Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 11th Feb 2011 11:35 UTC
PDAs, Cellphones, Wireless A lot of people are wondering why Nokia didn't choose to go with Android. How can Nokia differentiate themselves when Android is a lot more open and free than Windows Phone 7? As usual, the key to this is in the details. If you read the announcements carefully, you'll see that Microsoft offered Nokia something Google most likely didn't. Update: What a surprise. Elop just confirmed Nokia has a special deal with Microsoft. Whereas HTC, Samsung, and so on are not allowed to customise WP7 - Nokia is, further confirming my theory.
Thread beginning with comment 462048
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: So
by kragil on Fri 11th Feb 2011 15:01 UTC in reply to "RE: So"
kragil
Member since:
2006-01-04

.net (as in C# and VB#) on the other hand has 8000 WP7 apps and a lot of enterprise shit. Then there is the ├╝ber popular Silverlight.

Which great .net applications are so widely used?

Qt has stuff from Google, Adobe, Rovio, Skype etc, it may not be much but there more popular Qt apps than real .net apps.

Applications and games on Windows are still C++.

Edit: Oh, there also are the dozens of great Xbox live arcade and indie games.

Edited 2011-02-11 15:05 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[3]: So
by Thom_Holwerda on Fri 11th Feb 2011 15:05 in reply to "RE[2]: So"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

and a lot of enterprise shit


Bingo.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[4]: So
by segedunum on Fri 11th Feb 2011 20:36 in reply to "RE[3]: So"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

Well actually, no. In normal enterprises that have more sense than money COM, C++ and VB still rules. Anything that's been rewritten in the past ten years have been web applications. They're easy to run, don't need installed and the development tools are more varied and cheaper.

Those who read MSDN might think .Net is widely used, but it isn't used as much as a lot of people would like you to believe. If Microsoft doesn't use it very much and isn't rewriting everything in it then why should everyone else?

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: So
by gedmurphy on Fri 11th Feb 2011 15:13 in reply to "RE[2]: So"
gedmurphy Member since:
2005-12-23

Which great .net applications are so widely used?


Really?

.NET is probably the most popular framework in use right now. Additionally, C# is the 6th most popular programming language, of which includes php and python which aren't really suitable for application development.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: So
by Radio on Fri 11th Feb 2011 15:19 in reply to "RE[3]: So"
Radio Member since:
2009-06-20

You can keep pushing shit down my throat, I'm never going to enjoy it.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[4]: So
by segedunum on Sun 13th Feb 2011 00:35 in reply to "RE[3]: So"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

It might be popular with new job postings, but compared to the lines of code written with other web and frameworks where Microsoft has no real presence and the historical inertia of C++, VB and COM, it is a pretty miniscule proportion of the whole.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: So
by _txf_ on Fri 11th Feb 2011 15:23 in reply to "RE[2]: So"
_txf_ Member since:
2008-03-17

The only real proper .net wpf/silverlight style application that is in wide use is VS2010. This is primarily due to microsofts own incompetence in pushing wpf and silverlight (despite being excellent technically).

Silverlight is quite good for line of business apps that are thin frontends to web services good for many apps in WP7 but I have yet to see a decent beefy application using silverlight.

I also have yet to see a really good game using .net. Are there any speedy 3D engines in .net? Chances of Unreal Engine on WP7 == 0.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: So
by Nelson on Fri 11th Feb 2011 15:45 in reply to "RE[3]: So"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29


Silverlight is quite good for line of business apps that are thin frontends to web services good for many apps in WP7 but I have yet to see a decent beefy application using silverlight.


Winforms, WPF, and Silverlight have very strong footholds in the enterprise sector with some very large and complex apps leveraging the three. I've both helped develop, and seen in house solutions which blow my mind at how cool they are.


I also have yet to see a really good game using .net. Are there any speedy 3D engines in .net? Chances of Unreal Engine on WP7 == 0.


Unity3D is all over the app store. XNA all over WP7 and XBox Live. The game performance is relatively good compared to native games (Recent versions of the CLR have achieved near parity in key scenarios heavily used by things like game AI and Physics, and of course anything GPU bound is not reliant on the .NET CLR) and the development is a hell of a lot easier.

Also, be very careful of getting into the mind set of "It's native so it must be faster". In fact, a lot of games are slower, glitchier, and less polished because you need to deal with the four headed, twelve armed monster that is C++. Wrestling with, not to mention slaying that beast, is a black art.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: So
by nt_jerkface on Fri 11th Feb 2011 17:43 in reply to "RE[3]: So"
nt_jerkface Member since:
2009-08-26

Silverlight is quite good for line of business apps that are thin frontends to web services good for many apps in WP7 but I have yet to see a decent beefy application using silverlight.


Silverlight isn't designed for beefy applications but you can use it as an interface for anything.

I also have yet to see a really good game using .net.

Magicka.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: So
by Nelson on Fri 11th Feb 2011 15:37 in reply to "RE[2]: So"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

You really don't want to go there, lol. Are you forgetting about Unity3D which powers over 1,000 iPhone app store games with 250,000 registered users? XNA which has an XBox Live Indie Games install base of 1,500?

Hell, let's just see how many projects are powered by Mono: http://www.mono-project.com/Companies_Using_Mono

What about Visual Studio? Expression Blend? WebMatrix?
.NET has a pretty tight grip on the Line of Business enterprise sector as well.

Then there's the Windows Mobile 6 Compact Framework, the Miro Framework used in embedded programming.

The .NET install base is in the millions, with Visual Studio regularly achieving 4-5 million downloads. Most estimates peg the developer base at 6 million world wide.

What about Qt?

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: So
by Nth_Man on Sat 12th Feb 2011 00:41 in reply to "RE[3]: So"
Nth_Man Member since:
2010-05-16

What about Qt?

See http://www.osnews.com/thread?462187 for only the most notable uses.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: So
by nt_jerkface on Fri 11th Feb 2011 18:07 in reply to "RE[2]: So"
nt_jerkface Member since:
2009-08-26

Which great .net applications are so widely used?


Paint.net, keepass, fasttask, cdburnerXP and some others. .NET is mostly used in enterprise but there are a lot more consumer applications in .NET than Java.

Qt has stuff from Google, Adobe, Rovio, Skype etc, it may not be much but there more popular Qt apps than real .net apps.


Those companies are also porting to multiple platforms. .NET is obviously limited when it comes to cross-platform development. There is Mono but there are plenty of cases where Qt would be a better choice. But Qt is not perfect and still has some issues with local integration which is why so many Qt applications are actually hybrids and not portable. Those issues will be worked out eventually though.

Applications and games on Windows are still C++.


MS still focuses game development around C++ and DX. There is also the legacy factor whereby programs like Photoshop would be very expensive to re-write in .NET. Game companies have millions of lines of C++ code that they do not want to re-write in anything.

Qt is quality software and I was disappointed when Google decided to use their weird non-standard Java instead of Qt.

But I don't think MeeGo had a chance at this point which is why I don't think developers lost out. MeeGo needed to come out before WP7.

Reply Parent Score: 1