Hitting snags as it stitches together its wide-reaching software-as-a-service plans, Microsoft casts .Net farther and wider. Microsoft acknowledges that its software strategy has been slow to catch on and lays out a plan to move it forward. Therefore, it’s opening up to one of the most important open-source software projects, Apache, and getting closer to a key software rival as well, Oracle.
Bill Gates: Slow going for .Net
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
I’m certainly not surprised. People seem very much to hate subscriptions (Just look at .Mac, $9/mo for webhosting that integrates with your operating system and people are complaining that it’s too expensive) and Web Services seems doomed to failure in that respect.
One other thing I’ve noticed is that everone, even those who aren’t aware, hate running software from a virtual machine. It’s too slow, you’ve heard it before and I’m saying again. That’s because advances in virtual machines, even combined with faster hardware, have still failed to increase performance to acceptable levels and probably never will.
If Microsoft does succeed in releasing a version of Office compiled completely to CLR bytecode, it will be interesting to see how quickly it is adopted compared to previous versions.
What? are they going to copy (oops, I meant ‘learn from’) code from Apache now?
.NET still needs more grouming before is becomes as mature as Java. I love C#, but the .NET API needs more work. Althoug I eventually think it will get big. I hate to MS going about an swallowing every good software project (open or not) in its path.
my2c.
We’ve seen this enough times. Note:
Embrace. Extend. Assimilate. Destroy.
Apply these in a timeline to Apache’s situation we see here.
.NET is great as the .NET framework on the client-side. Any serious developer would use J2EE and refactoring tools on the server-side. The MS IDE and it’s tools just don’t cut it for more than drag’n’drop prototypes. Do it fast, do it all over again… All in my not so humble opinion. I’m all for .NET framework (compared to the Win32 API), but it has to much of IIS on the server in it for me to like it otherwise. I hope I’m proven wrong, tha Apache deal sounds interesting….
(I may be a sceptic though, don’t flame me just express your opinion)
And as far as C# goes, it’s more or less extended from Java, which means that any developer has to keep more, not less, in mind than in Java. The more a developer has to keep in mind, the more errors. All in proven studys, read ‘Code Complete’ by MS Press for examples about what you screw up with defines, preprocessors and other things you never thought about. After that read a good book about refactoring. Then you are set for RAD (Rapid Application Development), and remember that you should be able to have the same codebase for a couple of years…
I don’t know about the rest of you, but I haven’t seen any services or apps whatsoever relating to.NET, unless I’ve seen them and don’t know about it? So naturally, it doesn’t suprise me when MS says it has been slow going
I guess the MSN/Hotmail/Passport thing may be related to .NET, but where’s the rest of it?
Offices, coprorations & most all people in general want complete applications installed to their own harddrives, they don’t want a skeleton installed that depends on another entity and a internet connection to that entity just to function…
this is why .net wont fly…
It’ll fly if Microsoft decides it wants you to want it to fly.
Sure, the .NET api needs some work. But it is MUCH further along than the Java API was at it’s first release. In fact, it is further along in many areas now. Take a look at the XML/XSL namespaces. They will make you wonder what the hell Sun has been doing the last few years.
As for Visual Studio only being good for rapid development, you are out of your mind. There is no better development environment on any platform. Period.
.NET is not a skeleton, and it WILL be included in Windows releases, so there will be no dependency while installing apps. If you think it won’t fly, you are going to be very surprised.
-G
>>I guess the MSN/Hotmail/Passport thing may be related to .NET, but where’s the rest of it?<<
It’s not like .Net is some minor undertaking here. Uncle Bill’s grand scheme is still in the process of hatching. AFAIK the first true .Net OS will be Windows “Blackcomb”, which IIRC isn’t due out now until 2005 (so make it Q4 2006). I think it will be some time before we see all of this stuff, as the groundwork is only now being laid.
Whoo, and wait until they couple .Net with Palladium. I can hear the sweet sound of goosestepping Microsoft Certified Stormtroopers in the distance already.
This next Office.Net seems to be all about tying Office to a bunch of web services that MS can charge for. I’m curious to see if/when they will replace VBA with .net
Like ASP.net they could host a .net environment (forgot the actual terminology) within Office in which to run macros written in .net languages. Theoretically they could then take advantage of the .net security features (assuming they work) to reduce the risk from/of viruses.
And as FH mentioned, they could also tie it to Palladium, so everyone can feel warma and fuzzy passing thier macro-laden secure Office documents around.
The problem, imho, is that when someone mentions .NET no-one knows immediately what you mean. Web services over SOAP? Apps built for the .net runtime? Hailstorm? Passport^2?
I’m not saying it’s unclear what the pieces (like C# etc) are, but they shouldn’t have lumped everything in one heap and call it .NET. I mean how do you market _that_ to your customers, when even the developers are often still confused about what it really refers to.
End result: nobody cares. Business goes on as usual.
The guy who wrote that article is a moron. They can’t make the difference between .NET Framework and .NET My Services.
Also it says that .NET has “been out” for 2 years ?! I mean…what the hack…the final version of .NET framework (build 1.0.3705.0) was released in febraury.
Yeap .NET My Services are not ok..but who cares ? The .NET framework is doing ok and that’s all that counts.
> One other thing I’ve noticed is that everone, even those
> who aren’t aware, hate running software from a virtual
> machine. It’s too slow, you’ve heard it before and I’m
> saying again. That’s because advances in virtual
> machines, even combined with faster hardware, have still
> failed to increase performance to acceptable levels and
> probably never will.
Have you even tried there CLR? My guess is that you haven’t. I have done performance testing on it, and it is quite fast. They have one _BIG_ advantage with there virtual machine in that it only runs on x86. That is a huge advantage in the area of tuning versus Sun’s virtual machine which has to run on multiple flavors. Don’t get me wrong, I am not a Microsoft fan, but you do need to give the Devil his do sometimes.
Java was there 7 years ago. Now, it is working on many platforms, and proved itself. There are millions of Java developers, thousands of matured and ready to use open/closed programs, libraries, frameworks.
Why should I use .NET?
– .NET is not mature. .NET needs at least 3 years to get mature. .NET implementations on Linux, such as Mono, are completely untrustable, at least for 5 years for me. During this time, Java will already hit the space.
– There is no considerable performance difference between .NET and Java. Both are slow. Both are virtual machine based. .NET do not have JNI-like layer, but calling unmanaged code is still unacceptably slow, in the most cases, useless. (My company tried it on Windows, and abandoned it immediately after huge performance hit.) On Windows, .NET can be faster for client programs, but so what? Processors are getting faster and faster, and Java is getting more and more optimized. Latest JVM from Sun (1.4.1b) is running Swing programs incredibly fast. 1.4.2 will be even faster, as far as I know.
– .NET is NOT cross platform compatible, and never will be. First MS would never let it. Standards etc are all story. The important parts of .NET are not submitted to ECMA, such as Winforms and ADO.NET. Dear Miguel of course changed his idea, now telling Mono will not include WinForms. Haha. In short, even Linux versions will never be 100 percent compatible. So, for cross platform applications it is useless. Why should I lock myself to one platform? (Linux or Windows or whatever)
– I do not need to use any new technology. Java is good enough and working on many platforms already. Why should I try something else? C# is a copy of Java with couple of not so important improvements. Why should I shift to .Net? There is no reason to shift at all.
– I will never use .NET, since it means helping the most unethical company on the face of the world. Hell no! Even for the sake of Linux, I will never do that.
The guy who claims VS.NET is a good IDE is completely moron. It is for sure huge improvement over VS, but still very, very bad. It even do not have refactoring support yet.
For a nice IDE, check out IDEA (www.intellij.com) or Eclipse (www.eclipse.org). Especially Eclipse rocks! It changed my ideas about IDEs completely. Any its open source and free, as in beer.
Period.
Seems like most of the answers in here range from “I love .NET, but I can’t substantiate why…” to “I hate it, I feel my Java skillz / personal relevance threatened…” Why not debate a software platform based upon its merits instead of emotional / good vs. evil appeals?
I’ve worked with both and each has jood and bad things going for it. Yes, Java can be slow (if it’s not running on an UltraSPARC of some sort). .NET seems to be a bit zippier on Windows but I can’t compare it to Java on the UltraSPARC (at least I haven’t tried to compile and benchmark mint or rotor on the Sun boxes at school). Does anyone in here have real data or information concerning this topic?
– I will never use .NET, since it means helping the most unethical company on the face of the world. Hell no! Even for the sake of Linux, I will never do that.
Get a life. Use what works, whether it’s Java, .NET, Snobol, LISP, etc.
JM2C
>> I will never use .NET, since it means helping the most
>> unethical company on the face of the world. Hell no! Even
>> for the sake of Linux, I will never do that.
> Get a life. Use what works, whether it’s Java, .NET,
> Snobol, LISP, etc.
You know. Some people believe in ethics. If you want, you can use .NET. I won’t. Its not a anyway, since I am using what works, and luckily it is Java.
“The guy who claims VS.NET is a good IDE is completely moron. It is for sure huge improvement over VS, but still very, very bad. It even do not have refactoring support yet.”
Please…. Just because it doesn’t have refactoring support yet does not make it a bad IDE. IDEA and Eclipse don’t have RAD support, so does that make them bad? Nope.
I am absolutely positive that you have never used .NET or VS .NET for that matter. The CLR is extremely fast compared to any JVM. Try using it before you open your mouth and show your ignorance. Just because it is MS, does not mean that it is bad. They do have some of the best engineers. Don’t let your hatred for their business practices cloud your judgement.
-G
I cannot recall Microsoft fumbling around with a project of this magnitude as they have. They are capable of doing almost anything – look how they turned on a dime to focus on the internet and wiped out everyone in their path. But this, they can’t seem to get a real handle on it. And it leaves consumers and busnisses puzzled and baffled.
I used .NET while evaluating it for my firm, and VS.NET. And, I know a lot about .NET. I still think that it is not very good. I do not like VS.NET not only because it does not have refactorings. There are many other issues that I don’t like about it. It is more of a personal issue. Why are you accusing me of lying? I again think that IDEA (www.inteelij.com) and Eclipse (www.eclipse.org) are much better ides. Its my opinion. You may think different.
MS can have money and the best engineers. It does not mean that they will create the best. We saw the products their best engineers ended up with before. Secure, nice, beautiful products such as IE, IIS, WMP, etc.
CLI is faster than JVM: True on Windows. But not significantly faster. Not enough to make me shift to .NET and lock myself to Windows.
hey…let’s go fight over PC/Mac Vi/Emacs Linux/BSD…
when will people learn that these pissing contests really don’t matter…people will use what they LIKE to use and that’s really what freedom is all about…it’s fine to try to persuade someone that something is better based on TECHNICAL MERITS but that seldom happens on topics like these…instead it boils down to things like “it’s Microsoft so it’s bad” or “i use Emacs b/c Stallman wrote it”
people forget that these things are TOOLS and at the end of the day it doesn’t matter if you build a playset using a Stanley screwdriver or a Craftsman so long as you get the job done
-bytes256
This might seem like a stupid question. But what is .NET good for? How does it help a user? How does it help a buisness?
Please…. Just because it doesn’t have refactoring support yet does not make it a bad IDE.
No, what makes VisualStudio.NET a piss poor IDE is that it takes over 2GB of disk space and runs incredibly slow. I mean it’s nice sometimes to start typing a line of code and have an excuse to take a half hour break while VS chugs away on generating its context sensitive information and line completion information, but sometimes I really want to get something done.
If you are talking only about RAD designers, I think Borland makes the best ones for Windows. They are significantly faster. Since MS hired one of the Delphi creators (who for some reason turned into a complete phallus upon his arrival at MS) to do C#, VS.NET does have some of the nice features of the Borland products, but they are still not quite up to snuff in my opinion.
So you’re saying that Vi is more productive than Emacs b/c it runs faster and takes up a lot less space right?
<sarcasm>
And forget about Windows…let’s start using DOS again…it’s gotta be wicked productive for development…yeah i can see it now…using vi to code NASM assembly code on DOS 2.0…yeah now that’s productivity!!!
</sarcasm>
Seems like most of the answers in here range from “I love .NET, but I can’t substantiate why…” to “I hate it, I feel my Java skillz / personal relevance threatened…” Why not debate a software platform based upon its merits instead of emotional / good vs. evil appeals?
Well, when the company you are talking about has the complete obliteration of its competitors and the complete domination over what you do on your computer as its goals, I think a “holy war” is perhaps in order.
Anyway, I have discussed the merits and lack thereof of concerning .NET since the dumb thing was release in February and I’ve been forced to program using it at work. Usually, when a new technology is forced down my throat, I eventually find some redeeming value that lets me tolerate it or even like it; which is what happened with Java. However, .NET just pisses me off to use.
The reasons I don’t like it are that it is slow, cumbersome and convoluted to program web apps with. Why people think it is better to build web apps via a mish mash of disparate technologies glued together with a gargantuan IDE when there are better, readily available technologies out there is beyond me. The thing I dislike about .NET the most is ties to IIS; the digital, fetid lump of poo. Another thing I don’t like, although a minor issue, is Microsoft’s documentation. They throw so much crap and nonsense into the MSDN library that it hinders my ability to find what I’m after.
There is nothing new about .NET. All the technologies, such as XML, SOAP, etc. are already available to me. CLR is just a VM; of which there are better ones available. Why tie myself down to Microsoft’s whipping post when there is no need?
when will people learn that these pissing contests really don’t matter…
If they don’t matter, why do you keep getting into them with me?
i just try to fight ignorance…if you actually put forth the technical merits or lack thereof to persuade people to not use .NET in favor of a technically superior alternative, but you don’t do that…you just give the tired old “MS is the evil empire” and “MS Software is slow and bloated” arguments…which no one cares about…tell me a platform that does what .NET does w/o being slow and bloated? Java…hahahaha…ROFL…I like Java a lot…but it’s about the same as .NET speedwise…which means…they’re both pretty darn good…and as far as bloat…guess what…for now .NET is actually LEANER than Java
-bytes256
So you’re saying that Vi is more productive than Emacs b/c it runs faster and takes up a lot less space right?
No, I don’t recall saying anything at all regarding either editor. You have been reading OSNews haven’t you?
I think that’s the problem with posting concerning .NET or anything else. There are those, such as yourself apparently, who have no idea what .NET is or does, or that you can do all of those things in a more cross-platform and open way.
I won’t discuss this furthur with you if all you’re going to do is metaphorically place your hands over your ears and chant prayers to Microsoft.
Actually i was just making an illogical comparison based on what you were saying…you said VS.NET is unproductive b/c it is large and slow…which is not necessarily the case if the “bloat” is a set of useful features…
just b/c VS.NET is too bloated for you doesn’t make it worthless or a “piss-poor IDE”…just say you prefer something else…simple as that
-bytes256
Oh, and I guess we can all look to the massive amount of technical data that you have presented proving that .NET is worth anyones attention as an example of posting perfection. Have you actually ever created anything with .NET? If so, what?
If you want examples of what I’m saying, fine. Open a new project and create a drag and drop clicky ASP.NET control in C# or VB. For example, create a calander control that displays in a drop-down combo box and is totally internationalized (meaning it displays the time and date information in the correct formats depending on the default language setting of the browser that accesses the page once you are done).
Next, open up an ASP.NET application and drag your point and click control onto the page designer. Pretty simple so far, but I need the page to be displayed in a seperate layer so that the web page’s contents wont get shifted around when I click on the drop-down combo calander that you are going to create.
Next, compile the program and then make the page available to more that 100 people at the same time (can’t do it without forking over some big bucks since IIS only comes with a 5 simultaneous user license by default).
Okay, this might make you feel that .NET is cool at this point since the calendar works well and looks nice (assuming you programmed in the ability to change colors, highlight the current day, show weekends in a different color from weekdays and store the selected date in a variable). Well guess what, I can accomplish the exact same functionality using standard HTML and JavaScript. And do you know what the best part is? When all the programming you did in .NET finally makes it down to the client’s browser and displays your calander on the screen, guess what a quick look at the source code of the HTML page will reveal? JAVASCRIPT!!!
So, if you want to tie yourself to .NET and wrap your legs around Bill, fine. But .NET is nothing more that a bunch of existing technology wrapped and bundled into a new box and sold to you for several thousand dollars and your freedom.
I can go on if you require.
yeah that’s fine, but how long would it take you to code that very same app in raw javascript? and make sure that it looks ok in a variety of browsers?
and i will admit i’ve never done anything with .NET (i can’t afford VS.NET)
i’m just concerned that your dislike for .NET is more about politics than technical merit…and that’s fine…we get the picture…you HATE Microsoft…they’re monopolists wanna dominate the world…yadda, yadda, yadda…and that’s fine
but you gotta admit, .NET can do some pretty slick stuff and when Mono gets here your argument about it not being cross platform won’t hold any water
Visual Studio .NET takes up so much space because it is installing the SDK and TONS of documentation. No other development environment has any where near as much doc. And in my experiences with it, it is NOT slow.
“you can do all of those things in a more cross-platform and open way”
Please…
“CLI is faster than JVM…But not significantly faster”
Dude. It is many TIMES faster. It is really like night and day. Check out http://www.rawweb.net:8080/publications/technical/Technical_Languag…
-G
I don’t know if any of you actually code in Java. We are doing things with Java that will make your head explode. Its very very fast. We do 100% Java on all layers, all the time. .NET is nowhere on the map. We do the REAL work behind the scenes for financial institutions. I don’t see .NET or C# going anywhere in the financial market. Seriously, I don’t think we even have a copy of Studio .NET, because our customers aren’t asking for any products.
TO:gmlongo again: “Dude. It is many TIMES faster. It is really like night and day.”
No dude. I tried it by myself for my own projects dude.
It is really not that faster dude. AND dude, even if it was dude, I have much important things to do rather than licking Billy’s balls dude. AND dude, it is not CROSS PLATFORM COMPATIBLE dude, which is my most important factor dude. 
Sorry dude, but I won’t use .NET dude.
Cau Dude.
bitch about .NET not being cross-platform and then bitch about Mono which will make it cross-platform
hmm…very interesting
-bytes256
Will Mono include WinForms? No. There are even problems with covering ADO.NET, since MS has the patents. How many of .NET’s passport related classes will be covered? Answer from the Mono site: We are not there yet. There is still a long time until we reach that part of .NET.
Mono will NOT make .NET cross platform. It will not be 100 percent cross platform.
We will see in 3 years, since it will probably take 3 years to reach production quality. 
yeah that’s fine, but how long would it take you to code that very same app in raw javascript? and make sure that it looks ok in a variety of browsers?
Not long.
and i will admit i’ve never done anything with .NET (i can’t afford VS.NET)
You don’t need to have VS.NET to create .NET apps. If you want to try it, you can download one of the free tools and the .NET runtime and try .NET today.
i’m just concerned that your dislike for .NET is more about politics than technical merit…
There are political reasons I don’t like .NET, but I have used .NET every weekday since February. Technically, I can already do anything .NET can do with other technologies. Nothing new here. If people understand that .NET is just a repackaging of current technologies in an albeit appealing form for some, then fine. But it simply isn’t the great, earth-shattering, world-changing technology that everyone makes it out to be.
but you gotta admit, .NET can do some pretty slick stuff and when Mono gets here your argument about it not being cross platform won’t hold any water
I have said that .NET is an excellent replacement for the Win32 API and MFC. I have also said that one of the .NET languages, C#, is an outstanding replacement for VB (however, outshining VB can’t be too hard.
) .NET does have it’s place. However, I think that a lot of people are buying into .NET not because it is a superior technology to what exists today, but rather because of all the marketing hype.
Sorry to create an atmosphere of ire here today. I hope you’ll accept my apologies.
bitch about .NET not being cross-platform and then bitch about Mono which will make it cross-platform
hmm…very interesting
Personally, I think the Mono project is misguided. The reason for this opinion is that it’s pretty much guaranteed that Mono will never achieve 100% full compatibility with .NET. The result will be the same catastrophe that awaited Java had Sun not won their suit against MS.
That catastrophe is that Windows programmers will develop .NET applications, which utilize WinForms, ADO.NET, or any number of other “unsupported” APIs. The result is that these programs will only run under Windows. It probably will be possible to write Mono programs and have them run on Windows, but the model will be broken the other way around.
I hope for Miguel’s sake that I’m wrong, but I doubt I am.
Everybody always says, “Microsoft doesn’t innovate.” Is that so? And if it’s true, does open source do any better?
Let’s see. Here at http://research.microsoft.com/research/, Microsoft seems to be doing quite a lot. I remember a while back using a sample release of their Whisper speech technology. It wasn’t as good as ViaVoice, but it was quite good, and free. Now they’ve implemented it into Word. Sure, WordPerfect had a “speech edition” first, but it wasn’t as good as Microsoft’s – and still, the innovation was done by a private company.
Now, Microsoft has .NET. Like it or not, it’s a very good idea, and it’s not necessarily controlled by MS. Web services alone are not particularly innovative, but the degree to which Microsoft is integrating them into their operating systems, and therefore the degree to which the Internet is made more transparent and easier to use, is.
What about other companies? Apple and Dell are the two most important computer companies of the 90s. Dell helped on the economic end, bringing the price of computers so low that the average family can now spend $200 a year to get an up-to-date computer (lifespan of 3 yrs.) On the technology end, if it wasn’t for Apple, we’d still be using parallel-port printers, serial modems, and infrared; instead, USB and FireWire now provide superfast, supereasy connectivity for local devices, soon to be superceded by Bluetooth, and AirPort provides 11mb (soon 54mb) wireless network access. Those technologies were standard in Apple’s product line years before they were in the first PC; now, a PC maker without USB would get laughed out of the market, and parallel is finally on its deathbed.
When you download a distribution of Linux, what do you get? You get a kernel and system tools that are directly copied from AT&T’s Unix, at the time an innovative operating system. You get a graphical desktop that at a low-level is based on 1970’s dumb-terminal X Window System, and the GUI the user actually sees is increasingly a direct ripoff of Windows; KDE has ~70% marketshare, and Gnome, almost as Windows-like as KDE, has ~20%. Everything in a standard Linux distro is a direct ripoff of a corporate-created product.
Open source is great. Once a technology is innovated, hackers working in their free time can generally create a much better quality end product than paid workers can. And open source can prevent Microsoft’s “embrace and extend” from working; Mono will mean that closing .NET is a loss for Microsoft and Microsoft only. But OSS isn’t coming up with any new ideas. The companies are, whether they’re Microsoft, Apple, or someone else. .NET is one of those technologies. And now all the people who said Microsoft doesn’t innovate are watching Microsoft innovate, and laughing at them.
If there has been one thing I have learned these last few years, it is that people don’t buy products because of technical superiority but rather they buy them because of the pretty shrink wrapping they come in. Marketing hype and clout is what makes the difference and sometimes it seems its all that matters.
For example why is it that so many people use Visual Studio and gimpy, rehashed MS frameworks when (well in my opinion for what it is worth) companies like Borland clearly produce superior RADs and frameworks.
This is why Microsoft and .NET will win in the end. Microsoft will do everything and anything to shove .NET down everyones throat. Your comming along for the ride wether you like it or not. Period.
Microsoft is the #1 corporation on the planet with the top market cap at $500 Billion (General Electric is #2).
I just read today that MS is adding another $1 Billion per year to R&D (for a total of $5.2 Billion), which they say is mostly going to be spent on .NET…
Also, they announced plans to immediately hire another 5,000 developers to add to their existing 50,000 employees…
Even IBM, MS’s biggest rival, has been unable to avoid making layoffs this year.
How exactly are you supposed to compete with that, even if you have great technology like Borland or Novell?
> I just read today that MS is adding another $1 Billion
> per year to R&D (for a total of $5.2 Billion), which
> they say is mostly going to be spent on .NET…
R&D or reverse engineering? Low blow but yeah as long as they keep investing in R&D they’ll remain strong. It seems companies flounder when they stop doing R&D.
> Also, they announced plans to immediately hire another
> 5,000 developers to add to their existing 50,000
> employees…
Intresting. How many of those are actual American employees? My bet is that a lot of them will be H-1Bs or the equivelent.
> How exactly are you supposed to compete with that, even > if you have great technology like Borland or Novell?
You don’t. They assimlate your ideas and you get shoved to the side. Haven’t we learned anything from the DOJs attempt to break up Microsoft (even though is was unsuccessful)? Thats why I don’t buy into this whole “OSS is not innovative and yet Microsoft is” argument. IMO, its like the kettle calling the pot black.
>>On the technology end, if it wasn’t for Apple, we’d still be using parallel-port printers, serial modems, and infrared; instead, USB and FireWire now provide superfast, supereasy connectivity for local devices, soon to be superceded by Bluetooth, and AirPort provides 11mb (soon 54mb) wireless network access.
hell no i dont want wireless replacing anything wired. especially in a business enviroment. having it as an option is fine though. plus mozilla is a pretty innovative open source project.
We saw their beautifully secure, nice and efficient products such as IIS, WMP, IE, VS, VS.NET etc. which they created with their millions, and the best computer engineers in the world.
They all suck. I will never use .NET.
I’m still confused on the hole .NET thing, so forgive me, seriously. (We code in JAVA that handles TRILLIONS of US $ worldwide)
Isn’t this passport one log-in thing required for .NET or is this something different? And if so, are they going to REQUIRE for development/deployment on Microsoft only software/hardware? If this is the case, I don’t see how they could make this pig fly. I don’t see it.
“I have much important things to do rather than licking Billy’s balls dude”
How old are you? You make my points better than I ever could. Your ignorant bashing of Microsoft products reveals more about yourself than you will ever know. You obviously are blinded by your own stupidity.
-G
well said gmlongo!
IIS only comes with a 5 simultaneous user license by default…
I’ve been looking for info on this (on MS site and Google) since reading your post. Are you referring to authenticated users or anonymous users? I can’t find anything that restricts the number of simultaneous anonymous web users. That wouldn’t make much sense, even for MS. If so, it means MS has a funny definition of “free” regarding IIS. I would appreciate a URL.
Now, Microsoft has .NET. Like it or not, it’s a very good idea…
Good idea or not, it is not an original idea. It is re-packaging and marketing of existing ideas.
and it’s not necessarily controlled by MS.
My only response to this statement would have to be a slight shake of the head and a smile.
When you download a distribution of Linux, what do you get?
A stable system.
You get a kernel and system tools that are directly copied from AT&T’s Unix, at the time an innovative operating system.
The BSD crowd is more closely related to AT&T’s Unix than Linux is.
You get a graphical desktop that at a low-level is based on 1970’s dumb-terminal X Window System…
And yet it is funny how much more functional it is that the Windows GUI.
…and the GUI the user actually sees is increasingly a direct ripoff of Windows
What Corporate OS does enlightenment, fluxbox, blackbox, and such mimic?
Also, KDE looks more like CDE that Windows. There are similarities, yes, but Windows doesn’t support pop-up icons on the taskbar, applets on the taskbar, etc. Therefore, even if KDE was a direct rip-off from Windows, they’ve obviously improved, or innovated, beyond what MS has done wouldn’t you say?
Everything in a standard Linux distro is a direct ripoff of a corporate-created product.
It is fair to say that there are similarities, but to say that everything is a direct rip-off is entirely false.
Open source is great. Once a technology is innovated, hackers working in their free time can generally create a much better quality end product than paid workers can.
An excellent endorsement of the power of OSS.
Mono will mean that closing .NET is a loss for Microsoft and Microsoft only.
And what data do you have to support that statement? We already now that Microsoft tried to “extend” Java and add WFC to it, thereby making it “better” under Windows and making J++ incompatible with the Java standard used everywhere else. Why people don’t think this will happen with .NET is entirely beyond me.
But OSS isn’t coming up with any new ideas.
You are completely wrong here. But even if you weren’t, how do you explain, for example, Mozilla being a lot better than IE; or Apache being better than IIS?
And now all the people who said Microsoft doesn’t innovate are watching Microsoft innovate, and laughing at them.
Well, I haven’t seen anything new in .NET, just as many people have posted here. I have even seen some pretty good examples. You have made a lot of claims with no evidence to back them up. If you can show me something new and innovative, perhaps I will stop laughing.
hell no i dont want wireless replacing anything wired. especially in a business enviroment. having it as an option is fine though. plus mozilla is a pretty innovative open source project.
Why not? Is it a problem of security? Encryption will soon be quite secure, so that won’t be a problem.
A stable system… and yet it is funny how much more functional it is that the Windows GUI.
You’re making the mistake that I’m attacking Linux. I’m not. I use Debian as my primary OS. Everything that Microsoft or Apple does, OSS does better. That includes Apache and Moz, among others. And as of yet, Microsoft hasn’t released all that much in the way of innovation in their products.
But that’s not the point. Microsoft has their research labs going full-speed. I don’t suppose you took a look at http://research.microsoft.com – they really do have a lot going there. The kind of research they’re doing at that lab is the kind that used to go on in universities. The original UNIX was hugely developed and improved upon at universities, and Mosaic, the first web browser, was developed in publicly-funded labs. Both of those were extremely innovative.
So what happened? How come now, instead of universities, it’s corporations doing the research? It seems strange that there could be such a shift in only 30 years.