Tim Anderson's ITWriting

Want to reproduce this article?

If you would like to reproduce this article on your own publication or web site, please contact Tim Anderson .

40 comments

---

Comment posted on 2008-07-07 08:28:19 by: Commoner.


my word, there are a lot of misinformed people on this forum... there are a lot of comments left here by self-confessed experts who really don't know anything about that they are saying.

Some moments of wisdom that made me laugh:

* C# is a copy of Java, they only changed a couple of objects, that's all.

* Isn't Java Sun's version of C?

and many more.

Are there really people out there who go onto forums and claim to be IT "professionals"? Because many who commented here have no idea what they are talking about.

Regards.

---

Comment posted on 2007-07-04 18:58:08 by: Vignesh.
I saw someone saying if .NET is going to be platform independent and tat could spell the end of java. This is insane. I think people who dont know the power of J2ME and EE talk all rubbish here.

There is so much overload work done by the OS if its using .NET. If there is no performance, then why to use .NET??

Also there wil be no end to java because i dont think there is a support for J2ME in .NET..

i think am right?? jus let me know if am wrong..

---

Comment posted on 2006-03-06 05:07:55 by: Glenn Martin.
Please try to remember that VPC emulates a Pentium 2 CPU...

---

Comment posted on 2006-03-05 20:13:09 by: Jim Wilson.
For what it's worth, I just started playing with a Mac for the first time since 1987. The first thing I did was install Firefox. The second thing I did was install VPC with Windows XP Pro. Then I installed all the updates, including the .NET 2.0 framework. Finally I installed a fairly large .NET application that connects to SQL Server 2005 over the Internet. Everything works perfectly, but very slowly. That's how I ended up on this page--hoping there was some way to improved performance.

---

Comment posted on 2006-02-12 22:31:47 by: Glenn Martin.
I got Mono/Mono Develop running on OS X 10.4.
http://www.xargos.com

---

Comment posted on 2006-01-24 09:19:04 by: Unknown.
I have experience with both Objective-C/OpenStep and C#/.NET. I've built applications with both (as well as Python/PyQT, C/Delphi, C/QT, and various and sundry UNIX command line applications in C and C with STL).

I think most of the comments here miss the point. This isn't about Java vs. C#. It's about Cocoa vs. .NET (and perhaps slightly less about C# vs. Objective-C). Now that I've developed with C# and .NET, I can seriously say that I much prefer Cocoa.

It seems to be much more consistent to me. For instance, a .NET text box control has a BackColor property. So does a combobox. Great, fine. But why doesn't a date time picker (which looks to be a textbox with a special dropdown chooser) have this property? There's no good reason. Cocoa seems to me to have a much more consistent and unified design approach.

Second, the static compile-time approach of C# ensures that I cannot assume certain facts that I already know about my program at runtime. To someone who has developed with Python, Objective-C, or Smalltalk, such an approach is tiring and tedious. Yes, if you're writing system software static typing and early binding make a lot of sense. Not so for application software. And the lack of Categories from Objective-C really annoys me. It's extremely useful at times.

The Windows Forms designer generates code instead of an XML description or serialized objects. Yuck. It's extremely brittle and I have encountered incomprehensible problems when the designer decided to change something in the code and fooled itself into a corner, making it impossible to get back into design mode for no good reason.

Finally, the .NET design approach seems awfully "heavy". Cocoa has more of a "just do it" feel. .NET wants you to run through an obstacle course of inter-related structural behemoths. It just feels like mountains upon mountains of architecture that isn't necessary.

Sadly, I have a feeling that Cocoa (and Objective-C) will die in the marketplace because it doesn't fit the preconceived notions that most developers have about how programming languages and development work. Which is a shame, because once you get into it, it's much more comfortable to work in.

---

Comment posted on 2006-01-17 17:18:48 by: coimbatore guy.
Universal binaries are available now for Intel based Mac OS X applications. Mac is an easy platform to write code. Who knows Windows applications may run on Intel Macs with Mono. Xcode with mono may one day able to compile VB, C# on .Net framework. Waiting for that to happen sooner. But one thing developer base is still low for mac. - <a href="http://www.coimbatorecity.com">Coimbatore City software developer</a>

---

Comment posted on 2006-01-05 08:41:00 by: Unknown.
I am a C#/.NET programmer who happens to own a mac on which I like to do my webdesign/database development. If I understand you correctly, you are interested in much of the same thing. While Virtual PC is a nice emulator, it is terribly slow to run application such as VisualStudio.NET, VisualStudio2005 or even the recent Express Editions. Even a task as simple as loading the .NET 2.0 SDK is a major task.

I run a G4 PowerBook with 1GB of memory and I shut everything off when running VPC and allocate all 1GB of my memory to VPC, but it\'s still slow.

The coming age of Intel-based Macs may hold a ray of light for us, expanding Microsoft's support of FreeBSD and (holds breath) perhaps even a native OS X .NET compiler.

---

Comment posted on 2005-08-31 20:30:15 by: j. maclean.
I have a few points, so I'll just list them:

1-All these languages that some people here are bashing and others are praising have their faults, as well as their strengths. If you don't like C#, don't use it, if you don't like java, don't use it, both are good, easy to use languages, and neither sucks.

2-.NET is a useful platform for developing applications quickly and efficiently, that are stable and efficient, but do not have a far reach to other platforms, while java isn't as stable and efficient (in my expirience), but is usable on most platforms.

3-.NET is not a bloat or a cancer, it's a framework/runtime just like JRE is to java. And while it may be a particularly large download, as well as slow your boot time down a few seconds (maybe go microwave yourselves some Pop-Tarts in that time:D), it doesn't slow down the apps themselves.

4-"M$" obviously is doing something right, they have $40 billion, and they weren't always the large company that they are today. And no I haven't been marched onto the MS boat, because I run Linux as well, so shut it you fucking beatniks!

And if you like one language doesn't mean the others must be destroyed and everyone should be forced into your way of thinking, because that's exacly what YOU THINK MS is trying to do. So please play nice:)

---

Comment posted on 2005-08-30 16:36:43 by: Gonzo.
I don't understand people saying "Don't be the herd" by all means just because it's comming from Microsoft. C-Sharp with .Net is by means a more productive (especially reagarding time) programming environment then Cplusplus and MFC ever was.
If it is suitable for you wholly depends on what type of level you are writing your code for.
If you are doing driver stuff or writing your own pixel pipeline, OF COURSE Csharp/.Net is NOT the thing for you, but it was never ment for, and you know that. If you want to stay away from it, do so, but don't mark everyone using it as "fool of the century".
You guys always think the only reason Microsoft does business with success is because they fool each other to death - I don't deny that there are corrupt elements inside Microsoft corp -, but another good reason is: They sell stuff the people WANT to use, because its easy to use them. If you want to juggle thousands of config files - do so - but let others do their sh*t!

---

Comment posted on 2005-08-14 03:49:53 by: Anonymous.
C# really is a great language. It truly is the best in those days. Truly object oriented, very powerful (gets the best out of C/C ), fills in gaps from Java and easy enough to use and learn. It should be implemented on all platforms. Not only .NET.

---

Comment posted on 2005-04-06 17:35:18 by: bayazet.
I absolutely hate all this object oriented hype. What is so special in java? Megs and megs of bloated VM, that eventually eats up all your memory so you have to reboot? Or C#, another piece of shit? That one ever worse, because it's being pushed too hard like a cancer growth. Yes, memory management is great, but somehow it's been achieved through monstrous code bloats , whatever you call it - "CLR", "Framework" or "JVM". And I know it's not true, you don't need megs of space to do GC. So why do they have to put on your hardrive so much shit just to make it work? Even VB with its thousend and one dependancies looks tight and compact in comparison with freaking java and c#. OOP isn't panacea. It's good for certain things and totally unexceptable for many others. Objective C would do much better if you absolutely cannot live without OOP. If you have acute craving for IDE use GnuStep. There are good scripting languages with clear syntax like lua and scheme that would do all your scripting tasks. You don't need to become hypnotized zombies and just march to what M$ or Sun tells you is the best for you. Don't be the herd.

---

Comment posted on 2005-03-11 18:32:44 by: Jon Dell.
Objective-C (with Cocoa) may be more "elegant" but I can't to say it is easy to learn. even using apple's own samples and tutorials i don't quite understand how it works or how to expand it in any way. I have tried out many languages trying to find a good one for gui applications (for command line i use ansi c, web i use php).

for gui-centric languages java/swing is not THAT hard to use but is very slow/inefficient - still for cross platform it is my main language (i mainly do university assignments - i am a student).

Python/wxPython with boa constructor is one of my favourite combinations for creating gui programs .... but it can also be slow - but unlike java the code is slow not the gui - and to create a non-dependant exe requires it to compile even a simple program to 1.8mb .... which seemes large to me.

.net with System.Windows.Forms using c# (although .net has made vb viable again) is very easy to write programs in - espically coming from java/swing
the windows.forms designer in #develop/vs.net can be really usefull to learning the in's and outs of the language.

while trying to learn languages i have tried to write a simple notepad clone (i have written one in each language i listed) and here is my comclusion based on each language

Obj-C/Cocoa - overly complicated and took about 1-2 hours with tutorial

Java/Swing - slow but using my text book for the swing code style it took me about 45mins

Python/wxPython with boa constrictor - was extremely fast to write using a simple tutorial - took <10mins

c#/windows.forms - was first fortae into the language ..... but took me about an hour to write .... but given that experience it is now the language i would prefer to write all my gui programs in (but i may be stuck with java until mono's mwf comes out because my main school machine is an iBookG4)

.net may be seen by many as a replacement to java ... but in many ways it is better than java .... at least in my opinion ....

ok . i think that is all i wanted to say on this subject

---

Comment posted on 2005-03-11 15:27:33 by: John Batte.
Well I don't know a thing about Objective-C so I can't make comments as to its ease of use when compared to C#, although now I guess I'll try to go and research it... but I'm a hard-core C# developer, and yes I see the similarity between C# and Java, especially in the memory management arena. However, I also see the Win32 roots of the Framework, and can't get behind the idea that C# is just a Java rip. Personally, I think they're both fantastic development platforms. By the way, the Mac OSX Framework scenario depicted earlier does indeed work, but it should be noted that the Mac Framework is more akin to the Compact Framework, in that the underlying technologies that support more advanced Framework elements are rooted in Win32, and simply don't exist on other platforms. If the Framework could migrate its andvanced graphical and communications models from technologies like COM and GDI to a new implementation that keeps multiplatform support in mind, then we could be seeing a fully functional, cross-platform Framework in the near future. I know what it's like to be a M$ basher; hell I used to be one. I've grown up since then. If M$ has what it takes to dominate the software development market, then they deserve it. Marketing, business mergers, and cutthroat corporate politics are tools that get used by everyone in the business world. If M$ is better at using these tools, they will succeed. More power to them.

---

Comment posted on 2005-03-09 00:29:22 by: Tom.
.Net is a powerful tool, and once it spreads to other platforms, it should (slowly) spell the end of Java.

The reason is that .Net isn't a language, like Java. It's a *common framework* to run languages upon. You can run Java in .Net if you can compile it to MSIL -- nothing is stopping you (in fact, I'd be surprised if there aren't already Java IL compilers around). Then all of a sudden, whoah -- you've got the language that you love as WELL as the wonderful, wonderful, wonderful framework libraries.

Aside from the paranoid "Microsoft is taking over the world" conspiracy buffs, what more do you want?

Simple language: .Net isn't a language. It's a platform. C# is a language -- but if it's the main reason you're avoiding .Net, try managed C , or VB.NET, or even Perl.NET (yes, it exists. Surprised?)

Get educated, people, and don't just buy all the anti-MS FUD hook, line, and sinker.

---

Comment posted on 2005-01-03 07:57:41 by: waqas.
iwant do create dos networking plz

---

Comment posted on 2004-11-23 01:10:45 by: Rana.
Hi all,

Former WebObjects developer gone c#/.Net.

Steve Jobs has held up Sony as a model of quality brand name recognition Apple would emulate. Sony makes hardware and is an oem of Microsoft. I'm not sure he evnviosns Apple as an oem for Microsoft, but the analogy stands as his model.

I love Apple hardware and am pining over the new models and monitors. The single thing that continues to hold me back from buying another mac is the severly limited software market. As we know, Apple software market is a niche after thought to software developers interested in serving a lotta people. This is old news, yes yes, and is unfortunately current events for Apple.

The minute Apple bridges this incompatability between Windows/Mac softwares is the minute a lotta people are gonne be happy, including me. CLR anyone?

---

Comment posted on 2004-11-22 14:21:29 by: Orlando.
Can you trust Microsoft?
I think you can't. You can't trust a company where in their MSN site they send Opera a bad html file (they did a special html file for the Opera browser). So the people who go into MSN with opera they saw a site totally different (one layer over another). What do you expect they will do with Linux?
I think if they someday do a "interpreter" for Linux, they will do something like that.
C# is a copy of Java, they only changed a couple of objects, that's all. The only difference is the framework. Don't be fool, don't trust MS again, they fucked it a lot of times before, why they will not fuck it this time?

---

Comment posted on 2004-09-15 22:23:24 by: Daniel.
People, please keep in mind that for all practical intents and purposes, the CLR is the O/S portion of .NET, meaning that no, it is not anything at all like Java. When under theoretical operation, there is no interpreted or run-time compile code, and all assemblies, including your own, should run as native executables on whatever system you drop them into.

In fact, when properly implemented on any generic system (including pure hardware with no base O/S), the CLR is much more like Win32API (only in terms of providing a base-universe, not in terms of the mess :-). This provided so you will never have to write your own File.Open() function (as mentioned in one of the previous posts in regard to gaming and video libraries).

This approach is theoretically enabled by a first-time run compiler that creates native executables for any target system the first time they are loaded. To distribute software for this platform, you theoretically simply copy the OBJ output of your compiler to the system, and run the application.

The reason I say theoretically here is that unfortunately, Microsoft has not followed their own theory on this point (instead, making their CLR highly dependent on Win32), and more unfortunately, independent working groups such as Mono, have followed Microsoft - instead of the concept.

What we have now is a lot of .NET beta platforms that run as run-time IL interpreters, while what we really need is someone who will just sit down for a few months and write first-time compilers for various environments and hardware - that's it.

Okay - who will volunteer to do this? I would, but I am busy making components that want very, very badly to run on the newest Sun laptop.

Any takers?

P.S. For those skeptics out there who think this system is a Microsoft strategy to take over the world - they gave you the source code to do whatever you want to do with it. What else are you waiting for? :-)

---

Comment posted on 2004-09-11 03:15:58 by: Fredrik Andersson.
I have bin coding for many years. I know just about every interesting language there is to know, from simple scripting (and advance) to assembler on various CPU. My point in telling this is that i have seen the days when game developing (performance critical code) moved from being written partially in assembler to be written totaly in C, then C . Back then I didn't like where game development went (because there was a pride in writing pure assembler, and C/C were for lazy coders).

Eventually I aswell as everyone else had to accept the facts that C/C compilers got infact so good at optimizing code that there was no human brain that could do it as good. Even if a human brain could remember everything and actually write such good optimized and bug free code in assembler there was not a chance that he or she could do it in the same amounth of time. Next step in this process was actually the stung in your heart wher you had to accept that you must user other 3D/2D graphics libs to make use of accelerated hardware. All those amazing, super optimized graphics routines you've spent month and years to build up was now useless (mostly anyway). Today you're a cool coder if you know OpenGL or Direct3D. This is facts and everyone agrees.

Why is it like this? Because most of the times, you as a developer can never write better and faster code then those who wrote theise libraries. Why you might ask? Because thats their job! You're job is to make something out of the building stones that they provide for you.

That said we can easily say that development goes forward and each language, framework or platform has it's life line. Another one takes over and life goes on. Assembler and C/C will allways have their place, but that place gets smaller and smaller when computer gets faster and development platforms gets more and more sofisticated.

I think you allready know where my discussion is heading. What I'm trying to say is that Java and .NET has their places in history, you cannot avoid that. Cocoa and ObjC is a most wonderfull combination, KDE API is one of the best designed C API I've ever seen. But let me tell you one thing, even thou I (this is my opinion) find BeOS API better then KDE API in almost every way, it is KDE that lives, not BeOS.

Now I personally find .NET to be the better API for desktop and Web application development around theise days. I love the idea of mono and I'm following Cocoa# development with excitement (bridge between mono and Cocoa framework).

Final words, to all of you who beleives in Java, continue to support your language of choice. To all of you who compares C/C with Java or .NET, read up on the subject. And to all of you who compares perl or other scripting languages with .NET or Java, again read up on the subject. Also you Java and you .NET developer who throws shit on eachother, perhaps you should read up on the subject aswell because there is significant differences in the underlying architecture.

Sorry for my long inlay, but this is my point of view.

-- Frasse

(reservations made for anything written that might be wrong, due to lack of sleep and heavy doses of caffine)

---

Comment posted on 2004-05-22 22:33:25 by: Kip Raymond.
The beauty of .NET isn't so much in the languages, but in the Framework. The Framework thrusts the elements in Web Form construction into a higher level of abstraction. Concepts such as View State and Code Behind (code-HTML separation) are hard to leave behind once you start working with them. C# is a very clean and robust language, a cakewalk for anyone skilled in Java, and fun to work with. One can only hope that full-blown development tools such as Visual Studio .NET arise for the MacOSX, no matter which vendor makes them. I come from a UNIX background and have been traditionally biased against MS products. I've worked with Cold Fusion, PHP, and JSP, and though they are all very good platforms, .NET is the superior choice in my opinion. I say this after developing some real live commercial apps in the .NET framework. I also expect Whidbey, the next version of .NET, to be simply incredible.

---

Comment posted on 2004-05-21 21:31:22 by: John Hammarberg.
Damn text parsing. With C I mean C-plusplus.

---

Comment posted on 2004-05-21 21:29:55 by: John Hammarberg.
90%% of a language is the libraries.

All needed is better C libraries. Microsoft never even tried writing object oriented libraries, MFC is C Win32 wrapper joke. Even the standard C libraries are too complicated to use or too C influenced.

Garbage collection and high level development like VB/Java can be done in C but still you have the complete power of low level when you need it.

Added, a couple of extensions to the C syntax and the world would be perfect.

C#, J and .NET is nice for doing web and database patching, just like VB. But being a former game developer and now a low level developer (compression, encryption, drivers ect) .NET is not for me.

---

Comment posted on 2004-03-23 19:11:20 by: microsoft demon.
Shut up all you Java coders! Microsoft can do whatever the fuck they want to! Sun created Java, Sun wanted to take over the world with Java! So fuck Sun for wanting the same thing that Microsoft wants.

Shut Up!!!!!

---

Comment posted on 2004-03-18 03:31:51 by: kbeter.
C# is a fantastic language, and I hope .Net development continues further simply due to the productivity it provides.

Anyone who bashes C# certainly is of the anti-Microsoft world, or a hardware device programmer. I could not believe the previous statement of not hiring someone if all they knew was C#. Lol, I guess it really all depends on your project goals now doesn't it?

We've built a browser-based security enterprise application in 3 months with just 2 programmers.. and we're competing against a company with 15 programmers, and winning.

I guess I wouldn't hire a programmer if they didn't know C#... because they would be 10x less productive.

---

Comment posted on 2004-03-03 21:20:42 by: nsmith.
I have not had the opportunity to dabble in C# but I make my living in Java development. To be blunt, I am worried about moving to C# because I am concerned their language will be just as horrible as their history in operating systems. Microsoft thinks that they are the most innovative in this field, but the only reason they can even think they hold this title is because they have such a domination in the market.

I do not like the idea of C#. This is another ploy by Microsoft to dominate the industry. Sun had a good idea with Java and I think they did it very well. I do not want to see Microsoft phase out Java with a cross-platform C#.

---

Comment posted on 2004-02-23 21:17:39 by: Andrew Kinnie.
"- Have you spent more than 3 minutes with C#?"

Yes. I made the mistake of attempting to develop an app on it. It isn't close to the elegance of Objective C and Cocoa. (as I said)

Basically, they tried to do a better Java. Some of it is cool, some isn't particularly. However, even Java doesn't come close to the elegance of Objective C.

Obj C is much clearer, more straight forward, etc. From your post, it doesn't seem like you really looked at Obj-C.

---

Comment posted on 2004-02-22 08:55:20 by: Chris.
For another angle on cross platform development, have a look at REALBasic from real software. It is very similar to VB6 but is much more object orientated, although debugging tools aren't as good. Best thing about it is that it compiles to OS 9, OSX, Windows (all flavours) and shortly Linux. What is more, it creates a single .exe WITH NO DEPENDENCIES....No .NET CLR or installation prog required! A simple hello world type prog compiles to about 1.4MB as a windows exe...not bad. The main downside is its database support seemed a bit flaky...at least the ODBC aspects, but I haven't seriously got into too much.

---

Comment posted on 2004-02-04 17:16:13 by: Anonymous.
"- Have you spent more than 3 minutes with C#?"
Yes, it reminds me javascript.

"- Isn't Java Sun's version of C ?"
M$ did not invent C. Same way one can say that C# is a version of C.

"I'm a professional Java & C programmer in a company transitioning everything to .NET. I love .NET : C#, CLS, 2 stage compiler....the list goes on. Java connectivity sucks and C == registry and DLL Hell."

There you go... CLS, two stages compiler... It's a trick of M$ to give magic names to simple things to make it look like they invented something radically new. Bullshit! They did not. They did invent DLL hell. DLL Hell is not a part of C language , it's part of M$ architecture. Now they "invented" XCOPY for their installations in .net. And they made it sound like it's something new. But that's how it was done in DOS, and is done in Linux and Unix!

I just don't get it. What is wrong with Perl, Tcl/Tk, Python. You can achieve the same results with those tools without using dont net.

"Thanks, Microsoft. Finally, you've done something right. Open source means .NET framework will soon find the Mac."
Yeah, thanks... Also be ready for their "certification" exams which is their another way to milk money out of this hype.

---

Comment posted on 2004-02-04 17:03:53 by: bayazet.
I absolutely hate .net. It's big and it's like a cancer: it proliferates to other operating systems and lets M$ creep into places where they don't belong. And once they are there we know what happens next. They gonna kill everything that remotedly looks like a possible competing technology. C# and Java is for people who want to be led by hand so that their mess will be cleaned for them. May be it's a good thing for starting programmers but I would not hire the one who can't programm in C regardless how well he is versed in all this super-duper rubbish like C$.

---

Comment posted on 2004-01-29 19:59:26 by: Scott McGillivray.
"Only someone who hasn't spent more than three minutes with Objective C could say such a thing seriously."
- Have you spent more than 3 minutes with C#?

"Microsoft's version of Java"
- Isn't Java Sun's version of C ?

I'm a professional Java & C programmer in a company transitioning everything to .NET. I love .NET : C#, CLS, 2 stage compiler....the list goes on. Java connectivity sucks and C == registry and DLL Hell.

Thanks, Microsoft. Finally, you've done something right. Open source means .NET framework will soon find the Mac.

---

Comment posted on 2003-12-10 21:03:42 by: Andrew Kinnie.
"I love the C# langauge. It is leaps and bounds more flexible and easier to use than Objective-C."

I sure hope this was a joke.... Only someone who hasn't spent more than three minutes with Objective C could say such a thing seriously.

.Net (and C#) is OK, but it doesn't hold a candle to the elegance of Objective C and Cocoa.

---

Comment posted on 2003-09-14 17:09:19 by: Mark Minnoye.
I found a very interesting artcle on this subject.
<quote>
I was idly reading up about C# (Microsoft's version of Java, as far as I'm concerned) and typed "C# Mac OS X" into Google just out of curiosity. It led to me this MSDN downloads page where I discovered that Microsoft has released a reference implementation of ECMA-334 (C#) and ECMA-335 (Common Language Infrastructure) under the Microsoft Shared Source Initiative. I downloaded the 122Mb source tarball, unpacked it and built the system (which took quite a while!). Now I have a fully-functional C# compiler on my Mac which is interesting to compare C# with Java (and C ). The slightly more surreal part is that I can also run .exe managed executables on my Mac. This is kinda cool!
</quote>
source: http://www.corfield.org/index.php?fuseaction=blog.archive&category=osx

If this is true , .net already is -kind of- cross plaformt and this discussion would be obsolete.

---

Comment posted on 2003-07-01 19:50:17 by: Drew Crawford.
I completely agree that .net needs to go cross-platform. The thing that you guys don't realize is... it already has. Slowly. Inch-by-inch. Microsoft's not going to randomly shock the world and decide to support all OSes. What they are going to do is creep very, very slowly toward them. Example:
With the release of Everett, I can write proggies for the pocketpc. Not only do they run on the pocketpc, they run on my computer too. Not with an emu. Like a regular windows app.
Example 2:
J#. M$ has been waiting for some time to get all the legal junk worked out so they could create something that Java developers could easily migrate to (b/c Java is great, but it sucks compared to .net). Now, microsoft allows java devs to import their existing code to the .net framework. While this isn't exactly cross-dev, Microsoft is extending someone else's dev environment. And trust me, they'll extend it again next version. Just a little.

---

Comment posted on 2003-06-13 14:35:34 by: Trix.
Don't we all. But it will never happen. .net was a very good product. And to the guys who said get out of .net.... Maybe there are a few companies that are performance freakes and can't afford new hardware. but the majority don't want to spend Hours and hours waiting for a program to be done... and then waiing more time to change something. Sure .net is slower then C but I can write an app and maintain in it 1/8 of the time you can in C . That is the whole point, two differn't worlds, speed and productivity

---

Comment posted on 2003-05-06 10:15:27 by: Richard Lowe.
"If the .NET runtime weren't such an inefficient solution to a problem caused by outmoded programming techniques I'd be all over it too, but the fact is simply that .NET exists solely to bloat apps and sell new hardware."

Uh, yeah, so bloated... I guess 'cause it's directly comparable to Java in this regard you'd better call up the 100's of Fortune 1000 companies running Java and .NET apps to drive their critical business processes and tell them to scrap them and re-write them in C , COBOL, Fortran and LISP and hey, why not Assembler?

Nice job getting it to work on a Mac, I wouldn't hold my breath for a OSX version, though.

R.

---

Comment posted on 2003-04-15 16:50:07 by: Tim Anderson.
For sure, if .Net runs on Virtual PC, VB6 runs fine as well.

Tim

---

Comment posted on 2003-04-15 16:42:28 by: Brad Westfall.
I am asking the google groups if my vb progrm will work on a mac or anything else rather than windows. People are only giving me advise on .net. I use vb6 still. Will they work on other opp systems?

-Brad

---

Comment posted on 2003-04-15 00:27:06 by: James Warkentin.
Wow man, you're really begging for it. If the .NET runtime weren't such an inefficient solution to a problem caused by outmoded programming techniques I'd be all over it too, but the fact is simply that .NET exists solely to bloat apps and sell new hardware.

---

Comment posted on 2002-11-28 01:52:33 by: Kelsey McClanahan.
Thanks Tim! I love the C# langauge. It is leaps and bounds more flexible and easier to use than Objective-C. I hope that someone will either port Windows.Forms to MAC OS X (with it's own windows system) or develop a bridge between C# and the Cocoa Framework.

I make a living programming in C#, but love MAC OS X as well... Just wish I could merge the two worlds!

---

You are welcome to comment on this page. For your guidance, HTML is not supported and URLs will be displayed as plain text. Add your comment here:

Your name: 

Your email (optional - will not be displayed or made public):

Type this code:    

Your comment