Spose you have a point on that. And, I might add, this also allows me to blame Microsoft for even my own faults. If something I write doesn't work on windows, my boss starts bitching against Microsoft instead of asking me if I'm sure I did anything wrong.
I know, this encourages developers to write even more shitty programs, that doesn't work and requires other people to work on it, making the end user (which, thanks to Microsoft uber-simplified interfaces, is usually clueless) have to pay for a lot of work that wasn't really needed.
I 3 uncle Bill
Wow. Amazng, ain't it?
A pity that, if you only TALK to someone who is a member of the famigerated Linux community, you can see that things are pretty different. But, reality isn't that shiny as fiction is.... therefore, we have this article.
Probably, some people just decides not to see. And I, a convicted linux user, have to admit that uncle Bill is not one of them.
To put it really simply, I see the fact as follows:
1).NET is something that matters to developers, not to the users. If under the case there's C#, C++, C or twenty chinese guys calculating by hand, it doesn't matter to any user as long as it works.
So why should Microsoft write their OS in C#? To make it Open Source and go "see my source! It's better than Linux!". I don't think so.
2) imho, I don't think Microsoft is putting too much effort in this (Longhorn). Because, the target of Longhorn seems pretty dead. The things that can be done now with PCs could be done with the PCs I used five year ago. Maybe faster, but nothing really new came out. While other areas (embed systems just for one) are in great expansion and I think Microsoft is planning to jump into 'em.
3) I suspend my judgemnt on Longhorn till it's out.
Slashdot Mirror
Spose you have a point on that. And, I might add, this also allows me to blame Microsoft for even my own faults. If something I write doesn't work on windows, my boss starts bitching against Microsoft instead of asking me if I'm sure I did anything wrong. I know, this encourages developers to write even more shitty programs, that doesn't work and requires other people to work on it, making the end user (which, thanks to Microsoft uber-simplified interfaces, is usually clueless) have to pay for a lot of work that wasn't really needed. I 3 uncle Bill
Wow. Amazng, ain't it? A pity that, if you only TALK to someone who is a member of the famigerated Linux community, you can see that things are pretty different. But, reality isn't that shiny as fiction is.... therefore, we have this article.
Probably, some people just decides not to see. And I, a convicted linux user, have to admit that uncle Bill is not one of them. To put it really simply, I see the fact as follows: 1) .NET is something that matters to developers, not to the users. If under the case there's C#, C++, C or twenty chinese guys calculating by hand, it doesn't matter to any user as long as it works.
So why should Microsoft write their OS in C#? To make it Open Source and go "see my source! It's better than Linux!". I don't think so.
2) imho, I don't think Microsoft is putting too much effort in this (Longhorn). Because, the target of Longhorn seems pretty dead. The things that can be done now with PCs could be done with the PCs I used five year ago. Maybe faster, but nothing really new came out. While other areas (embed systems just for one) are in great expansion and I think Microsoft is planning to jump into 'em.
3) I suspend my judgemnt on Longhorn till it's out.