Devs Worried Microsoft Will Dump .NET

Dupe by cgeys · 2011-06-13 07:17 · Score: 4, Informative

This is dupe from last week. Just for Joel to get some visitors to his ad ridden .info site...

Re:Dupe by paziek · 2011-06-13 07:20 · Score: 1

Not exactly. Previous summary centered around Silverlight, only to mention .NET as a side effect. Now its full blown .NET FUD.
Re:Dupe by lul_wat · 2011-06-13 10:09 · Score: 1

No one actually RTFA

--
Divide a cake by zero. Is it still a cake?
Re:Dupe by pinkushun · 2011-06-14 00:40 · Score: 1

False, both summaries point to the same source links: two Silverlight forum threads and an Open letter.
Spend at least 300 seconds reading each link, then report back.
It's that damn bad i-programming.info site; news coming from there has been shoddy, badly written an incorrectly reported.

Comment removed by account_deleted · 2011-06-13 07:19 · Score: 1

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Why worry. by LWATCDR · 2011-06-13 07:23 · Score: 3, Insightful

When has Microsoft ever just killed off a technology that they pushed? Next thing you know will be telling me that VB6 and FoxPro are in danger of going away.

--
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.

Re:Why worry. by cayenne8 · 2011-06-13 08:16 · Score: 1

IMO they bought FoxPro just so they COULD kill it.
I thought it was so they could get the Jet database engine from FP...and put it into that abomination called Access....

--
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Re:Why worry. by LWATCDR · 2011-06-13 08:18 · Score: 1

Two bad you where too much a coward to post none AC. I have heard a lot of about Haskell and functional programming languages but never have had the time to sit down and learn yet another way to program. I was brought up on structured and them moved to object oriented which is really handy.

--
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
Re:Why worry. by Penguinisto · 2011-06-13 08:54 · Score: 1

...and put it into that abomination called Access....
...and Exchange, and a whole host of other places where a fscking database (of any kind!) should never *ever* reside.

--
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
Re:Why worry. by turgid · 2011-06-13 08:59 · Score: 1

Try scheme. It's simpler than Haskell and there are many interpreters and compilers available for it. Most Linux distributions come with guile which is a scheme interpreter.
If you already know object oriented programming, you might like scala.

--
Stick Men
Re:Why worry. by LWATCDR · 2011-06-13 09:00 · Score: 1

I was joking and I guess you are stupid.

--
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
Re:Why worry. by crazycheetah · 2011-06-13 09:10 · Score: 1

There is a time and place for everything under the sun. .NET most certainly has it's time and place. As does Java.
C/C++ also most certainly has it's time and place. As does ASM (yes, still).
And yes, Haskell has it's time and place as well.
Even HTML5/Javascript, and whatever else you want to start throwing around have their proper time and place.
You sound like the type of person that I hate working with in my career as a programmer. I don't want to be bitched at for using VBA when VBA is (unfortunately) hands down the only good option on the table for the problem (especially when at least some of the project absolutely requires it to even think of getting the job done--yes those cases exist, though for me it's actually the COM version of WinWrap basic, and an old, outdated version of WinWrap basic at that). I also don't want to be told to use a language that has no place in my project what-so-ever due to multiple technical requirements and limitations. If all of that leads me to do VBA and eventually add in some C/C++ where appropriate, then I'm damn well going to use VBA and C/C++ where appropriate, because that's the right tool for the job.
Get off my lawn.
Re:Why worry. by Mongoose+Disciple · 2011-06-13 09:14 · Score: 5, Informative

This would be funny if millions of people weren't STILL using VB6. :P Hell, I've worked at two Fortune 500 companies in the last year that had business critical applications still in VB6.
Now, that millions of people are still using VB6 is funny, but that's not where you were going with that.
Re:Why worry. by vga_init · 2011-06-13 09:21 · Score: 1

Yeah, I mean just look at PlaysForSure
Re:Why worry. by Nethemas+the+Great · 2011-06-13 09:45 · Score: 1

Did you really have to remind me of those? Shame on you!

--
Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
Re:Why worry. by Eponymous+Coward · 2011-06-13 09:45 · Score: 2

If that enragiates you, I recommend you never look at how SQLite is used.
Re:Why worry. by Required+Snark · 2011-06-13 10:38 · Score: 3, Insightful

Microsoft Flight simulator was dumped in 2009. It was not only used for aircraft simulation, but also for geographic information systems. Microsoft was lying to these users even after they shut down the group supporting the project, but the truth came out from the laid off employees. Locheed picked up the professional version recently and is supporting their version. I have no idea what this new version means to the GIS projects that were using it. I assume that many of the GIS users are completely screwed at this point no matter what.
Why does anyone think that NET users are any less disposable then the GIS users?

--
Why is Snark Required?
Re:Why worry. by MrSteveSD · 2011-06-13 11:41 · Score: 1

This would be funny if millions of people weren't STILL using VB6. :P Hell, I've worked at two Fortune 500 companies in the last year that had business critical applications still in VB6.
This does not surprise me. Companies made huge investments in millions of lines of VB6 code. Many companies (particularly smaller ones) simply could not afford to dump that investment and do a .NET rewrite.

It's a bad situation to be in though, especially when it's not an internal product. Customers start backing away slowly when they find out you're trying to sell them something written in a dead unsupported language.

Of course, if VB6 had been Open Source, Microsoft would never have been able to dump it, since another company would have taken over the reins and they would have lost huge numbers of developers. As it was though, they knew they could dump it and also knew that despite the anger, the enormous gravitational pull of Microsoft would drag everyone over to .NET.
Re:Why worry. by gutnor · 2011-06-13 11:54 · Score: 1

And virtually killed. I mean what Microsoft announce and what they deliver is vastly different world. They may pull us a trick like creating a extra ultra low level Win32 API used inconsistently between the OS, their IDE and Office.

Then they would provide as promised a HTML5/JS API, but with IE10, that will require Win8 or above, meaning that the developer will need to stay with the Win32 API for another round.

Wait and See what they actually deliver - they probably won't even know until they need to print it on the box. /bitter with MS promises
Re:Why worry. by Jerry · 2011-06-13 13:31 · Score: 1, Interesting

That they are using it does not mean that VB6 as a tool is still alive. In fact, the Visual Basic 6.0 IDE is no longer supported as of April 8, 2008.
That's about the same time they stopped supporting VFP 9.0. We were using VFP 6.0 when MS announced on the UniversalThread (UT) that VFB 6.0 would be the last version of that tool. The 250,000 VFP coders registered at UT were outraged and threatened a mass exodus to a tool MS didn't control. In the end, tens of thousands did migrate to other tools, while Microsoft put VFP on minimal life support to prevent further defections. I saw the handwriting on the wall and I moved my apps to Qt in 2004 and have been well pleased.
Microsoft had their MVP VFP coders, like Kevin McNish (IIRC) and others, start pushing C# and .NET as a replacement for VFP and holding classes on the UT, and many took the leap to .NET. Now it appears that MS screwed them twice in about five years. Will they bend over and take it for a third time?

--
Running with Linux for over 20 years!
Re:Why worry. by Alex+Belits · 2011-06-13 14:03 · Score: 1

Correction: anyone who learned .Net in order to get job security should die in a fire.

--
Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
Re:Why worry. by Gadget_Guy · 2011-06-13 14:11 · Score: 1

Well, Microsoft never really pushed VB6
Really? Visual Basic 6 was around for 5 years before it was replaced by VB.NET. Do you really think that Microsoft kept quiet about it for all that time and still somehow had it become an annoying popular development product?

and IMO they bought FoxPro just so they COULD kill it.
They aquired FoxPro in 1992, sold it through six versions and it is still available and supported today. They will not be releasing another version after the current one, but they have still sold it for over 20 years.

Microsoft Bob.
Yay! A truely failed and discontinued product. You finally found a technology that they killed off, which must have annoyed both of the users of MS Bob.

Zune.
You can still buy this today. It also still lives on in software form with the XBox360 and Windows Phone 7.

XENIX
Got sold off and transformed into SCO UNIX.

Personally, I feel absolutely no sympathy to anyone who's hitched his wagon to a company that only provides a development environment because they use illegal monopoly tactics to ruin their competition.
You don't have to feel sorry for them. Just let them wallow in their filthy money that they earned by choosing the most popular computing platform.
Re:Why worry. by dbIII · 2011-06-13 14:50 · Score: 1

When the only ways to run your old applications are with Win98 or Win98 on a virtual machine that's pretty close to dead.
Replacements for half of that stuff were written over the course of many years in what's now a newer extinct VB, and then dotnet 1.0 (can't use their fucking stupid name in a sentence without changing it). It's a moving target and unsuitable for anything that is not under active and constant development. If you want to write some sort of simple tool and use it for a decade then it's not a good choice to have it require to use something that will become abandonware within the expected lifetime of that application.
Re:Why worry. by plopez · 2011-06-13 15:01 · Score: 1

The entire VB6 thread you started reads eerily like COBOL discussions :)

--
putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
Re:Why worry. by man_of_mr_e · 2011-06-13 15:01 · Score: 1

VB6 wasn't "killed off", it was just migrated. Microsoft continued to produce new versions of Foxpro for 10 years after acquiring it.
Bob was never born, hard to kill something that died before it was even a product.
Xenix was sold to a little company called the Santa Cruz Operation.

--
If you need web hosting, you could do worse than here
Re:Why worry. by Belial6 · 2011-06-13 16:57 · Score: 1

Bob wasn't a failure, and it was only discontinued because it had completed it's purpose. It got Bill laid.
Re:Why worry. by Belial6 · 2011-06-13 17:00 · Score: 1

Well, all the nay sayers that said Mono would always be trailing behind may end up having to eat their words....
Re:Why worry. by Rockoon · 2011-06-13 22:32 · Score: 1

This. Really.

Most of the programmers here at slashdot dont want to face the ugly truth.. that there are more VB6/VBA programs than whatever their pet favorite language is (yes, that includes C++)

It is arguably the most successful programming language ever. Sure, when you head down to the local store there (probably) arent any VB6 programs on the shelf.. but that isnt evidence of much at all.. every big corporation in the world has more than a few in-house VB6 applications, with accounting departments that have dozens if not hundreds of VBA apps, and thats not counting all the stuff that they contracted out for. Now start adding in governments.. A hundred million VB6/VBA applications is likely to be a conservative estimate world-wide.

These arent killer applications, but they are NECESSARY applications and they were created when the world really went fully-digital. The entire reason it was successful is that the developers could focus on the business logic instead of trivialities like user interface issues. which translated directly into faster (cheaper) development. It costs money to replace those applications, so they don't get replaced, and as such it is unlikely that any other language will overtake VB6's success any time soon.

--
"His name was James Damore."
Re:Why worry. by ceoyoyo · 2011-06-13 23:19 · Score: 1

.Net is Microsoft's main development platform for their OS, which is the core of their business.
MSFS was a flight simulator, admittedly with a dedicated and vocal (but relatively small) following. If what you say is true, there were a few other people who were too cheap to buy proper software using it for some other purposes.
Re:Why worry. by nosfucious · 2011-06-14 01:16 · Score: 1

Plenty of good reasons. Most centre around busines, rather than technical, reasons.
Compliance is one area that may force you. A quasi-independant internal and/or external audit for S-Ox compliance may point out unsupported O/S, development tools, language or hardware. Either the cash is found to upgrade, OR at least someone at a high level has to make a decision to "let it ride" and take responsibility for it.
Obviously, it's a CYA move,

--
Q:I was listening to a CD in Grip and it sounded horrible! What's up? A:Perhaps you are listening to country music
Re:Why worry. by kestasjk · 2011-06-14 01:18 · Score: 1

Why does anyone think that NET users are any less disposable then the GIS users?
Because they're far more valuable to Microsoft, and represent a much bigger investment.

--
// MD_Update(&m,buf,j);
Re:Why worry. by Mongoose+Disciple · 2011-06-14 01:20 · Score: 1

Many companies (particularly smaller ones) simply could not afford to dump that investment and do a .NET rewrite.
To be fair, Visual Studio has an autoconvert-VB6-to-VB.NET migration tool that's actually rather good -- as long as you didn't do anything too crazy with your VB6 app, like, say, use a bunch of third-party UI controls.
Which, as it happens, a fair number of businesses did.
Re:Why worry. by LWATCDR · 2011-06-14 02:32 · Score: 1

With our customer base the more completely independent the actual program is the better off we are. I know that their are ways to package up Perl but I have not looked at other options. Also we do not distribute source with all of our programs. We only do that with our FOSS projects which we have a few small ones. For Windows compiled systems are just so much easier to distribute. For in house stuff I use Perl for the throw aways and Java for the real apps. I keep hoping we can move our clerical staff off of Windows to Linux so Java was a good choice at the time for portability. As it is I am having a heck of a time just getting them off Office and onto OO.org. And I actually like programing in Java. And no my programs are not slow except when I make an error in database design. Usually I can fix that with a look bit of attention to detail. But then we are running an almost million tuple database on a 600Mhz P3 server with 50 or so users.
I would say you are making some rather rude statements just to be smug.

--
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
Re:Why worry. by godefroi · 2011-06-14 02:47 · Score: 1

enragiates
Wow, that is my new favorite word! Thank you!

--
Karma: Poor (Mostly affected by lame karma-joke sigs)
Re:Why worry. by Xest · 2011-06-14 03:16 · Score: 1

"Why does anyone think that NET users are any less disposable then the GIS users?"
Because the loss of GIS users via Microsoft flight sim to Microsoft was inconsequential in that they numbered so few that the financial loss was more than made up for in the gain of no longer having to fund MS flight sim's development.
In contrast, the loss of .NET developers forced to move to something like Java would completely destroy Microsoft's indie games strategy, their web strategy, their client development strategy, and their phone strategy.
In other words it'd basically kill off the vast majority of the company. Microsoft depends on the likes of ASP.NET to shift many of it's MS SQL Server licenses and Windows Server licenses, it depends on .NET developers to build it's entire range of Windows Phone applications to develop some XBL Indie and Arcade games. It depends on .NET to push Windows Desktop as a platform in that companies can build bespoke apps easier for it than any other platform.
The MS Flight Sim user base just isn't comparable to the .NET userbase, the former was an inconsequential loss making business unit, the latter is fundamental to the vast majority of Microsoft's strategy and very existence.
Re:Why worry. by Alex+Belits · 2011-06-14 05:11 · Score: 1

There are plenty of legitimate reasons to only use compiled (or only interpreted) languages for a particular project. "So we can distribute it commercially" is not among them -- my point stands.

--
Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
Re:Why worry. by CLaRGe · 2011-06-14 13:36 · Score: 1

This would be funny if millions of people weren't STILL using VB6.
If MSFT could kill off VB6 they would, but there's just too much investment in LOB apps, and business owners are not going to pay to port those apps to another platform when whey work just fine now.
MSFT has to convince business that building on a MSFT platform is cost effective. Cross platform is cost effective right now (iOS + Windows). As more LOB apps are built on Android, MSFT has an even bigger problem b/c none of those VB6 or .Net apps will run on anything but Windows (desktops).

--
http://10CentMail.com - the Amazon SES app.
Re:Why worry. by CLaRGe · 2011-06-14 13:42 · Score: 1

Why does anyone think that NET users are any less disposable then the GIS users?
I don't remember slashdot covering the demise of Flight Simulator. Just sayin.

--
http://10CentMail.com - the Amazon SES app.
Re:Why worry. by Mongoose+Disciple · 2011-06-15 05:59 · Score: 1

MSFT has to convince business that building on a MSFT platform is cost effective.
Uh, which business? There's more .NET development work (for businesses) in my market than qualified people to do it.
I think you're speaking more to how you'd like things to be than how they actually are.
For most businesses of any size, the cost of a Windows license doesn't even amount to a rounding error in their budget.

Short Answer? by OverlordQ · 2011-06-13 07:24 · Score: 4, Insightful

No.

If you watch the presentation for what it really is, what they're saying is if you want the 'New Hotness' flashy canvas, yes your apps will have to be HTML/JS. No, they're not going to throw away everything out there, you'll be able to use 'old and busted'.

--
Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.

Re:Short Answer? by squ0zen · 2011-06-13 07:52 · Score: 1

...'New Hotness'...'old and busted'.
Somebody was watching Men In Black II over the weekend...
Re:Short Answer? by Dadoo · 2011-06-13 07:52 · Score: 1

No.
Yeah, my sentiments, exactly. Even if they were planning to get rid of it a couple of weeks ago, they certainly would have changed their minds, by now, after all the developer outrage.

--
Sit, Ubuntu, sit. Good dog.
Re:Short Answer? by shutdown+-p+now · 2011-06-13 08:24 · Score: 1

s if you want the 'New Hotness' flashy canvas, yes your apps will have to be HTML/JS.
It doesn't even say that. It says that you can write flashy apps with HTML5/JS; it doesn't say that you'll have to.
Re:Short Answer? by Foofoobar · 2011-06-13 08:53 · Score: 1

No ... just that if you want them to work on iPhone and Android and the other 45% of the web market that Microsoft can't run ActiveX and it's other proprietariness in, HTML5/JS is the way to go.

In other words, 'we don't dominate anymore so we need to use open tools... deal with it'

--
This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is mine.
Re:Short Answer? by shutdown+-p+now · 2011-06-13 08:56 · Score: 1

What does "web market" has to do with this at all? This whole story started when a new Win8 UI presentation repeatedly mentioned HTML5/JS (and not Silverlight or .NET in general) in the context of writing desktop apps.
Re:Short Answer? by gmhowell · 2011-06-13 11:42 · Score: 1

Will Microsoft dump .net?
First you'd need to get Microsoft to actually *define* .net. Something they've never done.
Christ, next thing you know, you'll be asking the US for exit strategies for their multiple wars of aggression.

--
Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
Re:Short Answer? by Foofoobar · 2011-06-14 15:33 · Score: 1

gee I dunno, only that the web drives everything nowadays? did you ever think of that? That web applications are what power everything? Hence why HTML5 and JS are the new focus. Its not like Microsoft just picked two languages blindly from a friggin hat. Think about it.

--
This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is mine.
Re:Short Answer? by shutdown+-p+now · 2011-06-14 16:15 · Score: 1

gee I dunno, only that the web drives everything nowadays? did you ever think of that? That web applications are what power everything?
How many web apps did you see in Apple's iOS app store?

Re:Yeah, cos you know... by EraserMouseMan · 2011-06-13 07:25 · Score: 3, Insightful

HTML5 isn't a .NET killer anymore than LCD TVs are a Hollywood killer. HTML5 excels at the GUI. .NET is mainly used for server-side processing. Long live .NET. Long live HTML5.

No. by RyuuzakiTetsuya · 2011-06-13 07:25 · Score: 3, Interesting

You can't write good direct x code even if they did manage to provide a JS wrapper. .net is here to stay.

--
Non impediti ratione cogitationus.

Re:No. by JMZero · 2011-06-13 07:29 · Score: 1

You can't write good direct x code even if they did manage to provide a JS wrapper. .net is here to stay.
You know another place you can't write good DirectX code? .NET. Well, at least ever since they killed MDX.
You're right in that there's no reason to believe MS is dumping .NET in general - but people using it to do XNA Game Studio stuff is hardly the core thing MS is going to be worried about.

--
Let's not stir that bag of worms...
Re:No. by MightyMartian · 2011-06-13 07:31 · Score: 1

I don't see any reason you couldn't convert Javascript over to a VM-style engine just like .Net and Java. To some extent it's already been done anyways.
I'm not saying it's a good idea, or that .Net is in fact at any risk (although it wouldn't be the first time MS promoted a development platform only to change their minds), but Javascript is just a bloody language, and if you're developing an application layer, by whatever means, you can give the language as much or as little low-level access or access to other APIs as you please. If you wanted, and had the resources Redmond has, you could turn Javascript into another C/C++.
Whether this is the right or sensible thing to do, I dunno. This was the dream of Java back in the day, to have everything from the OS right up to the applications all running under Java VMs. Maybe Microsoft has decided that since Javascript is the scripting language of the Web, making it the application language of Windows is a good idea.

--
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Re:No. by SplashMyBandit · 2011-06-13 07:38 · Score: 1

Why write Direct X when you can write OpenGL and have it work on Windows *and* everywhere else (the phonez)? Oh yeah, for the web you have WebGL. Also, you can use Java (not going away) for your OpenGL. So there are certainly (IMHO better) alternatives to Direct X and .NET if you look around.
Re:No. by 91degrees · 2011-06-13 07:52 · Score: 1

Because OpenGL support for Windows sucks! Sure, the drivers are fine, but if you actually want to use a modern version of the API, you need to do a lot of faffing about checking for extensions, and get a pointer to a fnction bofre actually using it. There's also no official OpenGL wrapper for .Net.
Re:No. by Roogna · 2011-06-13 07:55 · Score: 1

Then bitch about that to Microsoft. Demand your cross platform compatibility! :)
Re:No. by djdanlib · 2011-06-13 08:13 · Score: 1

MDX was rather unpleasant to work with, though. Based upon what I saw (which may not have been a representative sample) the encapsulation didn't really work at its best unless you were using managed C++, which was an unfortunate perpetration by itself.
Re:No. by vlm · 2011-06-13 08:20 · Score: 1

This was the dream of Java back in the day, to have everything from the OS right up to the applications all running under Java VMs.
This was the dream of Java back in the day, to have everything from the OS right up to the applications all running under different mandatory Java VMs, from openjdk to mandatory conflicting version numbers. Everyone is used to the MS idea of one application = one server, due to poor interoperability. It got to the point at one job were we were considering multiple desktop machines due to the need for conflicting java runtimes. The new paradigm of one application = one enduser machine. Which I'm sure would be very profitable for MS and the hardware mfgrs...

--
"Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
Re:No. by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-13 08:24 · Score: 1

I don't see any reason you couldn't convert Javascript over to a VM-style engine just like .Net and Java. To some extent it's already been done anyways.
In JavaScript, all numbers are floats. Integers only work because some happen to be expressible as floats. Not a good choice for any application that does computation on amounts of money.
In JavaScript, it is not possible (even in theory) to statically determine the type of most vars you will find in real code. Even if you ban eval() and JSON.parse(). Try writing a large program with more than ten developers without static typing.
Prototype-based inheritance is okay on a small project, but there is a reason the five most popular JavaScript libraries implement a system to fake class-based inheritance: Most programmers strongly prefer it.
Perhaps, with a lot of work, JavaScript could be enhanced to fix these issues, every implementation could be updated, and a VM that runs JavaScript almost as fast as a traditional language could be developed. Seems like a lot of effort to get us back to where we are today with other languages.

Javascript is just a bloody language, and if you're developing an application layer, by whatever means, you can give the language as much or as little low-level access or access to other APIs as you please. If you wanted, and had the resources Redmond has, you could turn Javascript into another C/C++.
Do you really believe that the only difference between languages is the effort Microsoft chooses to put into them? The people in Redmond are people, not gods. There are real trade-offs to be made in language design, and Microsoft can't avoid making those trade-offs by paying money. There is no amount of money that will make mips assembly a good language to do web programming in, and javascript will never be a good language to express a device driver or video codec. No VM magic can change these things.
Re:No. by BitZtream · 2011-06-13 08:25 · Score: 1, Insightful

Because OpenGL support for Windows sucks! Sure, the drivers are fine, but if you actually want to use a modern version of the API, you need to do a lot of faffing about checking for extensions, and get a pointer to a fnction bofre actually using it. There's also no official OpenGL wrapper for .Net.
Seriously? Your argument is that you don't like using the P/Invoke methods to deal with OGL extensions and you don't want to use a non-official OpenGL.NET wrapper even though there are several that work just fine?
Your post SCREAMS lazy/crappy developer.
You may not be, but your post really makes you sound like it.

--
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
Re:No. by RyuuzakiTetsuya · 2011-06-13 08:27 · Score: 3, Interesting

I'm no fan of DirectX myself, however, I cited it as one of the many SDKs and APIs that Windows devs live and die off of.
Besides, OGL is graphics only. DirectX is a comprehensive suite of APIs that handle input, sound and networking.
SDL would probably be a better analogy.

--
Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
Re:No. by bloodhawk · 2011-06-13 09:06 · Score: 1

It isn't MS's job to do the work the OpenGL team should have already done.
Re:No. by bhcompy · 2011-06-13 09:48 · Score: 1

Because WebGL is immature and slow as shiat? You aren't getting a spiffy-smooth 3d capable/video hardware accelerated GUI like Aero with WebGL as it is today.
Re:No. by cOldhandle · 2011-06-13 10:34 · Score: 1

Your comment makes no sense (unless I misunderstood it). DirectX is a C++ API. There is no official way of using the latest versions of DirectX from .NET.
Re:No. by ShavedOrangutan · 2011-06-13 10:53 · Score: 1

It got to the point at one job were we were considering multiple desktop machines due to the need for conflicting java runtimes.
I have to call BS on that. Java VMs don't even need to be "installed". Even in the case that an application is tied to a specific run time version (and I blame the developer for that), you can distribute the VM with the app, dump it onto the filesystem, and run it. If you're talking about loading over the web, with Java Web Start you can specify the exact VM you want in the manifest.

--
Godaddy is a scam and a ripoff.
Re:No. by exomondo · 2011-06-13 11:26 · Score: 1

Even in the case that an application is tied to a specific run time version (and I blame the developer for that), you can distribute the VM with the app, dump it onto the filesystem, and run it.
So you're going to distribute the VM for every single platform with the app then are you? Or are you going to have a VM+app package for every single platform?
Re:No. by am+2k · 2011-06-13 11:58 · Score: 1

if you actually want to use a modern version of the API, you need to do a lot of faffing about checking for extensions, and get a pointer to a fnction bofre actually using it.
Or you could use GLEW, which does all that for you and works really well under Windows.
Re:No. by Cutting_Crew · 2011-06-13 14:09 · Score: 1

Actually OpenGL 4.0/4.1 has finally caught up to DirectX 11, especially with advanced API features such as tesselation. It has also moved away from state based to object based which takes away a lot of headache as you are now supposed to write shaders for everything. OpenGL has made somewhat of a comeback as well. If works for every platform, including PS3 and it would be perfect for Mac, but Apple, even though they are on the freaking Architecture Review Board, are about 2 years behind writing a driver for OpenGL 3.0 despite helping to the write the spec for it. Unbelievable to me really. Lion will bring OpenGL to 3.2 or 3.3 maybe but they will still be a good year behind OpenGL 4.0 out of the gate.
Re:No. by SplashMyBandit · 2011-06-13 14:33 · Score: 1

That's right. It isn't Microsoft's responsibility to support file access (hard disk manufacturers should do this), or networking (IETF, W3C and Cisco should do this), or sound (Creative Labs should do this). Right? The sarcasm is particularly because Windows was pitched as having compliance for US Government requirements (POSIX etc).
Re:No. by SplashMyBandit · 2011-06-13 14:35 · Score: 1

Oh yeah, and you don't have to check device capabilities in Direct3D either?
Re:No. by 91degrees · 2011-06-13 19:10 · Score: 1

I'm a lazy developer! I got into computers because I want the computer to do the work. This is what I loved about OpenGL in the fist place. Call glVertex a few times and you have a polygon. Sure, it's not the most efficient way of doing things but a lot of the time, speed of development is more important than how fast the software runs.

I don't want to spend ages trying to find a solution. Which one do I use? Which is best supported? Do they handle all vendor specific extensions? Is there a community or support behind them? How mature are they?

Or I just use DirectX. The capabilities check even supports autocomplete.Yes, I like typing less. It means I don't need to worry about whether I'm looking for GL_ARB_tex_env_combine or GL_ARB_texture_env_combine.

So I may well be a lazy/crappy developer. There are quite a few of us and OpenGL isn't a good choice for us. You think companies are going to only hire the non-lazy minority, or just decide to forget cross-platform?
Re:No. by Rockoon · 2011-06-13 22:44 · Score: 1

I think the point is that with OpenGL you arent asking a generic capability question with a common API over all vendors, but instead are asking "Is the proprietary nVidia extension supported? How about the proprietary ATI extension?" and then handling nVidia's differently than ATI's (because while they both support the capability, their extensions are not always compatible.)

When OpenGl was still lagging badly in standardized capabilities, this very issue made OpenGL a monstrosity to work with while still remaining at the forefront of technology.

Even today, OpenGL code that uses the latest features still requires separate code paths for various manufacturer even with the same capability sets.. thats the end of the fucking debate on why DirectX is preferred when you don't give a rats ass about cross platform.

--
"His name was James Damore."
Re:No. by terjeber · 2011-06-13 23:58 · Score: 1

Not because OpenGL for Windows sucks, like someone else is saying, simply because, compared to DirectX, OpenGL sucks. Big hairy balls. It is eons away from being a competitor to DirectX, and it probably will never get there since it doesn't have half the muscle behind it needed to get there.
Re:No. by terjeber · 2011-06-14 00:01 · Score: 1

Your post SCREAMS lazy/crappy developer.
Lazy is a mandatory requirement for a developer. Good developers are lazy. That's how things get better. This is not a trait for developers only. The guy who invented the wheel was too bloody lazy to carry stuff, just ask his wife and his neighbors. That horrible contraption that lazy bastard wrought upon the world should never have gone anywhere. Sadly people are too lazy, and now a large number of wood carriers are out of a job because of that bastard.
Re:No. by SplashMyBandit · 2011-06-14 06:28 · Score: 1

So your debate boils down to cursing and stating "it just is" ? I guess you haven't programmed OpenGL lately after you switched to Direct X. Turns out you very rarely need to check for extensions if you are using the shader pipeline unless you are targetting a specific optimisation for a specific piece of hardware. Most of the time is is not needed, especially as many extension migrate to the 'Core' as OpenGL evolves. These extensions give you access to features that you would otherwise have to wait for the OpenGL ARB/Khronos to make official. For example it lets Windows XP get Direct X 11-equivalent features. Can you do that with Direct X? I think you know the answer.
Regarding the cross-platform capability. You might even be a decent developer but you are clearly a poor businessman. Windows is dominant on the desktop for sure, but it turns out that the market pie is growing at a huge rate away from the desktop (consoles, tablets/pads and phones). Shame you have make a retarded business decision to lock yourself into the desktop based on a misguided belief the compting == Windows (a mindset of someone who is focussed on the path and was not prepared for the future). For us that have better strategic vision we have chosen OpenGL (despite its rough ride of late) not only because of the technology but also because of the strategic business factors (multi-platform being one). Unfortunately we can only lead the DirectX guys to water, we cant make them think (about the long term strategic aspects of their technology choice - we're clearly approaching the end of the 'Windows-only' era and only some of us are well-prepared). Don't believe me? That's cool, but how about you read the following article with an open mind, and see how choosing OpenGL personally made this guy $US 3.5 million in a month because of the *business* opportunity he was able to exploit due to that choice. And the world of computing is only going to get more diverse with time ... (which is why your blinkered focus on the desktop shows poor business decision making)
http://techhaze.com/2010/03/interview-with-x-plane-creator-austin-meyer/
Re:No. by 91degrees · 2011-06-14 10:34 · Score: 1

It's not abut API features. OpenGL supports most of what Direct3D does, and being mature APIs a lot of the new stuff is only of interest to a relatively small number of developers.

If you could just test for functionality using an enum (or even a defined type) and call a function I'd like it a hell of a lot more. As it is, you have to check for an extension by name (i.e. a string; so no compile time checks), then load the function by name, if it exists (which is a platform specific process) then call it. It works but there's a lot more chance of failure.
Re:No. by Rockoon · 2011-06-14 21:44 · Score: 1

So your debate boils down to "yeah.. what you said is 100% true.. but its bad business to be programming for windows"

--
"His name was James Damore."
Re:No. by RyuuzakiTetsuya · 2011-06-14 22:00 · Score: 1

DirectX was the first API I could think of that Windows developers live and die off of. Oops
Still. My point stands.

--
Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
Re:No. by SplashMyBandit · 2011-06-15 06:57 · Score: 1

You'll notice that he's admits his argument is mostly talking about OpenGL from the past. And yes, I am not so unreasonable as to not acknowledge where he has made a valid point. BTW, programming *only* for Windows when you can easily enough program for all platforms (including Windows) is pretty silly, yes? Only the blinkered can't see the choice clearly.

This would be suicide for Microsoft by DemonGenius · 2011-06-13 07:25 · Score: 1

Too many companies develop enterprise software on the .NET Framework for them to just scrap it altogether. As people continue to use .NET, Microsoft will have to continue to support it and eventually develop new features to cater to developer needs. .NET is here to stay for a long time.

Re:This would be suicide for Microsoft by MightyMartian · 2011-06-13 07:33 · Score: 2

A helluva lot of software was developed under FoxPro and VB5/6 in the day, and Microsoft had little trouble switching gears. In general, it means that the older development platform is steadily decelerated in favor of the new architecture. Still, Windows 7 still runs VB6 apps, so I'm assuming, if this story has any legs at all (and I'm not convinced it does), we could go the same route with .NET.

--
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Re:This would be suicide for Microsoft by mikael_j · 2011-06-13 07:43 · Score: 1

I'd have to say that I think that .NET has a bit more life in it than VB6 had when they released .NET.
.NET is actually modern and makes sense, VB6 (and earlier versions) was plain painful to work with. I still end up having to fix legacy VB6 software from time to time, it's not just the environment in which you're coding, it's also the fact that a large percentage of VB software, including "enterprise" software, looks like it was written by dyslexic monkeys with a fear of comments and proper indenting. By comparison most .NET software, even bad VB.NET code, looks amazing. And C#.NET is a lot like Java (better in some ways and worse in other ways).

--
Greylisting is to SMTP as NAT is to IPv4
Re:This would be suicide for Microsoft by FirstNoel · 2011-06-13 07:51 · Score: 1

That sounds like you had poor coders, not a VB6 issue if the coders aren't professional. I've written/debug plenty of VB6 code. Compared to VS 2010 Visual Basic.Net yeah, it's not as easy in some respects. But there's a familiarity there to "pre-objected oriented" code that a lot of older programmers are used to.
Just because something is new and shiny doesn't mean it's automatically better than the older version. VB.Net 2002 sucked donkey balls compared to VB6, it took them to 2008 to get it good enough for me. I know a few coders now who are just starting to get into .NET and away from VB6, it's not a simple switch for all.

--
"Hmm. I am to metaphor cheese as metaphor cheese is to transitive verb crackers!"
Re:This would be suicide for Microsoft by man_of_mr_e · 2011-06-13 15:24 · Score: 1

That's a ridiculous argument. MS replaced VB6 with VB.NET. HTML5 is not a replacement for VB.NET or C# or any of the 95% of other technologies in .NET that have no comparison to HTML5 and javascript.
It's a ridiculous concept. It would be like replacing Windows with a graphing calculator.

--
If you need web hosting, you could do worse than here
Re:This would be suicide for Microsoft by mikael_j · 2011-06-13 18:15 · Score: 1

I'm sorry but I to me VB6 has always come off as being on-par with PHP 3.x. Not quite full-fledged, very rough around the edges and lacking lots of little niceties that developers have come to expect from modern development environments.
Just because it's familiar doesn't mean it's good. VB as a language was plagued with all sorts of quirks from the beginning, to this day VB.NET keeps a few of those alive (although in practice I'm inclined to agree with whoever it was that stated that VB.NET is just "[...] C#.NET for people who can't be bothered to remember to put a semicolon at the end of every statement and that there's a difference between = and ==", no that's not a word-for-word quote but I had someone describe VB.NET to me that way).

--
Greylisting is to SMTP as NAT is to IPv4

Doubtful by Subratik · 2011-06-13 07:25 · Score: 1

They might drop .net like VB but that doesn't stop them from creating a newly-improved programming language exactly like javascript and html that is bound to blow the competition out of the water... and let's not forget, no backwards compatibility!!!

Re:Doubtful by MightyMartian · 2011-06-13 07:34 · Score: 5, Insightful

And just imagine, all this effort just to reinvent what C did 40 years ago.

--
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.

Don't Worry by binarylarry · 2011-06-13 07:25 · Score: 1, Troll

You can always switch to Mono.

ROFLMAO!

--
Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!

Re:Don't Worry by gregarican · 2011-06-13 07:34 · Score: 1, Troll

Yeah, Mono is up to...what....NET 1.1 or 2.0 now? That will surely be a great safety net!
Re:Don't Worry by rubycodez · 2011-06-13 07:46 · Score: 1

sure, you can just go to Miguel's de Icaza's new company Xamarin and hire them as consultants to write Mono to whatever .NET version you need, for a nominal fee
Re:Don't Worry by BitZtream · 2011-06-13 08:28 · Score: 1

If you knew anything about the CLR, you'd know that the last major change to the system was 2.0, everything since then is just a different standard library. Theres no real reason for Mono to claim a newer version of the CLR, and their libraries do support some newer stuff where its popular.
If you wanted to bitch about mono, the crappiness of the VM is a good thing to bitch about and how it performs. Picking on semantics without understanding even what you are saying is probably not a good course if you want to look intelligent.

--
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager

And nothing of value was lost by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · 2011-06-13 07:27 · Score: 1

I highly doubt that MS will dump .NET simply because it is there technology and the control it provides. I would be more worried about them embracing, extending and extinguishing HTML5 and JavaScript as anyone could develop using these free tools instead of Visual Studio.

--
Time to offend someone

breaking news by nimbius · 2011-06-13 07:27 · Score: 4, Funny

developers worry that closed platform multinational vendor may deprecate without concern
bloated proprietary framework in favour of "Next Big Thing(c)" in order to shore up appearance
of internet dominance. further research suggests multinational vendor may dabble in/support "next big thing"
until it loses its questionable interest, profits slip, lawsuits ensue, or wacky CEO sings songs.

all this followed by analysis/fearmongering/rampant speculation that closed platform multinational vendor may have
only been relevant a decade ago and/or is secretly a homosexual sharia law terrorist kenyan.

--
Good people go to bed earlier.

Misleading, FUD, etc by A+Friendly+Troll · 2011-06-13 07:28 · Score: 5, Insightful

The developers worry about Silverlight and WPF, not .Net in general. .Net will still have its place for desktop apps and it will still be used as a server-side web platform. Silverlight and WPF have nothing (well, almost nothing, to the point of being inconsequential) to do with that.

But this is Slashdot, and that's Soulskill...

Re:Misleading, FUD, etc by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-13 08:02 · Score: 1

Exactly right. I sat there wondering how they could possibly be kill the whole framework, until flipping through those forums.

First, those people are retarded. Second, Silverlight is largely DoA, except for a small handful of high profile uses (like on Netflix, which people HATE). What are these people screaming about?
Re:Misleading, FUD, etc by michaelmalak · 2011-06-13 08:04 · Score: 1

Indeed, my first response to the summary as written was, "What is Microsoft going to replace desktop and server-side C# with, C++? Yeah, right."
Re:Misleading, FUD, etc by jbplou · 2011-06-13 10:30 · Score: 1

Also how about the fact it's used for parts of various MS Software products such as SQL Server and SharePoint.
Re:Misleading, FUD, etc by gbjbaanb · 2011-06-13 10:43 · Score: 1

yes actually.
As you will learn, Microsoft and Visual Studio, specifically, are re-doubling efforts to take part in the native code renaissance. Accordingly, you may see advances in our native tooling that the team thinks of as "C++ first" -> VC++ will extend its capabilities on a faster pace than it has ever done so in the past, at times surpassing the other VS languages/runtimes, in specific scenarios
Re:Misleading, FUD, etc by pinkushun · 2011-06-14 00:42 · Score: 1

It's that damn bad i-programming.info site; news coming from there has been shoddy, badly written an incorrectly reported.

Its shit like this slashdot.... by Yold · 2011-06-13 07:28 · Score: 5, Insightful

JavaScript is a great language, but using it for full-blown enterprise app development would be a major setback. Strongly typed languages are great for the enterprise, because you know (and Intellisense knows too) at compile time what to expect from objects.

Furthermore, I'd speculate that the performance of the .NET Virtual Machine is miles ahead of any JavaScript VM. I cannot recall hearing about any JavaScript VMs that support multiple threads either.

Shit like this makes me not even want to come to this site.

Re:Its shit like this slashdot.... by JustSomeProgrammer · 2011-06-13 07:40 · Score: 4, Insightful

+1 Agree. Javascript and HTML 5 I think is great for client side, but server side? I don't really want to write JavaScript for talking to a database.
Re:Its shit like this slashdot.... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-13 08:21 · Score: 1

Not only is it a bad idea, it's largely impossible. And that's because it's stupid FUD.

In truth, MSFT is not talking about replacing .Net with javascript (which technically doesn't even make sense), it's about replacing Silverlight applets with html5+js. Which makes perfect sense. Most of these people (even in those "developer" forums) don't actually know what they're talking about.
Re:Its shit like this slashdot.... by Malc · 2011-06-13 08:42 · Score: 4, Insightful

I don't know why JS gets such a bad wrap. It's got some really cool features, like closures and dynamic functionality like being able to compile and execute any string. With syntax very familiar to Java/C++/C/C#, it's easy to pickup and write object based code.
For those wanting to break out of the sandbox on Windows, Microsoft has allowed creation of COM objects for a very long time. I guess those are the roots of AJAX too.
Re:Its shit like this slashdot.... by jd · 2011-06-13 08:56 · Score: 1

Browsers used to be able to run Tcl/Tk. Good time, good times....

--
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
Re:Its shit like this slashdot.... by serutan · 2011-06-13 08:57 · Score: 1

True dat. Using javascript for backend coding would be like going back to classic ASP and VbScript.
Re:Its shit like this slashdot.... by itsdapead · 2011-06-13 09:53 · Score: 3, Interesting

JavaScript is a great language, but using it for full-blown enterprise app development would be a major setback.
True, but what might make sense is to use a client/server architecture with a Javascript/HTML client and a server written in .Net, Java or lovingly-hand-crafted-C. That gives you a client which could potentially run across iOS, Android, ChromeOS, OS X, Linux and WIndows from substantially the same codebase. That could be a boon if your boss is pestering you for an iPhone app, your managers want a web interface to work from hotel bedrooms or if Google actually manages to produce a thin client that actually costs less than a full PC.
Alternatively, HTML/JS might just be used to provide the "tile" aspect of your software (analogous to a widget in Android or on the OS X Dashboard) with some preview/current doc information but which fires up the "classic mode" app when you need it. You could even imagine "hybrid" laptops with a (maybe ARM-based) tablet in the lid that let you use widgets and only woke up the main computer for serious work.
Remember, Win8 is all about tablets and touchscreens, where Apple and Android are currently eating Microsoft's lunch (the corporates are going to be running Win7, if not XP, for a while yet) - and what Appledroid have shown is that software with a UI custom designed for tablets trumps "legacy" software. So, This could also be Microsoft being strategic, to try and ensure that developers go back to the drawing board and implement proper tablet interfaces, not just make minimal tweaks to their .Net forms UI to make things useable-ish.

--
In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
Re:Its shit like this slashdot.... by Required+Snark · 2011-06-13 11:13 · Score: 1

How nice to know that Wikipedia is a complete failure, since it is written in PHP, a non-strongly typed language. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki.
Like most Slashdot Pundits, you confuse narrow technical attributes of a tool with if it's utility in a particular situation. PHP is really good at serving pages, and is fast, robust and scalable. The success of the MidiaWiki platform is more then enough proof. The people who built it are smart and made a good choice in PHP, as the result demonstrates.
We are so fortunate to have you on Slashdot, since you can so easily dispense the absolute truth completely unencumbered by any pesky annoying real world examples. You, and the moderators who promoted you to +5 Interesting, are what makes Slashdot great. You are also the reason I post as Required Snark, because reality must occasionally make an appearance, even in Slashdot fantasy land,.

--
Why is Snark Required?
Re:Its shit like this slashdot.... by larry+bagina · 2011-06-13 11:30 · Score: 1

I think using Javascript in the backend is more like classic ASP with JScript.

--
Do you even lift?
These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.
Re:Its shit like this slashdot.... by MrSteveSD · 2011-06-13 11:53 · Score: 1

JavaScript is a great language, but using it for full-blown enterprise app development would be a major setback. Strongly typed languages are great for the enterprise, because you know (and Intellisense knows too) at compile time what to expect from objects.
I agree, but I think you probably mean Statically Typed rather than Strongly Typed. I had to learn Python recently and as I was googling for different language features I hoped for (Constants etc). I encountered the same kind of zealotry as with other scripting languages. There seems to be a huge amount of resistance to adding anything that might help to catch bugs early (static typing etc).

Most statically typed languages also have some kind of object or variant type you can use to hold any type. It seems only fair that scripting languages should offer static typing, at least as an option.
Re:Its shit like this slashdot.... by gutnor · 2011-06-13 12:21 · Score: 1

You are kidding right. The only thing Java and Javascript have in common is the 4 letters in their name. OK the syntax is "in the family"-ish but the concept of the language is vastly different than any of the language you cite. (plenty of framework try to beat javascript into looking like a class based OO language with various degree of success)

The bad wrap for JS is that although it is a neat little language (it is), it has the maturity of a language in beta. You need to have a look at a book like "javascript the good part", especially the chapter about the bad/awful part chapter, realise and cry [eg: read about "this" pointer meaning, arguments pseudo array, ...]. Another problem is that javascript, the core, is implemented by the browser, and even for core feature, browser can behave very differently, eg:15 years old+ language feature like rounding a bloody number. And of course, difficult to dissociate javascript from the rest of its environment: the DOM and all its pain.
Re:Its shit like this slashdot.... by mario_grgic · 2011-06-13 13:14 · Score: 1

Why not? node.js does exactly that and funny enough it has set some speed records (number of requests served per second). Javascript has one of the most optimized runtimes out there, with so much money poured into research and optimization. It has gotten fast enough, so that the server is not CPU bound (as usual), it's mostly I/O bound, or waiting for that database. So it really doesn't matter what you write that connection and query in (lisp, Python, Ruby, Cobol, Java, C# or Javascript), once its passed to the database, that's where its going to spend most of its time, in most cases.

--
As the island of our knowledge grows, so does the shore of our ignorance.
Re:Its shit like this slashdot.... by FreelanceWizard · 2011-06-13 14:01 · Score: 1

So, This could also be Microsoft being strategic, to try and ensure that developers go back to the drawing board and implement proper tablet interfaces, not just make minimal tweaks to their .Net forms UI to make things useable-ish.
That's why WPF and Silverlight both have an entire system for handling touch events and aren't bound to the form model of Windows Forms (now deprecated, actually; not quite obsolete or attributed Obsolete(), but definitely not receiving any new development). You can, for better or for worse, pull together all kinds of strange and new interfaces in WPF and Silverlight, and some of those would be good in a touch environment. In fact, Windows Phone 7 uses Silverlight as the UI and uses the theme/skin system baked into the architecture to make controls touch-friendly.
To be perfectly honest, I don't think Silverlight is toast, nor do I think WPF is going away. Microsoft is probably just trying to seem "into" HTML5 and JavaScript. Ultimately, we'll probably see JS added as a .NET Framework language and some new library that's not ASP.NET that allows the output of HTML5 using form controls.

--
The Freelance Wizard
Re:Its shit like this slashdot.... by Yold · 2011-06-13 14:25 · Score: 1

I never meant to promote .NET as a superior alternative. I've probably written more PHP than .NET in my life, I love using it for my own projects. In terms of web stuff (and even the occasional PERL substitute), PHP is a damn good language.
Re:Its shit like this slashdot.... by Eskarel · 2011-06-13 15:01 · Score: 1

Scripting languages work, they just don't scale in complexity very well. You can make very complex things with them, but the more complex the thing becomes and the more changes you make to it the more likely it is to turn into a tangled mess of garbage. Disciplined programmers can keep that from happening, but it takes a lot of work to do so.
Wikipedia is both relatively simple and relatively static in terms of features and presumably also has very disciplined programmers.
Re:Its shit like this slashdot.... by LongearedBat · 2011-06-13 17:04 · Score: 1

your boss is pestering you for an iPhone app, your managers want a web interface
I doubt that Apple will allow any scripting language on iOS anytime soon, or later, possibly never...

gives you a client which could potentially run across iOS, Android, ChromeOS, OS X, Linux and WIndows from substantially the same codebase.
That is why I really hope that the Mono project manages to survive. (Looks like Xamarin might save it.) Sure, it uses different UI tech for different platforms, but the business logic can be reused. And who knows... as Mono matures, perhaps the Mono team can consolidate UI building too.
Of course, scripting and HTML5 have their strengths, but I think it will take a little longer than one might expect before they're fully supported on all mobile platforms ('cos of Apple and the sheer volume of functionality in HTML5). Although they're great for UI front ends, they're not really suited for serious business logic, IMHO.
Re:Its shit like this slashdot.... by LongearedBat · 2011-06-13 17:33 · Score: 1

I don't know why JS gets such a bad rep. (FTFY. "rep" is short for reputation)
JS might be great for the things it can do, but it's the things it can't do that limit it.

easy to pickup and write object based code
Sure, but try writing those classes in JS with proper scoping, hard typing, speed from compilation, etc. It's not designed for that. Different tools have different uses, where each tool has its own strengths and its weaknesses. And that is why C++, C#, Java, etc. won't be abandoned for a long time.
And that is why the article is just negative hype. And negative hype is not what /. is supposed to be about, which leads to...

Shit like this makes me not even want to come to this site.
Re:Its shit like this slashdot.... by itsdapead · 2011-06-13 21:44 · Score: 1

I doubt that Apple will allow any scripting language on iOS anytime soon, or later, possibly never...
...but I think it will take a little longer than one might expect before they're fully supported on all mobile platforms
Except iOS already supports Javascript and browser components with a (reasonable approximation of) HTML5 (given that W3C are going to faff with the draft standard for a few years yet), I'm pretty sure that JS+HTML5 has always been on the list of Apple-sanctioned languages for Apps (which they've relaxed a bit now, anyway) and, anyway, you can run JS/HTML5 apps in the browser. Plus, pop in a "manifest" file and they can be "installed" with their own desktop icon and run full-screen with no browser furniture without having to go via the App store.
Android and ChromeOS have pretty good Javascript+HTML"5" too (they're all based on the same Webkit foundation that iOS uses, modulo a bit of version skew and different Javascript engines). Yeah, the touch interface hasn't quite standardized between Android and iOS yet, but dealing with that sort of thing is meat and drink to JS developers, and most JS application frameworks deal with it.
'course, I'm not saying MS won't jinx this by the old "embracing, extend, extinguish" maneuver, but this isn't like the corporate desktop where they inherited an unassailable monopoly from IBM - in the mobile market the jury is still out as to who might get "extinguished" if they try that.

--
In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
Re:Its shit like this slashdot.... by Malc · 2011-06-13 22:06 · Score: 1

You are kidding right. The only thing Java and Javascript have in common is the 4 letters in their name. OK the syntax is "in the family"-ish but the concept of the language is vastly different than any of the language you cite. (plenty of framework try to beat javascript into looking like a class based OO language with various degree of success)

Perhaps you could have taken the hint that I understand the differences between Java and JavaScript based on the list of the three other languages I mentioned. The syntactic similarity (grammar if you prefer) to other languages does make JavaScript easy to pickup (it doesn't get in the way of learning the platform in the same way as it would if you were picking up Scheme, SmallTalk, or any other very different language).
Re:Its shit like this slashdot.... by ceoyoyo · 2011-06-13 23:23 · Score: 1

So do other, much more capable languages.
Javascript is too slow and limited to write real games and the Javascript/HTML5 combination is too limited to write most other software easily. Not everything should be a web app.
Re:Its shit like this slashdot.... by kestasjk · 2011-06-14 01:36 · Score: 1
I also think JS has lots of great stuff that it doesn't get enough credit for, and can be great if done right. However C# also has closures, and will be able to compile and execute strings in the next version ("compiler as a service", it's called, though there's no reason to think it's any more advisable than eval() in JS).

But in addition to that it doesn't have the huge number of nasty things to avoid that JS has:
- Its iterators work as expected without needing a framework
- Properties are well supported (no getBlah() setBlah() pattern)
- You don't need to construct your own model of inheritance or use closures to get basic stuff like information hiding
- There are namespaces, a decent multi-threading model, the update cycle is faster, etc, etc
- No defaulting to the global namespace
And that doesn't even count non-language things like the .NET framework.

Although JS' functional nature lets it be a much better language than it would otherwise be, and makes up for a whole load of design mistakes, choosing it as a language which interacts with a Windows API would be crazy.
--
// MD_Update(&m,buf,j);
Re:Its shit like this slashdot.... by godefroi · 2011-06-14 03:04 · Score: 1

And out here in the real world, we've all been I/O bound since right around the time I/O was invented.

--
Karma: Poor (Mostly affected by lame karma-joke sigs)
Re:Its shit like this slashdot.... by godefroi · 2011-06-14 03:10 · Score: 1

Ultimately, we'll probably see JS added as a .NET Framework language and some new library that's not ASP.NET that allows the output of HTML5 using form controls.
Maybe they could call it JScript.NET

--
Karma: Poor (Mostly affected by lame karma-joke sigs)
Re:Its shit like this slashdot.... by cshark · 2011-06-14 04:41 · Score: 1

I think the funniest part about all this is that Javascript/HTML 5 apps can be done now.
Windows has had this capability as early as Windows 98, and it's in wide use. It's called a hypertext application or HTA.
Sure, this is the first time MS has allowed you to build OS widgets with it, but the technology has been around since the earth cooled.
Over the years, I've written some huge hta apps.
It's documented pretty well now, but when I was doing it the docs just didn't exist.
I found myself referring to the SunOne ASP documentation for ideas on how to get Javascript to work with activeX.
Jscript.net has also been around for awhile. Jscript.net ties Javascript directly into the .Net framework.
Anyway, it's not a bad way to write apps.
As a Javascript developer, my biggest complaint with Microsoft over this is that they've created this amazing interface for building apps that they themselves don't even take seriously.
Now they're taking it seriously, and the silver light developers are screaming because they're afraid that Microsoft will deprecate them the way they did the old VB developers? Well, that was a given. If it doesn't happen today, it'll happen tomorrow. .Net will eventually (probably not soon) be replaced with something new just like COM was. These are things we know and understand. Backwards compatibility and logical progression are not in the interests of a company that has to produce the latest greatest thing in order to get by. I don't know why people find this so shocking.
Anyway, bully for them on finally promoting this thing that's existed in Windows forever.
In my view, this has been a long time coming.
For useful information on how to develop Javascript apps that have full run of the windows system, check out Microsoft HTA over at technet.
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/scriptcenter/dd742317
Regards,
-Me

--
This signature has Super Cow Powers
Re:Its shit like this slashdot.... by hesaigo999ca · 2011-06-14 07:13 · Score: 1

Actually they have come along way with converters from c & c++ into js code....I was very surprised myself, thinking of how i used to use js for my quick but dirty stuff....and c++ for my REAL stuff....but apparently they have yet to find something they could not port over.....so I guess the web based OS/desktop is sooner here then we like to admit....pretty much all can be done inside the browser now.....so why bother with an OS per seh, when the browser becomes your OS!
Re:Its shit like this slashdot.... by LongearedBat · 2011-06-14 17:51 · Score: 1

Interesting. Thanks for correcting me. :)
Re:Its shit like this slashdot.... by ukyoCE · 2011-06-16 07:33 · Score: 1

Strongly typed languages are great for the enterprise, because you know (and Intellisense knows too) at compile time what to expect from objects.
After moving to Java and .NET development for the past few years, no, I don't buy it. The runtime XML errors are as frequent as their stacktraces are indecipherable. Not that XML errors are the only runtime errors you get either. All that being strongly typed and compiled seems to buy me is long compile and deploy times compared to interpreted languages. Either way I have to test well to determine if there are serious runtime errors.
It doesn't even buy me platform independence, apparently. The company I'm at is using Weblogic *8*. They can't even upgrade to a newer Weblogic, let alone move to a different application server, let alone a different server platform. I'm sure that's because "they're doing it wrong" by using app server or platform specific logic, but that's still what it boils down to in the real world.
I'm not saying Javascript in particular is the answer to that, but rather that I've found all interpreted languages to be dozens of times faster and more effective to develop with.

Silverlight is not windows in a browser by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-13 07:29 · Score: 2, Interesting

There are no Datasets in Silverlight! How could MS leave that out? Every Ms Programmer loved Ado recordsets and they love Datasets. Adoption would have been higher. Also, all calls to web r service must be non blocking. Bug hurdle for dumber devs. And no right mouse button! Any surprise silverlight flopped?

Re:Silverlight is not windows in a browser by kestasjk · 2011-06-14 01:50 · Score: 1

There are XBAPs if you want ADO.NET and full WPF in a browser, but of course that requires a full, massive framework. Silverlight is designed to run off the .NET compact framework, and that isn't good enough for ADO.NET and full WPF.

ADO.NET, as a data-source abstraction layer, makes little sense if you can't only reach out of the sandbox via isolated storage, web requests, and WCF.
Is it really a mystery why there's no right mouse button and you can't have blocking I/O? How would a right mouse button work on a tablet, how would blocking I/O work within a single-threaded web browser or get called from JS (which is non-blocking itself)?

There are still drop-downs, you just need to make it compatible with touch-screens using the more portable conventions. Also using non-blocking I/O for calling a web-service is just common sense. (And do you really want dumber devs developing apps for your handheld, where there's less battery life etc?)

Frankly I'd rather they had the ADO.NET entity framework than Datasets, and more sophisticated binding in WPF (e.g. better two-way binding, more complete type system) than right mouse button events, but there are always going to be people unhappy when you need to make cuts to something which contains stuff most people like.

--
// MD_Update(&m,buf,j);

XNA by tepples · 2011-06-13 07:29 · Score: 3, Informative

.NET is mainly used for server-side processing.

And for Xbox Live Indie Games.

That would be a GOOD thing by 93+Escort+Wagon · 2011-06-13 07:30 · Score: 1

If you're a Microsoft fan, this should make you happy - it would mean Microsoft is thinking about the future and realizing that future is multi-platform. In the past, Microsoft's behavior has been more along the lines of "attempting to shove the genie back into the bottle".

The problem I've encountered with a number of Windows "devs" is they seem strongly averse to learning anything new (or maybe they're simply incapable of doing so). In these guys' perfect world, everyone would still be running ActiveX-based apps with IE 6.

--
#DeleteChrome

Re:That would be a GOOD thing by choko · 2011-06-13 07:55 · Score: 1

It's not that they won't or can't learn anything new, it's that learning a new language takes time. That's time that could be spent coding and making money.
Re:That would be a GOOD thing by marcosdumay · 2011-06-13 07:58 · Score: 1

A multi-plataform Microsoft is the end of every Microsoft thing we have today. Fanboys are quite right to be afraid.
Also, the developers will take another hit... It seems that every decade MS makes their old developers' jobs go away, and create a shinning new technology that only inexperient developers will care to learn. Somehow, that doesn't hurt Microsoft's botton line, altough it severely hurts their image.

--
Rethinking email
Re:That would be a GOOD thing by shutdown+-p+now · 2011-06-13 08:29 · Score: 4, Insightful

In this particular case, the reason why people are up in arms is because .NET stack is actually significantly better than HTML5/JS stack at pretty much everything except for portability. As a language, C# (as of v4) roundly spanks JavaScript - it has every single feature of the latter except for prototypes (and even that you can emulate), and deals away with most of the flawed design decisions that have to be maintained in JS for the sake of back-compat (like semicolon auto-removal, or dynamic scoping of "this). As a framework, it's so far ahead it's not even something you can compare.
Of course, no-one said anything about .NET being dropped so far. People are making conjectures based on limited data, someone makes a pessimistic conclusion, and that enters a positive feedback loop where folks sit in the circle on the forums, and are exchanging opinions about how awful things are, with tone set bleaker and bleaker with every new iteration.
Re:That would be a GOOD thing by 93+Escort+Wagon · 2011-06-13 08:31 · Score: 1

A multi-platform Microsoft is the end of every Microsoft thing we have today. Fanboys are quite right to be afraid.
Thing is, that aspect of the Microsoft universe is going away whether the company or the fanboys like it or not. Microsoft only has two choices - remain in denial, or adapt. There is no third path.

--
#DeleteChrome
Re:That would be a GOOD thing by bhcompy · 2011-06-13 09:54 · Score: 1

The future is multiplatform? They said that with Java, too, then they realized how goddamn slow it was.

What about just being the rendering engine? by CokoBWare · 2011-06-13 07:30 · Score: 1

When MS says Win8 = HTML5/js, couldn't they just mean that apps built with the new tools for Win8 will RENDER using HTML5/js, but all of the platform is still .NET? This seems the likely evolutionary choice for me...

Sensational by JonnyRocks · 2011-06-13 07:31 · Score: 1

This story has gotten out of hand and I didn't think would show up here. They showed a start screen with tiles done in HTML5. .NET is not oging anywhere. All your full fledged applications will run on .NET. Microsoft themselves have invested in .NET, in their own products.

Re:Sensational by Malc · 2011-06-13 08:46 · Score: 1

This sounds like the crap that preceded Vista, and all the hyperbole about Microsoft replacing the filesystem with some sort of DB or object system (I can barely even remember now!). Microsoft have a long history backwards compatibility, and a good sense not to kill off their existing developers. For those who want to jump on the bandwagon, there will be something new and exciting for people to cut their teeth on, and place on their resume/CV.

Does dumping .NET mean dumping XNA? by tepples · 2011-06-13 07:31 · Score: 1

If Microsoft dumps the .NET Framework, then it dumps XNA Game Studio, and it also dumps the only widespread set-top platform for video games from the smallest of studios.

Re:Does dumping .NET mean dumping XNA? by cbhacking · 2011-06-13 10:32 · Score: 1

Considering XNA and Silverlight are still being pushed pretty hard with Windows Phone, I don't see them dropping support for XNA any time soon.
Actually, the whole discussion got started about Silverlight, and has snowballed from "unlikely gloomy speculation" straight through "baseless improbable rumors" to arrive at "absurd cries of the sky falling" and will probably go on from there. All because MS *added* support for a development technology in their new OS.
Some people...

--
There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...
Re:Does dumping .NET mean dumping XNA? by the-matt-mobile · 2011-06-13 11:19 · Score: 1

Considering XNA and Silverlight are still being pushed pretty hard with Windows Phone

Actually, that's the whole reason for the debate, right there. Windows 8 is the next iteration of Microsoft's very late-in-coming mobile strategy. The whole reason for the hoopla in the first place is that Silverlight was the center of that strategy for WP7, but the Windows 8 demo (done on a touch screen) looks like an indicator of a Crazy Ivan shift in that mobile development strategy. The discussion about on the MS forums is about WPF and Silverlight and the whole mobile strategy. The discussion here is a some bizarre chicken-little-sky-is-falling-ms-flamebait-typical-slashdot-crapfest.

even if it's true... by TWX · 2011-06-13 07:32 · Score: 1

...that's why you take a good, hard look at who pulls the strings for a given language and why before you adopt it. When a company, by itself, is the controlling body this is a risk. Granted, consortiums can take a long time to do things, and single companies theoretically can respond more quickly when needs arise, but a company is in the position to write the floor out from under you for the sake of their profits.

Microsoft has a track record of this kind of behavior. It's no surprise if true.

--
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.

Re:even if it's true... by turing_m · 2011-06-13 13:45 · Score: 1

...that's why you take a good, hard look at who pulls the strings for a given language and why before you adopt it
As long as it's properly FOSS and it is the best in its class, I think you are fine. If it's great, FOSS and the company screws up then it WILL be forked.

--
If I have seen further it is by stealing the Intellectual Property of giants.

Excuse for having IE as Windows default? by BlindMaster · 2011-06-13 07:32 · Score: 1

I guess there might be other strategy for MS to make this change. One thing I can think of is to have IE bundled with Windows, so they can ship and enable IE by default for better experience.

Re:Excuse for having IE as Windows default? by James+Carnley · 2011-06-13 09:06 · Score: 1

Windows has always had, and will continue to have, the core Internet Explorer components built-in and usable by all programs. The only thing that ever happened was removing the shell and putting in a new browser selection screen on start-up for some countries.
Any application that has ever been built with a browser control inside of it would cease to work if IE was not on the system. That will never happen.
There's no indication that these web based programs are any different. They use the Windows built-in web rendering controls to do their work.

The concern is pretty simple, as a manager... by HerculesMO · 2011-06-13 07:32 · Score: 1

What is the future of Silverlight/WPF going to really hold for us? We use it in Line of Business apps because we can cross deploy to our Mac users and Windows users, get a level of performance we know we can trust, and not worry about browser issues as we would in native ASP or PHP.

Microsoft is committed to the platform, and I don't think there's any denying that; the problem is that with a presentation of this magnitude, there has to be room to clarify the positions, and quickly. I work in the financial sector and people jump on news that ultimately amounts to nothing. It takes but a moment for their PR person to get out there and say we are fully commited to .NET as a platform, and the HTML5/JS is only going to be used for the tiles, or whatever.

My gut instinct tells me that this is a result of in-fighting within the teams at MS; the IE9 team is heavily embedded into the HTML5 arena, and obviously the rest of MS has its own methods and thoughts on things. Simply put, Ballmer needs to go, and they need a unified voice back in charge to get the infighting out (I have had friends who quit MS for this specific reason) and get the engineers able to shine.

Because despite what people at Slashdot think, MS hires some *really* smart people. They just have a terrible management layer.

--
The price is always right if someone else is paying.

Re:The concern is pretty simple, as a manager... by Dutch+Gun · 2011-06-13 08:32 · Score: 1

I doubt .NET is really going anywhere. There's a huge eco-system of apps written for .NET, and a number of entire languages and core libraries written on top of it. People keep talking about this nonsense of a "post PC world". Utter tripe - the kind of inane banter made by people who only care about new shiny gizmos, or those who have a vested interest in killing off the PC. The expansion of new markets doesn't necessarily guarantee the demise of the old. PCs are great at lots of things that other devices simply can't touch... you know, like doing actual work on it. Cooler and wiser heads will prevail. Either that, or MS will commit suicide in front of the entire world by throwing out a pretty amazing piece of technology they've been developing for the past decade.

--
Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
Re:The concern is pretty simple, as a manager... by Eponymous+Coward · 2011-06-13 10:01 · Score: 1

Microsoft loses more *really* smart people to Google, Apple and especially Facebook than they hire. Microsoft has matured and grown boring (with a couple of divisions like XBox being notable exceptions). They are still going to make more money than just about anybody, but their days of being able to attract the best talent passed around 10 years ago.
I've always said Silverlight is a fine choice for the intranet and now I'm wondering if that's actually true. I wonder if five years from now Silverlight applications will have the same stigma attached to them that applications that were built on IE6 have today?
Re:The concern is pretty simple, as a manager... by Nethemas+the+Great · 2011-06-13 10:58 · Score: 1

Silverlight a subset of .NET may have a dubious future since many of the problems it addresses parallel what HTML5/JS also address. Even so I doubt--especially given previous promises for Silverlight 5, the existing developer base and existing apps--that it's the end of the road. At most we may see much of its underpinnings simply compile to HTML5/JS but no one is going to start pulling the run out from under anyone. Further, no one is really in agreement on what HTML5 is supposed to be. Each vendor has their own idea and the W3C has given up on even really having a traditional specification. We're in the middle of yet another round of browser wars. Everyone is going to end up with their own implementation that is mostly but not nearly compatible enough with everyone else. Traditional GUI technologies aren't going anywhere because no one has a compelling enough replacement. Not only is HTML5/JS inferior GUI technology, but it lacks even the cross-platform compatibility that would even make it worth considering the sacrifice.
What people are also failing to grasp is that .NET has very little to do with presentation. Yes there are ASP.NET, Win Forms, and WPF but that is but a small portion of what makes up all that falls under the umbrella of .NET. An auto manufacturer isn't going to throw away their cars because someone created a new type of carburetor that fits a few more engine types than theirs. This whole issue is nothing but a bunch of nonsense with ignorant people flailing their arms and screaming like crazy people over things they don't know anything about.

--
Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.

Re:Short Answer by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-13 07:32 · Score: 1

Indeed, Microsoft won't dump it, they'll just mention HTML5 is the new buzzword in every marketing statement they make. Eventually it will sink in and all the HR people will stop placing ads for 14 years of .Net and start looking for 6 years of HTML5 experience.

Welcome to that lovely early twilight where nobody really cares about the one framework you specialized on instead of being a generalist, but you still aren't rare enough to command COBOL salaries.

Re:Yeah, cos you know... by moro_666 · 2011-06-13 07:33 · Score: 2

can Slashdot get *any* worse than this?

yes

ps. i'm not trolling, this is bad, but it can be a lot worse.

--

I'd tell you the chances of this story being a dupe, but you wouldn't like it.

open-source will naturally dominate by achlorophyl · 2011-06-13 07:33 · Score: 1

Aren't JavaScript and HTML5 kind of open-source philosophy? While .NET is apparently very proprietary... I think if you truly appreciate the world community of intelligent developers, we as a group will "naturally" move to more open practices... With a large group experimenting with code, how can any one corporation hope to match the bug-catching, the innovation?

--
David C. Baird theunspokenyes.com

Re:open-source will naturally dominate by MightyMartian · 2011-06-13 07:59 · Score: 1, Insightful

It's hardly "simple prejudice". First of all Mono sucks and does not offer anywhere near the current .NET experience. Mono developers are stuck a generation behind.
Second of all, there are many reasons not to trust Microsoft or its technologies, and damned few reasons to trust it. It's not like .NET does things so incredibly well that other platforms are left in the dust. Mono is not a killer app, any more than .NET is.

--
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Re:open-source will naturally dominate by smelch · 2011-06-13 08:06 · Score: 1

The problem is HTML5 and JS are not appropriate languages for 90% of development projects. Ever tried to, oh I don't know, make a complex CMS entirely in javascript and HTML5? What about multithreaded applications? What about just the fact that JavaScript is terrible to write any sizable library for an enterprise in? Do you really think Microsoft is going to back a dynamicly typed, poor-performing, ill-organized scripting language to be the only language for writing windows apps?

You can write Visual Studio in .Net, can you write a browser in JS?

--
If I can just reach out with my words and touch a butthole, just one, it will all be worth it.
Re:open-source will naturally dominate by Jerry · 2011-06-13 13:46 · Score: 1

No, the "only things" holding it back are its performances in mission critical situations like the Chinese Olympics, where the world got to watch a BSOD flash into the ceiling of the Bird Pavilion, and the $1 Billion in lost sales suffered by the London Stock Exchange when their .NET based app, written BY Microsoft and Aventure, crashed for the second time in less than a year.
If Microsoft, which owns the .NET API, both documented and undocumented, can't write an application which is both stable and with the transaction times they promised that .NET could deliver, who can?

--
Running with Linux for over 20 years!

No by allometry · 2011-06-13 07:34 · Score: 1

Perhaps its just me, but this question is mixing apples and oranges.

JS/HTML5 are stand alone utilities in their own right, but you typically don't see a website these days without some form of ajax going on. You still need something to fulfill those requests from a server and .NET, PHP, Java and many others fill that role well.

So, why posture a question like this? Why would Microsoft want to kill .NET development and toss away all the progress they've made with ASP.NET, C#, WP and XBOX?

I do quite a bit of .NET development with MVC 3 and I'm not the slightest bit worried. Anyone who's doing work with Silverlight should be, because I can see that technology being axed in favor of pushing tools that use HTML5, JS and CSS 3.

--
http://www.allometry.com

Re:No by MightyMartian · 2011-06-13 07:35 · Score: 1

So, why posture a question like this? Why would Microsoft want to kill .NET development and toss away all the progress they've made with ASP.NET, C#, WP and XBOX?
People were asking the same thing about VB6+COM. Microsoft does it because they can, and because Windows is still a substantial enough target for developers that they'll go along with it, mumbling and threatening to jump ship to be sure, but going along with it nevertheless.

--
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Re:No by smelch · 2011-06-13 08:10 · Score: 1

Microsoft does it because they can
No, they can't. It's just not possible. Are you out of your mind? Performance alone is a huge problem, add in the fact that you just can't and shouldn't do that for any kind of windows programs that don't run in the browser. If they tried to make it so JS could interact with the OS and the computer the way it needs to to replace .Net, you would end up with a proprietary mess of shit that wouldn't even be JS or HTML5.

--
If I can just reach out with my words and touch a butthole, just one, it will all be worth it.
Re:No by MightyMartian · 2011-06-13 08:14 · Score: 1

There's no reason you can't have multiple application layers running the same language, each layer exposing differing degrees of functionality and system access. Just because Microsoft, prior to .NET, pretty much let everything run with superuser or near-superuser rights doesn't mean that's the only way to do it.

--
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.

Then use mono-moonlight by marcello_dl · 2011-06-13 07:36 · Score: 3, Interesting

It's too easy and too soon to say told ya, it could be a clever MS strategy to instill panic and when hordes of devs cry release a new shiny net for win8, with Ballmer chanting "we care for you!!" in front of some burning chairs sacrificed for the occasion.

If things go wrong... till a couple months ago slashdot was full of people telling .net is good, 'cause there is a free implementation... since it appears to be true, to an extent, .net developers should regroup on mono, at least to keep investments already committed to .net safe for a few years.
It's not like a full free software stack when you run it on windows and MS will make sure that their own stuff runs better than mono on their own OS, but bitching about microsoft is a sign of little attention to their track record.

--
---- MISSING MISCELLANEOUS DATA SEGMENT --- [sigdash] trolololol

Re:Then use mono-moonlight by marcello_dl · 2011-06-14 18:24 · Score: 1

Coming from the framework formerly known as .NET...

--
---- MISSING MISCELLANEOUS DATA SEGMENT --- [sigdash] trolololol

Re:Silly by Tarlus · 2011-06-13 07:37 · Score: 2, Funny

Silverlight devs

Are you sure that should be plural? =)

--
/* No Comment */

Awww by ravenswood1000 · 2011-06-13 07:38 · Score: 1

They are from Microsoft. Let them cry. Poor babies

Hey, hey. by drolli · 2011-06-13 07:39 · Score: 1

There seem to be people out there who confuse .net with silverlight or things running in your browser.

Yes. that is *one* technology where .net can be, but is not much used. It is like "oh, cryptographic tokens dont run java exclusively", has oracle/sun let us down?

The main amount of .net in my impression is on the server side/native windows applications. As far as i can see microsoft is *not* going to make the windows desktop and html5 browser coupled to some small computing core with ajax.

In the web, silverlight never catched on. If you couldn't interpret the statistics as a company for yourself and did invest more in it than a functional prototype in the alpha stage to figure that out, you deserve to loose the investment; if it wipes you out financially, good for the world. End users may have illusions about technologies which are there to stay. Softwar companies not.

Microsoft always consistently supports very old technologies which were successfully introduced. Things which were not successful are most of the time kept compatible but not evolved. And microsoft never tried to push a technology beyond the point where a vast majority of the customers plainly did not find it useful.

This Is News? by Kozar_The_Malignant · 2011-06-13 07:42 · Score: 1

>Microsoft developers feel left in the dark and very angry at the way they are being treated.

I thought that was the normal state of affairs for MS developers.

--
Some mornings it's hardly worth chewing through the restraints to get out of bed.

Re:This Is News? by jd · 2011-06-13 08:57 · Score: 1

No, like Orcs, they are oblivious to their former status of Elves prior to being Corrupted by Morgoth.

--
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)

Netflix? by warchildx · 2011-06-13 07:43 · Score: 1

Doesnt netflix require silverlight? will microsoft be migrating this to something else, or include "microsoft silverlight runtime" for future windows os, but no new feature releases?

Silverlight, probably. .NET, probably not. by JMZero · 2011-06-13 07:43 · Score: 1

This story made a lot more sense when it was about Silverlight. HTML5+Script does a lot of what Silverlight is meant to do, and it thus makes sense Silverlight is going to get less love.

However, HTML5+Script doesn't replace the other roles .NET has in the MS dev plan, which is basically everything else: random desktop apps, services, database-integrated software, server-side web stuff. That last one might seem like the closest, but even then it makes sense for MS to leave the server side mostly the same, but just change how it works on the client side.

MS has certainly dumped developers before - and I fully expect them to screw over Silverlight developers - but .NET is a reasonable framework, the bulk of which is not replaced by HTML5+Script. Even as someone who's fairly skeptical about MS, I find it very unlikely we'll see a major shift from .NET in the next 5 years.

--
Let's not stir that bag of worms...

Re:Oh, dear, god.. by afabbro · 2011-06-13 07:44 · Score: 4, Insightful

I surely can't be the only one praying that they do drop .NET?

Yes, you are. .NET is one of Microsoft's better ideas.

Or perhaps you're a VB6 man...?

--
Advice: on VPS providers

They aren't comparable by Toonol · 2011-06-13 07:44 · Score: 1

I like Javascript; it's a nice little language, more elegant and powerful than it's often given credit for. However, it has a certain domain, and it cannot be used for every task .net is good for. The only things moving from .net to Javascript will be small, undemanding apps.

Now, I wouldn't put it past MS to drop .net and introduce something new; but it won't be a JS/HTML5 combo. It would be something else. Right now, if they dropped .net, most development would move to C++ or Java, not javascript.

ftfy by drb226 · 2011-06-13 07:45 · Score: 1

PHBs Worried, Devs Secretly Hopeful, Microsoft Will Dump .NET

Re:ftfy by gewalker · 2011-06-13 09:40 · Score: 1

Not very likely -- any developer that endured the pain of learning to use .NET does not want that investment flushed away. Those that jump want to jump ship will do so regardless of MS decision to keep .NET. Just like VB6 developers clinging to VB6 and FORTRAN programmers clinging to FORTRAN.
Re:ftfy by drb226 · 2011-06-13 11:44 · Score: 1

This may be rather No-True-Scotsman-ish of me, but I don't consider VB6ers and FORTRANers to be proper "devs". Well, maybe the FORTAN ones, if they are really old. Then they can be considered legacy devs.

I'd not worry about it. by waddgodd · 2011-06-13 07:45 · Score: 1

I'd pretty much count on Microsoft phasing out .NET. Soon? Can't see that happening, the investment was too great too recently to get people to switch from visual studio. I DO see the first phase coming soon: accelerating the EOL of the products on the market now. I'd have thought that Microsoft devels would be ready for this kind of dick move by now, it's happened with every other Microsoft IDE.

--
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you

Hey, .NET devs by David+Gerard · 2011-06-13 07:46 · Score: 1

You know how all us freetards keep harping on about software freedom and why it's actually important and stuff?

This is why.

--
http://rocknerd.co.uk

.Net Programmers Shouldn't be so Upset by smist08 · 2011-06-13 07:46 · Score: 1

After all COBOL programmers still get jobs. In the computer industry you either upgrade your skills or off to a legacy programming retirement home. .Net now joins the ranks of COBOL, VB6, Fortran, etc. as well paying but un-exciting jobs maintaining old programs. No one is going to start writing a new exciting program that doesn't run on all of iOS, MacOS, Android, WebOS and even Windows. What's the point, lots of people are doing it, get on board.

Re:.Net Programmers Shouldn't be so Upset by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-13 08:38 · Score: 1

Why are they all whining.
They should hop on board on Cosmos and roll out their own OS's all in vanilla .NET.
It's the lifecycle in IT: you are cutting edge or you evolve (other function, other job, training, ...) or you maintain. It're the rules in a dynamic system with thousands and millions trying to push the edge further.

Killing SL will not directly kill .NET by rabun_bike · 2011-06-13 07:48 · Score: 1

First, .NET != Silverlight. Killing Silverlight will not kill the .NET CLR. A special version of the .NET CLR was created to support Microsoft's push into vector based graphic UI's (e.g. Silverlight) but .NET is just a programming language that Silverlight adopted for good reason. HTML5 + JS, in my humble opinion, is simply a change in direction from the previous attempt of trying to dumb down flashy Windows's UI development with XAML. After all, XAML was simply a XML based description language for the underlying vector graphics engine. If you haven't picked up by now, the interfaces to this vector graphics engine are changing with the industry. This of course sucks for those who are heavily invested in Silverlight development. Likewise, Flash developers are being locked out of the Apple ecosystem and are facing different frustrations. In all, the reality is that the industry is moving forward and there are a lot of people who have invested into these technologies and they are not going to be happy about the changes. I don't blame them. I, just as any developer on the Windows platform, have suffered through the Microsoft technology graveyard which has headstones for VB6, VBX controls, ActiveX, COM, COM+, MTS, DNA, MSMQ (to a degree), C++'s MFC, ATL, RDP, DCOM, DAO, VBScript, VBA, and ASP among many others. Microsoft technologies entering triage include C++ CLR, ASP.NET, XAML, WPF, and I am certain quite a few others. Now, in my humble opinion I don't think the .NET CLR is dead or even dying as it is the defacto programming language for WinForm development on the Windows platform. But it isn't going to be a hot technology. One could argue new Windows based applications won't need .NET but that will take some time if it is even possible. The language is really the only sane way to build applications for Windows unless you are using one of the very nice open source C++ frameworks or you simply have given up on Windows and target the web. In that case you better brush up on HTML5 and JS.

Re:Killing SL will not directly kill .NET by cyber-vandal · 2011-06-13 08:05 · Score: 1

.NET is a framework that several languages including VB, C# and Python can target. It isn't a language in itself.
Re:Killing SL will not directly kill .NET by rabun_bike · 2011-06-13 09:03 · Score: 1

Defining what is and what is not .NET is the source of much confusion to many people. But the CLR (Common Language Runtime) is the heart of the Microsoft implementation of the .NET platform and all higher level languages (VB.NET, C#, F#, etc) that are supported on the platform compiled down the IL language and execute on the .NET JIT compiler. The use of .NET and .NET Framework is interchangeable in my previous port. The lack of mentioning a specific language implementation was by purpose since it doesn't matter as the .NET CLR is just a VM that any compiled can target as long as the compiler emits valid IL code. And anyone familiar with the .NET platform can surely distinguish between the two without me having to specify "The .NET Framework which consists CLR and runs supported languages compiled to the IL language."
Re:Killing SL will not directly kill .NET by cyber-vandal · 2011-06-14 09:53 · Score: 1

You called it a language, which it isn't. It would be like calling Rails a language.
Re:Killing SL will not directly kill .NET by rabun_bike · 2011-06-15 02:14 · Score: 1

So what if I called it a language? The fact that I made an omission in an unedited online post is not novel. It does not mean I don't have a through understanding of the platform. Anyone programming on the .NET platform knows that and can easily infer my intent. Do you always spend so much time picking apart ever detail of every online post? Good grief.
Re:Killing SL will not directly kill .NET by cyber-vandal · 2011-06-15 09:59 · Score: 1

No but being an irritating sod brightens my day :-P

Re:Short Answer by EraserMouseMan · 2011-06-13 07:52 · Score: 2

Eventually it will sink in and all the HR people will stop placing ads for 14 years of .Net and start looking for 6 years of HTML5 experience

In addition to 5 years of Web 3.0. HR people and dang recruiters are quite the obtuse bunch most of the time.

Re:Yeah, cos you know... by bondsbw · 2011-06-13 07:57 · Score: 5, Informative

.NET is mainly used for server-side processing.

Wait, what? I make client applications... Windows apps. I don't make websites. I don't make client applications that require constant connection with a server. So your statement completely forgets about me and thousands of developers who need to make real applications that work in the real world, not some dream land in the cloud.

I'm beginning to wonder if Microsoft hasn't forgotten about us too.

Oh... and this: HTML5 may excel with GUI, but it's not better than WPF. WPF is definitely better in terms of combining the power, flexibility, and ease-of-development of UIs. (Before the flaming begins... I never said WPF is better for everyone, it's just better for me and my Windows clients.)

--
All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.

Long term yes for windows 8 no by DarkOx · 2011-06-13 07:57 · Score: 1

Dot Net is not going away in Windows 8 and it will probably be supported for at the very least the next decade. I would expect the trend to be away from it though toward emca script to be very real, that and possibly other interpreted languages. The whole bytecode interpreter concept is yesterdays tech. There was a brief period where for performance reasons it made sense, Dot Net if anything appeared after that day was passed. I have been saying this for years now and I stick by it. We are at a point where devices are powerful enough that a purely interpeted language is faster and more felxible to develop in, is more portable, and performs fine for all but a small subset of applications. Those applications that don't work well as interpeted code or so performance intensive that only native code is a real solution, whatever languge you select. Bycode interpeters be it CLR or JVM are answers to a question nobody is really asking anymore. They have little value other than incumbancy.

--
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html

Re:Long term yes for windows 8 no by GWRedDragon · 2011-06-13 08:15 · Score: 1

Bytecode interpreters, as opposed to scripting languages, have a very real advantage that is unrelated to speed: you can use any language. If the target is the .net CLR, you can use C#, VB.NET, C++, F#...plus about a hundred others. Going with the .NET platform allows the language to be flexible, whereas with javascript you're stuck with a hacked language with no internal consistency, ridiculously stupid semantics in some cases, and a loosely typed straitjacket that causes problems in any larger application. Of course if we're using .NET and you LIKE the javascript language, a compiler could easily be developed that compiles it to .NET IL. The opposite is not true.

On dot-net (not debt) by Tetsujin · 2011-06-13 08:00 · Score: 2

I surely can't be the only one praying that they do drop .NET?

Yes, you are. .NET is one of Microsoft's better ideas.

Could I ask for your perspective on why this is the case?

--
Bow-ties are cool.

Re:On dot-net (not debt) by Mongoose+Disciple · 2011-06-13 08:11 · Score: 4, Interesting

Could I ask for your perspective on why this is the case?
I'm not the person you're replying to, but I'll give you mine:
It's basically Java done one better. Basically it's the version of Java you'd come up with if you'd spent 5 years in the trenches as a Java developer and had a good set of ideas as how you could do a better job if you had it to write over again from scratch, keeping everything that's good about Java (except for the cross-platform action, which in my experience for any practical application was more of an in-theory benefit than actual benefit) and fixing a lot of things that weren't quite right.
(Granted, Java is since then improving, as well.)
I'm sure a lot of people don't think much of Java, either. It's not the right tool for every task, and neither is .NET -- but for several niches (e.g. writing custom applications for a business's internal use) it's a pretty awesome one.
Re:On dot-net (not debt) by halivar · 2011-06-13 08:25 · Score: 2

For me, C# is all the best parts of C++, Java, and ObjectPascal rolled into one beautiful linguistic burrito.
Re:On dot-net (not debt) by gfody · 2011-06-13 08:32 · Score: 2

.NET consists of a stack-based intermediate language designed for jitting rather than interpreting by a CLR that supports a bunch of very nice high level languages and platforms. Its design was lead by Anders Hejlsberg who many consider to be the Sir Isaac Newton of programming. .NET is beautiful and something MS actually got right.

--

bite my glorious golden ass.
Re:On dot-net (not debt) by pixelpusher220 · 2011-06-13 08:38 · Score: 1

beautiful linguistic burrito
Some would say you get the same type of 'output' as consuming a 'burrito'.

I keeed! I keeed!

--
People in cars cause accidents....accidents in cars cause people :-D
Re:On dot-net (not debt) by Samantha+Wright · 2011-06-13 09:06 · Score: 1

The analogy was under-cooked to begin with. Perhaps even corny or cheesy.

--
Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
Re:On dot-net (not debt) by halivar · 2011-06-13 09:08 · Score: 1

It must have pissed you the hell off when they added IF..END IF blocks to Fortran. Kids and their toys, indeed.
Re:On dot-net (not debt) by david_thornley · 2011-06-13 09:15 · Score: 1

So you say it has C++'s type-safe templating system that allows (among other things) the STL, automatic RAII, and uniform, standard, vendor-supported libraries on all major platforms?

--
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Re:On dot-net (not debt) by Kjella · 2011-06-13 09:19 · Score: 2

keeping everything that's good about Java (except for the cross-platform action, which in my experience for any practical application was more of an in-theory benefit than actual benefit)
I worked a lot with a huge honking Java app that ran on Windows, Linux and Unix but with a web browser GUI. It never became good at doing GUIs, but a lot of server code is written in and will continue to be written in Java. My prediction is that Java will be the new COBOL long after Microsoft has moved from .NET to something else.
That said, between C# in the hands of MS and Java in the hands of Oracle, I wish there was a third option. There's always C/C++ but they're getting really long in the tooth and with all respect to Perl/PHP/Python/Ruby/Haskell and so on they're not a replacement. I don't know, buy out Qt, steal all the best ideas from C# and Java then turn it into the Q language. I'll get right on that after I win my $100 million in the lottery...

--
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Re:On dot-net (not debt) by Mongoose+Disciple · 2011-06-13 09:24 · Score: 1

There's always C/C++ but they're getting really long in the tooth and with all respect to Perl/PHP/Python/Ruby/Haskell and so on they're not a replacement.
Yeah, I pretty well agree with that. There are things I write in C still, and there's things I'd write in one of the pile o' scripting-ish languages, but for 95+% of the work I'm called on to do professionally a language like Java or C# is by far the clear choice.
That being said, I think Microsoft's stewardship of C# has been pretty good so far (at least, I can't point to a company that I think has done a better job with anything remotely similar, and I'm hard pressed to name an open community that's done better by me, for the purposes I care about), and I have my hopes (perhaps naive) that even Oracle can't screw up Java at this point, it mostly being in the hands of the Java community for most effective purposes, so I'm less worried about needing a third option than you are at this point.
Re:On dot-net (not debt) by FutureDomain · 2011-06-13 09:39 · Score: 1

So you say it has C++'s type-safe templating system that allows (among other things) the STL,
Yes, via generics. They are even more flexible than C++ because you can add constraints.

automatic RAII,
Not directly. .NET is garbage collected, and although finalizers are called whenever the object is cleaned up (so you know it will be called), there is no guarantee when it will be called. Unlike Java though, C# does support support Ruby/Python style closure blocks ("using" statement) so although it is not automatic, RAII can be done.

and uniform, standard, vendor-supported libraries on all major platforms?
Yep, and they even have the same assembly format, common type specifications, and IL code across platforms. Whereas C++'s objects and libraries vary based on platform and architecture, .NET is uniform across implementations.

--
Hydraulic pizza oven!! Guided missile! Herring sandwich! Styrofoam! Jayne Mansfield! Aluminum siding! Borax!
Re:On dot-net (not debt) by praxis · 2011-06-13 10:18 · Score: 1

I'm not sure what definition of major platforms you use, but .NET's target platforms list is anemic.
Re:On dot-net (not debt) by larry+bagina · 2011-06-13 11:19 · Score: 1

If you're shitting cheese, you need to visit a VD clinic NOW.

--
Do you even lift?
These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.
Re:On dot-net (not debt) by lgw · 2011-06-13 12:53 · Score: 1

C# is great for "medium" code - not scripts, but not code where every interface must make ironclad promises, or make execution spedd promises. C# generics are easy, but limited (C++ templates are actually a turing-complete language, albiet an ridiculously obfuscated one). C# is lacking "const" function parameters, so any function could change your objects. C# has really annoying leaks that can be avoided by a deep understanding of RAII (because you can forget a using block). .NET is also lacking something key: you can't rename a new file over an existing one atomically, so you don't have atomic file update (without pinvoke).
Most of the time, none of that matters, and the fact that all IEnumerables now give you map and reduce (err, select and aggragate, or whatever) is awesome, along with the quite nice lambda syntax. But when you actually need those C++ features, you're screwed, I've spent a bit too much time connecting C++ with C# via horrible managed C++ for comfort, but I guess it is a work-around.

--
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.

Spoken like a true web developer by StikyPad · 2011-06-13 08:02 · Score: 4, Interesting

"The problem is that Microsoft needs a technology that gives it an edge, and HTML5/JavaScript is everybody's edge."

Pardon the French, but are you fucking kidding me? HTML5/JS isn't anybody's edge. HTML/JS is in no way appropriate for writing an actual application. It may work, barely, in some circumstances, but it's the worst tool for almost any job except where it's required (in the browser).

Fortunately, as stated elsewhere, the concern is with the abandonment of Silverlight (which isn't really that great a loss, except for the people MS tricked into investing time and money in), not .NET as a whole.

--
https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere

Re:Spoken like a true web developer by v1 · 2011-06-13 08:05 · Score: 1

*nods*
That's saying "Microsoft needs more customer lock-in and more proprietary things to force on their users, not following open standards and inter-operability." what's wrong with you?
Of course, I suppose that might be good for Microsoft, but not the rest of the planet. Whose side are you on anyway?

--
I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
Re:Spoken like a true web developer by guruevi · 2011-06-13 08:23 · Score: 1

I think the problem is twofold. Microsoft seems very tightlipped about .NET in mobile Windows devices and Windows 8 in general. Then there is the derivatives Silverlight and WPF which Microsoft has proposed is the replacement of Flash/ActiveX except that (finally) some have learned that giving your project in the hands of an ill-supported plugin from a corporate machine is not a good idea in general so they choose HTML5/JavaScript and even Microsoft is getting better supporting HTML5/JS in their browsers and even mobile browsers so that people are worried their precious code they had so nicely written in the Microsoft-language-du-jour is going to be unsupported come next generation. It's the repeat of the same issues coders had with MSN Channels, Active Desktop, VB, ActiveX, .NET1.0, .NET2.0 and they seem to never learn.

--
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
Re:Spoken like a true web developer by 140Mandak262Jamuna · 2011-06-13 08:54 · Score: 1

It's the repeat of the same issues coders had with MSN Channels, Active Desktop, VB, ActiveX, .NET1.0, .NET2.0 and they seem to never learn.
No, it is not that they never learn. It is that a new generation suckers are being conned every few years. There are suckers being born every minute.

--
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
Re:Spoken like a true web developer by serutan · 2011-06-13 08:55 · Score: 1

I agree, and I don't see how Microsoft can "kill" .Net. As the article points out, Microsoft tends to abandon platforms it isn't interested in, but so what? .Net works fine, doesn't really need anything more done to it, and has a huge development community using it and documenting how to use it better. Seems like it can survive on its own without any further input from MS.
Re:Spoken like a true web developer by vga_init · 2011-06-13 09:27 · Score: 1

It works better than you think. It just depends on the environment, and I would say that not all Javascript environments are created equal. Magical design changes can surprise you. What you need to do is think outside the box! When I studied Java years ago I had no expectation that Java would ever be a part of a system like Android. One reason for this is that Android Java is not your granddaddy's Java; it's got all kinds of crazy differences. The same thing could happen to Javascript. A new language that can utilize the talents of existing Javascript developers and carries the language into uncharted territory would be wonderful.
Re:Spoken like a true web developer by graveyhead · 2011-06-13 11:43 · Score: 1

Oh wow it would be so great if Netflix drops Silverlight. The DRM all tied up in it stops me using my paid Netflix account on Linux. Grr.

--
std::disclaimer<std::legalese> sig=new std::disclaimer; sig->dump(); delete sig;
Re:Spoken like a true web developer by Corson · 2011-06-13 15:01 · Score: 1

This reminds me of a posting in Joel's blog/book: "Fire and Motion".
Re:Spoken like a true web developer by kestasjk · 2011-06-14 01:58 · Score: 1

As someone who has invested time into learning Silverlight I'm not worried at all, and don't really understand all this stuff.

Obviously just because MS didn't mention Silverlight at a Win 8 demo they aren't abandoning the whole .NET framework, but even concluding they are abandoning Silverlight is crazy when they're right in the middle of bringing out a major new release of it (XAML binding debugging, speed increases, better video and sound control playback control, support for rendering WPF stuff in a browser outside of a Silverlight frame, etc).

All I've been hearing about in TechEd e-mails recently has been Windows Phone 7 this and Silverlight 4 that, so all this commossion on /. about Silverlight (and .NET!) being abandoned is more puzzling than concerning.

--
// MD_Update(&m,buf,j);

Re:Oh geeee by cyber-vandal · 2011-06-13 08:04 · Score: 1

Yeh I can just see Microsoft's next server platform being HTML5 + JS

Silverlight and WPF might be going away but ASP.NET is unlikely to go anywhere for some time to come.

Re:Yeah, cos you know... by MikeDirnt69 · 2011-06-13 08:04 · Score: 1

He said mainly, not every.

--
Am I eval()? - http://www.monst3r.com.br

This is a stupid article. by Mongoose+Disciple · 2011-06-13 08:06 · Score: 3, Informative

And this is why it's stupid:

Web development is a small subset of what you can do with .NET.

The other 90%+ of things you can do with .NET you're not going to write as a web application. Period.

Someone might as well ask whether HTML5 will replace C++. It'd be as about as idiotic of a question. Not only is the answer obviously no in either case, even asking the question reveals that the asker doesn't have even the most basic idea of what they're talking about.

UI / Logic Separation by Lawand · 2011-06-13 08:06 · Score: 1

The next big thing might be the separation of UI and core program logic. An example of this is what Nokia's Qt is heading towards: QML for UI (which is similar to or might even be a subset to Javascript, I am not sure) and Qt for the program logic and actual implementation of functionality. This is a powerful approach and it has many advantages that I think most Slashdot reader know. This might a new (optional) strategy for Microsoft applications, HTML5/Javascript for the UI and .NET for the implementation. Disclaimer: I am an expert in neither Qt/QML nor HTML5/Javascript/.NET and what I am saying is just a thought, and I haven't heard about Microsoft (or anyone else for that matter) saying that this is what they are aiming at. I just wanted to share a thought.

--
Your Ad here

Re:UI / Logic Separation by shutdown+-p+now · 2011-06-13 08:36 · Score: 2

The next big thing might be the separation of UI and core program logic.
What do you mean, "the next big thing"? It has been the norm on .NET GUI stack for, what, 5 years now (since first version of WPF)? - there's XAML for UI, with bindings to data model implemented in code. Same thing in Silverlight.
Re:UI / Logic Separation by ceoyoyo · 2011-06-13 23:29 · Score: 1

5 years you say? On .Net? Wow.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Model–view–controller
That one is from 1979.
Re:UI / Logic Separation by schlechtums · 2011-06-14 00:13 · Score: 1

Given that the article is about .NET, I'm not surprised that he would post about .NET's implementation of model-view-controller. The question is, why are you surprised?

He wasn't claiming .NET did it first, or that it does it the best. He was only claiming that it's not the next big thing for .NET, as .NET already supports this. But sure, go ahead, post your links about 1979. Show us more of your programming superiority. That's why we all came here...
Re:UI / Logic Separation by shutdown+-p+now · 2011-06-14 01:08 · Score: 1

MVC is old, yes. And you can do MVC in any UI framework, .NET is no exception here. People who wanted it did MVC in WinForms back in 2002.
My point was that there are frameworks which are designed from ground up to conform to that idea - Swing is one early example of that, but it was code-centric and thus not all that good. WPF/Silverlight is a relatively fresh example, and much more convenient at it. Qt Quick is yet another (the one which GGP has originally pointed out). These are usually characterized by clean separation of UI markup and model, using separate languages for both, and data bindings to wire up UI with the model - much like HTML + various templating engines on the web, but more complicated due to the need for live updates in rich client UI.

Does anyone still use that? by WillAffleckUW · 2011-06-13 08:13 · Score: 1

Seriously, though, HTML5 is a given and the spec for HTML6 is already underway. .NET dying is a good thing.

--
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --

Re:Does anyone still use that? by Tridus · 2011-06-13 08:14 · Score: 2

.net on the server is doing pretty well, particularly in Windows shops. We're not at the point where you can write application tier logic in HTML yet. :)

--
-- "So they told me that using the download page to download something was not something they anticipated." - Bill Gates

Re:ftfy (mod Parent Way Way Up) by WillAffleckUW · 2011-06-13 08:14 · Score: 1

I for one think our Pointy Haired Bosses should all go on a cruise to Hades.

--
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --

Squeal of the Wounded fanboi by Jeremiah+Cornelius · 2011-06-13 08:15 · Score: 5, Insightful

Is there nothing so shrill, so piercing? When they finally realize that they directed enthusiasm - even affection - and invested personal identity in a corporation, they are still so enthralled that they feel betrayed instead of enlightened.

Look. Microsoft, Apple, Google? You are just a bit of tissue and they will wad you up, when finished wiping. Apple wipes their nose, while Microsoft wipes somewhere lower in the anatomical procession... Small comfort to reflect upon, as you trace an arc through the air, upon disposal.

--
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."

Re:Squeal of the Wounded fanboi by musmax · 2011-06-13 09:13 · Score: 1

A precious entry for my revered wordsmith.txt file. I salute you, Sir.
Re:Squeal of the Wounded fanboi by CLaRGe · 2011-06-14 13:28 · Score: 1

If these were 20 somethings riding the bandwagon of a new hot dev language, yes. But these are corporate career devs who banked on .NET as a way to feed their families and remain competitive.
This is simply a 2nd order effect of the huge surprise (to AAPL and everyone else) that is iOS. Windows is no longer the only game in town. Corporate buyers of technology are seriously evaluating iOS as a LOB (line of business) app development platform. In response, MSFT, like any highly competitive business, is adjusting to market forces. Cross-platform dev is the business play for the near future, and corporate buyers are demanding cross-platform solutions.

--
http://10CentMail.com - the Amazon SES app.

Re:Oh, dear, god.. by Lanteran · 2011-06-13 08:17 · Score: 1

I'm hoping for it too...

--
"People don't want to learn linux" hasn't been a valid excuse since '03.

Re:Oh, dear, god.. by the+linux+geek · 2011-06-13 08:19 · Score: 1

Why would you? Do you really want an OS where applications are written in HTML and Javascript? Why the fuck would anyone think that's a good idea?

Or are you one of those people that prefers C++/MFC and VB6?

Microsoft should really address this by Tridus · 2011-06-13 08:20 · Score: 1

The first article made more sense, because Silverlight is something that MS has been waffling on for quite a while now and HTML 5 is a realistic replacement for it. But all of .net? Now we're getting out into WTF territory.

The core of the problem here is that there's no competing narrative. Microsoft's response that "oh we'll address it in September" only fuels the fire because for someone who is already worried, silence only acts as confirmation. It's baffling just how badly they're bungling the PR on this for a company that used to be very good at developer relations.

Maybe now it's time to jump on the "Fire Ballmer" bandwagon because no CEO should be letting this go on for this long without having the company get involved.

--
-- "So they told me that using the download page to download something was not something they anticipated." - Bill Gates

Re:WTF is WPF? by shutdown+-p+now · 2011-06-13 08:25 · Score: 1

JFWI:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Presentation_Foundation

Re:Yeah, cos you know... by aBaldrich · 2011-06-13 08:26 · Score: 1

1. They make everyone jump into HTML5
2. Make some cool MS HTML5.5 Extension (C) TM Patent Pending.
3. (Nothing)
4. Profit!

--
In soviet russia the government regulates the companies.

Re:Yeah, cos you know... by FatAlb3rt · 2011-06-13 08:28 · Score: 1

And you're forgetting the thousands that program in .Net that do know C/C++ but work in a Microsoft shop.

Re:Silly by kimvette · 2011-06-13 08:28 · Score: 1, Troll

I think Netflix hired both of them to completely screw up their UI.

--
The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50

Re:Yeah, cos you know... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-13 08:31 · Score: 2, Insightful

Corporate developers use .Net because it is fast to build apps and get business done instead of fiddling with window handling routines and manually drawing things on screen. Surprisingly, many different development toolsets all have a place. Things like Java, .Net, Native Code, HTML5, etc. - all have a place where they make sense. However, the few folks who may be whining about HTLM5 and Javascript taking over for .Net are a bit clueless. .Net is actually very performant. Javascript - well, let's just say it is not performant. Javascript also isn't strongly typed, doesn't support robust error handling, and is only attractive at all as a least common denominator tool to allow web apps (like say Google Docs) to function. Ever tested the speed of something like Google Docs though against apps that do a ton more like say Open Office or MS Office? It isn't even close because Javascript just isn't something you would want to code an app that needs to do any code in for an app that requires performance. It also can't easily tie into the native APIs of any operating system services. So, .Net is not going anywhere. Native Code isn't either. It is just for those small apps like MS showed so far for Windows 8 touch devices - a weather app, an app that shows HTML5 video. A Twitter feed. Nothing serious. When they needed something more serious up came Excel and it wasn't done in Javascript.

Re:Oh geeee by shutdown+-p+now · 2011-06-13 08:33 · Score: 1

And... what? So far all you have is speculation on the forums.

.NET != Silverlight by geoffrobinson · 2011-06-13 08:33 · Score: 5, Insightful

.NET isn't quite the same thing as Silverlight. Dropping .NET would be a much bigger deal, and I don't expect that to happen anytime soon.

--
Except for ending slavery, the Nazis, communism, & securing American independence, war has never solved anything.

Re:.NET != Silverlight by rtb61 · 2011-06-13 16:51 · Score: 1

M$ had not the slightest qualm when it dropped all their M$ Office built in macro languages that corporations and governments had invested huge sums in, to favour visual basic for applications. The idea was to try to get force visual basic to become the default monopoly programming language.
So a further push into the web with visual basic via .Net but it again failed to force a monopoly on Bill Gates borg programming language.
So now, embrace, extend and extinguish javascript in another attempt to push visual basic as a monopoly programming language. This myopic focus on visual basic, must have some weird thing to do with Ballmer convincing Gates he should be still left in control.

--
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
Re:.NET != Silverlight by im_thatoneguy · 2011-06-13 18:00 · Score: 1

The whole thing is a non-story. Tiles are the new Gadgets. Anyone remember those? You know those things on the side of stock Vista installs?
Anyway time for a refresher course since evidently everyone forgot:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/cc163370.aspx

What Is a Sidebar Gadget?
A Sidebar gadget can be a powerful and handy little tool. So you might be surprised by how easy they are to create. In fact, if you know HTML, CSS, and JavaScript (and I suspect many of you already do), youâ(TM)re well on your way.
HTML + CSS and Javascript running lightweight little desktop apps... it all sounds so familiar....

Re:Short Answer by InsertCleverUsername · 2011-06-13 08:35 · Score: 1

No. At least not for a long while.

Exactly. Honestly, I'd be much more worried if I were a Silverlight dev. It does a few things HTML5 can't, but not nearly enough to make a career.

I'm still thinking that any day now <asp:Control runat="server"> will include <asp:Control runat="cloud"> and <asp:Control runat="client">.

--
Ask me about my sig!

MS believes developers don't matter. by gestalt_n_pepper · 2011-06-13 08:35 · Score: 1

As other posters have pointed out, VB6 and FoxPro would still work.

Which misses the point entirely. So what? Scan Monster to see how many jobs there are coding on vb6 or FoxPro vs. open source Java. Someone who invested in learning FoxPro is screwed. Java, not so much. Yes, developers *can* relearn another db, framework or language. How many times do you want to be do that in your life, and at what monetary cost?

Bottom line? Microsoft has abandoned platforms willy nilly for the past two decades. Instead of quietly extending VB6 to include .net syntax (or vice versa) or quietly extending Winforms to be WPF-like, some bozo decides to throw the whole platform away and start over. I don't know why it's done this way, but it's a friggin' disaster for developers who spend years learning the ins and outs of a framework, language or DB.

So, I welcome HTML5/Javascript. It's open, and some myopic exec or pig-ignorant kid isn't going to be able to change it because he/she had their latest brainwave.

--
Please do not read this sig. Thank you.

Re:MS believes developers don't matter. by Toonol · 2011-06-13 09:37 · Score: 1

Yes, developers *can* relearn another db, framework or language. How many times do you want to be do that in your life, and at what monetary cost?

Just as an aside... I hear this occasionally, and it doesn't make much sense to me.

1. It shouldn't take more than a weekend to learn a new language, and a week to learn a new API.

2. Why would it cost anything, other than a new compiler/development suite, that your company would be paying for anyway?

3. You should be eager to learn new languages and platforms anyway, even if nobody is forcing you to, because you're a programmer and learning new things will make you better and smarter.

Yes, there's threading in JS by davide+marney · 2011-06-13 08:39 · Score: 1

Take a look at Web Workers. I needed to synchronize multiple browsers to a common clock. Used ajax push engine as a message bus to send sync event timecodes, and a web worker on each client to run a timer in a separate thread from the main UI code. Works pretty good under Chrome.

--
"We receive as friendly that which agrees with, we resist with dislike that which opposes us" - Faraday

Saying that something works on a platform by jader3rd · 2011-06-13 08:42 · Score: 1

Saying that something works on a platform doesn't mean that something else doesn't work on the platform. The entire article is based on the idea that since it appears that Windows is going to host/run javascript directly, to create "apps", it means that Microsoft is killing off .Net. The same argument could be made that if Windows can host javascript that means that Microsoft is going to kill off the Win C Runtime. Not gonna happen. Adding a hammer to your tool chest doesn't mean that you're removing a wrench. The person who wrote this article must think that .Net is only used for quick on off apps, and doesn't know that many full blown enterprise stacks/applications are written in .Net.

And this is a big deal why? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-13 08:54 · Score: 1

I haven't used a product from MS in about 8 years.

With the state of their product offerings I don't see it as an issue to be concerned about in the long term.

It could be a good sign, I suppose- as they drop core products and IDEs devs and businesses will continue to move away from MS products in favor of better ones.

I'd call that a win for all involved, myself.

Windows devs: best to look at which of the languages of the future you want to learn. :)

Re:Yeah, cos you know... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-13 08:55 · Score: 4, Insightful

No, his statement completely forgets about you and thousands of developers who use .NET because they don't know C/C++.

Right. Because C/C++ is all there is. The only tool for every job. Plus, it's what Real Programmers(TM) use.

Grow up.

Summary gets somthing right. by stimpleton · 2011-06-13 08:56 · Score: 1

The summary is not exagerating about some feeling on that forum.

One guy who lists developed .NET games and Silverlight in his sig rants(bleep outs as they appear in forum):

"Now they're not just f*****g Silverlight developers, they're f*****g WPF developers as well? The video is just another nail in the coffin for Silverlight. Only a complete f*****g idiot would start a new major project in Silverlight, WPF, or Winforms now. What are you people thinking, are you insane? Just so there's no confusion, when my text is edited, the *** stands for F - * - * - * - * - * - G Because we've just been F****D."

--

In post Patriot Act America, the library books scan you.

.Net isn't going anywhere by darkgrayknight · 2011-06-13 09:05 · Score: 1

I don't think Microsoft is killing .net or even silverlight. At some point there will be some more merging movements between .net, wpf, silverlight, html5/javascript, svg, etc. Silverlight is the current Windows Phone 7 development environment, so it isn't going anywhere. The advantage of writing in Silverlight is that it is a subset of WPF. So phone apps can be windows apps pretty easily. They won't throw that all away. There maybe some modifications to add html5/javascript for lighter weight applications, but there will always be a need for more power than html5/javascript can provide.

Re:Yeah, cos you know... by Toonol · 2011-06-13 09:08 · Score: 1

No, his statement completely forgets about you and thousands of developers who use .NET because they don't know C/C++.

And the logical inverse is that you're forgetting about the thousands of developers who use .NET despite knowing C/C++.

There are applications for C and C++ that .Net doesn't work well for; and there are applications that are more reasonable to create in .Net than C++. The worst decision would be to use one language for every purpose. C/C++ isn't interchangeable with C# for the same reason C# isn't interchangeable with Javascript/HTML5; they're different languages because they have different features tailored to different purposes. The fact that there is some overlap doesn't make them all equivalent.

strong typing by StripedCow · 2011-06-13 09:11 · Score: 1

As long as javascript does not have strong typing, I don't think anybody will consider it a valid replacement for .NET languages.

--
If Pandora's box is destined to be opened, *I* want to be the one to open it.

Re:strong typing by JustNiz · 2011-06-13 09:18 · Score: 4, Funny

Meh. Strong typing is waaay overrated.
I can't tell you how many broken keyboards it has cost me.

Re:Oh geeee by Mongoose+Disciple · 2011-06-13 09:16 · Score: 1

Now? Now you still look like a gomer, because this article is stupid, and even if it wasn't? Microsoft hasn't succeeded in making VB6 go away despite a decade of trying and the people who make their dev tools fervently praying it would disappear.

A stopped clock is right twice a day; as a software prophet of doom, you have some work to rise to that standard.

Re:Yeah, cos you know... by theshowmecanuck · 2011-06-13 09:20 · Score: 2

1) Embrace
2) Extend
3) Extinguish
4) Profit

FTFY

--
-- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.

Re:Yeah, cos you know... by Nethemas+the+Great · 2011-06-13 09:32 · Score: 1

A better example might be, HTML5 isn't a .NET killer any more than Basset hounds are an SUV killer. Someone was trying to make hay for ad revenue and there were enough ignorant code monkeys and wannabes to bite. HTML5 and .NET are unrelated technologies solving entirely different problems.

--
Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.

Re:Yeah, cos you know... by CharlyFoxtrot · 2011-06-13 09:35 · Score: 2

Hammers 4 ever ! Death to screwdrivers !

--
If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error.

These Aren't The 'Droids You're looking for. by NotSanguine · 2011-06-13 09:36 · Score: 1

...He can go about his business.
Move along
Nothing to see here folks, just the inane rantings of a moron (Mike James, that is).

--
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr

C++ Renaissance by gbjbaanb · 2011-06-13 09:38 · Score: 1

C++ is undergoing a renaissance at Microsoft. Someone said that it makes sense as the platform team at MS doesn't like .NET and so doesn;t really give a fig what the dev team is trying to push. I guess the Mobile team is pushing Silverlight but no-one cares about them either. It sounds about right knowing Microsoft's huge staff and the infighting between teams.

I welcome a return to C++ on Microsoft platform, .NET is nice enough but it always felt a bit 'VB' to me, and besides, I have a huge amount of code to keep going (can't afford to rewrite it all). In any case, it does appear MS is moving away from its ".NET only, everywhere" approach to a more heterogenous development platform. I'm sure C# will be in there somewhere, even if WPF and Silverlight are relegated to the attic to keep VB and Foxpro company.

So yeah, everything just keeps going round and round.

Re:C++ Renaissance by Eponymous+Coward · 2011-06-13 09:49 · Score: 1

I've noticed the same thing. C++ was definitely taking on second class status at Microsoft. Recently, that trend has been sharply reversed. I think Herb Sutter has finally become effective inside the Microsoft machine.
Re:C++ Renaissance by pauljlucas · 2011-06-13 10:22 · Score: 1

C++ is undergoing a renaissance at Microsoft.

If only they would make it so that you can safely allocate an object in one DLL and destroy it in either another DLL or your main app using native C++ new/delete operators rather than their archaic COM mechanism.

--
If you reply, do so only to what I explicitly wrote. If I didn't write it, don't assume or infer it.
Re:C++ Renaissance by gbjbaanb · 2011-06-13 20:08 · Score: 1

you can, its just that both dlls need to use the same CRT subsystem. ie. its no good allocating in one dll using the debug CRT and then releasing in another using the release CRT.
I guess they could remove one or the other CRTs, like you get with COM or .NET; or you could build everything with the same CRT; or you could keep the "best practice" method of providing a release routine everywhere you provide an allocation routine. The latter is very sensible as it helps you keep group operations on your data objects in the same place.
Re:C++ Renaissance by pauljlucas · 2011-06-13 23:41 · Score: 1

My point is that you don't have this kind of issue on any other platform.

--
If you reply, do so only to what I explicitly wrote. If I didn't write it, don't assume or infer it.

Re:Yeah, cos you know... by Nethemas+the+Great · 2011-06-13 09:43 · Score: 1

I fail to understand what C/C++ has to do with a collection of technology frameworks. .NET isn't a programming language. You're comparing apples to motorcycles.

--
Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.

No problem. by Animats · 2011-06-13 09:46 · Score: 1

We'll just switch over to other well-supported Microsoft technologies, like Visual J++, for our PlaysForSure application.

As an old programmer .... by johnlcallaway · 2011-06-13 09:48 · Score: 2

... who as at some time wrote programs of varying complexity in assembler, NEAT/3, COBOL, FORTRAN, Java, C, C++, C#, JavaScript, PERL, various Unix shell scripts, DOS and many others that time have passed on, there is only one thing I have to say about anyone lamenting the passing of anything ...

Adapt .. or become the most expendable at layoff time.

The .NET and Java and Ruby and Python programmers today will suffer the same fate as the FORTRAN and COBOL programmers of the 60s and 70s. If you are too afraid to learn new things, you will become obsolete. You will become a dime-a-dozen programmer stuck with maintaining obsolete, legacy code that was so poorly written that no one wants to touch it. You will become the first person to be let go as the new kids get hired on.

It doesn't happen overnight. Today, you can tell your boss that you don't know how to do that and he will get someone else to do it. You can whine about what an abomination it is to use that new stuff when the old stuff is just fine. And he will get someone else to learn it. There is enough work to keep you around for a few more years, so keep it up.

But soon, after a few more new technologies have shown up, based on the stuff you originally didn't think was worth looking at, you will look around and realize you don't know jack schit anymore. I've seen it happen over and over again, because *I* was the one willing to step up and learn new stuff by saying "I don't know, but I can figure it out." No matter what a pile of donkey dung I thought it was. Now, I'm 52, employed, and still working on new tech .. and loving it! *AND* I know all of the old crap and can get in there and play hero when some POS C code written 15 years ago by a librarian fails.

Stop whining and do something about it by learning the new tools.

What a bunch of babies....

--
I rarely read replies, it's my opinion and if you thought about your opinion a little more, I'm OK with that.

Re:As an old programmer .... by jeffgtr · 2011-06-13 13:39 · Score: 1

Yep it's called evolution. Adapt or die, it applies to most everything, just happens a little faster in the tech field. If you adapt you'll be even more valuable because not only will you know the new stuff, you'll be the only one around who can fix/modify the old stuff. It's your choice, expendable or indispensable. Personally I don't like .net so if it's going away (and I doubt that it is) I say good riddance.
Re:As an old programmer .... by Lisandro · 2011-06-14 00:55 · Score: 1

Much, much, MUCH agreed. Mod parent up.
Re:As an old programmer .... by johnlcallaway · 2011-06-14 02:25 · Score: 1

And your debating is accomplishing ... what??? Is your ego so big that you really think anyone of any importance is listening to you and going to say 'I didn't think about that! Quick .. let's do what this guy says!' All you are doing is either inflaming those that disagree, or sharing with 'like minded folk' who already agree with you. Very few have actually changed their minds while reading this type of intercourse, and Microsoft doesn't even know you or I exist.

Your innocence is cute .. but every single programming change has been met with EXACTLY the same debate. COBOL, FORTRAN, C, C++, Java, C#, and all of the script languages have always been derided when they first came out. Remember .COM??? That was supposed to solve everything. Well .. .NET doesn't solve everything and evolution will take it's course. No matter what point you take, others will share their opinions of why you are wrong, so the net result is ... zero. Everything is an opinion, and unless you can show provable MS dollar based reasons why they need to do something, they will ignore you.

Your 'debate', which is really more like two kids arguing over whether Coke or Pepsi is better, doesn't amount to jack. If you are serious about it, go to work at Microsoft where you might have at least a snowball's chance in hell of making any difference.

--
I rarely read replies, it's my opinion and if you thought about your opinion a little more, I'm OK with that.

UI & code side by Synerg1y · 2011-06-13 09:52 · Score: 1

Let me start out by saying if they kill off silverlight nobody will miss it I don't think. Now, because javascript is client-side based language, and so is HTML5, 100% of the source is available to the browser. This doesn't work for most commercial solutions. I don't understand the validity of the comparison, it's like comparing apples and oranges. .NET works w/ jscript and html5, not as a competitor, nor is the latter a replacement. This kinda shit comes from newbs who probably wouldn't know where to start writing html1-4, much less predict technologies futures. Leave code to the coder people and go write about cooking, thanks.

Re:Yeah, cos you know... by ILongForDarkness · 2011-06-13 09:56 · Score: 1

I agree. If you know that your customers are windows users WPF/.Net is a huge advantage. At my work everyone uses windows. I'm pretty much the only guy that can code and can do a good job in C++ vb.net etc. I hacked something together that was about 3k loc, 10 reasonably complex objects, several "windows"/pages whatever of UI, connecting to 4 different databases etc as a web app. Guess how much effort it took to go from a web app to a desktop app? About 20 minutes. That is the power of .Net. You can change your mind pretty much whenever you want to and for the most part it will just be a matter of compiling your code as a WPF browser app versus Windows app.

I'm not saying platform independence isn't a great thing but for about half of the companies I worked for they were completely windows shops. I don't want to handcuff myself to javascript and HTML 5 if someone might want a desktop widget, or a full blown desktop app out of the thing sometime (or huge parts of the program would be reusable to make said systems). Additionally I find things like LINQ and lambda functions in .Net a very clean way of expressing my intent in my code versus having for loop spaghetti every time I want to iterate over an object to find every order where the customer was Bob in a set that I've already loaded into a local variable.

Re:Yeah, cos you know... by cavreader · 2011-06-13 09:58 · Score: 1

.NET is also useful for creating wrappers for C++ native code modules to simplify the middle tier development for programmers who are not efficient with C++. I am currently working for a large corporation that has about 2 developers out of about 500 with no practical experience with C++. I was a little shocked when I found that out.

I dislike Javascript by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-13 10:01 · Score: 1

I dislike Javascript. For the important job of client side web browser scripting language, I think we can and should do better.

Re:Yeah, cos you know... by cyberstealth1024 · 2011-06-13 10:05 · Score: 1

Hear, hear! May hammers take over the world!

Re:Silverlight, probably. .NET, probably not. by ILongForDarkness · 2011-06-13 10:12 · Score: 1

I agree. We seem to be in this damned scary world were all the devs rav about the UI in slashdot. What happened? Where is the command line school of thought? :-) A GUI is an abstraction that presents a well designed and implemented system to the user, not the other way around. Yeah so what Unity gave Ubuntu a slightly different shiny button than it had before, etc etc. To me we need to focus more on the systems and support for systems development (I use that kind of loosely as we are still talking up in the app layer) and not the shinny buttons in user land. At some level you need to be able to present things like print dialogs in a browser, or at least it would be nice to be able to, however the back end still has to be logically structured and written in a language that allows that to be expressed in a concise and clean mapping between concept and code. Java, .Net, python etc are the ways that is done. Javascript and HTML will never take the place of .Net because .Net is mainly a below UI language with some functionality for UI built on top. I think you can see that from XAML designers in the latest Visual Studio's. GUI is going to be more in the realm of graphics designers with a back end that is some sort of mark up. But the functionality will call into something more powerful like ASP, VB, C#, Java etc. Over on the desktop app land I don't think you'll see any change. .Net does what it needs to do to keep those developers happy with the GUI they can build and it is nice to have easy access to call into whatever objects are on the screen from the code that is used for the system logic.

Re:Oh geeee by unity100 · 2011-06-13 11:03 · Score: 1

and dumping of silverlight. there is a saying here, that goes 'the coming of wednesday is apparent from thursday' (yes its backwards). i think you can get what it means.

--
Read radical news here

Re:Oh geeee by unity100 · 2011-06-13 11:05 · Score: 1

silverlight is gone. if i suggested it a month ago, i would be modded down. look at how it turned out recently ...

--
Read radical news here

Hype by jakartus · 2011-06-13 11:53 · Score: 1

Yes Microsoft is embracing HTML5 and Javascript and JQuery, but does that mean the end of .NET? Those technologies are client side/browser technologies. .NET will still be used on the server side, just like it is today and has been. Yes Silverlight (as a WEB client) will be impacted but that is it. It does not mean .NET/C# is going away anymore than Javascript/HTML5 is going to make Java or PHP go away.

Re:Yeah, cos you know... by bondsbw · 2011-06-13 12:44 · Score: 1

And my response is, that it's not even "mainly" used for server-side processing. There's much more to .NET than ASP.NET.

--
All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.

What's left? by t2t10 · 2011-06-13 13:43 · Score: 1

If Microsoft were to do that, what's left? Their kernel? Their aging MS Office suite? Or are they going to become a total patent troll?

Re:Yeah, cos you know... by Alex+Belits · 2011-06-13 13:54 · Score: 1

.NET is also useful for incompetent developers who spends weeks writing trivial wrappers over code written by competent developers in C and C++, despite competent developers being able to write better GUI in Qt spending mere hours of additional development time.

FTFY.

--
Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.

Re:WTF is WPF? by Cutting_Crew · 2011-06-13 14:04 · Score: 1

I can't believe some companies are still looking for MFC developers..despite MS switching to WPF. UNbelievable.

Re:Yeah, cos you know... by bondsbw · 2011-06-13 14:07 · Score: 1

Haha... not sure if intentional, but your steps define GP's steps pretty well.

--
All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.

Re:Fear Mongering by a-yz · 2011-06-13 14:18 · Score: 1

I read the i-programmer article referenced at the top of this thread. It's implied claim that Microsoft is dumping .NET is baseless and dumb (though the idea that Silverlight is being de-emphasized is probably valid). I feel like I'm in an audience of jumping screeching monkeys, and only a few of us are just standing here watching the frenzy in wonder.

Read "Mac OS X Lion Has a Browser-Only Mode" above by Corson · 2011-06-13 14:34 · Score: 1

If you read the posting "Mac OS X Lion Has a Browser-Only Mode" above, and keep in mind that Google are bringing Chrome OS to the table in addition to Android, then you have the answer to the puzzle: M$ want to show that they can also do that (HTML5+JS, that is). Windows 8 has a "dual personality": one can choose from two kinds of user interfaces. So sleep tight and stop worrying.

some cheese with that whine? by milimetric · 2011-06-13 14:43 · Score: 1

I'm a 29 year old developer. I've heard this story from at least one co-worker at every company I've been at:

"Boy oh boy, technology X from 10+ years ago was really the best, why did we ever move away from that?"

As if Microsoft and all the other evil companies randomly force everyone to develop in their newest environments. If you like something, use it and stick with it. If you think it makes sense for Microsoft to become obsolete just because you fell in love with their technology, you're a little off your rocker.

As for me, HTML5 and JS is the best technology ever, I'm going to learn that and never have to learn anything ever again ;)

What about C#? by TechwoIf · 2011-06-13 14:53 · Score: 1

Sence C# requires .NET to run, will it get dumped? As far as I know, every C# program out there that I've seen required .NET before I could download and run it.

Advertisers! Advertisers! Advertisers! by Alex+Belits · 2011-06-13 14:58 · Score: 1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HTkA9L2J2gY

I wish they were all this stupid.

--
Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.

Re:Advertisers! Advertisers! Advertisers! by t2t10 · 2011-06-14 08:19 · Score: 1

Is that for real? That idiot is running a major computer company? Unbelievable.

Developers Shafted By Microsoft by Crypto+Gnome · 2011-06-13 15:00 · Score: 1

News at Eleven!!!!

WHUT? You mean this is no surprise? Not even News?

Sorry folks but everyone with a clue already knew that DOT NET was a Microsoft attempt to completely screw (over) the developer community.

The fact that said community was too blind to see it does not make the above statement any less true.

--
Visit CryptoGnome in his home.

Re:Yeah, cos you know... by twebb72 · 2011-06-13 15:37 · Score: 1

HTML5 excels at the GUI.

HTML5 excels at the GUI in a browser. FTFY. There are many other GUI API's that are far superior.

Re:Yeah, cos you know... by twebb72 · 2011-06-13 15:47 · Score: 1

I agree with your comments wholly. Microsoft is positioning themselves to compliment silverlight/wpf, with html5/javascript. In this fashion, you can go from web app to desktop app, just like you can go from silverlight to wpf. So many web developers are absolutely lost when faced with an event driven application, that it doesn't translate well -- this is their answer. They're trying to open up more native desktop applications, for windows, by letting web apps run standalone.
In this way, any web developer who doesn't have the event driven experience, and whose brains turn to mush as soon as they have to touch the server (and God, the market if flooded with these useful idiots), allows them to write desktop apps just as mindless.

Re:Article source writer is WRONG by Jeremiah+Cornelius · 2011-06-13 16:36 · Score: 1

Heh...

TurboPascal.

--
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."

ahem... by cshark · 2011-06-13 17:37 · Score: 1

So?

Anyone remember the death of VB, ASP, and COM circa 2001?
I'm pretty sure I predicted something like this.

There was some outcry then, but a lot of us really felt shafted over the thing.
Those of us that were smart realized there was no future in being a Microsoft Evangelist. .Net is different though. It's survived longer than I ever thought it would. That's for certain. Four major incarnations now, and I never saw it going past three.

The Microsoft Evangelists need to understand one key point.
You just don't matter to them.

Otherwise, they would have a problem making you obsolete, and/or forcing you to re-educate yourself.
It's obvious that they don't.

So why not pick up a real platform?
Broaden your horizons a little?
Make yourself an asset, rather than just a member of the crowd?

Easier said than done, or any number of other excuses, I'm sure.

--

This signature has Super Cow Powers

Dumb by KlomDark · 2011-06-13 18:17 · Score: 1

This article is fucking stupid, even Javascript web sites need a web service to fetch data from. Not like you are going to write a web service in JavaScript. This is just FUD.

Re:Oh geeee by benjymouse · 2011-06-13 18:42 · Score: 1

silverlight is gone. if i suggested it a month ago, i would be modded down. look at how it turned out recently ...

No it is not. It is still Internet FUD spread by the likes of you. Silverlight is at the core of Microsoft mobile strategy. Will you come back here and eat crow when that is confirmed? Or will you then go into full spin FUD mode and claim that is just Microsoft saying it is at the core of the strategy, but they will be doing something else?

Silverlight has very good bindings to JavaScript. Silverlight can still do a lot of stuff that JavaScript and HTML5 cannot do. Stuff which is important to the Metro Phone UI.

--
Reading slashdot one-liner: (irm http://rss.slashdot.org/Slashdot/slashdot).rdf.item | fl title,desc*

Re:Yeah, cos you know... by rioki · 2011-06-13 19:10 · Score: 1

Don't cry. Microsoft gave up on my a long time ago. I am a hardcore C++ native programmer and native can rip managed applications to shreds in nano seconds. Not only did they fail to provide a update / replacement for MFC (a good start, considering it was developed 92) but they almost completely forgot that there are native applications. I am not advocating one technology over the other (ok I am a bit), but certain computationally intensive tasks just don't mend well with .Net and I don't want to have a native-managed transition just to have a GUI. You know what I use nowadays on windows? GTKmm!

HTML5 and JavaScript makes sense for *tiles* by benjymouse · 2011-06-13 22:54 · Score: 1

That MS is about to axe Silverlight or .NET is FUD spread by an unholy alliance between click-whoring bloggers and individuals suffering from bad cases of Microsoft Hate Disease.

If you look at what MS has been doing with the browser HTML5 and JavaScript for tiles makes a lot of sense: Look at how IE9 integrated with the taskbar. Look at webslices introduced with IE7 (iirc). This will be about websites having an easy path to have tiles on the Windows 8 desktop. Not just as shortcuts to the front pages, but tiles which (like web slices) actually display live information directly from the sites. And don't be surprised if they are made using simple markup just like web slices.

MS is trying to blur the lines between apps, applications and internet sites.

But for application development .NET nor Silverlight are going away any time soon. On the contrary, Silverlight is very much at the core of Windows Phone 7/8. There are still tons of things you can do with .NET and not with HTML / JavaScript, like true threads and task oriented parallelism which will be *huge* going forward.

--
Reading slashdot one-liner: (irm http://rss.slashdot.org/Slashdot/slashdot).rdf.item | fl title,desc*

Re:Yeah, cos you know... by Zediker · 2011-06-13 23:05 · Score: 1

He may be referring to the Windows Foundation series of capability in .Net (e.g., Presentation Foundation, Workflow Foundation, Communication Foundation).

Its not directly referred to much, but it is a great set of capability.

--
I love to slaughter the english language.

Re:Oh geeee by Mongoose+Disciple · 2011-06-14 01:25 · Score: 1

You'd get modded down because you're wrong. As you're still wrong.

Silverlight didn't go anywhere. Shit, it just released a new version. Another new version is due later this year.

Re:Yeah, cos you know... by ByOhTek · 2011-06-14 01:36 · Score: 1

What about those who know C/C++, but actually prefer .NET for many tasks?

--
Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).

Re:Yeah, cos you know... by Xest · 2011-06-14 03:09 · Score: 1

I understand you're trying to make a positive contribution to the conversation but it's also sad to see you modded +4 insightful as your post is one of the most blatant examples I've seen in recent years about how misinformed some Slashdot comments are and how many ignorant moderators there are that will mod any old completely wrong falsehood up.

"HTML5 excels at the GUI"

Fuck no it doesn't. No, not in any way shape or form, it's in fact quite terrible for it in the grand scheme of things. What it is at least is the next iteration of HTML - something that's been hacked way beyond it's original purpose of displaying largely static hyperlinked content. The very fact HTML has been mangled into a tool to create full blown interfaces is both it's strength and weakness- it's brought the web forward, but it also means it's far weaker than a purpose designed set of tools for producing web applications would be. XAML in WPF is an example of markup designed specifically for GUIs and it does it far better than HTML ever will be able to.

".NET is mainly used for server-side processing."

No, it's not. That's one of many things it's used for but it's also used for everything from desktop applications to XBox games (indie, and some arcade games use .NET), pretty much the whole Windows Phone 7 platform application layer, amongst all the server side uses which range far and wide from HPC to simple dynamic web pages.

Your sentiment isn't wrong, but it seems obvious you're way out of your depth with the subject in general.

MSFT see's the light with C++ by CLaRGe · 2011-06-14 13:51 · Score: 1

C++ is the most cross-platform language available. You can write native apps on Windows, iOS, Android, WebOS, RIM's OS, Nokia's flavor of the month, etc

MSFT is now looking to update their C++ offering by renaming it WinC++. See for yourself: http://www.zdnet.com/blog/microsoft/what-is-winc-and-how-does-it-figure-in-microsofts-bid-to-make-tools-a-2-billion-business/9359

--
http://10CentMail.com - the Amazon SES app.

Re:Yeah, cos you know... by theshowmecanuck · 2011-06-14 13:59 · Score: 1

Microsoft Antitrust Case

--
-- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.

Re:Yeah, cos you know... by cbiltcliffe · 2011-06-15 00:34 · Score: 1

Mike, Mike, or MC?

Yeah, yeah, I know.....the middle one isn't spelled the same,

--
"City hall" in German is "Rathaus" Kinda explains a few things......

Re:Yeah, cos you know... by KlomDark · 2011-06-24 13:26 · Score: 1

Possible to write good code, maybe it's possible. But fucking torturous to the poor developer. Feels like writing ASP.old code or Cold Fusion, sucky as embedded tag interpretation. Yuck, count me out. If you like that shit, go for it, you'll have no competition from me for your shitty job.

Slashdot Mirror

Devs Worried Microsoft Will Dump .NET

300 of 440 comments (clear)