Vista’s development tools use cross-platform standards, so you can use them to write normal apps that will run on multiple platforms or Web-based apps with multiple browser support. Also, new security features planned for the Vista version of Windows Server will include an automatic patch check and a file system that can fix itself, Microsoft said. Watch some videos of Vista here.
Cross-platform standards can only be a good thing. This is a good path for Microsoft and I think that they’re definitely headed in the right direction, at least on this issue.
I read it in the past that web based apps develop in Vista would be only accessed by Vista. At that time I thought they were making a big mistake. Look at XP, it doesnt have a huge market share and Vista might follow the same road killing the web based apps.
The success of PHP is that is cross-platform so everyone can develop it and use it.
Well, one thing is for sure, this guys are arrogant a bunch of F*****g liars but they’re not dumb.
MS NEVER said web apps made on Vista would only work on vista.
You probably read that from some troll to spread false information.
MS NEVER said web apps made on Vista would only work on vista.
You probably read that from some troll to spread false information.
either that, or made an assumption based on their business practices since their inception….
php is a horrible language. I’m sorry, but not real web developer would pick php as a first choice. You’d most likely see something like python, perl, C#, or java, before php. There are just too many things wrong with php right now. They say 5.2 might be better, but I have yet to be impressed.
php is the perl of webapp development. it definately has its place. i would use it before perl or python any day, i hate asp with a passion, and would only use java for large scale project (although if the project is large enough, theres no real other choice)
To Microsoft, “cross-platform” means Windows plus a second class Mac port.
In this case, they are probably talking about the Mac port of Avalon. They might do a Mac or Mactel port of .NET.
It’s extreamely unlikely that there will be any *nix support in any of this.
Don’t forget what happened to Microsoft Internet Explorer on Mac.
Microsoft sure says a lot of things.
What I’ve noticed is that some of it comes true, some of it is abandoned, and the rest is constantly rehashed through the reiteration of terms. I’ll give them this; they definitely have an eye on things.
Ok, here we have the embrace. I wonder when and how the extend and extinguish occurs.
Java anyone ?
No thanks
RE:”o you can use them to write normal apps that will run on multiple platforms”
i hope not, this could mean spyware/malware in third party apps in GNU/Linux’s future…
i will be carefull of what i use in the future…
Well those demo videos link pretty smooth. However, how powerful a graphics card am I going to need for this stuff?
On second thoughts, maybe I’ll just stick with my mini which provides all of these effects with a low-end 32Mb card.
Well, everything about the mini is low-end
Applications will be portable between Windows Vista, Windows XP and probably but not assured Windows CE….
so they will be dumping xaml and avalon in favor of XUL-SVG-Canvas? or adopting the cross platform standards of flash and pdf?
I’ll believe they care about cross-platform when OpenGL get’s first class (or even second class) status.
See the sticky news item at http://www.opengl.org/ for more.
Stop trying to spread your FUD about that in an unrelated topic please.
Stop trying to spread your FUD about that in an unrelated topic please.
Can you stop your ridiculous trolling please? OpenGL is a cross platform development standard. Since the topic is about Microsoft’s oh-so wonderful use of cross-platform development standards (of which OpenGL is uncategorically one), and OpenGL is certainly in the ball-park of Avalon regarding functionality, you cannot get more on-topic than that.
Stop trying to desperately make Microsoft look good on this. You can’t.
> OpenGL is certainly in the ball-park of Avalon
> regarding functionality, you cannot get more on-topic
> than that.
What? Is that seriously what you meant to say? OpenGL and the WPF aren’t really comparable at all.
What? Is that seriously what you meant to say? OpenGL and the WPF aren’t really comparable at all.
In terms of what cross-platform technology Avalon is based on, yes.
Uh.. This article is about WPF/E, which is a 2d/3d/vector-based graphics platform. No where in the article is OpenGL, a 3d graphics platform, mentioned.
Not only that, what the parent post is talking about is FUD against Microsoft. Vista’s support for OpenGL is barely any different than what’s on XP.
Uh.. This article is about WPF/E, which is a 2d/3d/vector-based graphics platform. No where in the article is OpenGL, a 3d graphics platform, mentioned.
Nice cop-out. Since the article talks about cross-platform standards and 3D vector graphics one can quite reasonably ask why they’re not using OpenGL as their base – an open standard.
Not only that, what the parent post is talking about is FUD against Microsoft. Vista’s support for OpenGL is barely any different than what’s on XP.
It is not FUD against Microsoft, it’s true, and the support for OpenGL in Vista is not the same as that in Windows XP (where it was crippled as well).
You’re living in a fantasy world.
Can somebody take this article down, or at the very least amend it please? Vista’s development tools do not use cross-platform standards by any stretch of anyone’s imagination. I do not see Microsoft using SVG, or giving a perfectly good cross platform standard like OpenGL equal treatment, or anything else that is remotely cross-platform.
Oh, and can the little sad Microsoft fanboys (or employees?!) with multiple accounts, used for the purposes of modding people down, stop modding down comments that are perfectly legitimate on this topic? I do not like people doing the Microsoft=bashing thing for the sake of it on topics like this, but the claim that Microsoft produces cross-platform development tools (based on evidence, products and actual actions) is so wrong it is astonishing in the extreme and simply beggars belief.
When I read cross platform standards I think it will work on a very wide range to computers and os’s without problems.
However, I am not sure that is what Microsoft means when they say cross platform standards – maybe they mean only other versions of Windows or maybe it will sort of work on other systems if the programer is very very carful not to use some Windows only features in MS development systems of which they, MS, forgot to mention to the programer before he started.
As yet we haven’t even got to the possibility that this is just more meaningless fluff from MS marketing.
I am truly amazed that at this point in time we are still discussing Windows security as a valid topic.
People, we are only hurting technology by not speaking up against the Microsoft hype engine. That’s all this is… HYPE.
The alternatives (or as I would remind everyone… THE FOUNDATION OF THE INTERNET) is not Windows. It’s UNIX.
UNIX, Apache have stood the test of time regarding security and performance because they were designed to do so.
Windows was not.
Fact.