Slashdot Mirror

Do not use "Microsoft .NET" or ".NET" in the name of your products, services, or devices.

i hate m$ as much as the next /.'er, but you're wrong on both counts.

MS gives theirs away for free, too.

MSDN membership is comparable to the price of ADC, when you compare the same ADC and MSDN levels. (msdn level 1 costs $500, level 2 costs around $1500).

one really annoying thing about apple -- I can use the latest versions of microsoft visual c on my clunky old W2K installation just fine (no way in hell am i "upgrading" to xp!). however apple's latest xcode requires me to upgrade osx -- it won't install on osx 10.3.9. it will only install on osx 10.4, and i can't see any good reason for it. this means for apple, i have to shell out $130 just to be able to upgrade xcode.

And you're certain you were not running Internet Explorer for Solaris at any time? It's been a while that I did, but I'm pretty sure that it comes with its own registry.

From http://forums.microsoft.com/MSDN/ShowPost.aspx?Pos tID=126606&SiteID=1:

"Until November 7, 2006, we are promotionally discounting the downloadable versions of Express to free. This doesn't mean that the product turns off after a year, but rather that as long as you download the product before November 7, 2006, you can get it for free and you can use it forever."

Strange, from where I'm sitting they give the platform away for free, and always have done;

• v1.0 SDK
• v1.1 SDK
• v2.0 SDK

They even describe the SDKs as "verything you need to write, build, test, and deploy .NET". Sure, Visual Studio is a nice editor, but you don't need Visual Studio to write .net code. If you do want that crutch well you have, from Microsoft, the Express Editions, cost free for the next year, as well as 3rd party open source solutions like SharpDevelop.

So, according to your logic Windows wishes to gain more developers.

Strange, from where I'm sitting they give the platform away for free, and always have done;

• v1.0 SDK
• v1.1 SDK
• v2.0 SDK

They even describe the SDKs as "verything you need to write, build, test, and deploy .NET". Sure, Visual Studio is a nice editor, but you don't need Visual Studio to write .net code. If you do want that crutch well you have, from Microsoft, the Express Editions, cost free for the next year, as well as 3rd party open source solutions like SharpDevelop.

So, according to your logic Windows wishes to gain more developers.

Strange, from where I'm sitting they give the platform away for free, and always have done;

• v1.0 SDK
• v1.1 SDK
• v2.0 SDK

They even describe the SDKs as "verything you need to write, build, test, and deploy .NET". Sure, Visual Studio is a nice editor, but you don't need Visual Studio to write .net code. If you do want that crutch well you have, from Microsoft, the Express Editions, cost free for the next year, as well as 3rd party open source solutions like SharpDevelop.

So, according to your logic Windows wishes to gain more developers.

Strange, from where I'm sitting they give the platform away for free, and always have done;

• v1.0 SDK
• v1.1 SDK
• v2.0 SDK

They even describe the SDKs as "verything you need to write, build, test, and deploy .NET". Sure, Visual Studio is a nice editor, but you don't need Visual Studio to write .net code. If you do want that crutch well you have, from Microsoft, the Express Editions, cost free for the next year, as well as 3rd party open source solutions like SharpDevelop.

So, according to your logic Windows wishes to gain more developers.

One thing you have neglected to mention is that MS has released "light" versions of their development software.

This seems to be the result of competitive pressure from Apple's XCode and Eclipse.

(One caveat is that the tools will eventually cost $50. Get them while they're free [as in beer]).

http://msdn.microsoft.com/vstudio/express/

-Mike

Sure you can.

In addition to that, what software company (Like Great Plains, People Soft, SAS)

Well...MS now owns Great Plains.
SAS? Install Center: SAS for Linux®.
PeopleSoft? Owned by Oracle, who does support Linux.

True, but not exactly. Microsoft has submitted C# for ECMA standardization (ECMA-334, IIRC).
The Common Language Infrastructure (CLI), has also been submitted for standardization.
From http://msdn.microsoft.com/netframework/ecma/: ECMA submitted the standards and TR to ISO/IEC JTC 1 via the latter's Fast-Track process. In April, 2003, ISO ratified the standards as ISO/IEC 23270 (C#), ISO/IEC 23271 (CLI) and ISO/IEC 23272 (CLI TR). Equivalent specifications have also been adopted as 2nd edition standards and TR by ECMA.

This allows free software developers to create free (as in freedom) .NET implementations, such as Mono and DotGNU. I consider this open-minded, and appreciate developping free software in C#.
On a related subject, they also opened their RSS extensions, protected by a Creative Commons License.

Even if it is true that using C# indirectly contributes to Microsoft's success, that's also a gift to FS developers.

C# is absolutely nothing more than Java embraced and extended by MS. I'm sure you remember this lawsuit, followed just shy of three years later by this announcement.

Let's not forget that C# is the closed-source bastard stepchild of another, mostly closed-source language. What does that make Mono??

Wow.

I think you win an award.

In some paragraphs you have an egregious error in almost every sentence.

Sun can do this to an even greater extent, since they control who is allowed to implement VMs.

No, they do not. They control who can call their Java VM's "Java compliant."

Their standards are 100% proprietary and closely controlled.

No, they are not "closely controlled" - they collaborate extensively through the JCP, and indeed much of Java 5 was defined that way. OS developers like the Apache Group are behind many of the new parts of the spec...

They also protect themselves with patents.

Which their license explicitly grants you the use of, when implementing JVMs...

Microsoft actually has open standards

Unlike MS, who has the option of potentially GPL-incompatible RAND licensing for C# and the CLR, and doesn't standardize the rest of .NET APIs at all... what are you smoking, really?

You are basically saying you can take your .NET app to some other server? Or ever will be able to, at some point in the future? Lies this obvious just make you look foolish.

Sun is in a much better position to lock Java down and prevent people from using it.

So as you can see, this is wrong.

Same with C#.

Except all those class not found errors.... Oops, your API didn't come with you... I guess you don't mind rewriting everything?

Sort of like Sun's constantly changing GUI APIs which become very popular then have support for them dropped, right?

What are you smoking? Seriously? No APIs have been dropped yet. They have added new, never removed the old...

Like COBOL and Fortran, right?

I notice you ignored the point about the spec and the standard and the VM. Not surprising.

C#/.NET is also well specified and even more unencumbered.

So you are aware this is a blatant lie, right?

Oh it's OK. Just point me to the other vendor that implements .NET. Not C#, not the CLR. .NET... Oh wait, you can't! Bzzzzzzzzzzzzt.

And Sun's VM is not open source

Poor reading comprehension. The source is available. Not the same as open source. As I pointed out, it is not FSF or OSI compliant.

GNU classpath implementations have only recently come to a half-decent level of completeness.

The compiler and VM are done for some time. They are doing the entire API, and that is also pretty far along now. Mono is nowhere near this, and you probably even know it.

Hell, even commercial alternatives to Java's tend to be a pain to set up and suck donkey balls.

I had no problem with IBM's system. Actually I didn't have too much trouble with BEA's either. Perhaps you're just bad at it?

What's that thing called? Oh yeah, evidence. When you make bold claims, you better back them up.

I don't think you would recognize evidence if a worm delivered it to your IIS server's homepage. You've certainly overlooked everything I've provided thus far.

Let's see these numbers then. Evidence.

Duh OK. The fact that you don't already know this, though, is by itself basically proof that you're an ignorant fanboy kid who likes to shoot their mouth off without having any idea what you're saying... If you did, you would try to change the subject rather than dig your hole this much deeper: Reference 1. Reference 2.

Unsafe code mixing is RARE and requires you specifically telling the compiler to allow it. But hey, don't let things like facts get in your way.

You say "RARE" and make a childish insult. However I point to Microsoft promoting the practice

Nice. Flame war. I'm staying out of it, except to say that you can skip the registration by downloading the disc images Microsoft provides, rather than using the standard install tool, which requires an internet connection to download the components. You also get to keep the tools should Microsoft pull the online portion of the install files at a future date.

http://msdn.microsoft.com/vstudio/express/support/ install/

So you're saying XP is related to the Church? Interesting.....

;-)

MS is only confusing about this if you lack the ability to read. They've answered this question quite succinctly in the Express edition FAQ ever since the product first launched and the announcement was made:

http://msdn.microsoft.com/vstudio/express/support/ faq/#pricing

12. Do customers who acquire the Visual Studio Express products during the free promotional pricing period have to pay after the first year if they want to continue to use them?

No, as long as you download Visual Studio Express on or before November 7th 2006, you will not have to pay for it.

check out MS Visual Studio Express C# for FREE
http://msdn.microsoft.com/vstudio/express/default. aspx

>> Even the source of Sun's VM is available (though not under the GPL, at least you can read it, see what's going on in the VM, and fix bugs)

You can check out SSCLI [a.k.a Rotor] which is a free [shared source licensing] implementation of the CLR. In other words, you too can see what's going on in the VM and fix bugs. You can also build it on FreeBSD and MacOS X.

wow, visual studio for free for one year man ... what should i do after 366 days ?

Microsoft's response, from the FAQ:

Do customers who acquire the Visual Studio Express products during the free promotional pricing period have to pay after the first year if they want to continue to use them?

No, as long as you download Visual Studio Express on or before November 7th 2006, you will not have to pay for it.

Its modded informative because its true. My assertion that .NET has excellent support for developing web services corrects the parent post, and therefore is informative.

You want a link? http://msdn.microsoft.com/webservices/

You can develop the skeleton of a web service using a dozen lines of code in .NET using both C# and VB .NET (although I still don't understand why MS decided to keep that antiquated language around). Creating and consuming data from web services is a snap, and is actually one of the major considerations when Microsoft developed the .NET platform. If you can get past all the marketing mumbo jumbo, check it out. http://www.microsoft.com/net/default.mspx

Its modded informative because its true. My assertion that .NET has excellent support for developing web services corrects the parent post, and therefore is informative.

You want a link? http://msdn.microsoft.com/webservices/

You can develop the skeleton of a web service using a dozen lines of code in .NET using both C# and VB .NET (although I still don't understand why MS decided to keep that antiquated language around). Creating and consuming data from web services is a snap, and is actually one of the major considerations when Microsoft developed the .NET platform. If you can get past all the marketing mumbo jumbo, check it out. http://www.microsoft.com/net/default.mspx

C# and Java suck. Learn F# instead! ;-)

If they want they can take it and go home. When MS decides its time to stop, as they did for many of their other much vaunted initiatives, then that's it, your party is over.

Java is well specified and unencumbered.

Based purely on raw numbers of job offers, if you're looking to make money off this skill you would be flipping crazy to learn C#...

... C# is not better enough to justify the baggage of being locked into the world's most notorious vendor. In many cases the supposed advantages of C# are a wash or even bad ideas - such as their pointless and absurd practice of mixing VM and non-VM code at every opportunity, and allowing unsafe code to be mixed in...

C# people claim their runtime is language agnostic. It is not. It's C* agnostic. Any language significantly different from a C/C++/Java-like language can't be supported efficiently. No surprise there.

I don't expect Mono to succeed even in its modest promises, although if they do, they may wish they didn't. Perhaps their best path will be to stop trying to be compatible and diverge into a kind of "dirty .NET"...

Based on the notion that the express versions are approx 50 megs and the enterprise versions pack in at 250megs++, you can count on missing documentation, missing help files, missing APIs, missing source libraries, missing interfaces, crippled database connectivity, missing redistribution components, etc. Some of this can be gotten from the MSDN CDs, and some of it can be had by digging around on http://msdn.microsoft.com/

For a beginner learning OOP, buying an intermediate book from O'Reilly on C# would probably fill in the missing pieces since Microsoft's MSDN has sucked donkey balls since VS6.

What about just the SDK, as opposed to the Express version (which seems time-limited or something)? I personally develop with GVim for Windows, so the IDEs don't bother me.

If you want to write okay code that works, VB-style, go with C#/.NET. Microsoft tends to slap together code in any way that works, without much thought to good design...

It's funny you say that, given the sprawling .NET framework design guideline...

I agree completely.

.NET for example, has a robust, fully developed design guideline to ensure that library developers are writing compatible code that extends the framework.

There is even a utility called FXCop available that can scan through your solution to make sure that your code is complying with the guidelines. Visual Studio 2005 has this functionality builtin by default.

Bruce Eckel recently said
"C# 3.0 may be too forward-thinking for Java to catch up to."

Don't believe the hype.

Who is "they"?

Microsoft themselves, in their own developer literature.

"The Microsoft .NET Framework promotes interaction with COM components, COM+ services, external type libraries, and many operating system services..."

link

That's just the first reference I found. I've seen position papers where they go even further to sell the ease of use of their unmanaged interop like a feature... so have you probably.

Old saw indeed. What's so surprising about it? The interop and unmanaged code features get big billing... why do you think that is? So no one will use them?

Again, what is your reason for saying that so categorically?

I'm surprised you would ask considering how thoroughly the "commonness" of the CLR has been debunked on /. (reference)

The fact that Python has been ported to JVM and .NET doesn't really speak to the point I'm trying to make here.

Ah, wondeful pessimism.

So I guess you just ignored the statements afterwards explaining the reasons for this pessimism?

C# people claim their language is "better." I've used both - C# is not better enough to justify...

Is that still true with C# 2.0? How about with C# 3.0? Bruce Eckel recently said
"C# 3.0 may be too forward-thinking for Java to catch up to."

such as their pointless and absurd practice of mixing VM and non-VM code at every opportunity

Who is "they"? - if it's C# programmers in general, I don't see any evidence of that in the code that I've worked with. If it is the .net class library implementers, I'd say that the equivalent classes in the java runtime are probably written in C++ not java at all so the point is moot.

Either way I'm a bit surprised to see this old saw come up again, and I'd like to see some example, references or other justifications for saying it.

Any language significantly different from a C/C++/Java-like language can't be supported efficiently.

Again, what is your reason for saying that so categorically? There is evidence that suggest that the true situation may be otherwise.

I don't expect Mono to succeed even in its modest promises, although if they do, they may wish they didn't.

Ah, wondeful pessimism.

.Net's reflection capabilities are quite a bit more extensive than Java's (there is native support for outputting byte-code and even entire classes at run time). If you want to pick on C#/.Net, pick on it's limited exception handling (unchecked exception handling only makes 'black box' use of objects more difficult), or simply the fact that C#'s feature set is obviously derived from Java.

As for features that C# offers that Java doesn't... Wikipedia has a list and links to other sites with more. Whether or not you find these features useful or painful is a matter of taste, though. Many of the features of C# were created to make Visual Basic-style GUI creation easy and painless. C# offers operator overloading, true multidimensional arrays, delegates and unsigned types. Unless you have the pleasure of running in an entirely Java/managed environment, those unsigned types are a life saver (or at least a sanity saver). Delegates (multicast function pointers) make wiring up event-based GUIs a little easier. True multidimensional arrays are either invaluable or useless, depending on the kind of software you write. Operator overloading can also be useful, provided it's used carefully (and can cause no end of confusion if it's not).

I have programmed in both Java and C#, but I primarly work in VB.NET. So you should know up front that I like working in Windows. I really like the .NET framework. I can say that using Visual Studio and the .NET framework has made writing code really fun. I would reccomend learning C# if all else is equal, and yes mono does seem to be really popular.

Also, I think that we'll be seeing much more language development in C#. In my opinion, the LINQ (Language Integrated Query) project is the coolest language advancement since OOP. C#, ASP.NET, and the .NET framework just seem to be a little bit ahead of the Linux alternatives, and Visual Studio 2005 is an excellent IDE.

Bottom line though, learn about Object Orient Programming and Design. Learning Patterns is an excellent way to see how to really use OOD. Check out the book Design Patterns: Elements of Reusable Object-Oriented Softwareby the "gang of four (gof)" listed under Erich Gamma.

Good Luck, and stick with it, it gets easier, and a good IDE really helps.

I believe the main costs are incurred here.

Come again?

Less FUD please, thanks. :)

You can download them for free here. You can also get SQL 2005 Express Edition on the same page.

visual studio which will cost you a fortune

Come again?

Article doesn't mention working with Sega on the Dreamcast. Which in my opinion lead Microsoft in to making the Xbox (because the Dreamcast failed). It had the experience just a few years before launching the Xbox.
http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/1998/May9 8/Segagmpr.mspx
"We have worked very closely with Sega for nearly two years to optimize Windows CE to provide the services and level of performance necessary for the exacting development requirements of video games," said Harel Kodesh, general manager, consumer appliances group at Microsoft. "We are tremendously excited by the opportunities the Dreamcast system offers to traditional video game developers and the PC gaming community."

Yeah, this is where MS ISA server comes in. It's working rather well for us. http://www.microsoft.com/isaserver/default.mspx

Your comment about MS Sql Server isn't quite accurate, they provide a fully functional demo of SQL server 2005
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?fa milyid=6931fa7f-c094-49a2-a050-2d07993566ec&displa ylang=en/ here

From the website
This fully functional trial software will automatically expire after six months. You can obtain the fully licensed version at any time.
You can also get a version of SQL server called express which is feature limited but doesn't expire, for development work.

The point is that metadata is useful, or even mandatory, for allowing certain internal workflow or functionality, but sensitive enough that you'd never want that metadata to go out with the published version of the document.

I've been on both sides of this problem with current Windows/Office implementations - receiving sales or RFP information that included "hidden" revision or comment information intended for another client, or catching similar information in documents heading out the door.

Within Office, there's a Remove Hidden Data add-in that allows you to clean up documents before publishing. Having this functionality enforced somehow once you leave a specified environment would be extremely helpful, while allowing you to leverage the advantages of tagging your file (i.e. if I do anything that looks like publishing, strip off all the metadata in the process)

$0.02

It's all under control. Just train your users to manage their own metadata.

What Express does not include when compared to SQL Server SE and above is Analysis Services, Reporting Services...

It's worth noting that free version of Reporting Services will be included in the Express edition soon.

Actually there are a few, sony ericson p910i i think is on ce the mda series of phones with t-mobile and the the xda series from o2, the m2000 from orange. they run wince as well.
The HP iPAQ hw6500 Mobile Messenger , sprints i930 , samsung i730...
see link below
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsmobile/default.msp x

incidently active sync is now at 4.2 (link above)

one of nicest phones i've seen lately is the mda pro
http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/reviews/index.cfm?revie wid=165

generally it is very nice but the screens still 320 by 256 which makes remote desktop more awkward than it could be.
http://www.fpsece.net/index.html playstation emulator for ce
http://www.scummvm.org/downloads.php allows you to run things like flight of the amazon queen and beneath a steelsky on ce and as you mentioned there is java gaming as well.

The built in browser IE isn't great so opera may well be a welcome improvement. (id prefer a version of firefox thou)
  Very little reason to make a phone CE? for microsoft there is if you use MSOffice and Outlook there is.

and of course there is GPS which can run while playing your mp3's and be your phone too.

finally can i recommend velcro i put the hook half in a suitable space on my dashboard and the other half on my phone battery pack.

you don't really want to leave your gps in the car its likely to get broken into for this alone. being your phone too means its with you.

Sony Ericsson has a few phones in their offerings that run on WinCE (or Windows Mobile)....
and there are more:
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsmobile/smartphone/ default.mspx

MSDN doesn't exactly document the proprietary and non-standard extensions to Kerberos that prevent anyone other than Microsoft from creating a server that can provide Active Directory to Windows clients.

Actually it does and it it's not a "non-standard" extension. The Windows PAC format is described in fair detail on MSDN here:

http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url= /library/en-us/dnkerb/html/msdn_pac.asp

The structure is stored in the authorization-data field of the Kerberos ticket and functions exactly as Kerberos designers intended. The Samba guys have managed to produce Kerberos tickets with a PAC that Windows clients will accept.

HOWEVER, I strongly beleive that MS MUST sincerely assist third parties with interoperability. If you have a monopoly in a product market where that product is marshalling all of your customers data, whether it's in the form of a network protocol or a file format, that customer should be entitled to obtain the protocol information necessary to create a replacement product that is fully independant of the original. This ensures that no one entity has complete responsibility for potentially curcial functions of business and government. If only one factory made all the ball bearings in the world every truck, electric motor, and pinball machine would be at the mercy of a handful of people.

The MS Kerberos PAC is NDR encoded and the the list of group SIDs in it isn't very useful without DCE/RPC over SMB named pipes to resolve to names but this is NOT a case of "embrace and extend". If MS provides customers with the necessary information to properly decode the NDR and resolve the SIDs then we can dissapate the responsibility of the infratructure in our organizations.

I wouldn't call SQL Server Standard a junior product... Take a look at the differences between editions here. SQL Server 2005 Standard has no cap on RAM like SQL 2000 Standard did, and you can cluster it. Now factor in what it costs, I think it's a pretty smart buy.

SQL Server 2005 (and SQL Server Express, or SSE) launched almost two months ago now. You can go download the full RTM version of SSE from http://msdn.microsoft.com/vstudio/express/sql/ right this second if you want to.

SQL Server Express is not really meant for any serious production environments. I suppose one could use it for a personal web site here and there, but it is a tool primarily meant for developers.

Instead of having to have access to a full fledged SQL Server, you use SQL Server Express to develop your application and then deploy it to a full SQL Server when that server becomes available.

Since SQL Server Express supports the vast majority of the features that a developer might need, it is very useful during the initial development of an application.

In my experience, SQL Server Express is great for basic projects (like a personal web site or blog) and for the initial phases of development of a "real" project. Once you start getting into the realm of serious applications, where one might need finer grained control of isolation and locking, or when you are at the point where you need to do performance testing of your application, you really do need to move up to the full SQL Server box.

At any rate, I'm not really sure this comparison is all that fair. MySQL makes an attempt to be a database server for "real" applications, where as SQL Server Express is more of a development tool / MS Access replacement that is targeted at personal projects.

SQL Server Express is not really meant for any serious production environments. I suppose one could use it for a personal web site here and there, but it is a tool primarily meant for developers.

Instead of having to have access to a full fledged SQL Server, you use SQL Server Express to develop your application and then deploy it to a full SQL Server when that server becomes available.

Since SQL Server Express supports the vast majority of the features that a developer might need, it is very useful during the initial development of an application.

In my experience, SQL Server Express is great for basic projects (like a personal web site or blog) and for the initial phases of development of a "real" project. Once you start getting into the realm of serious applications, where one might need finer grained control of isolation and locking, or when you are at the point where you need to do performance testing of your application, you really do need to move up to the full SQL Server box.

At any rate, I'm not really sure this comparison is all that fair. MySQL makes an attempt to be a database server for "real" applications, where as SQL Server Express is more of a development tool / MS Access replacement that is targeted at personal projects.

These idiots...

Oracle
http://www.oracle.com/technology/tech/xml/xmldb/in dex.html
Microsoft
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url= /library/en-us/dnsql90/html/sql2k5xmloptions.asp

you know, the ones that sell the most databases today. Not to mention just about every other successful commerically sold database.

>> stupid 2 teh maxx0rz

Very cogent and convincing.

As usual, Dvorak's knowledge of the topic at hand is shallow and his conclusions are simplistic and short sighted.

Microsoft is not interesting in gaining browser market share outside of the Windows platform. Sure, they might be able to steer more people toward MSN and thereby make more in advertising revenue, but how much more? If 90% of the market already uses Windows, and gaining that extra 10% is fairly difficult for a wide variety of reasons, it may not be worth it to them.

Even if it was, it has nothing to do with why Microsoft dropped support for the Mac. The direction Microsoft is taking IE is different than the direction everybody else is taking web browsers. Microsoft sees IE as an application that will allow users to access both web pages and smart client applications.

They see the future as a mesh of standard web apps and smart client applications created with things like ClickOnce (at first), and eventually IE-hosted Avalon applications. (WPF.) Their hope is that eventually the line between web apps and client apps will blur, and since it will be (they hope) via IE and Avalon, it will draw even more people to using Windows since the UI/functionality experience is so much better than standard web applications. At least that's the business point of view.