|
|
Not only is the .Net a bloated (1.2 Gb!) distribution
[.Net Framework + Visual Studio .Net] but the design principles behind the product are completely motivated by Microsoft's continued need to dominate the technogolies that it perceives drive the marketplace.
C# is an obvious rip-off of Java. Does Microsoft think I'm going to continually invest my valuable lifespan learning "new" languages with no tangible benefits over existing languages? C# is proprietary and flys in the face of a multi-platform advantage enjoyed by Java.
VB is horribly incompatible with VB 6. Project conversion from VB6 to VB7 is verrrrry slow (almost 1/2 hour to convert a simple project with several forms) and results in hundreds of errors that much be attended to manually due to changes in VB.
Each change is a reference to some documentation link that must be visited and absorbed.
Tired of going down the same roads...
|
|
|
|
|
C# is proprietary and flys in the face of a multi-platform advantage enjoyed by Java.
did you forget? Java is owned by Sun.
VB is horribly incompatible with VB 6.
VB?? talking about proprietary... at least MS is submitting C# to a standards body (which Sun won't do with Java and MS would never do with VB).
-c
POKE 808,234
|
|
|
|
|
Java execution support is at least supported on a variety of operating systems and browsers whereas C# requires the Common Execution environment that Microsoft is not likely to make available elsewhere. I guess by "proprietary", I mean "limiting".
Yeah, VB is proprietary but my point there was about compatibility.
|
|
|
|
|
Actually, .NET is being ported to other platforms.
Tim Smith
Descartes Systems Sciences, Inc.
|
|
|
|
|
i heard, back in the summer, that there are at least two companies (Ximian and Corel, i think) working on .Net CLR's for Linux - with MS's permission. believe it when ya see it, of course.
-c
POKE 808,234
|
|
|
|
|
Hi, you mean i can write program with VC++ and my program run on Linux ?
Other question, what is POKE 808, 234 ?
My month article: Game programming by DirectX by Lan Mader.
Please visit in: www.geocities.com/hadi_rezaie/index.html
Hadi Rezaie
|
|
|
|
|
There is the mono project that will make .NET available to LINUX.
http://www.linuxdevices.com/news/NS6609104471.html
Javas primary goal was to build OS independent client software. How many commercial client apps written in Java do you know.
With .NET you will have some powerful libraries (Forms, etc) to get your job done in a productive manner.
All I need is a roadmap and then I might be able to find a clue.
|
|
|
|
|
If you're a regular you'll know I have little nice to say about C#/.NET. That being the case:
C# is proprietary and flys in the face of a multi-platform advantage enjoyed by Java.
You came from /., right ? Only there is it acceptable for Sun to have a proprietary language, but not M$.
Java wasn't exactly a new idea in any case.
Christian
After all, there's nothing wrong with an elite as long as I'm allowed to be part of it!! - Mike Burston Oct 23, 2001
|
|
|
|
|
I come from Sun -> Linux -> Microsoft [curse of selling software].
Sure, Java is controlled by Sun but it was a significant concept over what C# has to offer and it was needed at a time when Microsoft was not addressing cross-platform execution. C# is me-too with yet another way to offer the SAME concept. What's the benefit to us developers aside from making Microsoft technology function better?
|
|
|
|
|
What's the benefit to us developers aside from making Microsoft technology function better?
Not a damn thing. Like I said, if you read CP regularly you'll find many posts where I claim C# came out of M$ wanting to reuse the J++ code. That doesn't change that bagging it for being a proprietary language over Java is a bit rich.
Christian
After all, there's nothing wrong with an elite as long as I'm allowed to be part of it!! - Mike Burston Oct 23, 2001
|
|
|
|
|
Java is dead and it's Sun's fault. http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20011101.html
|
|
|
|
|
Interesting read. Thanks for the pointer.
To wine is devine.c
|
|
|
|
|
>Not only is the .Net a bloated (1.2 Gb!) distribution
The final distribution hasn't confirmed yet.
>C# is an obvious rip-off of Java
Oh and Java is such an original language. Java is C++ for dummies and was designed by Sun to sell more of their overpriced hardware in the Network Computer Scam.
>C# is proprietary and flys in the face of a multi-platform advantage >enjoyed by Java.
Name one decent multi-platform advantage that Java has. Most applications are written for pre-determined hardware, especially on the server-side.
>VB is horribly incompatible with VB 6. Project conversion from VB6 to VB7 >is verrrrry slow (almost 1/2 hour to convert a simple project with several >forms) and results in hundreds of errors that much be attended to manually >due to changes in VB.
Microsoft themselves have said that converting projects from VB6 to VB7 is not recommended. Why would anybody want to convert an existing project to another compiler? The project was designed to do a job, converting it to VB7 won't improve it.
Anyway, with a bit of luck it might teach some of those VB hackers how to program better.
Michael 
|
|
|
|
|
Michael P Butler wrote:
Anyway, with a bit of luck it might teach some of those VB hackers how to program better.
Oh dear, I simply cannot refuse that barbed insult.
Actually I don't think moving from VB6 to VB.NET will improve poor programmers. From what I have seen of .NET it makes it even easier so lousy programmers will become easy-lousy programmers. 
Will people respect me more if I say I code in C# as opposed to VB? Or do I simply have to switch to C++ to become respected? hehe
regards,
Paul Watson
Bluegrass
Cape Town, South Africa
Do you Sonork? I do! 100.9903 Stormfront
"The greatest thing you will ever learn is to love, and be loved in return" - Moulin Rouge
|
|
|
|
|
I wouldn't class you as one of those VB hackers. You come across as a pretty decent developer who just happens to use VB. Like I've said in the past Programming is programming no matter the language.
>Actually I don't think moving from VB6 to VB.NET will improve poor >programmers. From what I have seen of .NET it makes it even easier so lousy >programmers will become easy-lousy programmers.
Hopefully having to rewrite their apps will make them think about what they are doing. Not likely, a bad programmer is a bad programmer not matter how good the language is.
>Will people respect me more if I say I code in C# as opposed to VB? Or do I >simply have to switch to C++ to become respected? hehe
Round here only C++ seems to be respected. VB and C# are treated as languages for dummies. To learn C++ you need to have that attidude, I think it's part of the C++ standard
Michael
|
|
|
|
|
TBiker wrote:
Not only is the .Net a bloated (1.2 Gb!) distribution
[.Net Framework + Visual Studio .Net]
So tell me how large VS6 + the MFC libs are, or VS6 + the VB runtime, or pick a JRE and your Java IDE or choice.
The point is: so what?
The actual redistributables will be around 15Mb (+/- a few Mb). Even something like Netscape is bigger than that.
cheers,
Chris Maunder (CodeProject)
|
|
|
|
|
Its the "so what" attitude of Microsoft that has led to operating systems which seem to magically suck away all the benefit of increased clock speeds and available RAM. No matter how fast my processor is or how much memory I have, Microsoft products continue to amaze me in how the extra resources vanish to a point where my applications never get the benefit. That suggests a poor, bloated design. Sure, Microsoft can eat as much disk space as it needs for a rich development tool but when it takes four times longer to load Visual Studio .Net and twice as much memory before I am running like VS6, then something is really wrong there.
What happenned to the days of living with 4 Mb. RAM and a few floppies for a distribution?
That is my point.
|
|
|
|
|
The .NET runtime-redistributable is under 20 MB
http://download.microsoft.com/download/VisualStudioNET/Trial/2.0/W982KMeXP/EN-US/dotnetfx.exe
Nish
Sonork ID 100.9786 voidmain
www.busterboy.org
Nish is a BIG fan of Goran Ivanisevic
|
|
|
|
|
I'm amazed you would prefer Java over C#, or you haven't really looked at it and your following Sun's press rather than real honest investigation.
After working with Java over the last few years, just a quick peek into what C# has to offer...I'm ready to rewrite everything in C#! But I think some things need to be set straight first......
1) Java is not really platform independent.
2) Java introduces .jar hell which is equivalent to dll hell.
3) Java is SLOW regardless of the horsepower!
4) Java isn't original...C# isn't either.
|
|
|
|
|
Actually it's not a ripoff of java, it's written by the guy who wrote turbo pascal and Delphi.
C# also has a UNIX compiler now.
Don't use the IDE (I don't).. and your idea of "bloat" goes away.
Even the UNIX world sees how .NET is good, and they are trying to port it all to UNIX.
|
|
|
|
|
Having been using the CF with RC1 for the past couple of weeks I'm coming across a number of problems e.g. I can't use Web Services within a Pocket PC application! Has anybody been using it and what are your first impressions?
Stuart Gedge
E. stuart.gedge@mobileenterprise.co.uk
W. www.mobileenterprise.co.uk
|
|
|
|
|
Hi there,
I am considering implementing an application using the .DOTNET platform. In the past I've wasted significant time and effort implementing COM components in Visual C++. I'm pretty enticed by .DOTNET as will enable me to concentrate on the problem domain without worrying about the intricate details of implementing unmanaged COM code. My concerns are now related to ease of deployment on the older versions of Windows.
My questions:
How difficult will it be for Windows 95/98/NT/2000 users to install and run application developed in the .DOTNET environment?
Presumably they will have to update their OS.
If so, can I bundle this update with my installer?
Will they have to reboot their machine?
If so, how many times?
Can I compile to unmanaged binaries (i.e. traditional COM components) for backward compatibility so that an OS update is not required?
Does the OS update impose any additional fees from Microsoft?
For which versions of Windows are there updates available?
I'd sincerely appreciate your comments.
Thank you kindly
Jamie
|
|
|
|
|
1. The .NET Framework is available for Win9x/NT/2000/XP, so you can run your apps on all of them.
2. Using a Windows Installer-based setup, you can use the Merge Module that ships with the Framework SDK and it will automatically look to make sure the framework is installed.
3. Don't have to reboot.
4. You can interop with COM components from managed code as well as use unmanaged C++ to create code that does not require the CLR.
5. No
6. Win9x through WinXP
Cheers!
Colin
|
|
|
|
|
Hi everyone, hope u all can help me out..
I have a form which contains the validators components which I drag and drop on the page using vs.net.
And when I submit the form , it is okie, the form is validated, but how do I go to the next page since the form tag requires me to includes "runat=server", so that the page will be posted to the same page and be validated?
But I needed to submit the form again to the next page and I need the values which I had entered previously..how can I do that??
Regards,
adeline
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
