×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

What is .NET?

CmdrTaco posted more than 12 years ago | from the funny-you-should-ask dept.

Microsoft 522

CyberBry writes "There's a great technical overview of Microsoft .NET over at arstechnica: "In a remarkable feat of journalistic sleight-of-hand, thousands of column inches in many "reputable" on-line publications have talked at length about .NET whilst remaining largely ignorant of its nature, purpose, and implementation. Ask what .NET is, and you'll receive a wide range of answers, few of them accurate, all of them conflicting. Confusion amongst the press is rampant. The more common claims made of .NET are that it's a Java rip-off, or that it's subscription software. The truth is somewhat different.""

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

522 comments

First **really old** news pointer (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3003403)



Catch Speedy Gonzales

ONLY Q FILTHY MEXICAN, SUCH AS HERR GONZALES... (-1)

L.Torvalds (548450) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003605)

Would post first while anonymous. Die a terrible death, you fiend.

Re:First **really old** news pointer (-1, Offtopic)

IAgreeWithThisPost (550896) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003637)

no shit i think i read this 2 or 3 months ago. as an added thought, please mod me down. I am obviously a troll, flamebaiter, and an asshole. Please mod appropriately. thank you.

Second POST!!!! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3003414)

fucking 'eh

Trying to be cool (0, Redundant)

JohnHegarty (453016) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003415)

I think its Microsoft trying to be cool..... because that java thing went well... didn't it...

Re:Trying to be cool (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3003677)

I think it is still undecided if Java "went well" or "went badly and went away"...

Net (1, Funny)

DraKKon (7117) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003424)

Pronunciation: 'net
Function: noun
Usage: often capital
Etymology: Middle English nett, from Old English; akin to Old High German nezzi net
Date: before 12th century
1 a : an open-meshed fabric twisted, knotted, or woven together at regular intervals b : something made of net: as (1) : a device for catching fish, birds, or insects (2) : a fabric barricade which divides a court in half (as in tennis or volleyball) and over which a ball or shuttlecock must be hit to be in play (3) : the fabric that encloses the sides and back of the goal in various games (as soccer or hockey)
2 : an entrapping device or situation
3 : something resembling a net in reticulation (as of lines, fibers, or figures)
4 a : a group of communications stations operating under unified control b : NETWORK 4
5 : INTERNET

Oh.. DOT net... how silly of me

Here's the definition, straight from the source... (1)

Numair (77943) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003705)

What is .NET?

.NET is your life made truly mobile. It brings you new, more wonderful ways of communicating with the people you care about most. It's wireless reinvented.

.NET [mlife.com]

They've released the dev stuff. (5, Informative)

ratajik (57826) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003427)

I haven't seen this mentioned here yet, but they actually released the dev stuff for .NET. Article here [com.com]

.NET good, not evil (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3003430)

The main bone of contention that people have with .NET is the whole Hailstorm/Passport crap that MS is trying to push on us.

.NET itself is a very cool idea wherein any language can be used to write components that can be used by any other language. It's a means of allowing greater interaction between programs.

Hailstorm/Passport is an ill-devised way of online information management. With the amount of paranoia about this kind of stuff, the idea will be either flounder for a while or will be pushed as hard as possible. I think the former, but that's just me.

Re:.NET good, not evil (1)

jrnchimera (558684) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003549)

The biggest problem I see with .NET is that the apps that get created with it will only run on Windows servers. This is yet another example of Microsoft unfairly stiffling competition because not only does it create the most widely used OS, they can also create applications that only work on it OS's. I would bet that other software development firms will never have the kind of intimate knowledge of the Windows OS internals the way the MS App developers do.

Re:.NET good, not evil (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3003560)

They will run on any Windows client as well as any client that has the .NET runtime.

Didn't RMS and de Icaza have a big flap over this just a week ago or so?

Re:.NET good, not evil (2, Informative)

jrnchimera (558684) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003601)

Hmmm, according to an article I read, .Net applications can only be hosted on webservers running the Windows OS. Perhaps the article from the New York Times is incorrect?

Re:.NET good, not evil (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3003641)

.NET applications can reside anywhere on the network. Most, though, will reside on your hard drive, just like most of your applications do now.

What you may be talking about is the Distributed .NET concept wherein different pieces of the application puzzle lie across different servers on the network. In that case it may be possible that the servers must be .NET-serving enabled to host application components. That would make sense.

Re:.NET good, not evil (2, Informative)

Dan Hayes (212400) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003644)

Well yes, apart from the fact that they're in the middle of developing a FreeBSD version right now since they need reference implementations on two platforms to submit it as a standard.

But don't let the facts stop you eh?

CmdrTaco is dying! FP. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3003440)

That's because he runs a laughably incompetent news site packed with erroneous reports and diabolical postings. Long live trolls!

Screw this shit.

Fuck the Welsh!

Re:CmdrTaco is dying! FP. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3003480)

You fuck 'em -- that seems to be more your style anyway.

First Post (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3003450)

First post of goodness!! Yee-hah!

I honestly can't figure out (3, Interesting)

prisoner-of-enigma (535770) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003453)

...where MS is going with this initiative. They seem to be touting portability, but what kind of portability? Certainly not inter-OS portability, that's for sure. No doubt that their Common Language Runtime is so heavily patented, encrypted, folded, spindled and mutilated that it will be quite difficult for someone to make it run on a non-MS platform. I know that quite a few Linux-heads are working on it. Prediction: if they ever get it right, MS will sue them about four microseconds after they post it on Freshmeat.

That being said, it does seem like MS is trying to wean themselves out of a strictly x86 world, and portable binaries is a good way to do that. What about performance? Java used to be well known for crappy performance because of the abstraction forced on the code. Will .NET have similar limitations, I wonder?

-1 Flamebait (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3003484)

Didn't read the article.

Re:I honestly can't figure out (4, Informative)

rabtech (223758) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003579)

You obviously didn't read the article.

Microsoft themselves is developing a runtime for FreeBSD. When I say 'runtime' here I mean the CLR and the *BASIC* class libraries. You see, that is the standard that Microsoft has released to the EMCA as a standard, soon to be certified by ISO. It is completely open, non-patented, etc. Anyone can develop a compatible implementation.

However, a few key components are Windows-only: ADO.NET (universal data access) and WindowsForms (the GUI toolkit.) That is where Mono comes in with the development of compatible class libraries on Linux. Please understand: **the interfaces are the same as the Microsoft interfaces**, even though the implementation details are different.

Microsoft is fully aware of the Mono project and is taking no efforts to stop them. It doesn't really matter if they wanted to. The CLS (Common Language Specification) is part of the OPEN STANDARD. This is the definition of how classes and datatypes interact among languages and the IL; unless Microsoft managed to get a copyright on all the method names in WindowsForms, they can't stop me from creating a compatible implementation because I am simply using the CLS to write my classes that run on the CLR to provide objects for use by .NET programs.

(Short Version: go back and actually read the article, then try posting again.)

Re:I honestly can't figure out (1)

aulendil (243399) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003650)

> (Short Version: go back and actually read the > article, then try posting again.)

You make it sound so ... unslashdotted

Re:I honestly can't figure out (1)

prisoner-of-enigma (535770) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003681)

I did read the article. My comment on them not developing for other platforms was meant to convey that I doubt they'd PROMOTE it, as it would tend to cannibalize their OS monopoly. Making something and allowing it to be used w/o a ridiculously strict license are two different things.

Re:I honestly can't figure out (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3003608)

>That being said, it does seem like MS is trying to wean themselves out of a strictly x86 world

Has anyone thought that perhaps Intel (being somewhat friendly with Microsoft) has been pushing this initiative so they can finally put x86 instructions to rest? If Intel has a new processor that doesn't allow x86 instructions (because backward compability would slow it down), all they'd need is Microsoft to force everyone to compile with .NET and write a CLR for it.

Of course, this may not necesarilly be a bad thing. Imagine the speed improvements any processor would have if it didn't require backward compability. The downside is that it'd require a fully-compability CLR.

Sam

Talk Dirty To Me (-1)

The Lyrics Guy (539223) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003456)

Poison - Talk Dirty To Me

You know I never
I never seen you look so good
You never act the way you should
But I like it
And I know you like it too
The way that I want you
I gotta have you
Oh yes, I do

You know I never
I never ever stay out late
You know that I can hardly wait
Just to see you
And I know you cannot wait
Wait to see me too
I gotta touch you

Chorus:
Cause baby we'll be
At the drive-in
In the old man's Ford
behind the bushes
till I'm screamin' for more
Down the basement
lock the cellar door
And baby
Talk dirty to me

You know I call you
I call you on the telephone
I'm only hoping that you're home
So I can hear you
When you say those words to me
And whisper so softly
I gotta hear you

Chorus

C.C. pick up that guitar and talk to me

Solo, Chorus out

What .NET is to me..... (-1, Offtopic)

GoatTroll (556420) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003458)

Isn't it awefully nice to have a penis,
Isn't it frightfully good to have a dong?
It's swell to have a stiffy,
It's divine to own a dick,
From the tiniest little tadger,
To the world's biggest prick.

So three cheers for your Willy or John Thomas,
Hooray for your one-eyed trouser snake,
Your piece of pork, your wife's best friend,
Your Percy or your cock,
You can wrap it up in ribbons,
You can slip it in your sock,
But don't take it out in public,
Or they will stick you in the dock,

And you won't come back.

Language neutrality (1)

icejai (214906) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003461)

I think this quality of .NET will make it popular among web developers. There is much money to be saved and labour productivity to be gained by not having to rewrite/port code from one language to another.

Re:Language neutrality (3, Interesting)

Phil-14 (1277) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003537)

Everyone talks about .NET's supposed
language neutrality, but based on what I've
read so far, it's only language neutral if
your language is c# or close to it.


However, maybe they should repeat
the claim another million times; it worked
with getting people to think Windows
was secure.

Alan Thicke. DEAD. (-1)

Alan_Thicke (553655) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003465)

I just heard the sad news on CBC radio. Comedy actor/writer Alan Thicke was found dead in his home this morning. Even if you never liked his work, you can appreciate what he did for 80's television. Truly a Canadian icon.
He will be missed :(



Show me That Smile (The Growing Pains Theme Song):

Show me that smile again.
Ooh show me that smile.
Don't waste another minute on your crying.
We're nowhere near the end.
We're nowhere near.
The best is ready to begin.

As long as we got each other [slashdot.org]
We got the world
Sitting right in our hands.
Baby rain or shine;
All the time.
We got each other
Sharing the laughter and love.

Fuck Alan Thicke... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3003538)

and you too, fucking nigger lover.

.NET is... (4, Funny)

pq (42856) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003466)

.NET is just a way to catch the .FISH!
Bwahahahahaha...

Re:.NET is... (0)

questionlp (58365) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003535)

And according to the Fish (aka Babelfish), ".NET is just a way to catch the .FISH!" becomes:
The network is exactly the method to take the FISH
After English -> Japanese -> English -> Spanish -> English ;-)

Hmm... maybe Microsoft (and pq) knows something we don't. hehe.

Re:.NET is... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3003568)

A FAG IS YUO.

net (-1, Redundant)

Joe the Lesser (533425) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003475)

net Pronunciation Key (nt) n.
1. An openwork fabric made of threads or cords that are woven or knotted together at regular intervals.

2. Something made of openwork fabric, especially:
a. A device for capturing birds, fish, or insects.
b. A barrier against flying insects.
c. A mesh for holding the hair in place.
d. Something that entraps; a snare.
e. A fine mesh fabric used as curtain or dress material or as the foundation for various laces.
3. Sports.
a. A barrier of meshwork cord or rope strung between two posts to divide a court in half, as in tennis and badminton.
A ball that is hit into this meshwork barrier.
The goal in soccer, hockey, and lacrosse.
The cord meshwork attached to the hoop of a basket in basketball.
A meshed network of lines, figures, or fibers.
A radio, television, or telephone network.

I'm impressed ... (1)

NWT (540003) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003477)

At first sight I thought .NET were some little idea developped by MS, but it's seems quite big and complicated now ...

I wonder if they're only trying to get a bigger part of the NET and its users under control, or if they're planning something bigger ...

Re:I'm impressed ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3003564)

Well, of COURSE THEY ARE! If they weren't, they wouldn't be M$ and wouldn't have a monopoly in the first place.

what I have yet to see... (0)

SweetAndSourJesus (555410) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003486)

I'm a FreeBSD guy. I've yet to see anything regarding how this is going to affect me. Naturally, I'm not going to get any of the .NT err .NET goodness, but MS doesn't seem to be shipping any of their marketing jazz my way.

Does anyone have any links to info regarding .NET's impact on the un*x world?

Also, are they really going to call everything *.NET? It just seems so...what's the word I'm looking for...well, inane.

the article (1)

f00zbll (526151) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003497)

I found the article well written and better than most news publications. The arstechnica guys are deligent about their research and try to be as object as they can. I personally found their review more object the than the recent batch of reviews. I look forward to the next installment covering the software of .NET, ie the servers and services portion.

Re:the article (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3003502)

That would be "diligent" and "objective" .

... whatever.

The truth behind the mystery... (2, Funny)

The G (7787) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003501)

.NET is mlife.
--G

Behind .Net: #@ +10 ; Insightful @# (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3003622)

F$ck .Net. For that matter, F$ck the entire
Microcslop hegemony.

Marx_spork.

DOTNET (-1)

Serial Troller (556155) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003508)

DOTNET is that small withered thing in Billy Boy's pants that he wants to RAPE YOUR COMPUTER with. Idiots. Stop posting this SLOP all over the front page!

great article! (1, Offtopic)

timdorr (213400) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003509)

Wow. 2 Slashdottings for us Arsians in such a sort span of time... I hope some of your guys get subscriptions to that site to help us with the bandwidth bill.. =D

Back on topic, I can attest that this is a great article. Before, all I knew of .NET was something about subscription services and some set of servers... Now it all makes sense...

Great read!

.NET, J2EE, WebServices (1, Insightful)

rootmonkey (457887) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003510)

.NET is Microsoft's Web Services answer plain and simple, the problem is not too many people understand what Web Services entails.

One of black marks that J2EE gets in the .NET vs J2EE comparison is the fact that .NET was designed with web services in mind while J2EE has been playing catch up with it various Web Services extensions. I disagree with this view though. I look at it more as J2EE is more mature and has been around longer so that is why web services were not designed into from the begining. Second, I think it shows the power of J2EE that it can be extended in such a manner that works well with the existing platform. J2EE also has a much larger support for other types of protocols with existing enterprise systems. This allows systems to ease into the J2EE platform whereas with .NET you have to make the big leap and move everything into the .NET frame work leaving legacy systems.

What IS the .NET? (4, Funny)

denzo (113290) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003517)

Unfortunately, no one can be told what the .NET is. You have to see it for yourself.

.NET is stupid. (0, Troll)

Penguinoflight (517245) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003525)

Those crazy folks at microsoft keep messing things up! ".net" has just made zone.com inconvenient (the only ms service I use), and all the other msn stuff is worse. .NET has launched, but it hasn't proven any advantage.

It's not just that I'm a MS hater, the other Zone users don't like .net either, make your customers happy and don't use it.

Re:.NET is stupid. (1)

Merconium (551470) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003602)

Bwahahhahaha! This is a joke, right? Take a look at the article and you'll see why zones.com and the passport fiasco has very little to do with what .net is.

Duh, I'm not laughing. (1)

Penguinoflight (517245) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003645)

that's zone.com like I said in my post. Maybe you should have read my post. I felt like making a joke but couldn't think of anything funny about .net, because it might actually succeed in the enterprise, but only if they're all lunatics.

What .NET means to me... (0, Flamebait)

powerlinekid (442532) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003526)

.Net is a package of sorts. In it your have your c# which is a rip off of java (just look at the syntax... yeah yeah i know runtime is different). Nothing new, just this time its legal. You have your compilers and runtimes for c# and api, just a new way of distributing microsoft software for more money. You have your passport thingy which is supposed to be this great big identification thing that works with all things microsoft... well thats just so you buy more microsoft stuff which equals more money for microsoft. Pretty much, .Net is a repackaging of old microsoft ideas but with a slicker name, and interface and on top of that its kind of legal this time. Nothing new, nothing to see here.

Has anyone used any of the .NET services? (1)

amhax (557376) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003529)

I was just wondering if anyone has yet used .NET for full integration of all services(as .NET was intended to do) and what are/were the results?

Any dismal failures?

Books, VS.NET, .NET FreeBSD (5, Informative)

XBL (305578) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003530)

There are some good .NET development books coming out now. Even O'Reilly has had one out for a while (which I have), so the publishing companies seem to be eager to sell .NET.

Right now I am downloading the seven CD Visual Studio.NET Enterprise final version (yep, already warezed), a $2500 program. It even has a version of Visio bundled for doing application modeling, and that somehow automatically starts producing code, from what I understand. This is going to be interesting to try.

I have had the VS.NET Beta 2 for a few months, and it's generally easy to use, but very slow. I mean, a general "Hello World" application takes several seconds to compile, and also at least 3 seconds to execute! I have done the same thing using the raw .NET framwork development tools, and it seemed much faster (probably because my hand-written code was much smaller).

Microsoft is developing a version of the .NET runtime and classes for FreeBSD. I have talked with the lead engineer of this project over e-mail, and he said that it's due to be out in late Spring. I asked him about the Windows Forms stuff, and he said it will be based on Tk (could someone explain the implications of this?). He also said that there are going to be very few UNIX-specific classes, but they hope people will develop those on their own.

Re:Books, VS.NET, .NET FreeBSD (2)

rabtech (223758) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003596)

Please be aware that you can purchase a copy of any single visual studio tool, such as VB for really cheap. You are then eligible for the upgrade price on Visual Studio.

Right now at least, starting from scratch, it is cheaper to pickup VB 6.0, then buy the VS.NET upgrade.

Re:Books, VS.NET, .NET FreeBSD (3, Informative)

clontzman (325677) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003680)

I ordered an academic copy of VS Professional for $99. If you're a student, have one in your family or can find a way to finagle a student ID (or take a class at a local university), it's an excellent way to get a legit copy for a very competitive price. The individual languages are cheaper still.

Re:Books, VS.NET, .NET FreeBSD (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3003697)

Am I not a student of Life itself?

City University says it will award me credits based on my work experience. Can I use my work ID as evidence of my being a student?

.NET is a Come ON! (-1, Flamebait)

Shuh (13578) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003541)

It's M$'s attempt to shake-down the internet community by giving them a proprietary, closed-box "solution" to the unprecedented freedom and interoperability presented in our current open, "free," internet scheme.

.NET is ... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3003548)

.NET is just another attempt to attract design-less developers.

Does it actually provide anything that C++ does not, except $$$ for M$ ?

Who Cares? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3003551)

I mean really, who cares?

Was that so complicated? (5, Insightful)

JohnDenver (246743) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003555)

.NET is a "software platform". It's a language-neutral environment for writing programs that can easily and securely interoperate. Rather than targetting a particular hardware/OS combination, programs will instead target ".NET", and will run wherever .NET is implemented.

When your friends ask, just tell them "It's a language-neutral Java knock-off..."

Why do people try to make it more complicated? Ok, .NET never interprets bytecode, rather it does JIT compiling. Big deal. Ok, .NET uses SOAP as it's RPC conduit. Yawn. .NET offers Passport for developers who don't want to write thier own user authentication and may want to offer thier users the convienence of not having to enter thier condo's address. *snore* (wipe drool from mouth in a dazed stupor)

Others like to confuse the application that can be written by .NET (You can write them in most other languages too) like Web Services and equate .NET with Web Services, when Web Services are just one type of program you can make in .NET

The Platform != It's Applications

It's Simple: It's a Java rip off!

Mod parent up (1)

blakestah (91866) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003633)

The reality is, .NET is a platform to
produce NET enabled applications.

So is Java.

Microsoft is trying REAL hard not to make it seem like they are re-inventing Java, whereas in fact they are reinventing Java.

Just coincidental that Windows XP drops default Java support.

So, all developers get another language to learn, harder than Java, and the public gets more fragmentation of the NET than before.

Whereas the technical details between the implementations may differ, both exist for only one reason - to provide net enabled applications.

Move along, no neutrality here... (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3003665)

When your friends ask, just tell them "It's a language-neutral Java knock-off..."
Don't. Point them to One Runtime to Bind them All [javalobby.org] instead, which is a good read on the topic of the (absence of) language neutrality in the CLR.

Hmmmm (3, Interesting)

2nd Post! (213333) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003559)

Having read the first page...

.NET sounds like OS X's ne NeXT's Cocoa frameworks *with* the addition of a common runtime library... or... Java

.NET sounds like Java + JVM + jars + beans + JIT (to be fair, Java really doesn't exist without much of the above)

Am I off base?

Cocoa has the bundles concept, which sounds like assemblies.
Cocoa has the framework concept, except they haven't updated for NT in a *long* time.
Cocoa can be accessed through at least 2 languages: Java, Objective C+, and I think someone is working on a Python binding.
Cocoa lacks the VM concept, but if you write in Java, you gain this ability.

.WHAT (0, Flamebait)

danro (544913) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003565)

The term .NET seem to be a lot of things, doesn't it?
Mostly it seems to be a "One Word To confuse them all" typ of thing.
My guess is that MS is throwing a few promising concepts (the CLR, CTL, C#...) into the word and bundle it with a Grand Marketing Scheme, and a few years from now we will se what .NET is.

...that is, they will claim the things that turned out to be sucessful is .NET and everything else will not be mentioned att all.

.NET seems to be a work in progress, MS vision of .NET probably has very little to do with the technical foundation they are launching right now. They are aiming for a big piece of someones cake...

The sad thing is that I really like C#, it's a shame to see such a fine young language get bundled with pure evil =)

Only the MONO team can save me now...

more importantly... (1)

evilpaul13 (181626) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003569)

More importantly, what is The Matrix?

..but needing a more immediate answer, "What is spam?" You know what I'm talking about it's not quite pork and its not quite ham. I find it both flabbergasting and perplexing!

Sad news ... Stephen King dead at 54 (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3003571)


I just heard some sad news on talk radio - Horror/Sci Fi writer Stephen King was found dead in his Maine home this morning. There weren't any more details. I'm sure everyone in the Slashdot community will miss him - even if you didn't enjoy his work, there's no denying his contributions to popular culture. Truly an American icon.

Article is inaccurate. (4, Informative)

Carnage4Life (106069) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003572)

Although the article is a decent technical overview of the .NET Framework I don't agree with the articles description of what constitutes .NET. From looking at .NET first hand I prefer Miguel's description of .NET [microsoft.com] which is
Microsoft .NET strategy encompasses many efforts including:
The .NET development platform, a new platform for writing software [.NET Framework discussed in article]
Web services
Microsoft Server Applications
New tools that use the new development platform
Hailstorm, the Microsoft .NET Passport-centralized single sign-on system that is being integrated into Microsoft Windows XP. [now called .NET My Services]
Disclaimer: I work at MSFT but this is MY PERSONAL OPINION not some official claim.

Ya know... (1)

VivisectRob (550902) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003577)

Up until now, I really havn't given much of a damn about .NET because there have been so many conflicting definitions as to itz nature, purpose, present, or even itz future. It has been the equivalent of the computer world looking up in the sky at the clouds and calling each of the different shapes ".NET"... I'm surprised it took this long for everyone to step back and say "what the heck is this thing anyway"

with apologies to SNL (1)

freerangegeek (451133) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003584)

It's a desert topping AND a floor wax. Or more likely it's whatever Microsoft needs it to be to spread FUD.

If it ain't new...it ain't news... (1)

The_Real_MrRabbit (541342) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003585)

Gee thanks...this review has been there for over two weeks...and now someone creates a ./ item for it...is this a covert attempt to simply crash ARS because of some animosity on your part? Thanks *sshole...now I can't browse my favorite technical site... =8-(

Re:If it ain't new...it ain't news... (2, Informative)

DrPizza (558687) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003626)

OK. That's interesting to know. Given that, I, ah, wrote the article, and can guarantee that it wasn't finished, let alone posted, "over two weeks" ago.

My Concern (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3003587)

My concern with the open variants are what happens when you try to run an executable designed for M$ official verison of .NET and the Portable.NET or Mono stuff doesn't yet implement a specific class. Will they just bomb out? That wouldn't be any good considering that M$ has only submitted ~900 of 3000+ classes.

Anyone know the answer?

(this is a fake sig, I put it in the comment)

Is this article acurate? (1)

Andrewkov (140579) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003612)

The article makes it sound like .NET is basically like Java. Java targets the Virtual Machine instead of a type of CPU or architecture, the article says that your compiler will make programs for the .NET runtime engine (virtual machine) .. I though .NET was was kinda like Gnome or KDE without the Window managers, just a framework and some libraries for writing programs. Isn't it supposed to be an API accessable from several programming languages? Maybe I'm the one that's confused!!

Re:Is this article acurate? (1)

DrPizza (558687) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003685)

Perhaps you need to re-read the article. It talks about language independence, amongst other things.

I just don't like Passport. (0, Offtopic)

amhax (557376) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003614)

I hate the idea that only one password gets me into everything. Do I want to trust Microsoft to be the weakest link in my security scheme? I don't have much faith in their security products thusfar, what is to insure that their password DB isn't cracked and everything I use is exploited because of it.

I prefer my internal(memorized) password list.

BBCTech article - Rivals queue up to take on M$ (2, Informative)

jeff13 (255285) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003629)

This article [bbc.co.uk] , rejected by Slashdot for this one I might suppose, has some thoughts regarding what other companies and groups think about .NET (Not exactly favourable) and mentions how other companies will be rolling out there own networks.

I'm not sure how I feel about this statement.
Microsoft is developing its own Java-like language, called C#, and it has developed a tool that lets those familiar with Java use their knowledge to create Java-like programs for .Net servers.

Not explicitly OS independant... (1)

Rexifer (81021) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003636)

If you look at the MS documentation, they pretty readily mention the language agnostic aspects of .NET, but I've *never* seen them mention the OS independant thing... Since they're essentially using bytecode, everyone assumes that .NET is platform agnostic, as well. But... so was Microsoft's implementation of Java. Which was not 100% cross-platform compliant. Now that the spec is in the hands of an organization that can't legally enforce 100% compliance, my question is, how does this help me as a developer? There's just as much opportunity for divergence as if I were using language-centric approach.

Its COM+! (0)

rufusdufus (450462) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003646)

Hey, the thing described in the article is what they used to call COM+ until they didn't make the ship date for Windows 2000.

Make no mistake, .NET is pure FUD. Its a name made up by marketing one day, and development was told to make something that would fit into the marketing scheme.

.NETs only substance is a java clone, passport and messenger.

Re:Its COM+! (1)

rufusdufus (450462) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003663)

To be clear; MS did ship something called COM+ in Windows 2000, but it wasnt the COM+ project, it was just a bunch of bug fixes, the COM+ team did not make the ship date, but they had to ship something with the name for marketing reasons.

You want the collective /. answer? (4, Redundant)

gosand (234100) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003657)

The collective /. answer is probably "Microsoft's latest secret method for leveraging their monopoly to take over the world."

IMHO, that is probably pretty darn accurate. Nobody knows exactly how just yet. Yeah, it sounds like I am paranoid, I have good reason to be.

Microsoft^H^H^H^Hpoly [cafepress.com]

Classes and APIs more important than language (2, Insightful)

nmnilsson (549442) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003658)

Programming Windoze for a living, I couldn't care less about language interoperability and all that hype.
It's neat. But that's it.
In my experience, language skills comes a distant second to knowing your OS.
What I really hope for are quirk-free class libraries, and bugfree APIs. I'd have to find a new job then, of course... :)

That's good. (1)

FreeLinux (555387) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003669)

A detailed technical explanation of .NET, for those that were interested but were still to lazy to look at MSDN [microsoft.com] for themselves.

That said, the hype of .NET is increasing and it will no doubt become the "standard" for Windows development. But, regardless of the promises and conceptual or theoretical "superiority" of .NET, I can't help but think that this is yet another layer of complication. Yet another standard is broken by Microsoft (C++ class inheritance for one). I predict that .NET will be the ire of developers of the future. It will make us long for the "simpler/better" days of MFC and COM.

I think that I'll take a step back. From now on, all my development work will be done in QBASIC. ;)

What is .NET? (2)

J'raxis (248192) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003674)

It is four bytes long.
It is three US-ASCII letters preceded by a period.
It can also be written as 0x2E4E4554.
Or, 0x4BD5C5E3 in EBCDIC.
It has a total ASCII value of 277 (712 in EBCDIC).
Its checksum is 303cb0ef9edb9082d61bbbe5825d972a.
Goes great with .COM and .ORG.
Alone, it gets blocked by the caps lameness filter.

duh! a domain name extension (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3003679)

.net is a domain name extension you fools, just like .com or .org. duh!

Review misplaces priorities (5, Insightful)

RovingSlug (26517) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003682)

This is perhaps a little disappointing. ... But these features are somewhat notable omissions from Microsoft's first release; profiling JIT compilers are becoming common in the Java world, and optimizing native code compilers are becoming the norm, with considerable benefits from their use.

Stability before performance, every time.

Or he'd rather be writing, "The JIT produces fast code, but sometimes crashes."? Or, ".NET is vaporware, still three to five years on the horizon."?

The reviewer should recognize and applaud the focus of the developers. Because you know they were sitting around saying, "Wouldn't it be nice if we did this fancy optimization...". Instead, they put first things first.

"Premature optimization is the root of all evil," D.E. Knuth. Learn it. Live it.

"Decent" article (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3003689)


I think the author of this article should look over the titles of each section and make sure they match with the content. Here's an example: "Is this MS's [latest] attempt to kill Java?" And then the article proceeds to NOT answer the question.

SAT time: (2, Funny)

base3 (539820) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003690)

.NET : MONOPOLY
o (A) government : tax
o (B) sponge : water
o (C) car : travel
o (D) tank : invasion
o (E) girder : bridge

This is a hard one! The good news is that the SAT has no guessing penalty.

Why I won't be developing with .NET: $$$ (1, Insightful)

djradon (105400) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003703)

Anyone who wants to develop for .NET needs to shell out at least $1,079 for Visual Studio [microsoft.com] . That's $1,079 more than it takes to develop in Java, and $1,079 too much.

How can Microsoft afford to shut out all the developers that don't have big corporations backing them? Why not at least give away the compiler and class library?

The awful truth (0, Troll)

humanx (253580) | more than 12 years ago | (#3003706)

MS want to make .NET so abstract and complex just to hide what it really is, a patetic java rip-off.
( Remeber, that plataform that MS couldn't control )

JVM = CLR
CLS + CTS = Byte code espc.
Web Services = How many companies offer SOAP for Java

Language indendent?. who needs a project written in 3 different languages ( I'm dying for writing those cobol web services ;-) ).

Sure. Buy .NET, And keep paying MS for the rest of your live.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...