Why is .NET so popular? (Serious Question)
-
you really think .NET is good for web??? do you mean the c# language or the .NET runtime? if you mean c# then sure it's a nice language and works well for many tasks including web if you mean, however, .NET is good for web then i would respectfully say you are talking from the wrong end of your body ... .NET is the antithesis of what the web is about and consequently sucks at it ... the web is not the desktop and should not be treated as such ... just because someone can write a desktop app does not mean they can write a web app ... completely different problem domain with different rules and constraints that need to be understood properly to write a good web app (website / service / etc) would you think it a great idea to use say php to write desktop apps? that a good javascript programmer would necessarily be a good c++ programmer for desktop environments? no the inverse is true as well /end_rant
"mostly watching the human race is like watching dogs watch tv ... they see the pictures move but the meaning escapes them"
-
I have some limited experience with C# and VS 2008 and I don't understand why the .Net framework is so popular. It is a meta environment running on top of the operating system just like Java and the non-Windows implementations do not have all of the capabilities of the Windows version so it's not truly cross platform. I don't see why -- other than Microsoft's semi-forcing the issue -- someone would choose to use this. Shouldn't Win32/64 code run just as well, if not better, since there is no runtime between the code and the system? I can't help thinking of Java or even UCSD P-System Pascal when I look at this. I realize .Net has a large amount of built-in functionality but the same thing could be implemented in native code as well. What am I not seeing here?
It is not as popular as one would think. The most popular web tech is PHP. .NET is probabaly the second or the third. I think its popularity is due to Microsoft technology in whole rather than .NET. Anyone doing software development using Microsoft previous technology (C++, Visual Basic, ASP, etc.) automatically switches to .NET.
TOMZ_KV
-
I have some limited experience with C# and VS 2008 and I don't understand why the .Net framework is so popular. It is a meta environment running on top of the operating system just like Java and the non-Windows implementations do not have all of the capabilities of the Windows version so it's not truly cross platform. I don't see why -- other than Microsoft's semi-forcing the issue -- someone would choose to use this. Shouldn't Win32/64 code run just as well, if not better, since there is no runtime between the code and the system? I can't help thinking of Java or even UCSD P-System Pascal when I look at this. I realize .Net has a large amount of built-in functionality but the same thing could be implemented in native code as well. What am I not seeing here?
-
l a u r e n wrote:
.NET is the antithesis of what the web is about
Pulling ideology into a technical argument is, at the least, unprofessional. It is unfortunate we see it happen so often nowadays..
i consider my reasons for saying such to be based on solid technical grounds you, however, add nothing to the discussion other than a personal attack based upon your undisclosed technical knowledge and unknown political agenda so i think /ignore is a good way to respond to you thanks for playing tho
"mostly watching the human race is like watching dogs watch tv ... they see the pictures move but the meaning escapes them"
-
I have some limited experience with C# and VS 2008 and I don't understand why the .Net framework is so popular. It is a meta environment running on top of the operating system just like Java and the non-Windows implementations do not have all of the capabilities of the Windows version so it's not truly cross platform. I don't see why -- other than Microsoft's semi-forcing the issue -- someone would choose to use this. Shouldn't Win32/64 code run just as well, if not better, since there is no runtime between the code and the system? I can't help thinking of Java or even UCSD P-System Pascal when I look at this. I realize .Net has a large amount of built-in functionality but the same thing could be implemented in native code as well. What am I not seeing here?
First off, unless you are writing in microcode, maybe even picocode, you haven't been writing 'native' code. If the oldest CPU you wrote assembler for was the 8086 you probably haven't written 'native' code. If you are writing code for the Win32/64 system you haven't been writing to the 'system', you've been targeting OS level APIs that have been working with the system. Expect to see more languages that target a virtual processor, it's the only way to have a chance of getting a single binary to work under multiple OSes. Most of the popular web languages target a 'virtual processor', consider perl, javascript, PHP(?), those are 'interpreted' languages. C#, Java, UCSD P-System, many BASICs, all run on a 'virtual' processor, they could be called interpreters as well. The native vs. non-native binaries is a non-issue unless your doing embedded work, even your C compiler isn't targeting the metal. Yes, you can say 'but I'm closer to the metal' but the better interpreters use JIT compiling to get better performance. Eventually the difference between the JIT and pre-compiled will be nil. So the answer as I see it is, marketing. Of course it helps that MS bought the guy who designed Delphi away from Borland to design C#. Properties were a pain to implement in C++. :-D
-
I have some limited experience with C# and VS 2008 and I don't understand why the .Net framework is so popular. It is a meta environment running on top of the operating system just like Java and the non-Windows implementations do not have all of the capabilities of the Windows version so it's not truly cross platform. I don't see why -- other than Microsoft's semi-forcing the issue -- someone would choose to use this. Shouldn't Win32/64 code run just as well, if not better, since there is no runtime between the code and the system? I can't help thinking of Java or even UCSD P-System Pascal when I look at this. I realize .Net has a large amount of built-in functionality but the same thing could be implemented in native code as well. What am I not seeing here?
OK here's a serious answer. I've been developing software for 35 years or so. I think .Net is popular because it's a good and consistent platform that targets the largest installed base of computers on the planet. I'm not a web development expert but have done some work with it and find that it is a solid and competent platform for developing web-based applications as well. Knowing very little about web development I and VS2008 were able to build a very functional application on the web in fairly short order - with database access and fairly consistent GUI - and it worked well. I don't care for web development but it's obvious to me that doing so with .Net works well. All this in one box. Multiple languages, both Windows and Web development. Great IDE. Vast, rich library of code and classes that let you do just about *anything*. Relatively inexpensive price of entry as professional tools go. (If you think software tools are expensive, try setting up a body shop and seeing what it costs to equip it). I'm not an MS Shill (They don't pay me a dime) but I have been using their technology since Bill Gates started the thing. I know excellence when I see it - and .Net is excellent, IMHO. I love doing development work but I frankly don't have the time (or bandwidth) anymore to just fool around. I resisted moving to .Net for a number of years but now that I've spent a year working only with VS it's obvious to me that this platform has everything I need to pull off the product I'm developing. -Max
-
I have some limited experience with C# and VS 2008 and I don't understand why the .Net framework is so popular. It is a meta environment running on top of the operating system just like Java and the non-Windows implementations do not have all of the capabilities of the Windows version so it's not truly cross platform. I don't see why -- other than Microsoft's semi-forcing the issue -- someone would choose to use this. Shouldn't Win32/64 code run just as well, if not better, since there is no runtime between the code and the system? I can't help thinking of Java or even UCSD P-System Pascal when I look at this. I realize .Net has a large amount of built-in functionality but the same thing could be implemented in native code as well. What am I not seeing here?
Visual Studio, WPF GUI (or 3rd party win forms Gui), C# is easy to learn yet powerful. You don't need your code to be the Fastest. It just needs to be fast enough. When I look for (Free) help on open source languages the documentation is not there, the help is either too general or too complex. I find the mindset of the open source world to be "if your not at a 401 experience level then come back when you are" Microsoft has alot of 101, 201, 301 college level material available free. Open source seems to have 101 & 401 levels available. I find it too time consuming to make the jump with out paying someone. Also I discover Frameworks with intellisense. Open Source says real programmers don't need intellisense (text editor and command line is the way to go). Yes I am stereotyping. Honestly I would love to up my experience level of Java, Ruby, Python etc... from 101 to 401 but my kids would then hate me because they would never see me.
modified on Thursday, December 2, 2010 9:51 AM
-
I have some limited experience with C# and VS 2008 and I don't understand why the .Net framework is so popular. It is a meta environment running on top of the operating system just like Java and the non-Windows implementations do not have all of the capabilities of the Windows version so it's not truly cross platform. I don't see why -- other than Microsoft's semi-forcing the issue -- someone would choose to use this. Shouldn't Win32/64 code run just as well, if not better, since there is no runtime between the code and the system? I can't help thinking of Java or even UCSD P-System Pascal when I look at this. I realize .Net has a large amount of built-in functionality but the same thing could be implemented in native code as well. What am I not seeing here?
Ten years back, I had written my own windowing system using C helped by a great book by Al Stevens. Later I ported the whole framework to c++. This framework I built from scratch, contained about 5% assembly and the rest C/C++. This was during my college days and it was one of the most fun things I have done. I used this framework all through my college life and then in a project at my 2nd job too. However today the IT world is vastly different. My customers want applications with 75 windows and 1000s of windowing components like buttons (simple) and calendars (complex). And I don't want to sit with my framework I wrote 10 years back and add up new components as the need arises. Even if I claim to be the best programmer in this world, I cannot maintain a quality component better than what the creators of Java or now .NET do. Not to mention the upgrades and loads of free and paid components I can buy off the shelf. .NET in short is an enterprise development environment. Another reason for its popularity is the best of its kind coding platform like Visual Studio (2010), which makes like so much more easier. If I want to create an accounting package or a POS system with a serial interface today, I can get started in a few quick steps. Looking low level, .NET lets a team of (say) 100 developers work on a single code base, without worrying if programmer Mr. John ComeLately has forgotten to "delete" a pointer, causing the entire application to fail. From experience I can say, that the program will work perfectly fine till you have that big demo with the customer, and then it crashes spectacularly with a run-tme pointer exception :). At a higer level, .NET lets me learn a few tools quickly and get productive in the shortest possible time. It lets companies quickly replace programmers who move on to bigger and better things, without letting the project suffer. These are some of the reasons why systems like Java and .NET are so popular in my opinion.
-
b_dunphy wrote:
why the .Net framework is so popular.
Depends on whom you ask? How many*desktop* applications which you use on a day to day basis are written in .NET? Let' see:- 1. Internet Browsers - Chrome, IE, FF, Opera -> None of them are in .NET 2. Microsoft Office - Not .NET (though some add-ons can be .NET) 3. Windows Live Messenger, Yahoo messenger, Google Talk etc - Not .NET 4. Notepad, Paint, Calculator - Not .NET 5. Visual Studio - Mainly .NET 6. SQL Server - Not.NET but portions of Management studio/BI Studio are .NET 7. Task Manager - Not .NET I am just talking about Windows here. Mac and Linux users may survive even without knowing about .NET. The place where .NET is popular is in Websites developed for IIS (lot of intranet sites). ASP.NET is almost the de-facto choice. Now again, IIS is a very small percent of total websites out there. The only other place where .NET is popular is enterprise applications or custom developed enterprise apps.
Actually, MSN is .NET/WPF now, has been for a while. edit: er, I mean Windows Live Messenger ;P
-
I have some limited experience with C# and VS 2008 and I don't understand why the .Net framework is so popular. It is a meta environment running on top of the operating system just like Java and the non-Windows implementations do not have all of the capabilities of the Windows version so it's not truly cross platform. I don't see why -- other than Microsoft's semi-forcing the issue -- someone would choose to use this. Shouldn't Win32/64 code run just as well, if not better, since there is no runtime between the code and the system? I can't help thinking of Java or even UCSD P-System Pascal when I look at this. I realize .Net has a large amount of built-in functionality but the same thing could be implemented in native code as well. What am I not seeing here?
I believe that Microsoft has actually addressed the productivity issue head on, where Oracle with it's Java platform have not. Since cost of development is currently the foremost concern of management, it makes it almost a no brainer to choose the .Net platform. It's unfortunate that Java has not progressed the same way to provide a head on competition to Microsoft as I believe that would have furthered both platforms. I have extensive experience in both platforms and have to admit that for me, the winner is hands down Microsoft. They did their homework and continually improve the product based on what the customers are seeking. Sounds like a win-win situation to me.
mvarey
-
I have some limited experience with C# and VS 2008 and I don't understand why the .Net framework is so popular. It is a meta environment running on top of the operating system just like Java and the non-Windows implementations do not have all of the capabilities of the Windows version so it's not truly cross platform. I don't see why -- other than Microsoft's semi-forcing the issue -- someone would choose to use this. Shouldn't Win32/64 code run just as well, if not better, since there is no runtime between the code and the system? I can't help thinking of Java or even UCSD P-System Pascal when I look at this. I realize .Net has a large amount of built-in functionality but the same thing could be implemented in native code as well. What am I not seeing here?
If this question is truly "serious"...as I do see all the fun responses. Pure and simple...abstraction. Look at the evolution of software languages. We as developers need to continue to work faster, more efficiently and more effectively to implement business solutions with time-to-market in mind. I've view it as an evolution of development...where I don't need to write code to interact with the network stack, input/output of any kind, or other basic operations...since .NET provides this. In addition, there are a multitude of libraries to assist in tasks that could take a long while to implement. Sure, you could argue C++ and libraries...or any other language, such as Java, which was stated...yet...it's about making it easier for developers to build a business-centric solution faster and easier to maintain (hopefully if you designed it well). So, in short...abstraction from the system. As others joked...toggle switches to machine language to binary....to.... .NET. :D
-
Hehe, it depends.. Here is my C++ code for parsing some simple XML with obstacle information for the map:
bool ObstacleXMLLoader::LoadFromFile(std::string file, std::vector &data)
{
this->m_data_out = &data;
m_data_out->clear();struct XmlStateMachineScriptCommand script \[\] = { XML\_NODE("@TOP"), XML\_NODE("@obstacles", XP\_SKIP\_UNKNOWN), // skip the tags like coordinate\_system and bounding\_box XML\_TRAN("@TOP", ELEMENT, "obstacles", "@obstacles"), XML\_TRAN("@obstacles", ELEMENT, "point", "@in\_obstacle", boost::bind(&ObstacleXMLLoader::\_StartObstacle, this, ObstacleXMLLoader::POINT)), XML\_TRAN("@obstacles", ELEMENT, "line", "@in\_obstacle", boost::bind(&ObstacleXMLLoader::\_StartObstacle, this, ObstacleXMLLoader::LINE)), XML\_TRAN("@in\_obstacle", ATTRIBUTE, "height", "", boost::bind(&XMLAttributeParser, "height", \_1, &m\_to\_be\_filled.height)), XML\_TRAN("@in\_obstacle", ELEMENT, "coordinate", "@in\_coor"), XML\_TRAN("@in\_coor", ATTRIBUTE, "lat", "", boost::bind(&XMLAttributeParser, "lat", \_1, &m\_current\_coordinate.y)), XML\_TRAN("@in\_coor", ATTRIBUTE, "lon", "", boost::bind(&XMLAttributeParser, "lon", \_1, &m\_current\_coordinate.x)), XML\_NEND("@in\_coor", boost::bind(&ObstacleXMLLoader::\_PushCoordinate, this)), XML\_NEND("@in\_obstacle", boost::bind(&ObstacleXMLLoader::\_FinishObstacle, this)) }; return BaseXMLLoader::LoadFromFile(file, s\_machine\_name, sizeof(script)/sizeof(script\[0\]), script);}
Note this is SAX parser being able to process 25Mb XML in 4 seconds three-year old machine.
Oh God that code is hard to look at. I've been doing quite a bit of C/C++ in the last few months for embedded and Windows programming, and it really hurts after working with C# almost exclusively for a few years. I suppose it's kind of "fun," but it takes so much longer to do everything that I just feel unproductive.
-
Actually, MSN is .NET/WPF now, has been for a while. edit: er, I mean Windows Live Messenger ;P
No, it is not! When I first saw it I thought it was WPF too. Then I researched a little more using Spy++ and Visual Studio. It turns out that it is not WPF or .NET.
-
No, it is not! When I first saw it I thought it was WPF too. Then I researched a little more using Spy++ and Visual Studio. It turns out that it is not WPF or .NET.
What makes you think it isn't? The only way Messenger can take up 40mb in task manager is if it is loading the .NET runtime, there is no way it's running native code with that memory usage.
-
What makes you think it isn't? The only way Messenger can take up 40mb in task manager is if it is loading the .NET runtime, there is no way it's running native code with that memory usage.
Mike Marynowski wrote:
The only way Messenger can take up 40mb in task manager is if it is loading the .NET runtime
LOL:) Easiest way to find that is through Spy++. If an application is written in WPF (or has .NET) you see specific window classes. Also, when you attach a debugger you will find that there is no CLR loaded into the Live Messenger process.
-
DIP switch !!! DIP switch!!!! that's for you little ones just out of diapers Paddle switches are what you need I don't want to get out my bifocals magnifying glass just to move a switch with a toothpick. Real men use big beefy paddle switches for input (directly into memory) in octal, cause hex is for sissies.
-
Mike Marynowski wrote:
The only way Messenger can take up 40mb in task manager is if it is loading the .NET runtime
LOL:) Easiest way to find that is through Spy++. If an application is written in WPF (or has .NET) you see specific window classes. Also, when you attach a debugger you will find that there is no CLR loaded into the Live Messenger process.
Hmmm, it appears as though you are correct. I read something about the new MSN having a revamped UI with WPF a while ago, and when I saw the new UI, it looked pretty WPFish. How odd.
-
b_dunphy wrote:
why the .Net framework is so popular.
Depends on whom you ask? How many*desktop* applications which you use on a day to day basis are written in .NET? Let' see:- 1. Internet Browsers - Chrome, IE, FF, Opera -> None of them are in .NET 2. Microsoft Office - Not .NET (though some add-ons can be .NET) 3. Windows Live Messenger, Yahoo messenger, Google Talk etc - Not .NET 4. Notepad, Paint, Calculator - Not .NET 5. Visual Studio - Mainly .NET 6. SQL Server - Not.NET but portions of Management studio/BI Studio are .NET 7. Task Manager - Not .NET I am just talking about Windows here. Mac and Linux users may survive even without knowing about .NET. The place where .NET is popular is in Websites developed for IIS (lot of intranet sites). ASP.NET is almost the de-facto choice. Now again, IIS is a very small percent of total websites out there. The only other place where .NET is popular is enterprise applications or custom developed enterprise apps.
Rama Krishna Vavilala wrote:
The only other place where .NET is popular is enterprise applications or custom developed enterprise apps.
The "only other place"? That's a fairly substantial chunk of the market.
-
I have some limited experience with C# and VS 2008 and I don't understand why the .Net framework is so popular. It is a meta environment running on top of the operating system just like Java and the non-Windows implementations do not have all of the capabilities of the Windows version so it's not truly cross platform. I don't see why -- other than Microsoft's semi-forcing the issue -- someone would choose to use this. Shouldn't Win32/64 code run just as well, if not better, since there is no runtime between the code and the system? I can't help thinking of Java or even UCSD P-System Pascal when I look at this. I realize .Net has a large amount of built-in functionality but the same thing could be implemented in native code as well. What am I not seeing here?
I can't speak for why businesses choose their platforms, but as a programmer, starting with Visual Studio 2005 -- I finally feel like I'm in the proper development environment after programming for 35 years. 1) There's true integration -- if I need to create a class (and I have full OOP, not the sorta OOP you get in PHP) I can create a class, basically on-the-fly, and it will be immediately available to code that is calling it. Any mods are immediately available, with no gyrations or extra mechanics to link things up. It is an extremely productive environment. 2) There are so many well-built ready-made classes available, I can concentrate on the application without getting side-tracked building a software library. Starting with FORTRAN, I've built these types of libraries with each new platform, but in VS in most cases I don't need to. (How many times have I programmed a Shell Sort over the last 3 decades?) Many of these classes are quite sophisticated btw, a lot more than sorts. My specialty is systems analysis (mostly business systems) and applications -- I can stick to that instead of spending days researching other specialties. 3) Debugging is pretty amazing -- stepping into or around calls etc -- plus if I want to try out some code I can exercise pretty much any code I want at a breakpoint. It's just so simple! That's the thing -- it's simple. I just write code now. I don't see programmers using VB to write a generic app like Office, but for business apps it's great.
-
I have some limited experience with C# and VS 2008 and I don't understand why the .Net framework is so popular. It is a meta environment running on top of the operating system just like Java and the non-Windows implementations do not have all of the capabilities of the Windows version so it's not truly cross platform. I don't see why -- other than Microsoft's semi-forcing the issue -- someone would choose to use this. Shouldn't Win32/64 code run just as well, if not better, since there is no runtime between the code and the system? I can't help thinking of Java or even UCSD P-System Pascal when I look at this. I realize .Net has a large amount of built-in functionality but the same thing could be implemented in native code as well. What am I not seeing here?