Topic: .Net hands Linux (and gang) a loss

[Toasty0]

While surfing WWW I wandered into the Sony site. Wow, even they use .Net and Asp.Net...

Best,
Jerry  

[Demandred]

*reads case study*

Eh? What were they smoking when they wrote that?

"However, Java could only deliver on about 70% of the cross-platform promise."

So, they are saying that a Microsoft technology that currently only runs on Windows is more cross-platform than Java?

"As far as interoperability is concerned, we feel that the interface approach (Web services) is more solid than the portability approach. The reason why we feel the J2EE solution is not completely portable is because your J2EE application doesn't automatically run on every J2EE application server (without designing and verifying accordingly)."

And anything .NET only runs on a Windows operating system, thus they did have to design for the platform. They also seem to be saying that .NET doesn't need verification... well, whatever technology you are using, nobody but a cowboy would make it live without extensive testing. Did they outsource to India? *snicker*

"In the end, a commercially supported framework is cheaper. By the time you add the hardware (assuming that it's Sun) and the database (assuming that it's Oracle), the deployment costs even for a free J2EE application server are higher than for the .NET Framework."

Wha? If a PC-based server meets their needs (Windows doesn't run on anything else), why would they go out and buy an expensive Sun server? And naturally, since they wouldn't be using MS SQL, they'll be buying the uber-expensive Oracle. Couldn't possibly use an open-source database server.

"We knew that the only way to go was with standards-based development tools,"

If he means Microsoft standards, then yeah, I guess. I just find the whole article a tad over the top. I've never seen a story like this outside a Microsoft site. It kinda reminds me of Microsoft's response to Apple's Switch ads... they eventually had to admit that the woman in question happened to be a Microsoft employee.  

[Toasty0]

Quote:
*reads case study*

Eh? What were they smoking when they wrote that?

"However, Java could only deliver on about 70% of the cross-platform promise."

So, they are saying that a Microsoft technology that currently only runs on Windows is more cross-platform than Java?

Of course not. What they are sayting is that Java hasn't delivered on all its panacea promises.

Quote:

"As far as interoperability is concerned, we feel that the interface approach (Web services) is more solid than the portability approach. The reason why we feel the J2EE solution is not completely portable is because your J2EE application doesn't automatically run on every J2EE application server (without designing and verifying accordingly)."

And anything .NET only runs on a Windows operating system, thus they did have to design for the platform. They also seem to be saying that .NET doesn't need verification... well, whatever technology you are using, nobody but a cowboy would make it live without extensive testing. Did they outsource to India? *snicker*

I'm sure anyone else reading the site would be hard pressed to reach the above conclusion.

Quote:


"In the end, a commercially supported framework is cheaper. By the time you add the hardware (assuming that it's Sun) and the database (assuming that it's Oracle), the deployment costs even for a free J2EE application server are higher than for the .NET Framework."

Wha? If a PC-based server meets their needs (Windows doesn't run on anything else), why would they go out and buy an expensive Sun server? And naturally, since they wouldn't be using MS SQL, they'll be buying the uber-expensive Oracle. Couldn't possibly use an open-source database server.

Riiiiight. Clearly you want to compare a VW with a Mercedes. At least MS was honest about their comparison.

Quote:

"We knew that the only way to go was with standards-based development tools,"

If he means Microsoft standards, then yeah, I guess. I just find the whole article a tad over the top. I've never seen a story like this outside a Microsoft site. It kinda reminds me of Microsoft's response to Apple's Switch ads... they eventually had to admit that the woman in question happened to be a Microsoft employee.    

Ok, bro, next time you apply for a job remember not to toot your own horn.

<note to self: count to ten...one...two...>

Best,
Jerry    

[Scott Allen Abfalter]

Maybew to Microsoft 'interoperability' means "between different versions of Windows..."

*smile*

 

[Scott Allen Abfalter]

All I know is that I develop Java on my Windows PC and then FTP the jar file over to my Solaris system to run it.  When our lab was shy a SunBlade I put the software on a spare Linux box and it ran fine.  Same jar file, no recompile and no extra work.   That flexibility is very nice.

 

[TalonClaw]

I've been playing around with .NET and have to say it is a really nice tool.  Finally MS comes up with something that actually helps you develop quicker.  It's a good thing to learn.  I checked the job offerings in my area and every one of them is for .NET development.
 

[Toasty0]

Quote:
I've been playing around with .NET and have to say it is a really nice tool.  Finally MS comes up with something that actually helps you develop quicker.  It's a good thing to learn.  I checked the job offerings in my area and every one of them is for .NET development.
 

Hey, TC, you going with VB.Net, C#, or VC.Net?

Personally I'm going with C#/VC.Net, but my brother, a long time FoxPro developer, is going with VB.Net.

Btrw, have you looked at the managed DirectX 9 sdk?

Best,
Jerry  

[Scott Allen Abfalter]

For the record: .NET is certainly a step forward for doing development on a Microsoft system.  I'm not knocking it if that's what you want to do.  I just see J2SE/J2EE as a development platform that has a wider range of applicability; most particularly in an deployment environment with different OS's.  But that doesn't mean that there is anything wrong with .NET and C# for what it is.


 

[Toasty0]

TC--

Not sure how far you're drilling down with .Net but if you're doing any API hooking at all you might find this interesting.

http://msdn.microsoft.com/netframework/default.aspx?pull=/library/en-us/dndotnet/html/win32map.asp

Best,
Jerry  

[TalonClaw]

Quote:

Quote:
I've been playing around with .NET and have to say it is a really nice tool.  Finally MS comes up with something that actually helps you develop quicker.  It's a good thing to learn.  I checked the job offerings in my area and every one of them is for .NET development.
 

Hey, TC, you going with VB.Net, C#, or VC.Net?

Personally I'm going with C#/VC.Net, but my brother, a long time FoxPro developer, is going with VB.Net.

Btrw, have you looked at the managed DirectX 9 sdk?

Best,
Jerry  

As a VB programmer I understand the VB.NET but I want to learn C#/VC.Net.  It really isn't that much different.  The commands to connect to a database are virtually the same with a slight syntax difference.  Some of the jobs in my area are calling for C#/VC.Net so I want to go that route. I can already do VB.

I haven't looked at the Directx 9 sdk yet.  There is a lot to explore here.

[TalonClaw]

Quote:
TC--

Not sure how far you're drilling down with .Net but if you're doing any API hooking at all you might find this interesting.

http://msdn.microsoft.com/netframework/default.aspx?pull=/library/en-us/dndotnet/html/win32map.asp

Best,
Jerry  

Thanks for the link!