“He’s hardly as well-known as Bill Gates but Eric Rudder will have more influence over the future of Microsoft’s bet-the-company .Net software strategy than his more famous boss. Rudder, Microsoft’s 35-year-old senior vice president of developer and platform evangelism, is in charge of enlisting software developers to the cause–and keeping them happy. That’s a big job because, simply put, without a large corps of developers behind it, .Net will remain a pipe dream.” Read the interview at C|Net.
Selling Developers on .Net
2002-07-30 .NET 15 Comments
Legacy developer will stick to COM/MFC, has apple devs have kept Carbon.
Lower the price of VS.NET and maybe it will attract more developers.
For starters, I don’t have anything Microsoft except my Jornada 720 which runs Dynapad. But I do plan on using .NET. That is, I can’t wait until Mono and dotGNU are practical for me to use under Linux/PPC and Mac OS X. I cannot wait until the day when I can use Smalltalk or Lisp to seamlessly control libraries in C++, C#, Java and other stuff which repulses me.
.Net is trying to hug the world.
VS.Net reflects that. It is not a “delphi” and not a dreamweaver / ultradev.
What happend to “use the best tool for the job” ?
I did a small app in C# / .Net with database access and report and after messing a little bit with it, the memory that it was using jumped from 33 to 38 MBs.
I’m sure that if it was a delphi app it hardly would use 20 MBs. With the advantage that delphi puts everything into a single .exe and does not require the download of a Runtime Environment of 20 MBs or so.
IIS does not help .Net in the server either, because of its one hole per week ratio.
This new world with garbage collection and objects is not that perfect 🙂
Maybe its your style of coding thats sucking up resources?
Maybe its your style of coding thats sucking up resources?
I doubt it. .NET is fairly huge.
I agree with Marco. .NET is no Delphi. It can’t even compete. I think Borland kicks the old posterior in the realm of dev tools with Delphi and C++Builder. Awesome environments. Kylix is okay too.
The way I see it – and I could be wrong because I know little about .Net – it works a lot like Java. When you run a pure Java app, the VM has to load all the support classes. .Net has it’s own runtime VM and I assume it has to load the support classes as well. The more support classes you import, the more memory it will consume. Both the Java and .Net runtime are probably smart enough not to load a support class into memory twice if multiple running apps make use of it.
Window’s standard runtime libs are loaded as soon as Windows boots up, so it’s using that memory one way or another. With the .Net and Java runtimes, they’re just additional libs that are loaded on demand, and unloaded when no more apps are using them.
Unless you’re referring to your app itself consuming more memory rather than the overall amount of memory needed to run the app. This is just my way of rationalizing it. Can’t wait for someone to jump in and tell me I’m all wrong. I don’t really care, I don’t like .Net. It’s personal preference, don’t hate me for it.
For me it’s all about the money. Make entry into .NET cheap for me (both monitarily and timewise) and I would consider it. If I can sell something that only costs me my time to make using things like Java, Linux, Apache, Tomcat, Zope, etc., then I can capitalize on my skills to the fullest.
With .NET, the costs are simply too high and the technology itself too restrictive to make economic sense. I could give thousands of dollars away, and put on the MS shackles, to support .NET, but I think Bill has enough money already.
I know that someone is bound to throw out Mono, dotGNU, etc. but since they aren’t available to me today, they don’t warrant any consideration. We can have that discussion once they are released and stable.
How isn’t Mono available to you today? Not running Linux, Mac OS X, or Windows?
…that .NET is not as successful. Although from a “ease of development” view it’s great, from a practical one it’s not. I was developing .NET apps since BETA 1 but then ditched the platform because, frankly, being MS vendor locked is something I did not want.
“The way I see it … it works a lot like Java.”
Give me a break, .NET is a compkete rip-off of java. The only reason .NET exists is to kill java cause MS lost the suit with sun. If MS didn’t loose, .NET would not exist today. Why else would they spend that kind of money to create something that is no better than what we have now? Java is a threat to their OS monopoly so MS must kill it at all costs. Half of the poeple here are saying how pointless it is to switch to .NET cause there are no advantages. The only worth while thing that has come from it is the ability to use any programing language. That’s got to be the only thing that has not existed before, and the only compelling reason i can see for using .NET.
Remember, MS is not targetting single developers. There is no money in it for them. If you cannot afford VS7, then you are not in the *business* to create software (vs. hobby). MS is looking for mid to high tier companies to support the infrastructure. Once they begin to get traction, then prices may drop.
Um… The fact that it’s not yet stable was the first major roadblock. How IS it available to you?
The way I see it … it works a lot like Java.
Give me a break, .NET is a compkete rip-off of java.
How so? Java is a complete rip-off of Smalltalk. And Self. And various Lisps before it. Java didn’t do anything new, and I certainly wouldn’t say that C#+.NET is any more a cheap-shot rip-off of Java any more than Java is of Smalltalk. At least .NET doesn’t lock you into one shitty language like Sun does with Java.
Why else would they spend that kind of money to create something that is no better than what we have now? … The only worth while thing that has come from it is the ability to use any programing language. That’s got to be the only thing that has not existed before, and the only compelling reason i can see for using .NET.
Being able to use any language to use libraries that was written in any other language is a pretty big deal. I understand that you’re not a programmer, especially not one who doesn’t use a most widespread language like C++. You see, a company like Microsoft has incentives to make better dev tools. Why? Better dev tools mean more developers, perhaps even better developers, that spend more time creating better applications in higher numbers- rather than dealing with the complexities of the tools. Better applications means a better user experience, more satisfied users, and a wider user-base. In the case you weren’t able to follow me, that means more sales for Microsoft. As a business, they have all the reasons in the world to provide a better development environment.
Having this “minor” advantage is a lot bigger of a deal than you seem to be able to wrap your head around. I can draw a flow chart that shows how it’s a very worthwhile feature that Java doesn’t have.
.NET is a vast improvement over what you have now to develop on Windows- namely VB and VC++. .NET isn’t as mature as VB and VC++, but it will surprass them quickly as it gets polished.
re: target users
Yes, Visual Studio is expensive. But even hobby developers can use Mono’s .NET implementation and C# compiler for free on Windows to create ‘first-class’ .NET applications that run on Microsoft’s .NET runtime. Also, I think you can get MS’s C# compiler and the .NET runtime for free, in a command-line-only version.
If you’re a noble hobbyist, those are probably your best options. If you’re like a lot of hobbyists, you’ll probably just pirate VS.NET just like you pirated previous version of VS, VC++, and VB, which are also expensive.
if you agree with everything i said, why are you so bitchy?