Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 3rd May 2013 18:27 UTC
Windows "Microsoft's phone chief hates to call the new Nokia Lumia 521 cheap, but the lower-priced smartphone launching in the United States is the company's boldest move yet to win mass market share from leaders Apple and Samsung. The world's largest software company has so far focused on putting its Windows Phone software into expensive, high-end devices - chiefly from Nokia and HTC. But the new model will go on sale at Walmart later this month at an unsubsidized price under $150, relatively cheap for a new phone running up-to-date software without a long-term contract." Windows Phone is racing to the bottom just as fast as Android - with the difference being that expensive Android devices do not fail to sell.
Thread beginning with comment 560463
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Alfman
Member since:
2011-01-28

Nelson,

"The .NET is not a clone of the JVM, and in fact deviates from it in ways that the JVM is only now starting to catch up."

I found the framework and design of .net was almost a blatant ripoff of java. I'd be surprised to find many .net features that didn't already exist in java first. MS built .net because they failed in capturing the java market with their proprietary java variant J++.

That said, I've always liked .net language syntaxes much better than java. Java's designers refused to address certain widespread criticisms, among them checked exceptions and unnecessarily tedious typecasting frequently put me off when prototyping. Java had a duality of official GUI frameworks, but the Java2D classes didn't work in applets. Also, there was a big regression for write once & run everywhere in mobile applications (not through any fault of sun, still a real set back though).


I'd say c# is a serious contender for being my favorite programming language, but neither windows nor IIS are particularly compelling for the web work I do. Microsoft obviously has conflicted interests, but if they would support .net on linux I would be all over it.

Reply Parent Score: 2

PieterGen Member since:
2012-01-13

Some companies want their sites hosted on a Microsoft webserver. I never understood why. Unless of cause you'd like to play Minesweeper on that server ;-) The monolithic nature of Windows makes programs complex and vulnerable. And you can't compile custom kernels, so you're stuck with "everything & the kitchen sink".

Could it be that this monolithic nature (in contrast to the modular Unix-approach) is a big reason behind the slow development of WP8?

Edited 2013-05-04 09:52 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 0

tylerdurden Member since:
2009-03-17

Would you care to provide actual quantitative examples to the qualitative claims you just made?

Reply Parent Score: 2

lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

I found the framework and design of .net was almost a blatant ripoff of java. I'd be surprised to find many .net features that didn't already exist in java first. MS built .net because they failed in capturing the java market with their proprietary java variant J++.


C# was Java done right, tbh I don't care where it came from it is irrelevant.

Also Java != JVM.

I'd say c# is a serious contender for being my favorite programming language, but neither windows nor IIS are particularly compelling for the web work I do. Microsoft obviously has conflicted interests, but if they would support .net on linux I would be all over it.


There is always mono, though I don't really understand what is wrong with IIS and Windows.

Edited 2013-05-05 17:26 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

lucas_maximus,

"C# was Java done right, tbh I don't care where it came from it is irrelevant."

It's irrelevant to you maybe, but it wasn't irrelevant in the context of the thread discussing the relationship between the two.


"Also Java != JVM."

You don't need to tell me, although two were designed completely with each other in mind as evidenced the name "Java Virtual Machine".


"There is always mono, though I don't really understand what is wrong with IIS and Windows."

In my opinion linux has an advantage with lightweight remote administration tools like ssh/rsync/etc. Obviously windows can do the same things, and you can use remote desktop, but the whole GUI on the server is kind of unnecessary and out of place. With linux, we get the flexibility of provisioning a machine with only the pieces we need.


In any case this wasn't what I was talking about. I was talking about how many linux developers would like to offer official .net support using linux (count me in). I can't blame microsoft for not supporting linux though since if they did many IIS hosting providers would promptly switch to linux. Windows/IIS has few compelling advantages in the server space (note that this is rather different than saying anything is "wrong with IIS and windows").

Reply Parent Score: 2

Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

You're going to have to say exactly why the .NET Framework is a "blantant rip off". The only commonality between the two is that they're two languages which use a VM.

Its important to consider the fact that JVM as it is now, is not the JVM as it was 10 years ago. The same is true of the CLR, but when the CLR was launched it included features which leapfrogged the JVM in fundamental ways.

The way the metadata and bytecode are structured in the CLR are very different from the JVM internally, and if you read some of the papers published around that time, you can see the rationale for the differences. The JVM wasn't even JIT compiled at the time when the CLR came out.

Even today, the CLR and the JVM diverge in important ways. HotSpot supports dynamic recompilation of hot paths in the application and iirc still falls back to the interpeter under a host of scenarios. The CLR supports a straight up JIT compiler, some AOT options with NGEN, and Cloud Compilation using new machine specific IL on Windows Phone.

I think its more fair to say that the CLR was inspired by the JVM and other technologies at the time, but a rip off or a knock off clone? I think that is unfair, given how different they are architecturally.

C# similarly included some concrete improvements, though this is a little closer to Java, likely for familiarity.

Edited 2013-05-06 15:25 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

Neson,

"You're going to have to say exactly why the .NET Framework is a 'blantant rip off'. The only commonality between the two is that they're two languages which use a VM."

I said almost a blatant ripoff. Not just the managed code ideas but the class frameworks as well, coming from a Java background I remember being surprised how much of the class framework corresponded between the two, I suspect this was because MS used it's previous java experts to design the new .net platform. That's not a bad thing mind you, it's just a plausible explanation of how .net was created. I would love to hear the real stories from an insider, since as outsiders, we can only guess.


"The way the metadata and bytecode are structured in the CLR are very different from the JVM internally, and if you read some of the papers published around that time, you can see the rationale for the differences. The JVM wasn't even JIT compiled at the time when the CLR came out."

Maybe I'm missing something, but hotspot came out in 1999 and as far as I knew it was a JIT compiler. .net wasn't introduced until 2002.



"I think its more fair to say that the CLR was inspired by the JVM and other technologies at the time, but a rip off or a knock off clone? I think that is unfair, given how different they are architecturally."

I'm not arguing .net didn't have improvements, but it was often playing catch up (look at generics for example). I really don't care who did what first, and I'm so out of date with java that I couldn't give a meaningful comparison today anyways). All I can say is that I'm definitely happier with .net than I was with java/jvm. If you're more comfortable saying that .net is inspired by java rather than being a java clone, I can accept that too.

Reply Parent Score: 2