Slashdot Mirror
Web 2.0, Meet .Net 3.0
An anonymous reader writes to mention an eWeek article about Microsoft's move to rename WinFX to .Net Framework 3.0. Microsoft has also announced the availability of the beta version of the MSDN Wiki, the company's first step toward allowing customers to contribute to Microsoft's developer documentation. From the article: "It is purely a branding change, company officials said. The gist of the issue is that Microsoft has two successful developer brands in WinFX and .Net, and the company has seen 320,000 downloads of WinFX -- and 700 signed GoLive licenses -- since the December Community Technology Preview, and more than 35 million downloads of the .Net Framework since the November launch. "
Can it really be true?
Wow, how innovative! I wish the PHP documentation had user contributions too...
SUCK IT WEINERS
I'd like to propose that the first standard of Web 3.0 be to stop coining stupid phrases for every day things. Web 2.0, Dot Com's, etc.
My sig of choice is Marlboro
.NET 1.3 to .NET 2.0 was practically an entire different platform, and I can't get any of my .NET 1.3 software to compile and run right under .NET 2.0.
.NET 3.0 is literally an entirely different platform family from .NET 2.0?? Kind of like how JavaScript has nothing to do with Java?
And now
Given that they're the most powerful platform vendor in the world, with the ability to force adoption of virtually any programming environment, language or library that they choose, Microsoft sure does seem to act desperate sometimes.
Almost everyone already has a Javascript enabled browser. .NET 3.0 is likely to be a huge download and Joe User will not bother to download it. Only people that buy new computers with Vista Forever installed will be able to use Net 3.0 applications. Web 2.0 is available now. No large business targetting the general public will write web applications targetting .NET 3.0 for years.
Until then Web 2.0 will be picking up more and more steam.
I'll probably be modded down for this...
That feature was still buggy and it's been dropped from Web 3.0. We hope to include it in Web 3.1, but don't hold your breath.
Micorsoft just wants to stay ahead of everyone else, so Web 2.0 means .Net 3.0, Web 3.0 will mean .Net 4.0 and so on. This is their cheeky way of making it seem like they are ahead of the game. Branding doesn't make up for crappy products.
GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
I mean see how much better Netscape 8 is compared to Firefox 1.5.
.NET brand since after killing the "cool code names" (Avalon, Indigo) and turning then into indecypherable abbreviations (WPF, WCF, WTF and so on), people got confused, and slap WinFX on top of all that.
.NET also is not a great way to describe it since it's an OS programming framework, not just network related, but what the hell..
And seriously, it does make sense to align it with their
Of course
Let's face it, Microsoft's documentation is crap. Their MSDN pages are worst then crap - they're misleading. The searching function will often point you some random topic like Windows Mobile when you're looking for something related to SQL Server. On top of that, the pages themselves often read like VCR instructions. And example code? Fuhgettaboutit. This could be a step in the right direction, though. I've found various forums to be helpful, mostly because of the MVP system. For those who are not MS developers, MVPs are people in the industry who MS hooks up with various perks in exchange for them answering questions on forums. On a lot of MS forums, 80% of the questions are answered by 2% of the user base. These people are usually MVPs. So, yeah, the Wiki could be useful if the MVPs get involved. The wiki could also give people the chance to post example code, which is sorely missing from a lot of the MS documentation. However, it won't be incredibly useful unless they have decent searching. One problem with forums is that the same questions get asked and answered repeatedly. A decent searching feature would lead all askers to the same instance of the question, and the Wiki editing ability would give multiple contributors a chance to distill a really good answer.
With dynamic OLE licensing 6.23.0 That's my vote.
WinFX was a technology code word for the new .Net based replacement to the Win32 API. It's ALWAYS been .Net from the get go. Move along ... nothing to see here
There's 22.4 MB down the drain for the more gullible folks.
I went to the main "WinFX" page and followed the first link about the rename. Right there in black and white I see all I need to know:
.NET objects for laying out application windows. One reason I dropped Windows development is because I got sick of all the ever-changing libraries. And I don't mean gradual improvements. I mean every year they tell you to drop a whole library and switch to something completely different.
".NET Framework has becomes the most successful developer platform in the world."
I'm going to put down my cup of coffee, pick up the cool-aid and jump right on it! Just another Microsoft developer blogger trying to market for them. And they wonder why only current customers listen.
On a related note, I thought WinFX was originally just the replacement for WinForms, the original
Developers: We can use your help.
"purely a branding change" -- Standard operating procedure for MS -- they rename their stuff like clockwork. Trace the history of DDE, OLE, COM, DCOM, ActiveX, .Net etc etc etc (same basic stuff) or their alphabet soup of database access methods which all boil down to that incredible confusing ODBC control panel doodad. (And you have to install the drivers on EVERY DESKTOP, too, or at least you used to...) If MS is not renaming their techologies, they're reorganizing the company.
As if people weren't confused enough as to what .NET was anyway... At first Microsoft had named their future version of their OS "Windows.NET", they have .NET My Services web services, there's a .NET conference, a ".NET Enterprise Server", a .net TLD.
.NET was supposed to be a common language runtime environment, and now it's encompassing APIs that are not specific to the environment but specific to a certain version of Windows.
.NET 3.0 compliant?
.NET? They should just hold all announcements until they ship a product, IMHO.
Not only this, but
Now they're bringing this same confusion to WinFX? WinFX used to be the three pillars to the new Windows API to be included in Vista, encompassing Avalon (presentation layer), Indigo (communications layer), and WinFS (metadata database for the filesystem). Then some of these pillars were dropped, and now apparently according to Wikipedia there are four pillars. I'm not sure if these will still be available for Windows XP, and where Windows 2000 stands. Not only that, but will Mono have to re-implement major parts of Windows just to be
Anyway, all this makes me wonder, what is MS trying to accomplish with this moving-target definition of WinFX and
Twinstiq, game news
Last minute name changes seem to be getting popular at Microsoft.
I wonder if it has anything to do with domain name scalpers &or the typo/bogus/phishing-domain stuff they've got going on.
Wanna fight ? Bend over, stick your head up your ass, and fight for air.
TFA says, "Microsoft is continuing to roll out--slowly but surely--new branding that will be part of its overall Windows Vista campaign". So, supposedly, this is part of the marketing strategy for Vista.
I guess when your product isn't good enough, you need other ways to get it sold.
what's up with all these slashdot troll about .Net 3.0? it's just a rename you troll!
paper towels, percent of the *BSD as llitle overhead the deal with you
Maybe they should have moderation. (Score: -1, This deserves to be on http://thedailywtf.com/)
:-)
Oh well. Think of it as an opportunity, nay, an encouragement, to feel smug and/or point and laugh
Microsoft has really innovated! They've hijacked their own .NET platform!!
.NET. To start calling it .NET will confuse clueless managers and that would be most of them. The mono project will be telling people that they are the Linux .NET platform but clueless managers won't understand why the Linux .NET implementation isn't compatible with the Microsoft .NET 3.0 implementation.
WinFX IS NOT RELAITED TO
Good innovation Microsoft. Unless one looks one would never see that this is really an anticompetitive move! bravo for Microsoft innovation!!!
The race isn't always to the swift... but that's the way to bet!
Umm how many people got Net2 runtimes via autoupdate, while they are on 24/7 broadband? Few people will even know it came, so the raw size of it wont matter to most people in the long run.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
That shouldn't be a problem, only a complete bonehead would be using .NET or Mono for anything serious anyway.
There's almost never a good reason to use a plain Statement anyway. PreparedStatements handle proper parameter escaping automatically, and most drivers will cache them for reuse. There's a slight increase in complexity for creation, but there are a ton of libraries to ameliorate that for you.
I don't allow Statements to be used in any code that falls under my responsibility as a matter of course. I don't get why anyone would use them.
Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
...I wonder why they hadn't renamed it to "nude pics", or even "fr33 p0rn 4U". Downloads would have reached a bizzillion in far less than week.
On a more serious note, I wonder if this is just the old renowned way to force something down users' throat: just one more occasion to make users agree on a if-we-blow-your-computer-you-can't-sue-us, will-send-your-private-infos-to-third-parties, your-old-programs-won't-work-after-this EULA.
Since a lot of spam I received through the ages tries to have you to download some (fake) patch to protect you to some non-existant virus, exploiting your trust on a well-known trademark, it could be that this time it is the vendor that is (again) trying to make you "buy" something you don't need.
Nothing new in this, I know. Just pointing it out.
42.
I agree that the MSDN search function is worthless, because it is way too inaccurate and will swamp you with lots of topics that are not really related.
But once you found the right article, it tends to be OK. Actually Google can help you there, the chance that it points you to a useful MSDN article is better than using the search function on microsoft.com.
C - the footgun of programming languages
hmmm I just don't have a good reason to move from java or php for web's (and c++ for platforms) to .net, I have noticed microsoft is a lot of *buzz* but just a few about new and USEFULL features under their products.
.net a try may be I would...
But I consider my self an open mind man so if you could give me a good reason to give
People are enough confused as it is so the chance of anyone getting a grip about what dotnet really is supposed to be is slim to none.
Ajax is where i place my bet because it works. Ajax is being implemented by multiple sources and have shown to perform well. For the untrained eye dotnet seems like all hype and no show. A slew of marketing hype with nothing tangible in it.
HTTP/1.1 400
This is the first thing I thought of as well. Mono's largely compatible with Microsoft's .NET implementation. Having something completely different AND more proprietary than .NET 2.0 called .NET 3.0 is a royal kick in the balls. "Not .NET compatible" is something that simple minded people might yap on about now, and I don't guess that Microsoft would discourage such confusion.
.NET" and "They can't change the standardised part" (not so sure about the latter, actually).
Of course, I seem to recall some of the original explanations behind Mono being "We just think the language and runtime are a good idea, regardless of MS
(I personally wouldn't care if Windows programmers choose to inflict pain and suffering upon themselves with MS APIs, but every now and then I need to do Windows programming, and thus am exposed to the world of pain...)
I think those 700 subscriptions must be (I hope no real person is dumb enough - unfortunately they are) M$ employees given subscriptions instead of health-care benefits...
> Given that they're the most powerful platform vendor in the world, with the ability
.NET, M$ Office, & M$ Windows and all manner of useful programs.
> to force adoption of virtually any programming environment, language or library that
> they choose, Microsoft sure does seem to act desperate sometimes.
Micro$oft is crapping itself over the fact that OSS is improving at a speed that M$ can only dream about coming close to - and that includes replacements for
That is because of one main issue - developers are migrating away from the Win32 platform.
The migration curve of developers migrating to the Linux platform is such that before the end of this year (2006) there will be more developers actively writing software for the Linux platform than developers actively writing for the Win32 platform.
The consequence of all this is that current releases of Linux already have user-friendly functionality (without the DRM) that M$ is planning to initially introduce in M$ Windows Vi$ta.
> Given that they're the most powerful platform vendor in the world, with the ability
.NET, M$ Office, & M$ Windows and all manner of useful programs.
> to force adoption of virtually any programming environment, language or library that
> they choose, Microsoft sure does seem to act desperate sometimes.
Micro$oft is crapping itself over the fact that OSS is improving at a speed that M$ can only dream about coming close to - and that includes replacements for
That is because of one main issue - developers are migrating away from the Win32 platform.
The migration curve of developers migrating to the Linux platform is such that before the end of this year (2006) there will be more developers actively writing software for the Linux platform than developers actively writing for the Win32 platform.
The consequence of all this is that current releases of Linux already have user-friendly functionality (without the DRM) that M$ is planning to initially introduce in M$ Windows Vi$ta.
M$ just can't keep up the pace - that is why it's taking to rebranding instead of producing updates.
I mean the features I've seen mentioned like the XQuery-ish syntax to query data structures. Will this still be part of 3.0 or is that slated for a later version no longer called 3.0
You know, I like my stripped down Linux desktop. I don't usually install the KDE or Gnome libs, and avoid programs that would require me to.
.NET being bundled with Windows. If MS can reasonably keep to the standard, and keep the standard reasonable, I could develop apps on my Linux box, test them on my Mac, and deploy them on Windows, and people would just double-click the EXE and never know it used .NET, or that it was written for anything other than Windows. I doubt that would become a reality -- pretending to support a platform you don't test against is suicide -- but bundling .NET is a step in the right direction, technologically.
.NET makes it easier to call out to the standard environment, and other languages. And while it does make it easier to tie yourself to a platform, it also makes it easier to use nice cross-platform libraries like sdl, wxwindows, opengl...
But you know what? Dependencies aren't always bad. My system, like most, comes bundled with glibc. And, in a proprietary world, a virtual machine (compile once, run anywhere) makes a lot of sense, especially if you can make it as common on a Windows system as glibc is in the Unix world.
I like the idea of
Sucks for Java, but I don't like Java much right now.
So, technologically, bundling is the right thing here. But MS isn't a technology company, so this is probably motivated at least partly by their ongoing war against Java.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
You're referring to LINQ, right? LINQ is part of the 3.5 stack (previously called WinFX 3.5, and now, I assume, .NET FX 3.5), as described in this chat on MSDN.
Mads Torgersen[MSFT] (Expert): Q: This is a repeat in case it got lost: Can you give us a sense of the timing on working with C# 3 vs WinFX? If I were writing a book on each, which shoudl come first, and to what degree is one dependent on the other?
A: WinFX 3.0 is a Windows Vista timeframe release. We then release WinFX 3.5 which contains the LINQ libraries in the VS Orcas timeframe with C# 3.0.
No, but I used to work for Microsoft.
I think it's just about time Microsoft gave it up. I can't even understand what versions of windows ship with what services or their silly licensing. I can have a linux box up and running in the time it would take me to understand Microsofts delusional products strategy. Here's to the MS marketing folk, all my decisions are easier thanks to your efforts (-:
Great. Now everyone is wasting time beating crappy APIs into submission instead of working on useful functionality. Makes you wish Win32 only came with Intercal bindings.