Linked by Eugenia Loli on Thu 16th Mar 2006 03:00 UTC
.NET (dotGNU too) This article presents results of an investigation of the usage of .NET on five versions of Windows. The operating system files for the first version of Windows tested, XP Pro with Service Pack 2 applied, did not use .NET at all. This is understandable because XP was released before .NET was first released. The next version of Windows was the PDC 2003 build of Longhorn. This has a similar number of unmanaged executable files as XPSP2 but it also had thirty five .NET assemblies. Amongst these assemblies were two services.
Thread beginning with comment 105040
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Common sense?
by load_mic on Thu 16th Mar 2006 14:26 UTC in reply to "Common sense?"
load_mic
Member since:
2005-12-13

I can't see .NET being used for any sort of serious multimedia or systems applications or, for that matter, consumer shrink wrapped software.
I'm quite baffled at all the attention .NET ( and Java ) gets.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Common sense?
by sappyvcv on Thu 16th Mar 2006 14:56 in reply to "RE: Common sense?"
sappyvcv Member since:
2005-07-06

One word (or acronym): RAD

.NET is great for anything that doesn't need all the processing power it can get, can use a little extra memory, and will not be terribly affected by the overhead.

The reason for this overhead is security and reliability. .NET is memory managed, so the chance for stuff like buffer overflows and memory leaks is slim to none.

.NET is very locked down and pushes security over performance. They are offering a solution for security problems (In writing apps I mean). I honestly think the .NET framework is the first thing Microsoft really got right security-wise in a while (Server 2003 and IIS6 are very good though).

There have been 6 vulnerabilities for the 1.x framework in 3 years. Only one was "highly critical", and that was the JPEG processing which wasn't specific to the framework.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[3]: Common sense?
by Jamie on Thu 16th Mar 2006 16:18 in reply to "RE[2]: Common sense?"
Jamie Member since:
2005-07-06

One word (or acronym): RAD

But I get all that already with Delphi!

And pyhton is even morer RAD than c#.

Delphi is also fairly safe and it basically gives you everything c# offers but without any bloat, overhead or excessive memory consumption at all.

.Net rocks with asp.net and like Java is better suited for server side stuff where security is paramount. (security for user space apps is not really an issue!).

Also bear in mind that underneath the .Net framework is the more traditional c/c++ libs so any vulnerability there can still be exploited (IOW .Net does not guaranteee your code is safe rather it makes it safer relatively speaking)

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Common sense?
by whackedoutsavage on Thu 16th Mar 2006 15:50 in reply to "RE: Common sense?"
whackedoutsavage Member since:
2006-03-16

well, now you know of one.

http://www.adam.com/aia/features.htm

written in C# on the 1.1 platform.

Reply Parent Score: 1