.NET Framework ??

Damn right.

If you compile a DLL in the latest Visual Studio tools, you need to have .Net loaded on the target machine. Better dll handeling.

Cheers

now wait a second, you can make a net app look like xxxx.EXE on start up.. so, do you really know if it wasn't NET? And don't get me wrong, I write software my self, .NET is the biggest disappointment from MS I have ever seen. what a piece of crap. And I agree with you on the fact about wantabe programmers and those that really are. It's just a sorry way of saying "I'm not a VB programmer", you might as well be one, what's the difference. I haven't really check performance however, I would be willing to bet that VB is faster! at least it can compile to some what native code to some degree. I use C++ and Delphi mostly my self (Win32) on both.

Just say Nyet to NET.

-- Paul Hovnanian mailto: snipped-for-privacy@Hovnanian.com

------------------------------------------------------------------ Due to recent budget cuts, the light at the end of the tunnel has temporarily been turned off.

In fairness to the programmers, it's probably their managers telling them to use it.

Hasn't Borland jumped aboard also?

I'm willing to bet you a dollar that -- at least if you're running Windows XP or Vista -- you're using plenty of .Net programs without even knowing it.

You can argue that the overhead of .Net -- and similar technologies such as Java or (to a much lesser extent) Python -- are not worth their (sometimes quite significant) overhead, but there are some objectives advantages to what .Net is attempting to do. Not that that implies Microsoft has necessarily done a particularly good job (I wouldn't really know, having only ever written "toy" programs in .Net), but hey -- at least they're trying to advance technology while they take over the universe! :-)

Note that producing a stand-alone .exe doesn't imply that .Net is gone -- it could have just been bundled up in the executable.

.Net certainly isn't "needed," but neither is Windows Vista or XP, or Microsoft Outlook or Word or any other program out there. How easy or hard it is to get rid of .Net is largely a function of the size, complexity, and scope of the program that's written -- "hello world" is trivially ported to any language/framework you want, after all.

----Joel

Nope. Win98SE. No need for XP with all the problems. Biggest advantage is I can use XCOPY32 and copy every file to a backup disk. Takes only about 60 seconds, so I do it often.

Also, System File Checker is much better in Win98. I can verify every critical file on the hard disk and ensure nobody downgraded a dll of changed anything in the kernel.

Not likely. The exe is about the same size as before. And it loads much faster.

MS .NET is junk. The concept sucks, and the execution is typical MS crap.

I guess if you hire all these brilliant software jocks, you gotta let them earn their keep. But if they'd only keep it amongst themselves instead of forcing the rest of the planet to put up with it.

Regards,

Mike Monett

Try going away from microsoft and use some real software, written for purpose other than taking your money.

Its better said that "hello world" is more easily ported to .NET and as the programs get larger and demand more services (think databases, specialized networking, etc.) the odds increase that .NET will _not_ have support for it.

Any 'write once, run anywhere' apps have to target the lowest common denominator API set. With something like Java, which has a JRE for a wide range of platforms, it was worthwhile for developers to add the hooks for underlying services. For .NET, developers just asked "What's the point?" .NET originally ws planned to support only Windows (ignoring the Mono project). Its a 'write once, run in one place' runtime. So all the developers asked themselves, "If I've already got my stuff running on Windows (native .EXE), what does all that additional pain and suffering buy me?".

I use .net, in fact i pushed it my last job. I told the managers to use it and I am a c++ programmer, go figure. I guess I am an amateur.

What do you do for a living?

Borland lost it years ago, its all reactive, a bit like linux these days actually.

Then go argue with the people making comments about programmers and have your manager meet me in the alley.

The "hooks" for .Net come in the form of COM "objects." Pretty much every major Windows application out there has a COM interface available (including many of the fancier schematic capture/PCB layout tools, and even high-end RF design packages such as Microwave Office). So there's really a philosophical difference in design there: Java tries to have a higher-level "base" API -- but you're left with a myriad of different protocols for interfacing to anything not included in that API --, whereas .Net tries to have a purposely lower-level API and Microsoft dictates than any extensions should come in the form of COM objects. :-) (This is perhaps the main reason Microsoft Office remains notably more powerful than OpenOffice, even though the VAST majority of MSO users will probably *never* use those features.)

I do agree that how well these design philosophies work is largely a significant function of program size and complexity, though.

The unfortunate answer to that is, "it meets some pointy-haired boss's checklist for acceptable software purchases." :-( I have a friend who's a programmer and he says they see this all the time -- they have a very nice software package (it's very much COM-enabled -- .Net apps can interface with it just as readily as Excel or Visual BASIC or Java can!) written in C++, and yet they'll see some company's checklist for software purchases that requires the software be written in some .Net language. Apparently PHBs attend some Microsoft .Net infomercial seminar and buy into the hype that anything written in .Net is good, anything else is junk... when in actuality, of course, there's plenty of junk to be found regradless of the language chosen.

Said friend refers to "dot net" as "dot crap." :-)

---Joel

Solve Real-World Problems. :-)

Thanks! Rich

Not come across the '.NET' rubbish until now. Bought a USB hard disc this afternoon. Had on it's CD a "One click backup!!" program.

John,

One of my favorite programs for "backup" is Beyond Compare, by Scooter Software. Even though it's really meant more of "synchronizing" than "backing up," it's powerful enough to do the later much better than many of junkware packages that come with, e.g., new hard drives.

I'm quite confident it's not written in .Net. :-)

---Joel