that database calls will be faster.
Advantages if you just happen to also run 10s of thousands of other pieces of MS' software...
MS has been extremely vague about .NET and it's caused a lot of confusion as to what it really entails.
But I was thinking 3 years for it to be everywhere.
It will never be everywhere, even in the Windows world, because so many companies won't drop old deprecated software/hardware. I doubt there will be .NET runtimes for Win95 and I guarantee people will still be running it =)
C# is supposed to be like java, welll at least the code looks the same. At least for me a low-level C programmer.
And I know that .NET isn't directly with Internet based applications and data storage, but it is a step in this direction...
What I meant is that with VS.NET you can compile any language (although I think it's currently only VB, C++ and C#) so that it runs in the JIT compiler with the CLR.
I just don't understand why the hell do we need yet another language/framework to do something that is being done
by others already...
Because MS doesn't own it...
MS has a humongous number of developers under their command, of course they're going to push them to more products with their name on it.
The obvious advantage is that .Net code will run better on Windows (better, faster UI's). It is also very closely coupled with SQL Server (especially the next version of SQL Server) so I would imagine that database calls will be faster.
Advantages if you just happen to also run 10s of thousands of other pieces of MS' software...
<< I just got VS.net, and I would LIKE to be able to write some programs to take advantage of all these cool libraries. But if no one in the world is gonna have .NET installed, what's the point? Will .NET be shoved into the publics face? Will it be on Windows Update? Or in SP1? Does anyone have any details on any aggressive .NET spreading? >>
To answer your question, I do not know. I never played with the deployment of .NET apps but if it's like VB6, you can probably create a setup that contains the run-time.
The primary target of .NET are enterprise development, in my opinion, so I am not sure if Microsoft is eager to spread the framework aggressively.
<< I'm going to avoid all the bashing and nonsense debate going on here. >>
<flamesuit on="true">
And right on cue, a Microsoft fanboy enters the fray. Your first statement alone belittles everybody else's opinion, and yet you don't manage to add anything new or insightful to the discussion.
Okay, .Net is "elegant" and better than COM+. Big whoop. You don't think *all* serious applications are modularized or layered?
Besides, I wasn't bashing the product all. I even said as much as most Windows developers should rejoice since they now have a clearly better, more productive development platform/environment to work with.
You can read a comprehensive comparison of Java and C# (the languages) to see how much innovation is really taking place.
</flamesuit>
<< Okay, .Net is "elegant" and better than COM+. Big whoop. You don't think *all* serious applications are modularized or layered? >>
I was merely comparing .NET with what Microsoft had before. So what's your point?
I just made a post saying that I liked .NET and its elegance. So what if other serious applications are modularized and layered? I just said that it worked much better in .NET, especially compared to COM+.
But I do agree that my post was absurd and pointless. I'll edit it out.
<< You can read a comprehensive comparison of Java and C# (the languages) to see how much innovation is really taking place. >>
I skimmed through the page. It was an interesting read. Thank you.
About C# vs. Java as languages, I have no arguments to make since I don't know enough.
<< I did mean that ASP.Net was a big improvment over ASP, which I don't think anyone will argue with. I really don't know anything about .Net's advantages over Java, because I don't know a lot about Java. The obvious advantage is that .Net code will run better on Windows (better, faster UI's). It is also very closely coupled with SQL Server (especially the next version of SQL Server) so I would imagine that database calls will be faster. I think the IDE will be at least as good as anythng available for Java. You can use about 20 different languages with .Net (I'm not sure how big a deal this is, but if you are porting a large legacy Cobol app, it would probably be nice to have some Cobol.Net modules.) >>
As you said, .Net GUI apps will be better, but I'll address that later as one of Java's weaknesses.
First off, .Net's strong coupling to MS SQL Server doesn't mean database calls are any faster.
.Net has a slick marketing campaign going right now regarding a .Net port of Sun's (J2EE) Pet Store web application. One of the central claims is that .Net data handling is more efficient.
What they don't tell you is they compare apples to oranges since the .Net port uses SQL stored procedures, whereas the J2EE version uses something quite different entirely.
Benchmarks show the major commercial RDBMS are mostly in the same ballpark in performance. What that means is SQL stored procedures are usually similarly performing for any commercial RDBMS. Java server-side applications can use SQL stored procedures to access a MS SQL Server datastore if necessary. As an aside, MS SQL Server is a lot more affordable than Oracle.
<< What are some of Java's weaknesses? Where is Java strong where .Net is not? Other than paltform independance. >>
When you're asking about just the languages and core libraries, I've already given my answer: there's not much differentiation. Go read that article I linked to. However, if you're talking about the whole breath of software development, that is a really huge question with no clear answers, so I'll throw out some food for thought.
A weakness you alluded to is that Java GUI apps don't integrate very well with the host OS. A Java Swing app doesn't look like your typical native Windows application, nor does it perform as well. Although there are some solutions to this problem, there aren't any clear ones out there that will result with a bevy of Java client apps being developed in the near future.
One strength of Java that comes to mind is security. Security was a central design feature of Java, and JVM implementations have historically had very few security issues (there was a recently reported problem). Given Microsoft's track record, we can all safely assume MS .Net deployments will be more problematic over time. Note that security is also an important part of C# and the runtime, so it'll be up to MS to deliver a secure deployment server. I'm not holding my breath.
A main benefit of Java's server technologies is they are largely vendor-agnostic. You obviously choose Java the language and the freely-downloaded JVM, but other than that, an organization has a lot of flexibility to choose a vendor to deliver specific services, i.e. the RDBMS or an application server. Over time, market competition results in the tools and servers getting better. As one example, you can choose the Apache web server, and plug into a Java app server for programmability. On the other hand, you're mostly stuck with IIS (and the rest of .Net Server).
A weakness of JSP (the Java counterpart to ASP.Net ) is there was no standard tag library. However, I believe one has recently been completed. Most good designs use JSP for the UI only (i.e. the view in an MVC architecture), so this isn't a serious problem.
A relative strength of .Net is "web services". The technologies for web services are actually standardized, and are available for Java. However, a standard set of library classes hasn't been released yet for Java. So for web services development, .Net has a leg up in availability and ease-of-use for the next 6 months. As a personal opinion, web services has more hype than substance.
Another strength is VStudio .Net is a strong tool. There are some high quality development tools for Java, but arguably VStudio .Net as a de facto standard has a slight edge.
Finally, maturity needs to be mentioned. .Net is a new thing, and the reasonable expectation is that there will be growing pains of various types. It makes a lot of sense for Windows development shops to adopt .Net as soon as possible. But choosing .Net over Java/J2EE is also putting a lot of faith and investment into one company and its new product line.
<<
<< Okay, .Net is "elegant" and better than COM+. Big whoop. You don't think *all* serious applications are modularized or layered? >>
I was merely comparing .NET with what Microsoft had before. So what's your point?
I just made a post saying that I liked .NET and its elegance. So what if other serious applications are modularized and layered? I just said that it worked much better in .NET, especially compared to COM+.
But I do agree that my post was absurd and pointless. I'll edit it out. >>
Hey, we've written about .Net before in other thread(s) in a completely civil manner. I didn't mean to be so beliggerent, but your first sentence just appeared to belie your intention to avoid invective. And besides, inflammatory flamefests between geeks are actually usually non-personal.
Anyway, I did learn something from the now deleted post: that VStudio enforces developers to follow the architect's design. That sounds like a great feature, and like I said in a later post, (although I don't personally like VStudio), it is definitely in the (+) column for .Net
And besides, if anyone's strayed off topic and hijacked this thread, then I'm the guilty party.
My reply to your point is that any serious n-tier application is developed in various modules or layers. If that makes .Net elegant, then it makes other frameworks elegant as well. In reality, elegance is harder to define/appreciate. For example, Java can be a verbose coding language (for example, due to the lack of operator overloading or generic programming). Some people view this as a weakness or even non-elegant, but I view this as a philosophy. A central design philosophy for Java was simplicity; cut out any features that non-guru developers will trip over. For the gurus who need advanced functionality, it's still there. It just happens to be wrapped up in some library. The other common response to code verboseness is that most IDEs have auto-completion anyway. Personally, I use emacs and don't use code completion. For one, because I'm a fast typer, and for two I like to learn the APIs well enough to memorize most identifiers.
Another simple convention that I feel makes Java the language more elegant than C# is that class identifiers are capitalized, while instance identifiers are lowercase. Believe it or not, this makes the code more readable.
In that comparison article, you definitely get a feeling that in a lot of ways, C# the language is quite similar to Java. They kept C++ syntax and just changed some of the identifiers to make the similarity not quite so stark.
Anyway, from a developer standpoint, here's a short laundry list of language complaints:
- A preprocessor is an unnecessary throwback (I once believed a preprocessor is a nice feature, but not anymore)
- Although not universally accepted, checked exceptions (in Java) are an important evolutionary benefit
- Making method calls non-virtual by default is a C++ throwback that adds complexibility
- Operator overloading is another complex feature that probably leads to more abuse than it's worth
<< I just got VS.net, and I would LIKE to be able to write some programs to take advantage of all these cool libraries. But if no one in the world is gonna have .NET installed, what's the point? Will .NET be shoved into the publics face? Will it be on Windows Update? Or in SP1? Does anyone have any details on any aggressive .NET spreading? >>
I skimmed through the thread, but I'll just answer what is quoted
1) .NET framework will be included in every M$ OS after XP (well, maybe after XP SE)
2) .NET should be viewed as a competitor or Java. Personally, I think the lawsuit thing a few years back between M$ and Sun is what helped get the ball rolling on .NET.
3) .NET is machine independent, I think M$ is making a package for Solaris, and you have your Mono. Just like Java compiles down to bytecode, .NET compiles down to MIL (the M$ equivalent of Java bytecode).
4) When it comes to secuirty and trust, I know M$ is the worst so far but if you're a programmer, I think you should check out what the framework has to offer. There are a lot of classes!
http://arstechnica.com/paedia/n/net/net-1.html
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter