Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft .NET Core 2.0 For Linux Released; Redhat Will Bundle Microsoft's .NET (zdnet.com)
Billly Gates writes: Microsoft recently released Visual Studio 15.3 for Windows and Visual Studio 7.1 for Mac with .NET core 2.0. In addition to porting Microsoft Code and SQL Server to Linux, they have ported .NET. Redhat will bundle .NET in their software offerings instead of relying on Mono. .NET core is Microsoft's open-source .NET platform which is not based off Mono and available for Linux, Mac, and Windows here.
This has got to be the seventh sign.
I think I will repent, while I still have a chance.
First law of people: People are generally stupid.
I'll pay to watch that.
I got Red Hat Linux running at home. What does .NET brings to Linux that I couldn't do on my Windows PCS?
MS bought off Xamarin awhile ago. On Mac, the new Visual Studio is really the same previous Xamarin Studio with Visual Studio branding slapped on top. I wouldn't be surprised if they haven't done more or less the same with mono.
At least on fedora it seemed like anytime something used mono, mono itself wanted to pull in a bazillion dependencies for install. It looked bloated to me. Of course this was years ago, haven't seen mono in a long time. I guess this makes that project mostly obsolete.
You have to be able to trust your compiler...
I barely trust Microsoft to not release malware that infects other companies products. Why the hell would invite them into my OS if I don't have to.
I wish I had a good sig, but all the good ones are copyrighted
It's like MS haven't changed, instead of joining an existing project and improving it, they want to be in control. Old Microsoft, you haven't changed. Do not want
Uhm, because Microsoft always had the canonical source code to ASP.NET and Mono was a shitty attempt to re-implement it as open source? All they had to do was open it up, and they have. Hate on Microsoft all you want but this complaint is just silly.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Microsoft finally embraces OSS and all you do is bitch.
Your google skills *suck* man.
https://github.com/dotnet/core
https://github.com/dotnet/cli
Microsoft finally embraces OSS and all you do is bitch.
All that is left is extend and extinguish.
Long time Linux users will have seen exactly what's been happening: Linux has been slowing discarding its UNIX heritage, and has been becoming more Windows-like for a while now.
During its early years, we saw Linux tend to imitate Solaris, and to a lesser extent the other commercial UNIXes. But as they've faded away, we've seen Linux become more and more Windows-like.
Linux-oriented desktop environments like KDE and GNOME were the most obvious examples. They were clearly inspired by Windows, rather than UNIX desktop environments like CDE or NeWS or IRIX Interactive Desktop. GNOME 3 resembles the Windows Metro ideology.
Systemd has really accelerated the process. It brings ideas like binary logging and a monolithic architecture from Windows to Linux, for example. These are ideas that totally contradict with the traditional UNIX way of doing things.
Now the availability of .NET Core on Linux makes it even more Windows-like.
People familiar with FreeBSD and Solaris will see the differences clearly. Linux used to be a lot more like them than it was like Windows. But if you use a modern Linux distro today, it'll often feel closer to Windows than it will to FreeBSD or Solaris.
This is why we've seen so many long time Linux users move away from Linux, in favor of the *BSDs or macOS. When these people starting using Linux, often back in the 1990s, they used it because of how it adhered to the UNIX way of doing things. But now that so many modern Linux distros don't do this, these users have had to find better alternatives. So now they use FreeBSD, or OpenBSD, or NetBSD, or DragonflyBSD, or macOS. All of those OSes provide a much truer UNIX-like experience than Linux tends to these days.
Microsoft will secretly use this as another way to force Windows 10 on those who don't want it. Leave the office at night with RHEL running. Arrive at the office in the morning...Windows 10 is there to greet you.
"The two most abundant elements in the universe are hydrogen and stupidity." -Harlan Ellison
Mono is owned by Microsoft now anyways, so it is literally useless to use mono over dotnet as a second-source.
If only the FSF hadn't shuttered their dotgnut implementation because mono was more advanced, we wouldn't be in quite the dotnet quandry we are today.
... crap. When they actually port over the WPF (windows presentation foundation) so you can actually make beautiful drag-and-drop GUI applications in Linux and Windows using Visual Studio.
Until they add GUI, there's no point. And they 99% likely know that already. Without GUI, userland Windows programs won't target also Linux. The benefit to Microsoft is mostly in their direction, and not Linux.
I really hope that MS acquires Red Hat sometime soon.
I think that it would actually be the best thing for the Linux community if that happened.
Ideally it would be a huge wake-up call to Debian, and by extension Ubuntu. I don't think they'd want to deal with systemd, GNOME 3, and other software if it were primary developed by a MS-owned entity or a division of MS.
The ideal outcome of that would be Debian immediately ditching systemd in favor of OpenRC (or even sysvinit), along with GNOME 3 and GTK+ being ditched in favor of KDE and Qt.
If that happened, then Linux would regain what it has lost over the last decade. It would restore the reliability and trust we used to have in Linux, but that has been draining away with the rise of GNOME 3, GTK+ 3, and systemd.
Just click on the EULA I accept button, FFS
WARNING: Smartphones have side effects--most of them undocumented.
it's a trap!
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
The 3 E's?
Embrace,
Extend,
Extinguish.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
From that page,
"Embrace, extend, and extinguish",[1] also known as "Embrace, extend, and exterminate",[2] is a phrase that the U.S. Department of Justice found[3] was used internally by Microsoft[4] to describe its strategy for entering product categories involving widely used standards, extending those standards with proprietary capabilities, and then using those differences to disadvantage its competitors.
Just because they have failed at it recently in other product lines does not mean they have no desire to protect their original core OS business.
I'm not sure if I'm supposed to reply with a comment about the average Slashdot denizen or a comment about your mother. Hmm...
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
You both got to lecture each other so kiss and make up.
Everything has become more Windows like than the other way around. Binary is just another word for compressed and Windows has moved past that to tokenized interpreted which is even more compressed still, but you go ahead and use as much spacetime as you want.
I have been unimpressed by a number of apps written in mono recently (mainly 3D printer related stuff) as there seems to be no common versioning or even awareness of the different distros, what package management systems they may have or what the commonly installed and stable versions of any libraries may be.
You get these big ugly lists of instructions, usually telling you to uninstall all existing instances of mono and/or mono-based libraries and install the one specific version which their project will run with, then download 3 or 4 other dependencies from other projects (none of which give you a simple way to get the specific version of their project which is required) and then you have to fudge things around to bypass things provided by your resident package management system. Then the app prolly doesn't work anyway, or has the most primitive UI you have seen in years.
Ok, I know that a real Linux user has traditionally been prepared to edit configs and make files, build a few things from outside of their package management, and handle conflicting library dependencies without blinking, but I don't see why mono and .Net core projects had to take a huge backward step and make us mess around the way used to with Linux 15 years ago. I just expected if we were going to bring in all that bloat then it should at least have made things smoother to manage, or better looking, or something modern.
If I had a DeLorean... I would probably only drive it from time to time.
It compiles to bytecode, which can be turned into compilable c# or vb.net by a third party tool, Ilspy, which is open source and by default opens itself to show you its own decompilation.
So now your comment makes no sense. You don't have to trust, you can verify every line.
You clearly haven't used Gnome 3.
Onda Technology Institute
I would have thought that .NET, being effectively a substitute for Java for almost the same class of applications, doesn't substantially change the direction in which Linux distributions are heading since Java had already been present in them for quite some time.
Ezekiel 23:20
Your google skills *suck* man.
https://github.com/dotnet/core
https://github.com/dotnet/cli
He used Bing.
A substitute for Java? It's like saying Spanish is a substitute for English because it uses the same alphabet.
Tired of my customary (Score:1)
But who would you root for, do you want Microsoft or Poettering in your Linux?
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Things are much more complicated than what you both think. A big proportion of the .NET Framework code has been public for a while now. As far as it is a huge reality (different languages, platforms, implementation types, versions, etc.), they divided it in different repositories. The one you are linking, CoreCLR, includes the most basic parts (e.g., contents of mscorlib.dll in Windows), but there are others like CoreFX (newer parts) or Roslyn (compilers and Visual Studio).
.NET Framework has been systematically evolving and including more and more options and sub-types. Core refers to one of these classifications, although a quite big one: it aims to allow a somehow homogeneous management of the big number of supported platforms/formats. Here you can find a detailed description about it.
The
Custom Solvers 2.0 = Alvaro Carballo Garcia = varocarbas.
Just posting to see what is wrong with my profile (it is still not showing my last comment?!).
Custom Solvers 2.0 = Alvaro Carballo Garcia = varocarbas.
Long time Linux users will have seen exactly what's been happening: Linux has been slowing discarding its UNIX heritage, and has been becoming more Windows-like for a while now.
Long time Linux user here - I have been using linux since the days of Slackware on 80+ floppies, when the kernel version was 0.9. I don't think Linux is becoming Windows like - it is more like Windows is coming around to the fact that the UNIX model is in fact the better one. What we have been seeing is that there are more Windows style applications - the graphical desktop on Linux is still only an application layer, thankfully, and can be left out without much loss of functionality (OK, maybe I'm exaggerating a bit here). And happily, we don't have to run .net, which is little more than what Microsoft would have wanted the JVM to be, only they didn't get to dictate things that time around.
My own experience with .net is limited - due to work I'm forced to use 1 .net application, which I keep in a VM running Windows. It has plenty of resources and is all alone in there, yet it still manages to run out of network sockets and other resources, sometimes even before I have put it to any use. Our developers still haven't managed to figure out why, because it is apparently un-debuggable. If this is generally the way with .net, I can't see Linux being overwhelmed by a massive influx of superior applications.
While I agree in general still how is MacOS more UNIXy than Linux?
Go back 5-10 years and look at how VB was used and abused by self defined "programmers" who were accountants, MBA, engineering managers, and even some VP's. Their applications sometimes "worked", but usually under the umbrella of "just because you could doesn't mean you should".
I'd wager .NET is just v2.0 of this issue. Easy to use programming languages do not make people _good_ programmers. Just as a new cheap motorcycle doesn't make people good riders, or a new type of firearm doesn't make an untrained user more likely to hit a(n intended) target.
- Sig
It's a trap!
Nice analogy. Java and .NET are indeed very close to each other in most traits, just like Spanish and English. Unlike, say, Haskell and Forth, or APL and Prolog (or Chinese and Amharic...).
Ezekiel 23:20
Linux in general lacks professionalism, especially in development practices, which results in low quality of the software. I think that Microsoft getting involved in Linux will finally take things to the next level.
Yeah, right, I don't see it. Microsoft's window manager is so awesome that most of the time Windows Explorer pops a dialog it opens behind the window you're currently using. You wouldn't even know it's there unless unless you notice the pulsing button on the task bar.
Visual Studio for Mac is definitely Xamarin Studio with a different name. .NET Core is most certainly *not* Mono, it's an entirely different codebase.
Karma: Poor (Mostly affected by lame karma-joke sigs)
I have been unimpressed by a number of apps written in mono recently (mainly 3D printer related stuff) as there seems to be no common versioning or even awareness of the different distros, what package management systems they may have or what the commonly installed and stable versions of any libraries may be.
I've seen that, also. Several programs I've tried to use even crashed after failing to find a specific point release of mono installed.
Then the app prolly doesn't work anyway...
Ew. I just vomited a little bit.
If you want a vision of the future, imagine a youtube comments section scrolling - forever.
look at how VB was used and abused by self defined "programmers" who were accountants, MBA, engineering managers, and even some VP's
YEARS ago an engineer I worked with spent two years working on an elaborate script in Excel. It was his masterpiece and then we upgraded to Office 95 which ditched the excel macro engine for VBA. He was crushed.
"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
I don't think Linux is becoming Windows like - it is more like Windows is coming around to the fact that the UNIX model is in fact the better one.
They both borrow features from each other. However, there have been some pretty big changes to Linux that would have sounded like the signs of the apocalypse. For example (in no particular order): .NET from Microsoft (not just mono, which I equate to wine, but provided by Microsoft and shipped with RHEL!?!?!)
* ACL's
* selinux
* systemd init
* dbus
* gconf (and gsettings / dconf)
* pulse audio
* graphical boot
*
* merged desktop displays (instead of 0.0 and 0.1; aka xinerama, etc)
* binary logs (systemd)
* etc
Sadly, I think it's inevitable. In the early days of Linux, most, if not all, of the devs were coming from the UNIX world, or at least had some time on those other systems (I actively used SunOS, IRIX, HPUX, Solaris, FreeBSD, and Linux, all around the time of the release of version 2 of the Linux kernel). Now, most of those are dead, and the others are far more rare. Our younger devs may grow up using Linux, but they're also using Windows, and rarely any other unix-like OS.... so of course we get many mannerisms and such from Windows :-(
As a long time UNIX user, I find the idea that BSD, macOS, CDE, or NeWS represent "the UNIX way" ridiculous.
XFCE still looks as a UNIX to me. I have 12 (24) fullscreen frameless black&white text consoles in XFCE with alt-f1..alt-f12 hotkeys and this is all I needed on my 386/4MB and all I need today.
Wasn't KDE 'inspired' by CDE - at very least in terms of its acronym. But seriously, CDE was kind of Windows-like in its day. It's just that it was modeled after Windows 3. But then Windows 3 may well have been modeled after Unix GUIS from that period...
Posted from my Android phone. Oh, I can change this? There, that's better...
This is being driven by Microsoft, not RedHat. Mono started out based on the assumption that - because it's Microsoft (yes, it was that long ago), .NET would end up snaring a huge developer share, and Linux would wither if C# developers couldn't code for it. But since then, the internet changed a few things. Yes, there are still C# developers, but they're not the majority. Microsoft wants to lure developers to it's Azure cloud, and needs to support Linux for that to happen.
I.e., the assumption today is that if you want the developers, you need to be on Linux. That doesn't mean Linux developers need to actually use .NET, just because it's there...
Yes, .NET from Microsoft introduces an MS dependency for Linux developers that use it. But how many Linux devs actually do? What .NET on Linux does accomplish is to take what wind is left out of the sails of Mono. But Mono was pretty much a dead end anyway. RedHat spent lots of money toward its development, and probably doesn't want to have to continue maintaining the stuff that .NET replaces. Presumably the GNOME hooks for Mono will be adjusted to work with .NET, and what few apps actually are coded in Mono will continue to work. Beyond that, sure, internet back-end developers would do well to be wary of investing too heavily on Microsoft-controlled technologies. And desktop Linux developers aren't really being given anything of use here...
Posted from my Android phone. Oh, I can change this? There, that's better...
He was more like a fellow traveler, methinks. They can't possibly have paid him enough money to sell his soul like that, 15 years ago.
HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
Spanish and English are pretty far apart on the language tree. English is a Germanic language, and Spanish is a romance language derived from Latin. You have to go all the way back to Indo-European to find a common root, which IIRC is a theorized language as it's so far back there's no records about it. English does borrow a lot from the romance family through the Normal influence, which is French.
One huge difference between English and Spanish is the information density. They're almost at opposite ends of the spectrum: Spanish has a fairly low ranking in this metric, whereas English has one of the highest.
Just because you have one shitty application your statement on limitation of .NET sounds really funny. Clearly the limitation is your knowledge about .NET. I have seen as many shitty and slow application written in Java as in .NET. These are just tools and what really matters are the skills of developer.
I develop in both Java and C# and they are so similar. Although I have to say C# as of today has more language features. You have any equivalent in Java available in .NET.
- Spring MVC - ASP.NET MVC
- Hibernate - Nhibernate, EntityFramwork
- Spring DI - Autofac
- Maven - nuget + msbuild
and so on...
I have been developing new projects in ASP.NET Core for Linux since version 1.1 and it's damn fast. It uses own web server called Kestrel that sits behind Apache or ngnix.
Package management for .NET core on Linux is done by 'dotnet' command.
Saying that Java is nice because it works on all OS's is like saying that anal sex is nice because it works on all genders
You failed to grasp the point I was trying to make as in both languages (computer) are much different than one thinks. I'm a native speaker of both Spanish and English so I know very well the differences even if they share the same alphabet. It's the reason I didn't choose French over Spanish.
Tired of my customary (Score:1)
Spanish speakers tend to speak more quickly than their English-speaking counterparts, so the information rate in the spoken language is comparable
Actually, the whole point of that research paper was that *all* human languages seem to have roughly equivalent information rates, because ones with poorer information density make up for it with higher speaking rates. My point in bringing it up was only to show that Spanish and English really are very different languages as seen by the information density.
ASP.NET has been out of the picture for a long time now - it was closed source, yes, it still remains closed, but it's legacy tech. Microsoft essentially left it on life support, and moved on to ASP.NET MVC - which, despite the name, is a complete rewrite with a very different design, and which was open source from the get go (indeed, it was one of the first large OSS projects at MS, and helped pave the way for more broad OSS acceptance within the company). So Mono didn't need to re-implement it. At this point, the vast majority of new .NET web code that's written, is written in ASP.NET MVC. The biggest website that's using it is probably StackOverflow.
But .NET Core went one step further, and rewrote ASP.NET MVC again, to get rid of any remaining vestigial dependencies on the old web stack (it was mostly low-level HTTP stuff), and simplify it further. That's called ASP.NET Core, and it's what you use to develop web apps on .NET Core.
Anyone who wants a more modern language, for example.
ASP.NET has been out of the picture for a long time now - it was closed source, yes, it still remains closed, but it's legacy tech. Microsoft essentially left it on life support, and moved on to ASP.NET MVC
To the point that, when someones says "ASP.NET," I automatically assume they mean ASP.NET MVC.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."