|
Here's a different angle.
It won't be really ready for the masses until users have it embedded in the OS, e.g. Windows 2003. Since it is an optional download (~20MB), it will remain off the radar of users who won't download it because it's from Microsoft, or it's too big of a download, or they don't exactly understand why they need it.
Furthermore, this is why you don't see a HUGE move over to using .NET in Windows Applications (not web application) from Win32 Windows Applications. It's too much of a risk to deploy a .NET Windows Application and hope the users have the framework installed or don't mind installing the framework when competitors don't have the same requirement.
|
|
|
|
|
Use it, after some time you are cripple because you only know how to use a "framework" that is "free for now".
Later you suffer because you have no idea what is it about design, computing problem solving...
What to surprise with Microsoft $$$ .net will top the list?? .NET is just another JAVA, but with deeper pocket. Technically there is nothing new in .net
|
|
|
|
|
A framework is simply a toolset that provides common building blocks so that the engineer does not have to reinvent them for every project. Frameworks and object libraries usually do not affect the design. Rather, the implementation of said design can be much simpler if the building blocks are used.
|
|
|
|
|
As a relatively experienced Java and C#/VB.NET developer I feel I can give a fairly informed view:
I beg to differ on .NET being just another Java. It is based on the same principles as Java because it uses a VM concept but the language itself is more rich (Properties, Custom Attributes, Type Boxing, Delegates, Enumerated types etc.) which Java doesn't (yet) have. Speaking of which, Java 1.5 is being released to address some of these shortcomings. I like to call it Java.NET 
As for the framework, .NET and VS Studio .NET offer a complete development package.. writing web applications and web services is a breeze. The webform technology is great (Java is still trying to catch up with its Java Server Faces specification). I've yet to see an IDE matching VS.NET in terms of ease of use, performance and integration with the underlying languages and API's. The closest competiter in the Java world seems to be Eclipse, in particular it's code refactoring features. Still.. it offers no easy integrated functionality to build web applications and services and you need to make use of third party (usually non-free) solutions anyway, that simple don't integrate that well. In terms of building traditional GUI's, don't get me started on Swing and AWT.. I cannot think of any adjective fit for this post 
From my experience, moving from Java to .NET proved enlightening; moving back (as I am at the moment) felt very restrictive... I really got used to the richer features of .NET.
It is true that as a free / low cost solution Java is a good way to go, but on the other hand, how much is it really free? If it takes X man days to build a project in .NET and 2X man days to do it in Java the initial upfront saving may be lost with the first project, let alone several.
There is one disadvantage with .NET however.. it is not as multi-platform as Java despite efforts like the MONO .NET framework for Unix which I think are a long way off being in a truly usable state.
|
|
|
|
|
intellij idea 4.5 seems to close the gap.
TRUTH IS JAVA STILL RULES
|
|
|
|
|
Things are heading in the direction of managed code. dotNET is the way to go. Longhorn is going to be pretty much based on .NET. Many programs including Internet Explorer will be rewritten in .NET.
This type of opposition kind of reminds me of how c developers opposed c++, later how win32 developers opposed MFC... Just because some people are hard headed about what they like doesn't make .NET any less ready for use.
A few questions for those that didn’t vote yes:
- If you voted “almost” – what do you believe is missing from .NET? It’s obviously not the features since it has the least number of votes. What is it?
- If you voted “No, because the masses don't have .NET” – the only problem I see is distributing application through the internet. If you are using CD media then there is absolutely no problem. Is there anything else that I missed?
- If you voted “No, because it's too slow or too resource hungry” – this is a poor argument because anyone can write slow code in ANY language. Writing more optimized code comes with experience. There are a few areas of the .NET framework that are slower then unmanaged code, however the benefits of quick development and managed code almost always outweigh.
- If you voted “Plain old 'No'” – what are some of the reasons for your decision?
|
|
|
|
|
What I don't like about your approach is that you think in "black and white". .NET is good - let's use it for everything. Sorry, there are areas where .NET simply won't work well. Ie I work with machine translation and other NLP - related libraries, and writing them in .NET or some other GC environment is insane (some of my coleagues tried it with Java and they ended up rewriting it in C++). Other areas include image processing, games, CAD, real-time applications, scientific simulations, embedded apps, "core" infrastructure (OS, DBMS, web servers,...), device drivers, you name it.
For some applications (web based, for instance), .NET is the way to go. But saying that all new Windows applications should be developed with .NET is simply ridiculous.
My programming blahblahblah blog. If you ever find anything useful here, please let me know to remove it.
|
|
|
|
|
Its totally obvious that .NET is not for everything. Device drivers would be a hell of a pain to write in .NET.
|
|
|
|
|
Just one annotation,
just take a simple hello world sample as GUI application. I think it takes too long until the application is running. Where to optimize? Well when it's running the speed seems not that bad.
Cheers!
|
|
|
|
|
I think .NET is the best thing Microsoft has ever come up with.
I had a bad opinion about .NET before actually using the stuff, but if u'r an MFC programmer and tried out C#, u would definately know the difference.
.NET Base Classes, JIT Compilation and Specially the language interop are all amazing.
Application's a bit slow but thats the cost u always have to pay for RAD, an extremely maintainable code like C# and ofcourse the support of Base Classes. If speed's such an issue u can always go for Win32 (Never prefered MFC)
.NET is more than ready to take mass market and it already has.
Aleem
|
|
|
|
|
How many win32 DB applications you developed using .NET?
|
|
|
|
|
There are thousands of ASP.NET websites out there that the masses already use. They are using .NET just do not know it
Just look how many have already been at the National Do Not Call list site
Rocky <><
www.HintsAndTips.com
www.MyQuickPoll.com - 2004 Election poll is #33
www.GotTheAnswerToSpam.com
"We plan for the future, we learn from the past, we live life in the present!"
|
|
|
|
|
Following that logic, the most popular OS among masses is Linux
My programming blahblahblah blog. If you ever find anything useful here, please let me know to remove it.
|
|
|
|
|
Was not referring to popularity but that it is already used by the masses.. Of course, I expect to see Linux servers grow even more now that Mono is running. A lot like ChiliSoft that provided ASP compatibilty for Linux, Mono will help a lot of businesses use .NET on a Linux box. I would probably using it myself for my web server if I had enough knowledge to keep it secured and locked down.
Rocky <><
www.HintsAndTips.com
www.MyQuickPoll.com - 2004 Election poll is #33
www.GotTheAnswerToSpam.com
"We plan for the future, we learn from the past, we live life in the present!"
|
|
|
|
|
Perhaps more interestingly, by that logic Linux is "ready for the masses." While I suppose there's nothing particularly wrong with that metric in itself, it's not terribly useful.
|
|
|
|
|
.NET XML support is great. FCL, BCL...great. Also datasets, dataadapters and so on... MFC with ATL is still nightmare. But there is too many bugs, I belive, that in .NET 3.0 will be things right. Beta 2.0 is fixing some problems now. For example, there is many bugs with refresh of master-
|
|
|
|
|
I read this post from, of all places, Slashdot, where an argument around Mono and .NET had been swirling. Here's the original post, thought you all might find it intresting.
Think about it this way.
For years, developers targetting the windows platform had two (real) choices VB or C/C++.
With C/C++ you had two choices. Use the win32 API directly and/or use MFC. With VB, creation of GUI apps was made as simple
as possible, at the expense of a cumbersome language.
Throw COM into the mix, complex threading models and API interface du-jour and the bottom line is that Windows developers
have been guinea pigs feeding on inconsistent standards for 15 years.
-----Enter Java
Finally, a language that brings OOP to the masses without having to learn complex semantics regarding memory allocation. It
also eliminates the cumbersome and overly complex nature of STL in C++.
The drawbacks were twofold: Early java adopters didn't have the rich GUI IDE's present in VB5/6 and VC++/DevStudio. Like it
or not, it hurt producitivty, at least in the short term. Translation: corporate america didn't warm up to the idea
immediately.
Another drawback to java was the rampant verbosity of the language. There are those that do believe that enum's and value
types are GOOD things.
Then you had the immaturity of Java GUI toolkits that made 'rich client' apps look like they were written by high school
script kiddies.
---- Enter .NET/C#
Goodbye VB6. Goodbye VC++. Hello managed code. Goodbye MFC. Hello (working) garbage collection. Goodbye complex threading
models. Hello full-featured clone of java.* renamed as System.*.
C# as a language is a dream. It contains most of the language features that I had been dying for. It is readable, quick to
code in and is put together in a consistent manner.
There is very little about C# that is better than java. But for windows-based shops, Java can't hold a candle to c#/.net.
It isn't a religous war. You may not like microsoft's policies or busines practices. And they certainly didn't invent the
concept of a managed environment or one-up Java.
While the typical slashdotter is foaming at the mouth about MS, .NET and how we are all bunch of idiots, I am busy writing
code for a good company that just happens to base their operations on windows.
Imagine the ability to take an ASP.NET app that you RAD-developed using MS VS.NET tools and cross-compiling it in Mono,
running the whole thing under apache using mod_mono.
You would have the benefit of a killer IDE (VS.NET), a rock-solid back end (Apache) and an application framework that works
without headache!
That is why **I** use MS.NET and MONO. I don't particularly care for MS, but I am smart enough to know what side of the
bread is buttered.
Bottom line: Sometimes you have to get past the religious zealotry of the pro-linux/anti-ms crowd (ie. slashdot) and see
something for it's good.
This isn't a perfect world, and MS usually sucks, but .NET is cool. Linux is cool. Mono is cool.
Lets marry them together and reap the benefits.
Standing at the back of room pouting isn't helping advance your cause.
Judah Himango
|
|
|
|
|
How bad did he get flamed for posting that?
[Edit]
Or did they just drop a 10 megaton bomb on his house?
[/Edit]
Aaron Eldreth
TheCollective4.com
My Articles
I hereby boycott this poll. Really....
- Leppie
|
|
|
|
|
Actually it got rated +5 Insightful. Suprisingly, when it comes to Mono, the OSS people are pretty straightheaded, minus the few nut job zealots. Probably because Mono creator Miguel de Icaza is pretty well respected thanks to his work on Gnome and Corba, and is a regular Slashdotter...
Judah Himango
|
|
|
|
|
IMHO .Net is the best technology we have nowadays...
|
|
|
|
|
Have you ever looked at a computer? Or do you not consider computers *technology*?
Aaron Eldreth
TheCollective4.com
My Articles
I hereby boycott this poll. Really....
- Leppie
|
|
|
|
|
i think he was talking to the rest of us non-idiots.
|
|
|
|
|
No, because it's too slow or too resource hungry
AND
No, because it's too buggy
|
|
|
|
|
Kandjar wrote:
No, because it's too slow or too resource hungry
AND
No, because it's too buggy
Exactly what I thought, I agree 100%
Still, maybe I misjudged the question - I suppose things like FrontPage are more than ready, and very appropriate for "the masses" - doesn't mean I'd like to use it!
|
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
