Linked by Kyuss on Mon 13th May 2013 01:31 UTC
Microsoft "Most people understand that Windows is used by a variety of people who have a variety of needs, ranging from corporate server to workstation to POS terminals to home PC and beyond. Most people accept that whenever Microsoft updates Windows, it has to balance the competing requirements to find some kind of workable compromise. There is however another set of competing requirements that many do not really register, even those that call themselves power users or are IT admins. It is a conflict between developers/programmers and Microsoft itself."
Permalink for comment 561405
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Comment by Nelson
by Nelson on Mon 13th May 2013 13:20 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by Nelson"
Member since:

Yeah, because pointing out facts is astroturfing. Unlike the morons in this thread, or even the person who wrote the article, I've actually the technologies being discussed.

I've shipped deliverables using most of the technologies mentioned here and have followed their evolution. Is it astroturfing to point out that WPF, Silverlight, and WinRT share a similar lineage?

Or to correct falsehoods than WinRT is managed or is interoped using C++/CLI? Is that astroturfing?

Is it astoturfing to correctly point out the target demographic for Silverlight? All of this is independently verifiable. Silverlight was a RIA platform, it launched a long side RIA Services for .NET and had a scope that was different than what it ended up being.

Is it astroturfing to point out that XNA is terrible and has always been? Most people who actually used XNA, you know, the ones who would even give a damn, never liked it anyway and are glad to be on better middleware.

Unity, Unreal, or whatever are infinitely more supported and accepted by game developers and content creation tools. Its a more natural fit into the workflow. XNA was always deadweight and only on Windows Phone because Microsoft wasn't ready to put native code on WP7 and they needed a managed graphics API.

Had Microsoft had more time, I have no doubt that XNA would've never launched on the platform in favor of DirectX interop with WinRT which is more natural.

Reply Parent Score: 2