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 462079
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: So
by Nelson on Fri 11th Feb 2011 15:45 UTC 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[5]: So
by segedunum on Fri 11th Feb 2011 17:31 in reply to "RE[4]: So"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

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.

Total bollocks.

I don't care what cushy little number project you've got yourself on to that you might deliver some time in the next decade, when you've moved it to .Net 54.2 for the umpteenth time, but normal enterprises are chock full of legacy COM, C++ and VB applications that won't be rewritten in .Net. Anything new or rewritten in the past decade was written as a web application. That's right. One of those things that doesn't need a Windows platform.

People have been telling me that .Net has been happening for a decade, and while I occasionally see the odd system that's been rewritten about fifteen times for Winforms, WPF, Silverlight or whatever the MSDN loons have put out this week, the stuff that sits there and actually works uses.......something else.

Unity3D is all over the app store. XNA all over WP7 and XBox Live.

So no one apart from Microsoft then? Glad we cleared that up.

....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.

It's alright. Game developers have been doing that for years, and they've been doing unspeakable things in that that most normal developers would never do because speed matters.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[6]: So
by Nelson on Fri 11th Feb 2011 17:54 in reply to "RE[5]: So"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29


I don't care what cushy little number project you've got yourself on to that you might deliver some time in the next decade


We took it from white board to in customers hands in four months. It was a rewrite of a legacy C++ LOB app filled to the brim with COM using very legacy database solutions. We turned it into a mixed mode WPF app with O/RM using the Entity Framework, and to boot we were able to significantly improve performance, feature set, and maintainability (through separation of concerns, unit testing, and UI automation). We cut tens of thousands out of support dollars for a fraction of the cost it took to maintain that sinking ship for the same amount of time.

when you've moved it to .Net 54.2 for the umpteenth time, but normal enterprises are chock full of legacy COM, C++ and VB applications that won't be rewritten in .Net.


Most shops are moving towards at least WinForms, some WPF and some Silverlight depending on how well its pitched and what kind of needs they have.

Most anybody who does this kind of contracted work already specializes in both COM iterop and mixed mode applications, insofar as to maintain a lot of business logic, or at least salvage a significant portion of it. Things move very quickly once we get whiteboarded.


Anything new or rewritten in the past decade was written as a web application. That's right. One of those things that doesn't need a Windows platform.


This is ridiculously false. Don't just make shit up. The majority of LOB I see is all .NET, differing versions (some even .NET1.0/1.1) but the vast majority are .NET for the LOB sector.

The few that have those creaky MFC and C++ solutions are very dated and its usually the one thing hindering them from moving to a more modern OS because it relies on some weird shim specific to that version of Windows. A worse horror is one where most of the original maintainers of the code have gone, or the contracted company doesnt even exist anymore, so they really have no idea whats going on.

[q\
People have been telling me that .Net has been happening for a decade, and while I occasionally see the odd system that's been rewritten about fifteen times for Winforms, WPF, Silverlight or whatever the MSDN loons have put out this week, the stuff that sits there and actually works uses.......something else.
[/q]

.NET is not coming. .NET has arrived. The developers number in the millions. C# is extremely popular, Visual Studio is the undisputed IDE king. The age of these barbaric, runtimeless languages has come and gone. I for one, embrace our type safe, just in time compiling overlords.



So no one apart from Microsoft then? Glad we cleared that up.


Those are all frameworks used by thousands and thousands of developers. They have quite the following.


It's alright. Game developers have been doing that for years, and they've been doing unspeakable things in that that most normal developers would never do because speed matters.


Most of the performance gains in the video game sector from the past decade have been in the realm of pure graphics. When it comes to using the GPU: A shader is a shader. Done in C++ or done in XNA with C# or done in Unity with UnityScript, once it's on the GPU, it does not matter. So a lot of the worries about performance is misplaced.

Areas which legitimately may suffer under a managed environment are physics, AI, scene node construction and management, some CPU bound calculations on geometry, things like that. However many SIMD instructions exist in .NET (Mono.Simd comes to mind) which brings the performance on par, and even in some cases, surpasses native code performance due to the JITer having more runtime intelligence about the target machine than a compile time toolchain.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[6]: So
by avgalen on Sat 12th Feb 2011 02:48 in reply to "RE[5]: So"
avgalen Member since:
2010-09-23

Hopefully you do realise that web-applications CAN be .NET as well!

With proper code seperation, the actual business logic is nicely put in a seperate project and then a "WinForms" front-end is made for "inhouse power use" and a "WebForms" front-end is made for "access for everyone". More and more the WebForms front-end might be made into a Silverlight front-end as well, all running on the same back-end code.

Web-applications are nice for deployment and basic use
"Real" apllications just allow much more power

and basically ALL new Microsoft development is done with .NET, allowing web/windows/smartphone apps all from the same codebase all the time. Look at SharePoint or Expression products. Of course low level development still isn't done in .NET and tools like Office aren't (completely) converted (yet)

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[6]: So
by zombieChan on Tue 15th Feb 2011 02:57 in reply to "RE[5]: So"
zombieChan Member since:
2010-10-20

Most of that isn't soo true. I can only speak for a few places, but my last job was rewritting all those old VB applications to .Net WinForm applications.

I have a friend who writes a lot of .Net Desktop application and .Net web application for enterprises. .Net is quite big here in Minneapolis/St.Paul area.

Reply Parent Score: 1