Printable View
I'm curious to see opinions on .NET from the people here. Also, if you would, please state whether you are a high school student, college student, work at all as a developer, or if you have nothing to do with development other than teaching yourself. I'm interested to see what group of programmers like and dislike .NET and why.
I'm a professional. I use .NET/C# because it's a big time-saver in Windows Client development. Very VB-ish without VB's ugly language features. A bit like Borland Builder, but with all the standards necessary for professional development, like UNICODE.
That's exactly how I feel. ;)Quote:
Originally posted by nvoigt
I'm a professional. I use .NET/C# because it's a big time-saver in Windows Client development.
HS student. Sure I'll love it more once I get a release version :)
;)Quote:
Originally posted by -KEN-
HS student. Sure I'll love it more once I get a release version :)
I just got my license at work this past week. I've already got an XML parsing application going. :)
Not exactly programming, but in our college networking class we found we couldn't promote a .Net machine to a second domain controller when the PDC was running W2K Advanced Server. If there's not some fix to this, migration to .Net as a server platform will be seriously delayed.
They are coming out with .NET servers.
.NET is the debil.
ok seriously, i will never use it.
why, several reasons, not neccessarily pretaing to .NET itself but its creators...
1. I ABSOLUTLY CANNOT STAND FULL OOP! its disgusting... yuk...
2. SEVERE LACK OF SECURITY!!
3. EVERYTHING RUNS ON THE SAME DAMN RUNTIME!! which could be good or bad for efficiency it depends on how well its implemented. lets hope well.
4. MICROSOFT! nuf said.
5. I WILL NOT PARICIPATE IN THE PHASING OUT OF OLD STYLE PROGRAMMING, to where everything must be done on .NET and only .NET using MS certified OOP languages, NO I WILL NOT!
6. i don't think i need to go on because the uninformed will now assume i'm an unreasoned MS hating kiddy who reads to much Slashdot.
for those who think so, your very very wrong. i'm am far far from it.
to quote Samuel L. Jackson
"Don't make assumptions, because your making an ass out of you and umption"
I want to use VS.NET for the new C++ compiler and other updates but I'm also interested in learning managed C++. I would like to learn what the BCL can do, and see how well managed and unmanaged code work together. In addition, web forms programming looks very interesting. Since you collaborate, I might want to use some C# or VB.NET together on those kinds of applications. I like the idea of assemblies and working in at a higher level of abstraction. I'm a College student.
For the individual who complained about .net security, see:
.net framework security
067232184x
There are also many articles at < www.microsoft.com >. The .net framework actually solves many security bottlenecks that users experiece with applications written in the old style.
no flame war, but thats all talk and PR BS. alrighty.
anyways even if they do manage to secure it, i still have more than enough reasons to avoit it! such as OOP... C++ is as far as it goes, it is just perfect, it allows both, Procedural and OOP.
I guess you have no plans of working in a professional environment then. Because OOP is the standard of enterprise software development today.
That's not what he was saying....he was saying that C++ allowed good OOP principals, but does not preclude you from writting procedural codeQuote:
Originally posted by AMDPwred
I guess you have no plans of working in a professional environment then. Because OOP is the standard of enterprise software development today.
I understand that, but why focus on procedural when OOP can do everything? Understanding OOP makes you just that much more valuable to employers.Quote:
Originally posted by Fordy
That's not what he was saying....he was saying that C++ allowed good OOP principals, but does not preclude you from writting procedural code
We have them, maybe beta version, not sure. They set up fine as the first domain controller, just don't want to be second or later...Quote:
Originally posted by AMDPwred
They are coming out with .NET servers.
Yeah, they must be Beta. The normal release isn't for awhile. I think they delayed the release to continue work on security.Quote:
Originally posted by salvelinus
We have them, maybe beta version, not sure. They set up fine as the first domain controller, just don't want to be second or later...
>
That's not what he was saying....he was saying that C++ allowed good OOP principals, but does not preclude you from writting procedural code
<
Fordy is exactly right.
this is not evrything in life. you may be right but i don't believe in this. i use C++ for its flexibility i program for the most part procedurally but sometimes i just cant do without OOP,
so the mix is so absolutly perfect for my needs. eliminating procedural programming is really not neccessary, and i fail to see the reasoning behind it!
>
I understand that, but why focus on procedural when OOP can do everything? Understanding OOP makes you just that much more valuable to employers.
<
and is beside the point, i believe that a mix of the two brings maximum effciency, productivity, and makes doing things easy, being locked into OOP is not always an advantage...
but then again this is all just opinion.
>2. SEVERE LACK OF SECURITY!!
Can you explain in detail what this means ? I cannot see how any security concept, even if it were buggy as hell, would be worse than having the C/C++/Win98 concept of "click it, run it, pray it does no harm". I don't think .NET lacks security and I don't see any other security concept around that is worth noting.
The rest of the points are personal oppinion. I feel the other way about those stuff.
>would be worse than having the C/C++/Win98 concept of "click it, run it, pray it does no harm". I don't think .NET lacks security and I don't see any other security concept around that is worth noting.
<
all im sayin though im not to clear on it is it not as secure and "Unhackable" as MS claims the ass holes, sorry but BS like this gets on my nerves, especially when its being fed to people who don't know better or will never hear otherise. unhackable my butt.
>
The rest of the points are personal oppinion. I feel the other way about those stuff.
<
they were meant to be read, as my opinions. and only that.
>unhackable my butt.
I didn't notice anybody saying it was unhackable. It's quite a nice concept. I guess there will be bugs. It was programmed by humans, it will have errors in it. But this isn't a disadvantage of .NET. C++ cannot breed pink elephants. But I wouldn't count this as a disadvantage of C++, because no one else can either.
I don't even know if .net and Java are true OOP languages, actually they don't support templates or multiple inheritance. I personally think that C++ is the only true language capable of OOP, and so much more.
I think that mulitple inheritance and templates were too tough for Microsoft. They can hardly build a capable C++ compiler to begin with. This makes the arguement for those who say that they copied Java because it's almost exactly the same.
Before judging the .net framework I'd like to learn how to use it, but that will obviously take some time because I have to continue to learn C++ and it would be a big mistake to depend too much on the .net framework.
The framework is middleware. Java has proven that middleware is used and accepted widely. If middleware can solve my programming needs than I'll use it, however I don't think that it is capable of sovling all my needs. I'd like to approach it with some caution and give it some time to evolve.
Zen is correct although a little bit extreme.
I dislike .NET and Microsofts intensions...
High School student.
1. What is .net
.NET is more then the sum of it's parts, so listing some parts here will only give you a minimal outlook on what to expect.
.NET is a framework of classes to handle programming.
This framework is available to ALL languages that use .NET.
This means I have the very same objects programming in C++.NET, VB.NET or Cobol.NET.
.NET languages are compiled to MSIL ( Intermediate code ) which in turn is compiled by a just-in- time compiler when started on the target platform. Note that both steps are compiling. No interpretation here. As target platform, Windows exists, Linux will be available in the future through an open source project called Mono. Microsoft does not plan to extend it to other platforms, but the .NET framework and languages are standars, so anyone developing can give it a try.
With .NET you have policies. Policies can restrict your code in a way that Java applets try today. Today, you have the choice between no rights ( Java applets ) or all rights ( ActiveX elements ). With .NET you can give rights as you choose. You want internet files only access one of your printers and only drive D: in readonly mode ? Sure, no problem.
.NET comes with a new language, C#. C# and VB.NET are really good at RAD. With a feel like Borland, but all internal advantages Borland misses ( like full Unicode support ), .NET made a great leap from C++ with MFC to something as fast in execution but super-easy in developing.
Finally, if you don't like one element of a .NET language, you can always choose another language. You can compile all of them into one project. Theoretically, you can do this now, but everyone who did it knows it's a pain in the ass to work around all the limitations. This is time that could as well be spent coding something useful. So in .NET, you can have a VB.NET class in your project. Add a C# file and create a class that uses the VB-class as a baseclass. Create a C++ class that uses the C# class as baseclass. You can now use this class in any language you choose to it's full extend. Without worrying about calling conventions, datatypes, registering dlls or something like that.
Obviously, you can do this in any order, not just the one given above.
2. What languages are supported by .net
C++ C# VB ADO Smalltalk, elfial,
3. Are there any problems with .net
Yes, Sun, and high java users love to bash it. Mainly because it's made by microsoft.
4. If .net and C# have been summited to the ecma were can I view it?
http://msdn.microsoft.com/net/ecma/
5. What are the diffences between .net and Java?
a. Java can only use Java, .net can use numeres languages
b. Java is slower, since everytime the program runs it is interputed, .net programs compile to .exe files the first time they are run.
So noone is really zen??!!!
...who woulda known? Hey Zen! Good to have ya "back"
>So noone is really zen??!!!
Nope.
noone is not zen. Okay here is the problem. C++ only provide half of the solution. Why the hell doesn't the C++'ers describe COM and the MS OS. I really hate them for their weakness. I think that both C++ers and .neters suck big time.
Zenny, oh I shouldn't use his real name, goes by the name of Sorensen.
>>I don't even know if .net and Java are true OOP languages, actually they don't support templates or multiple inheritance. I personally think that C++ is the only true language capable of OOP, and so much more.<<
Well, being the absolute brilliant mind you are, you've failed to realize that .NET isn't a language...it has languages that are true OOP and support multiple inheritance and templates, though...so here's a nice lil moot point.
>>I think that mulitple inheritance and templates were too tough for Microsoft. They can hardly build a capable C++ compiler to begin with. This makes the arguement for those who say that they copied Java because it's almost exactly the same.<<
Huh? First off VC++6 is a wonderful compiler, probably one of the most widely used. Second of all the rest of that makes absolutely no sense...
>>Before judging the .net framework I'd like to learn how to use it
I had a feeling you'd never used it before...:p
>>all im sayin though im not to clear on it is it not as secure and "Unhackable" as MS claims the ass holes, sorry but BS like this gets on my nerves, especially when its being fed to people who don't know better or will never hear otherise. unhackable my butt.<<
and you'd be completely within your bounds to feel that way if anyone had said that .NET was unhackable.
>>1. I ABSOLUTLY CANNOT STAND FULL OOP! its disgusting... yuk... <<
Then use a non-full OOP language? Like C++.NET. But I guess you'd forgot that .NET wasn't a language unto itself :eek:
>>3. EVERYTHING RUNS ON THE SAME DAMN RUNTIME!! which could be good or bad for efficiency it depends on how well its implemented. lets hope well.<<
It works very well, and allows for some neat things. The only problem is that when you run the EXE for the first time it starts slowly.
>>4. MICROSOFT! nuf said.
Obviously not...explain.
>>5. I WILL NOT PARICIPATE IN THE PHASING OUT OF OLD STYLE PROGRAMMING, to where everything must be done on .NET and only .NET using MS certified OOP languages, NO I WILL NOT! <<
Noone's phasing anything out, and even if the world was turning towards this new .NET-style programming, 1) Why stand in the way or progress? And 2) Noone's holding a gun to your head to use it.
>>6. i don't think i need to go on because the uninformed will now assume i'm an unreasoned MS hating kiddy who reads to much Slashdot.<<
indeed :rolleyes:
>Huh? First off VC++6 is a wonderful compiler,
not once you've tried anything else.
>
and you'd be completely within your bounds to feel that way if anyone had said that .NET was unhackable.
<
maybe thats a slight exaggeration but not much of one, read the BS they tell people...
>
Then use a non-full OOP language? Like C++.NET. But I guess you'd forgot that .NET wasn't a language unto itself
<
i'll stick with the real one thanks.
> It works very well, and allows for some neat things. The only problem is that when you run the EXE for the first time it starts slowly.
SEE SEEEEEE!!! .NET ALREADY SUCKS!!!! heheh.
>Obviously not...explain.
read my most recent new thead on the GD. for one example.
secondly, don't get me started, i could go on for hours.( and i'm not freakin kidding.)
>Noone's phasing anything out,
whatever you say man...
>Why stand in the way or progress?
i don't call only programing for MS compliant platforms progress.
>And 2) Noone's holding a gun to your head to use it.
not yet... but they have a very large money/buisness vaccum
no-one, your "arguments" as you may think of them, are weak.
>i don't call only programing for MS compliant platforms progress.
MONO
.net and C# have both have emca commites and can be used on any platform, that supports them. Microsoft develpoped the support on windows and anyone else can develop support for others OSes and langueages.
>no-one, your "arguments" as you may think of them, are weak.
they are opinions, as they were clearly stated to be in an earilier post.
secondly to my discredit(and rightly so), i did not save the link to where i read these quotes to back up my statement, and i cannot find it again, so... i don't really know what to say.
>
.net and C# have both have emca commites and can be used on any platform, that supports them. Microsoft develpoped the support on windows and anyone else can develop support for others OSes and langueages.
<
and do you really believe this will be widely accepted? it still means the user has to have or get it to run your apps! i doubt it will be shipped with an version of linux.
besides that what about the MS stigma in the Open Source community? do you really honestly believe they'd accept it?
>and do you really believe this will be widely accepted? it still means the user has to have or get it to run your apps! i doubt it will be shipped with an version of linux.
besides that what about the MS stigma in the Open Source community? do you really honestly believe they'd accept it?<
MONO, MONO, MONO <-ok
Of course java requres the same thing but you don't seem to be complaing about it. If any other company besides microsoft made .net you would think it was great.
>MONO, MONO, MONO <-ok
I KNOW, but that doesn't answer my question.
>Of course java requres the same thing but you don't seem to be complaing about it.
yeah i do, i believe all versions of windows should be shipped with a java runtime since it's so widely friggen used!
>If any other company besides microsoft made .net you would think it was great.
honestly? nope i would still hate it.
but i would be less worried about it.
Since when does .net support templates and multiple inheritance??????