.NET woes

Am I to understand now that MS is forcing us to use .NET to do mail, internet, messaging, etc, etc?

I look up MAPI, Internet sessions, database support, etc, etc, and it all leads to .NET.

It seems as though the entire Platform SDK besides .NET has been deprecated.
This is not a good thing IMO.

In order to use .NET I must use CLR which I'm trying to avoid.


EDIT: Ok I gave in to the big boys. Have a book coming in the mail all about .NET and CLI. Somehow I'm not quite as excited about this one as my other books. But, if I want my skills to be 'marketable', I have to stay up to date and unfortunately that means C++/CLI and .NET.

Welcome to the dark side of C++ Bubba.

Although the change shouldn't be too hard on you; I mean, you already use Direct X. :)

.../cry...


(So that this post isn't completely meaningless... I don't understand why people took to .NET so fast, half the people in my programming classes love it, and I can't see why.)

I've had some experience with .NET. It's extremely easy to use compared to C++ and the Win32 APIs. And it has the Visual editor so designing the look of your applications is easier.

However, i still prefer C++ over .NET

You'd have to physically force me to use .NET. I'm talking bamboo shoots under my fingernails while waving a red hot poker towards my eye.

Winge all you want, MS is naturally going to place .NET at the core of their SDK and hence SDK docs. I envisage a point in time where all C/C++/other non-.NET compiled code is ran through a virtual machine/legacy layer of the CLR.

If you don't like it, move to Linux. It's the choice of a new generation. ;)

Least after .NET I was able to stop continuosly explaining GDI leaks caused by SelectObject() (or by coders who dont RTFM).


EDIT:

Quote:

---

It's the choice of a new generation.

---

You forget the Golden Rule...he who has the gold makes the rules.

We the older generation still use windows and pay / get paid to write code for it.

Good thing i don't want to... become "marketable".

What I will not take is an operating system that asks me a small fortune just for the "privilege" of coding on their system.

With every passing day, Linux becomes more and more a sexy operating system.

However the job boards are not asking for Linux.

The most popular stuff on job boards for C/C++ is:

.NET
CLI
SQL
MFC
COM
COM+
ODBC

and others.

It only makes sense to learn these technologies rather than try to fight what is obviously a losing battle.

For games and such and hobby code I'll use DirectX and my own wrappers, technologies, etc. But for the workplace, I'm gonna have to bite the bullet and learn what's needed, instead of what I like.

And I guess one way to defend C/C++ as a viable future language is to prove it can be used in cooperation with current and future technolgies. The problem here is that most of the jobs do not require C/C++ and I think it's because people are intimidated by it and that the dev time is significantly longer. I love the language and think it's the best thing since sliced bread, but not everyone in the world shares my opinion.

So I'm not turning my back on C/C++, I'm just expanding my horizons. Here are the facts. I can attempt to defend pure C/C++ and never get a job because my skill set is only C/C++ or I can expand my horizons, branch out, and learn current and/or new technolgies and perhaps land a job.

Need necessitates knowledge. And I need to get a computer job and stop spinning my wheels at 'good' non-computer jobs or I'm never gonna make the transition. I must expand my skill set. I may even attempt some Java, but know that C/C++ is and always will be my fav, even if I can't use it in the workplace.

You are right.

However, these particular boards don't seem to have Linux as a popular alternative. EDIT: Ignore this line... I thought you were referring to these boards.

I'm not a good example to follow anyways. I'm finally leaving my career to open a small bookstore. I finally have the time to learn C++ as I always wanted instead of having my past experience and job requirements constantly pushing me towards Visual Basic. I do get the chance to make choices. My days of slavery are almost over.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by novacain

You forget the Golden Rule...he who has the gold makes the rules.

---

I was actually quoting Pepsi. How popular is that vs other drinks? :rolleyes:

Bubba you already use COM if you DirectX, so you can tick that on your list. I can too, both with DirectX and other things like MS Word via Automation ("Look ma! No headers!"). ODBC as a skill doesn't mean much, just knowing the connection strings and DSNs really.

But .NET is the most requested skill at the mo due to MS's aggressive marketing to business, to the point where they all believe it'll solve all their systems issues at a cost to smile about. If you're looking to break into the programming industry you have to go with what's in vogue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mario F

What I will not take is an operating system that asks me a small fortune just for the "privilege" of coding on their system.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SMurf

...they all believe it'll solve all their systems issues at a cost to smile about.

---

I'm sorry...I'm missing the whole "cost" part of it. The compiler is free, and the runtime is free. If you want to pay for a flashy IDE, that's a choice. What exactly is this mythical "cost" you speak of? Personally, I use .Net for hobby programming, and I haven't had to spend a penny.

[edit] Holy crap, the new edit box is awesome.

>I'm sorry...I'm missing the whole "cost" part of it.
The documentation is free too. Presumably they're talking about the exorbitant cost of the OS itself. Though in a PC market where you essentially have Linux, which is free, and Windows, which is not, it's hard for the cost of Windows to not be exorbitant when compared to free. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pianorain

I'm sorry...I'm missing the whole "cost" part of it. The compiler is free, and the runtime is free. If you want to pay for a flashy IDE, that's a choice. What exactly is this mythical "cost" you speak of? Personally, I use .Net for hobby programming, and I haven't had to spend a penny.

---

It's just a shame that people can't live on "free", which is why there is a cost to the businesses I was referring to. They have to pay people to get them to do stuff. It sucks, I know. ;)

With "better" or faster development systems comes reduced cost as these Star Trek/Wars-worshipping, funny-smelling weirdos do things for your business and are promptly shown the door as soon as the project is done. Also there is a reduced need to phone them up should things go wrong as the system is "better" like that (or so MS has told them...).

You don't need to pay for a flashy IDE either... Visual Studio Express Edition will do.

However the cost I was talking about is indeed tied to the fact it only works under Windows. You will not see many libraries for C++/CLI free of charge, you will not see many IDE contenders for C++/CLI free of charge. You will not see many tools (profilers, code generators, documentation systems,...) for C++/CLI free of charge...

I hope I'm wrong. And Microsoft will provide C++/CLI and the CLR with a true non-commercial purpose (Ahah... sorry).

Oh... and say goodbye to portability.

Regardless, as I said before on another thread, I couldn't care any less what Microsoft does with the .Net Framework. It's the possibility that they may push C++/CLI as the replacement for ISO C++ programming that scares me.

As for Bubba, believing that the only option to be marketable in the job industry is to learn C++/CLI, seems to me rather naive.

>As for Bubba, believing that the only option to be marketable in the job industry is to learn C++/CLI, seems to me rather naive.


That's right, he could learn Java for example ;)

>I hope I'm wrong.
I think you are. Open source projects have a habit of sprouting where they're most needed. If C++/CLI grows to the point where people badly want those tools but don't want to pay for them, you'll see the free stuff showing up more and more.

>Oh... and say goodbye to portability.
In a way, portability is a myth. ;)

>It's the possibility that they may push C++/CLI as the replacement for ISO
>C++ programming that scares me.
The chance of that is vanishingly small. I can't begin to fathom why you would think that Microsoft's version of C++, that breaks every guideline for the ISO standard, could possibly replace it.

>believing that the only option to be marketable in the job industry is to learn C++/CLI, seems
>to me rather naive.
He never said it was the only option, just the most popular. If you remove the most popular options, getting a job is considerably more difficult, and failing to recognize that is naive. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Prelude

The chance of that is vanishingly small. I can't begin to fathom why you would think that Microsoft's version of C++, that breaks every guideline for the ISO standard, could possibly replace it.

---

Because in the future, interesting new features of Windows might only be accessible through a CLI API that has no native equivalent.

>Because in the future, interesting new features of Windows might only be
>accessible through a CLI API that has no native equivalent.
Are you suggesting that the standards committee will feel obligated to support a proprietary API as an exception? Given past decisions by the committe about features and additions, I predict that the C++ standard will simply ignore these "interesting new features" and let implementations deal with them as non-portable extensions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mario F.

Oh... and say goodbye to portability.

---

This is probably my favorite "I won't use .Net" myth to debunk. Why should I say goodbye to portability? The Mono project is in the process of implementing the CLR and the standard class libraries on a number of different OS's. If an OS has those two components, then it can run any CLS-compliant .Net application. Then the question becomes "Is a CLS-compliant application capable of doing anything useful?" Everything developed by the company I work for is CLS-compliant with the sole exception of registry operations (which could be handled by a config file) so I'd say so.

> The Mono project is in the process of implementing the CLR and the standard class libraries on a number of different OS's.


And as soon as mono is usefull MS will step in to get its dirty little fingers in the cookie jar. There's no way a company like that will let their technology run for free on other platforms. Its just not the MS way....

Hmm... let me make this clear. I'm not going to use .Net because... you got it, i don't want to.
Not because I think it's better, worse, more colorful, dull, cute or ugly.

If you prefer, I'm not going to use .Net because it is a personal choice. Just like, for instance, I don't feel interested in learning Delphi. I just... don't want to.

As for Mono... it has been around since the beta versions of .Net. Or close, I can't remember. It will always be a step behind Microsoft implementation of .Net. If I remember correctly, it took Mono 5 months to keep up with the .Net Framework 2.0 and it is still struggling to. And this is just for ASP.Net.

It's a viable solution, sure. But one that comes at the cost of lenghty compatibility updates. And I'm sure Microsoft will not be waiting for Mono to come up with new versions... nor it will think of Mono when changing function locations and whatnot like it so much enjoys to do with the DirectX API.

>>Oh... and say goodbye to portability.

Why is portability so important?



Approx 90% of home PCs run windows so limited extra return for a portable app (compared to a MS only app).

The biggest expense (IMO) in development is time costs (wages). If an app can be developed in significantly less time using a MS product (or targeting only a MS OS), then BAs will push that type of development.

I have coded, in a commercial capacity, for very high volume online trading sites, embedded XP for industrial devices and desktop apps.

Never needed any of these projects to be portable, as the target OS was always specified in the business requirements or by the hardware used.

Nor has specializing in MS technologies limited the projects I can work on.

I do agree that portability is playing a lower role. That has to do though with a lot of factors. Lack of vision from customers/solution providers, lack of knowledge, commercial companies pushing their "way of life", developer lazyness...

However portability is important despite the number of systems running MS Windows. If for anything else because I'm sure nobody in here would want to see a Windows only world. Lack of portability only serves the commercial brands. When Microsoft started their hype with the .Net Beta version, they did it by exacerbating the portable nature of the framework. Back then, 5 years ago or something, Linux was still posing a serious threat to Microsoft. Now that the waters have calmed, portability is no longer an issue. In fact, it's an enemy of a company that wants "every computer in america to run microsoft windows" (sic).

But... just as an example. 3 years ago The Portuguese Ministry of Higher Education (concentrates on universities) wanted to migrate to Linux. The cost was huge. The whole Visual Basic base had to be rewriten, Microsoft SQL Server databases migrated and queries rewritten and many other factors. I don't know them all. I was simply in charge of evaluating the VB migration. The idea was to move to a more cost effective IT solution.

It had to be abandoned. The time needed for the migration and the costs involved with hiring coders were simply too overwhelming. And to this day, the Ministry still has to pay Microsoft for every single computer, every single server. Bulk licenses, of course.

Meanwhile, on a small room, just like in the movies, an old computer still ran some legacy C code. That computer migration cost was calculated in 160 Euros. The cost of buying a new HD and of the guy installing linux and compiling the C code.

I try and make most of my code portable not because linux > windows or anything like that (I do believe that is true in a lot of cases) but more so that down the road, when the leading OS has changed, the API for it has changed, and all the other changes, I will still be able to use the same programing habits. I seriously considered learning to use DirectX due to it being the API that Microsoft supports and 90% of the time (atleast) my code will be executed on a MSOS.

But being forced into .NET to use it, I would rather not. I am not a professional game developer or anything, and that isn't my goal, learning game programming is more for a greater understanding.

>>3 years ago The Portuguese Ministry of Higher Education (concentrates on universities) wanted to migrate to Linux. The cost was huge.

I helped port one of Australia's largest banks online share trading site from Oracle based system to a MS SQL Server + white label solution.

Cost was huge over the 18 months it took to complete.

A senior developer's time is charged (by the company) at nearly Au$170/h and I was only one of a large team (>30 coders and testers).


Six months later, a merger ment they had to port everything to JAVA ....
(one bank had a contract stating that JAVA would be used, the others did not == move to JAVA)

Moral: Choices in technologies used in major development are rarely based on the best fit for the project at hand and are usually mede by people who know very little about the merits of one over the other.

Quote:

---

I don't understand why people took to .NET so fast, half the people in my programming classes love it, and I can't see why.

---

Because it's RAD without the nasty VB behind it. C# can create a productive commercial solution in probably half the time. I love C++, but I cannot justify charging double rates just because I like C++ better. C# gets the job done in 90% of business needs and in 50-80% of the time needed for a native C++ application. And don't anyone dare to tell me that a Win32 project or something involving DirectX, MFC, ATL, COM would be any more portable. The interface to our banking software a a windows DLL. The interface to our inhouse accounting software is an OCX. The interface to the post code labelling software is a windows DLL. Portability is for people who want to do it right and for people who have too much time on their hands. Businesses are neither. They care for ROI, right now.

>Am I to understand now that MS is forcing us to use .NET to do mail, internet, messaging, etc, etc?

But for other things, the Win API seems the only way to do things:

http://www.itwriting.com/blog/?postid=486

So, nvoigt, are you saying there is no market for C++? That it is just a toy for those who like it and it can only be justly applied on systems where a framework the likes of .Net was not created?

I formulate my opinions on this matter mostly on what I read here and there. However you guys use these tools at a professional level. I am curious as to if I'm learning a programmin language that, from what I'm reading here, is dying.

>Linux is not free.
You know perfectly well what I meant. :rolleyes: Linux is free in that there's not necessarily a direct cost in legally acquiring it. Sure, some distros are sold retail, and there's certainly the indirect cost of net access for downloads and the time spent installing and learning the system. But with that line of thinking, we'll spend more time specifying our definition of the word "free" rather than talking about more interesting things.

Quote:

---

Anyway, you make about as much sense as Richard Stallman when he said, "Linux is not free as in beer...". Maybe you can tell us where in the hell the free beer is, or the holy grail for that matter.

---

There was free beer at my friend's birthday party, the other day. Of course, it was at zero price relative to me, and I had extraneous expenses due to the cost of the present, travel and my time.

Quote:

---

Linux is an operating system. A corporation can use Linux as a platform for IBM or Oracles product line, but as far as I know, you would have to go about that by getting a license from a Linux vendor, and enterprise Linux is expensive. You are paying for the service and support mostly, but also indemnification and buch of other bull crap.

---

Well, you are equally guilty of not qualifying your statement that "Linux is not free."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MDofRockyView

Code:

---

// const qualifier
const char array "Linuxisnotfree";

---

---

Don't think that's gonna work, MountainDew. Buddy.

MDofRockyView you do realize one can edit his own posts , no need to post twice or more without having another person replying between them...

:edit:
Guess you already know where that button is located ...

>> A customer is told that their investment in a product line is secure because of portability; and this is the sales pitch.
Last edited by MDofRockyView : Today at 11:49 AM.

>Well cup cake, I didn't mean to offend you
You didn't.

>but I like to see you get angry, just don't ask me why.
I doubt very much you could say anything that would make me angry. ;)

>You are paying for the service and support mostly, but also indemnification and buch of other bull crap.
That's a fallacy. You're moving too quickly from the specific to the general. Explain the logic in this: "Enterprise Linux uses licenses for support. Licenses cost money, so Linux is not free".

>No, in all honesty, I just wanted Prelude's attention.
A better way would be to show a breadth and depth of knowledge that impresses me. That way you get my attention and keep it. Or if your posts are constantly amusing. But if you act like an idiot, you'll get my attention for a while and then quickly lose it in favor of more interesting people. Of course, some people want attention regardless of whether it's negative or positive.

/EDIT: Nevermind.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Prelude

A better way would be to show a breadth and depth of knowledge that impresses me. That way you get my attention and keep it. Or if your posts are constantly amusing. But if you act like an idiot, you'll get my attention for a while and then quickly lose it in favor of more interesting people. Of course, some people want attention regardless of whether it's negative or positive.

---

Hi Prelude. WoW friend.

Let's say, hypothetically, I threw a gummy bear at you. That
would impress you, right? EHl;athlah;wtawtearslehtai;

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Prelude

>
>No, in all honesty, I just wanted Prelude's attention.
A better way would be to show a breadth and depth of knowledge that impresses me. That way you get my attention and keep it. Or if your posts are constantly amusing. But if you act like an idiot, you'll get my attention for a while and then quickly lose it in favor of more interesting people. Of course, some people want attention regardless of whether it's negative or positive.

---

:wub:
:)

EDIT: rofl @ ethic

I almost certainly am.
Who the hell are you anyways? I haven't seen you post anywhere else lately (that I can recall) now suddenly you're... here.

Quote:

---

So, nvoigt, are you saying there is no market for C++? That it is just a toy for those who like it and it can only be justly applied on systems where a framework the likes of .Net was not created?

---

Certainly not. Like C#, Java, VB or pure C, C++ is a tool. And each tool has it's use. I would not use C++ to write a client side GUI and I would not use C# to write a server tier application. C++ is a very good tool, there is virtually nothing you cannot do with it, although it might not be as easy as with other tools. In any case, you won't get far with just knowing one language. I mean you would not expect to get hired at a construction site for your "hammer skills". You are either a worker, or not. There is no "hammer" guy there. The same applies to IT. C++ is a very good start because with C++ under your belt, learning the rest will be easy. But "just" C++ won't help you much, the same way that "just" C# won't. Fast forward 20 years and "just" C-doublesharpcrossplusextrahot will not be enough. You will need JavaAndTheRestOfIndonesia(Major), too.

You will never learn something that is the end of all. I studied C++ when Java was just the hottest, best, end-to-all-problems solution. Where I work we had a 3-tier system in C++ when C# came around. The other 3-tier system was then built in C#. Each has it's advantages, each has it's drawbacks. You will need to stay on top and learn new stuff to find the best solution to a problem at hand.

>You are very shy, in a way, and it shows.
Indeed. Especially in crowds. However, that has little to do with you seeking my attention. :p

>Hi Prelude. WoW friend.
Speaking of, I finally got WoW. What server are you on?

>Let's say, hypothetically, I threw a gummy bear at you. That would impress you, right?
If you could do that across the web, I'd be very impressed. ;)

>All software is licensed. Linux is licensed under the GPL. Enterprise Linux is a product that is
>sold by a Linux vendor to a customer with a contract. More?
Your statement was fallacious and no amount of rationalization will fix it. By the way, you're still moving too quickly from the specific to the general and trying to use it to justify your broken logic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Prelude

>You are very shy, in a way, and it shows.
Indeed. Especially in crowds. However, that has little to do with you seeking my attention. :p

>Hi Prelude. WoW friend.
Speaking of, I finally got WoW. What server are you on?


.

---

My main is on Bloodscalp, but I quit again. Account ends
July 25. I'm sure I'll be back, because I've quit 5 times.

Quote:

---

If you could do that across the web, I'd be very impressed.

---

What about if we were at a table drinking tea and all of the
sudden a gummy bear hit you in the face?

>> What about if we were at a table drinking tea and all of the
>> sudden a gummy bear hit you in the face?

Well, if it goes in the mouth and gets chewed, hey, free Gummy Bear!

>I am not moving from the specific to the general too quickly.
Yes, you are. You're using the specific instance of "A license for Enterprise Linux" to justify your statement that Linux as a whole is not free. This is not the case because there are countless exceptions beyond that single case where Linux is most certainly free by just about any definition you'd care to apply. By using a single specific case, and then applying that case as proof of a broader claim where it no longer applies, you've committed a fallacy. That's pure logic. QED ;)

By the way, you've managed to get my attention, but I'm already becoming bored. I guess you should have tried one of the better methods.

Since we're playing the attention game....

*dances on unicycle juggling puppies*

>You just don't know this
That's an unwarranted assumption on your part.

>because there is no person challenging your mind
People do challenge me when I make a mistake. If you haven't seen anyone challenge me then what does that imply?

>I told you that all of the Linux flavors come with a license and a contract
And I told you that I've no interest in a philosophical debate about the myriad definitions of free.

It's becoming hard to hear you, nvoight. I think the party has started. Can't miss it. But I got your last post.

@MDofRockyView:
Yeah sure. MS is just going to abandon 20 years of code to switch platforms. Ok, now I've heard about everything.

News flash. MS doesn't care about portability and it's obvious by their insistence on .NET. Why should they? They've made enough money already with code that has never been portable, standard, or um...pretty.

And if MS give games the backseat you are talking about, that completely defies everything that DirectX stands for. DirectX has been in development for a very long time. It started out crappy but has grown into an extremely powerful graphics API for producing top-notch high-quality games and multimedia apps. To say they are gonna switch platforms and leave some libraries laying around does not make sense and tells me you know little about COM.

Ridiculous. While you sit and dream and invent your own little world, I think the rest of us will live in the real one.

Also arguing with Prelude is probably not a good idea since she probably has forgotten more about C/C++ than you ever knew. Danger Will Robinson, Danger!!

> If you have no interest in a philosophical debate, than how do you flaunt the tools of
> philosphy. I recognize some of your words as the words of a philosopher. I know where it
> leads.
With regard to this statement, while philosphers may say something like what Prelude said, other people use those words too. Logic is used everywhere and does not deserve to be grouped with philosophy all the time.

> I stand by everything I said. I made three quarters of a million dollars this year.
That's great, but your income has nothing to do with anything, and in general it's quite rude to share personal information about your finances.

How about a mod closes the thread, this is getting stupid. MD, to say it bluntly you are blautantly rude. I think you need to go take a time out or something... I also second ahluka... Who are you, I may have seen you around here a couple times.

>How about a mod closes the thread, this is getting stupid.
I agree. Thread closed.