ATTENTION: You are viewing a page formatted for mobile devices; to view the full web page, click HERE.

Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion

Why the aversion to .NET Frameworks?

<< < (9/15) > >>

Ramesh Kumar:
Last spring I set up a netbook with Unbuntu linux, and the distro came with Mono in it. So it's not just pervasive on Windows, but common in linux as well. And from everything I read, current versions of Mono do a darned good job so long as the whole app is .Net without native code thrown in.
-CWuestefeld (February 17, 2010, 03:44 PM)
--- End quote ---

This is true as long as you target .Net 2.0 or lower (maybe 3.0/3.5 now).  But for current versions of .Net Mono is not there yet.  If they really want parity, they need to be working on the current .Net version along side Microsoft (which means they should be about to release .Net 4.0 compatible code).  I mean they already have the technology sharing license and are essentially partners (MS and Novell, the main project backers).  That said, I agree with most of what you are saying.
-steeladept (February 17, 2010, 03:56 PM)
--- End quote ---

easily 90% of .NET app come with some type of installer. (and...) Not all installers are intelligent enough to stop and make sure the runtime package they're holding is necessary. So you install app A and app B explodes (I see this a lot). ...Becaused something got moved/changed/updated/tinkered with (what shouldn't).
-Stoic Joker (February 17, 2010, 03:51 PM)
--- End quote ---

.net 2.0 doesn't override .net 1, and .net 3 install .net 2.0 automatically because it needs it as it builds on top of it.
So all .net framework can and do coexist without problem on the same machine.
-CoderOmega (February 17, 2010, 04:56 PM)
--- End quote ---

Not always; not entirely.  :)
Sometimes parts of earlier .NET version get discarded simply because a newer way gets seen to be better. That is why some .NET users express surprise over why a .NET app which used to run well on an earlier .NET version does not run on a later .NET version. But you are right for the most part!  :)
Ramesh  :)

Ramesh Kumar:
Versus Java I intuit third party developers carry one more fear or apprehension in .NET

They worry that if they create an app & it happens to be in a genre where Microsoft also has an app then the .NET runtime while allocating computer resources would show partiality to a Microsoft app. Perhaps Java has managed this fear psychosis better
Ramesh  :)

Good thing the EU courts wouldn't stand for that, if it could be proved of course.

Ramesh Kumar:
I have a different reason for so-far avoiding getting into dot net, as a programmer.

I really like a LOT of what they have done with it, but i'm not going to embrace a new giant powerful framework that doesn't have first-class cross platform support as one of it's main goals.
-mouser (February 18, 2010, 03:53 AM)
--- End quote ---

You are right.  :)
This is a major reason why .NET has not succeeded. .NET aka Microsoft has fought bitterly with too many players - both competitors & collaborators to truly become cross platform:-
1)Apple - competitor
2)Java - collaborator

Besides large players have now got stakes to compete both in software & also across computing devices aka hardware. So even if theoretically .NET can become cross platform practical difficulties & bitter memories would prevent it. Trying to strike technological friendship after bitter fights in the market place is just too little too late


--- ---.NET and C# are wonderful technologies and a joy to develop for.
+1, Mr. Crispy :)


[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version