My Microsoft .net on OSX question went over like a lead balloon
So I wanted to see what interest there was in the dot net community:
http://www.gotdotnet.com/Community/M...aspx?id=143167
It doesn't seem too promising to me. The prospect of being stuck with Java Swing garbage for my GUIs gives me nightmares.
http://www.gotdotnet.com/Community/M...aspx?id=143167
It doesn't seem too promising to me. The prospect of being stuck with Java Swing garbage for my GUIs gives me nightmares.
Comments
i love that band!
I'm being sarcastic. Well, somewhat. I've heard of it, I've read about it, I've read about it some more. What the hell is it suppose to do better than what we have? What problem is .net solving, or what solution is it offering? That we need?
Originally posted by iPeon
.net?
I'm being sarcastic. Well, somewhat. I've heard of it, I've read about it, I've read about it some more. What the hell is it suppose to do better than what we have? What problem is .net solving, or what solution is it offering? That we need?
Well, if you really want to know what it is...
Published by ZDNet
Microsoft prepares to explain .Net
With the campaign, dubbed "One Degree of Separation," the software maker will be pitching its .Net products and services--designed to bring business computing onto the Web--as a means by which companies can eliminate time and technology barriers between customers, partners and employees. The ads will appear in 10 countries in Europe and the Americas, Microsoft said Friday.
The ads will attempt to explain how Microsoft's vast .Net technology can, for instance, help make supply chains more efficient. They will feature companies that have already tried out .Net, including Dollar Rent A Car, which used the technology to integrate its reservation system with the Web site of an airline partner.
The .Net strategy ties together nearly all of the software giant's products, services, Web sites and development efforts. It includes a new blueprint for how software should be designed; a set of products for building that software; and .Net My Services, an initial set of Microsoft-hosted services. Later this year, the company plans to offer content, shopping, banking, entertainment and other Internet services through a variety of devices, all linked to its Passport authentication service.
Although Microsoft's introduction earlier this week of its Visual Studio.Net development tools was well-received by developers and Wall Street analysts, the company has yet to refine other aspects of the .Net strategy. Potential security vulnerabilities have already been spotted in the tools.
"Several elements are still needed...before the entire .Net platform can be deployed," Merrill Lynch analyst Christopher Shilakes said in a research note Wednesday.
Microsoft executives have acknowledged that the .Net strategy hasn't been perfected, especially when it comes to translating the technical aspects into concepts that fit with the way businesspeople think. In a recent interview with CNET News.com, Jim Allchin, group vice president of Microsoft's Platforms Group, said that the development of .Net My Services hasn't been fully thought out yet.
"I think we just got ahead of ourselves and didn't get clear enough thinking," Allchin said of the technology. "We did have smart people working on this, and they've done some incredible innovation. But the business side was confusing and didn't fit with what I think many of our customers wanted."
The advertising campaign follows a $200 million campaign for the company's new Windows XP launch. Allchin said Microsoft has not finished spending that budget.
So the main feature of .NET is the 200 megabucks budget spent on rebranding DirectX, Visual Basic Studio and MSN. Any more questions?
Originally posted by costique
Well, if you really want to know what it is...
So the main feature of .NET is the 200 megabucks budget spent on rebranding DirectX, Visual Basic Studio and MSN. Any more questions?
Tell me another framework that has all of the thick client libraries, all of the thin client libraries, install libraries (for writing installation and distribution packages), universal database access, graphics library, printing library, networking library, Globalization (for porting your application to any language/any dialect), IO library, messaging libraries, RPC libraries, XML libraries with full support for W3C schemas, Cryptography libraries (yeah, I want to use a M$ cryptography library!!! but thats beside the point), Regular expression libraries, Threading libraries, massive Web Services libraries, XSLT libraries, and a gazillion other things?
Where else does that exist? And don't say Java because they're playing catch-up in some areas. There are things that .net does better than Java (and there are things that Java does better than .net).
But who else has a class library this all encompassing? Its like a dream come true for developers.
Originally posted by Jukebox Hero
Tell me another framework that has all of the thick client libraries, all of the thin client libraries, install libraries (for writing installation and distribution packages), universal database access, graphics library, printing library, networking library, Globalization (for porting your application to any language/any dialect), IO library, messaging libraries, RPC libraries, XML libraries with full support for W3C schemas, Cryptography libraries (yeah, I want to use a M$ cryptography library!!! but thats beside the point), Regular expression libraries, Threading libraries, massive Web Services libraries, XSLT libraries, and a gazillion other things?
Aha! Bloatware®!
But who else has a class library this all encompassing? Its like a dream come true for developers.
I'm not sure every developer wants it all in a single framework. Take a look at Mac OS X: it has 80% of all this on 1 CD plus the 150% of all this in the BSD heritage. Am I wrong?
Originally posted by costique
Aha! Bloatware®!
I'm not sure every developer wants it all in a single framework. Take a look at Mac OS X: it has 80% of all this on 1 CD plus the 150% of all this in the BSD heritage. Am I wrong?
Yes and no. Developers can't keep up with all the new technologies. So the framework is a cheap way to get up and running with things like web services and validating XML parsers, etc. I bet it all exists for BSD, but you would have to know what your looking for and go hunting.
Don't get me wrong, I'm itching to get my hands on a Mac so I can try developing something for it. But somehow I doubt that the developer CDs for OSX have this much "bloatware".
Anybody know how it compares?
I have VPC 5 and 6, and 2000 or XP.
Will be trying to run with OS 10.2.6 on a 667MHz PB with 512MB RAM.
Originally posted by Jukebox Hero
Anybody know how it compares?
What I can say definitely, OS X Dev Tools don't have universal database access libs and W3C schemas. No full-blown XML libraries either, but XML in the form of property lists is everywhere. You can browse Apple Developer Site. If something is documented there, it's included for free (except EOF, I guess). I'm not familiar with .NET well enough to make a thorough comparison.
Originally posted by Mr Beardsley
Bloatware is right. The install ends up being over 3 gig, and it takes hours. It includes the tools to create web apps which you get in OS X from installing WebObjects. That is also what gives you alot of XML and internet services capability.
The development tool is large... its like 3 gigs... but the actual executable is remarkably small. Measured in k, not megs... This assumes the user has the net framework installed (14 meg install), but Java is worse than that.
So. Whats bloatware and whats useful functionality?
Originally posted by costique
Well, if you really want to know what it is...
That article explains nothing. Reads more like an ad rather then info. Just as others I have read. All I get from these are scenarios that seem to need a solution together with a pitch that .net is the solution. Quote: ".Net products and services--designed to bring business computing onto the Web--as a means by which companies can eliminate time and technology barriers between customers, partners and employees." Yes? And? What's so revolutionary about that? That has been being done without .net for years.
What is .net? Is it networking, is it software. What exactly is .net? Guess no one knows.
Cocoa is a framework. Java w/o Cocoa is a framework. Win32 is a framework. DOS is not much of a framework (couldn't help saying that.) Microsoft's "logic" goes like this: "Well, we need a solution that works with WinXP, WinXP Embed, WinCE, WinMobile, etc. but not Mac OS X, Palm OS, Linux, etc." So they came up with ".Net" by taking ActiveX and enhancing it to be a real platform for full-blown bloatware like Word and Photoshop. The second major .Net thing is a place where MS can take your credit card numbers and other personal info, sell your phone number to advertisers, your e-mail addr. and addr. to spammers, and let hackers get your credit card number.
Originally posted by ryaxnb
The second major .Net thing is a place where MS can take your credit card numbers and other personal info, sell your phone number to advertisers, your e-mail addr. and addr. to spammers, and let hackers get your credit card number.
Damn!
So the prospect of going back to Java or (egads!) C++ is frightning to me. I remember about 3 or 4 years ago I decided I was going to start a company developing commercial applications (something I'm trying again right now). But I remember spending 100 hr work weeks (40 hr job plus developing at home) for 6 months. At the end of that time, I decided I couldn't release my product in good faith. I was using Borland C++Builder and there were so many bugs in the VCL (Borland's application framework) that the application would crash with reasonable frequency. They have better debug tools now, but still. I also know its a leap of faith to compare VCL to Apple's framework. But in C++ you have all sorts of direct memory issues that just dont exist in modern languages like java and C#.
What I'm saying is that C# is going to give developers a leg up in the market. This ultimately translates to superior software for Windows. For all that Microsoft gets wrong, they get just enough right to make it hard to justify leaving their platform.
Except... 3 years from now, they'll transmorgify everything again. Anyone remember OLE?
In my opinion, it's a noble goal but one which MS never acheives due to intracacies of it's corporate culture.
Example: My company has been running the exact same code and database files for around 30 years. Yes, that's right, 30 year old programs are still running on the exact same database format with ZERO changes whatsoever. It is blazingly fast on RedHat9, able to kick the crap out of MS products in terms of end-cost, stability, maintainability, and performance.
Management could have switched over to Microsoft's flavor of the year. Instead, they've stayed with long term products that get the job done. Unify? What's to unify unless you keep hopping on different microsoft technologies every few years?
Is .net nice? Sure, but not as a replacement for live systems. You're better off sticking with what you've got as .net certainly won't future-proof your systems or investments in developer training.
Originally posted by dfiler
Yep, every few years MS comes out with new stuff that is supposedly so good that it'll be around forever and simplify the life of developers. Look, it unifies all these technologies, it's the holy grail of software developement.
Except... 3 years from now, they'll transmorgify everything again. Anyone remember OLE?
In my opinion, it's a noble goal but one which MS never acheives due to intracacies of it's corporate culture.
Example: My company has been running the exact same code and database files for around 30 years. Yes, that's right, 30 year old programs are still running on the exact same database format with ZERO changes whatsoever. It is blazingly fast on RedHat9, able to kick the crap out of MS products in terms of end-cost, stability, maintainability, and performance.
Management could have switched over to Microsoft's flavor of the year. Instead, they've stayed with long term products that get the job done. Unify? What's to unify unless you keep hopping on different microsoft technologies every few years?
Is .net nice? Sure, but not as a replacement for live systems. You're better off sticking with what you've got as .net certainly won't future-proof your systems or investments in developer training.
You're missing the point. Only the sale force is going to tell you to replace what already works. I'm talking about new development. We're talking about two different beasts.
Originally posted by Jukebox Hero
You're missing the point. Only the sale force is going to tell you to replace what already works. I'm talking about new development. We're talking about two different beasts.
Missing the point? Everyone is merely posting their thoughts on .net. Keep in mind that not every post following your post is a reply to, or contradiction of, your post.
But yes, the merits of .net differ for existing and proposed systems. This is why the longevity anecdote about our system seemed appropriate.
Thoughts specifically on the longevity record of microsoft's tools and environments? It seems that this should have at least as much bearing on the analysis of .net's merits as it's capabilities.
Originally posted by Jukebox Hero
But who else has a class library this all encompassing? Its like a dream come true for developers.
and script kiddies, hackers, wormwriters, etc.
and all based around what? Passport? HAHAHAHA *wipes tears of mirth*
the same Passport spyware that passes your info to 3rd parties?
the same Passport that has already been hacked and leaks credit card info?
wonder why more companies aren't jumping on board