Posted by
ryuzaki0
on from the where-do-we-go-from-here dept.
Ashcrow writes "EWeek has posted an article on Microsoft's .NET initiative. It's been three years since we were first introduced to .NET and virtually none of the promised advantages have come true. Is it time for Microsoft to move on?"
Re:You are kidding, right?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Obviously moderators have no clue what.NET even is because it has nothing to do with what he is talking about. The only part of.NET that exists now is the programming framework. I highly doubt that his "ping" times have been halved because he use C#. Even a moderator with a slight knowledge of computers will realize that ping time has nothing to do with the OS.
Troll explained
by
metamatic
·
· Score: 4, Informative
1, 2 and 4 are things UNIX has been able to offer for years.
3 is highly dubious. What's the connection between SOAP, virtual machines, and ping times?
5 is pure Microsoft marketing--look at their ads. Fact is, time after time independent analysis shows that TCO is lower for non-Microsoft solutions, both closed and open source.
-- GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
Re:Emperor's New Clothes test...
by
finkployd
·
· Score: 4, Informative
A fairly stable OS that will run on a majority of hardware
I'll give you fairily stable (2000 and XP are pretty good) but majority of hardware? Sure, you can have any processor you want as long as it is x86 (or StrongARM if you want winCE). I can't run Windows on Sparc, s/390, PPC, Alpha (well, NT 4 could), IBM's new 970, etc. Sure it supports the majority of consumer devices, but there is much, MUCH more to the computing world than Mom and Pop's PC. Windows is very small outside of this realm.
I have yet to find a distro of linux that won't mess up on my IBM laptop after about 2 weeks of running or will recognize all of my USB stuff on my desktop properly on install
Which laptop and which distros have you tried? I have run Redhat 7.3 and 9 on my T23 and have never had a problem (including using my USB devices). I might be to help you out or at least point you to some docs if you interested in getting it running.
Finkployd
.net web services
by
blowdart
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Microsoft did a bad job marketing.net. First it was web services, then came SQL.net and Windows.net. Even now article like the quoted eweek one talk about.net as it it's simply web services. Add to this the weenies that talk about passport as if it's the be all and end all of.net.
So what have they delivered for the developer? (what follows is my opinion, as someone who has used it and is still using it)
Well there's Visual Studio, an excellent IDE for those that use IDEs.
There's C#, VB.Net and an architecture that has allow Python.net, Perl.net, Fortran.net, Cobol.net and others. The multitude of languages comes into its own when you realise that objects written in one language are easily used in every other language, so you can have 1 developer using Perl, another using C#. Try that in Java. Try any cross language development in Java.
There's the.net framework, an nice OO library which is, of course, available to any.net language.
There's ASP.net which makes development of event driven sites a hell of a lot easier than embedded your own hidden frames and attaching page loads of those frames as javascript events trigger.
There's WinForms, yet another forms interface, but as it's usuable in any language there is no more bodged MFC.
Of course you do have web services, easy SOAP libraries, really nice XML support, remoting and other funky stuff.
Should MS give up? Hell no, they've produced a wonderful environment for developing for windows. Developing more than web services.
I don't think you can comment on.net unless you've used it. Journalists need not apply, nor should MS marketing people:)
Re:So much...
by
Randolpho
·
· Score: 4, Informative
The main problem with.Net is that it ties you to a specific OS which makes it a pain from a business economics point of view
Um.... MS is currently developing the.Net framework for *nix, at least according to this article (2nd to last paragraph), but until it's finished, there's the DotGNU Project, or Mono to tide you over.
-- "Times have not become more violent. They have just become more televised." -Marilyn Manson
Re:.Net was never clearly defined
by
scrytch
·
· Score: 4, Informative
.NET is the new ActiveX. ActiveX by itself was this nebulous definition, but what it boiled down to was nothing more than COM..NET boils down to three things behind the marketing umbrella name:
* the.NET Virtual Machine: Basically the same idea as other bytecode compiled languages, like UCSD Pascal (ooh you thought I was going to say JVM, well sun didn't invent the idea). Write once, deploy anywhere where windows (or mono) is. It has some features not seen in JVM's, like cached JIT code, so it doesn't have to rerun the JIT every single time you run the app.
* The.NET Common Language Runtime, including the system library: This is intended to replace the Win32 API with something as easy to use as most Visual BASIC libs, getting rid of HWNDS and HRESULTS and __farcall lpzsFoobletch and so on.
* Web services: Really just the first application of the first two, but Microsoft is plugging this SOAP-based stuff like the second coming. I somehow don't see it replacing RPC for communication with system services, but there it is.
-- I've finally had it: until slashdot gets article moderation, I am not coming back.
Slashdot Mirror
Obviously moderators have no clue what .NET even is because it has nothing to do with what he is talking about. The only part of .NET that exists now is the programming framework. I highly doubt that his "ping" times have been halved because he use C#. Even a moderator with a slight knowledge of computers will realize that ping time has nothing to do with the OS.
1, 2 and 4 are things UNIX has been able to offer for years.
3 is highly dubious. What's the connection between SOAP, virtual machines, and ping times?
5 is pure Microsoft marketing--look at their ads. Fact is, time after time independent analysis shows that TCO is lower for non-Microsoft solutions, both closed and open source.
GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
A fairly stable OS that will run on a majority of hardware
I'll give you fairily stable (2000 and XP are pretty good) but majority of hardware? Sure, you can have any processor you want as long as it is x86 (or StrongARM if you want winCE). I can't run Windows on Sparc, s/390, PPC, Alpha (well, NT 4 could), IBM's new 970, etc. Sure it supports the majority of consumer devices, but there is much, MUCH more to the computing world than Mom and Pop's PC. Windows is very small outside of this realm.
I have yet to find a distro of linux that won't mess up on my IBM laptop after about 2 weeks of running or will recognize all of my USB stuff on my desktop properly on install
Which laptop and which distros have you tried? I have run Redhat 7.3 and 9 on my T23 and have never had a problem (including using my USB devices). I might be to help you out or at least point you to some docs if you interested in getting it running.
Finkployd
Microsoft did a bad job marketing .net. First it was web services, then came SQL.net and Windows.net. Even now article like the quoted eweek one talk about .net as it it's simply web services. Add to this the weenies that talk about passport as if it's the be all and end all of .net.
So what have they delivered for the developer? (what follows is my opinion, as someone who has used it and is still using it)
Well there's Visual Studio, an excellent IDE for those that use IDEs.
There's C#, VB.Net and an architecture that has allow Python.net, Perl.net, Fortran.net, Cobol.net and others. The multitude of languages comes into its own when you realise that objects written in one language are easily used in every other language, so you can have 1 developer using Perl, another using C#. Try that in Java. Try any cross language development in Java.
There's the .net framework, an nice OO library which is, of course, available to any .net language.
There's ASP.net which makes development of event driven sites a hell of a lot easier than embedded your own hidden frames and attaching page loads of those frames as javascript events trigger.
There's WinForms, yet another forms interface, but as it's usuable in any language there is no more bodged MFC.
Of course you do have web services, easy SOAP libraries, really nice XML support, remoting and other funky stuff.
Should MS give up? Hell no, they've produced a wonderful environment for developing for windows. Developing more than web services.
I don't think you can comment on .net unless you've used it. Journalists need not apply, nor should MS marketing people :)
"Times have not become more violent. They have just become more televised."
-Marilyn Manson
.NET is the new ActiveX. ActiveX by itself was this nebulous definition, but what it boiled down to was nothing more than COM. .NET boils down to three things behind the marketing umbrella name:
.NET Virtual Machine: Basically the same idea as other bytecode compiled languages, like UCSD Pascal (ooh you thought I was going to say JVM, well sun didn't invent the idea). Write once, deploy anywhere where windows (or mono) is. It has some features not seen in JVM's, like cached JIT code, so it doesn't have to rerun the JIT every single time you run the app.
.NET Common Language Runtime, including the system library: This is intended to replace the Win32 API with something as easy to use as most Visual BASIC libs, getting rid of HWNDS and HRESULTS and __farcall lpzsFoobletch and so on.
* the
* The
* Web services: Really just the first application of the first two, but Microsoft is plugging this SOAP-based stuff like the second coming. I somehow don't see it replacing RPC for communication with system services, but there it is.
I've finally had it: until slashdot gets article moderation, I am not coming back.