.NET 4.7
-
I just downloaded and installed .NET version 4.7. Still trying to figure out what's new in version 4.7. I wish Microsoft would put an "executive summary" of differences in new versions on the web.
Get me coffee and no one gets hurt!
4.6, was changed to, 4.7. Can't you see?
The shit I complain about It's like there ain't a cloud in the sky and it's raining out - Eminem ~! Firewall !~
-
4.6, was changed to, 4.7. Can't you see?
The shit I complain about It's like there ain't a cloud in the sky and it's raining out - Eminem ~! Firewall !~
-
I just downloaded and installed .NET version 4.7. Still trying to figure out what's new in version 4.7. I wish Microsoft would put an "executive summary" of differences in new versions on the web.
Get me coffee and no one gets hurt!
Cornelius Henning wrote:
I wish Microsoft would put an "executive summary" of differences in new versions on the web.
What's new in the .NET Framework | Microsoft Docs[^] Is that "executive" enough for you? :-D
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer
-
Cornelius Henning wrote:
I wish Microsoft would put an "executive summary" of differences in new versions on the web.
What's new in the .NET Framework | Microsoft Docs[^] Is that "executive" enough for you? :-D
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer
-
Quote:
Is that "executive" enough for you
Absolutely! How did I miss that?:confused: Thanks for responding!
Get me coffee and no one gets hurt!
Cornelius Henning wrote:
How did I miss that?
Stormtrooper academy?
* CALL APOGEE, SAY AARDWOLF * GCS d--- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L- E-- W++ N++ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t++ 5? X R++ tv-- b+ DI+++ D++ G e++>+++ h--- ++>+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X * Never pay more than 20 bucks for a computer game. * I'm a puny punmaker.
-
Cornelius Henning wrote:
I wish Microsoft would put an "executive summary" of differences in new versions on the web.
What's new in the .NET Framework | Microsoft Docs[^] Is that "executive" enough for you? :-D
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer
So, amazingly little change from the 4.6.2 version and yet it is bumped an entire minor version to 4.7 instead of to 4.6.3 which would represent how little it has actually changed. Can anyone tell me of a significant update or addition in this version that makes it worth being a new minor version?
- I would love to change the world, but they won’t give me the source code.
-
Quote:
Is that "executive" enough for you
Absolutely! How did I miss that?:confused: Thanks for responding!
Get me coffee and no one gets hurt!
Cornelius Henning wrote:
How did I miss that?
Perhaps you were just waiting for the latest Updates to finish installing?
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein
"If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010
-
So, amazingly little change from the 4.6.2 version and yet it is bumped an entire minor version to 4.7 instead of to 4.6.3 which would represent how little it has actually changed. Can anyone tell me of a significant update or addition in this version that makes it worth being a new minor version?
- I would love to change the world, but they won’t give me the source code.
Forogar wrote:
Can anyone tell me of a significant update or addition in this version that makes it worth being a new minor version?
Nope.. but to ask another question - aren't people more excited about .NET Core than (what is probably now 'legacy') .NET 4.x.x? I know it can be an almost impossible job to get companies to invest in big changes, but as developers we usually like to jump onto the next big thing.. Personally I like the new possibilities for .NET Core (cross-platform development, containerisation (if that's even a word :)), additional built-in features) - all my own new .NET projects are .NET Core. What are the rest of you doing? Sticking with legacy or putting steps in place to move to Core?
Now is it bad enough that you let somebody else kick your butts without you trying to do it to each other? Now if we're all talking about the same man, and I think we are... it appears he's got a rather growing collection of our bikes.
-
Forogar wrote:
Can anyone tell me of a significant update or addition in this version that makes it worth being a new minor version?
Nope.. but to ask another question - aren't people more excited about .NET Core than (what is probably now 'legacy') .NET 4.x.x? I know it can be an almost impossible job to get companies to invest in big changes, but as developers we usually like to jump onto the next big thing.. Personally I like the new possibilities for .NET Core (cross-platform development, containerisation (if that's even a word :)), additional built-in features) - all my own new .NET projects are .NET Core. What are the rest of you doing? Sticking with legacy or putting steps in place to move to Core?
Now is it bad enough that you let somebody else kick your butts without you trying to do it to each other? Now if we're all talking about the same man, and I think we are... it appears he's got a rather growing collection of our bikes.
-
Forogar wrote:
Can anyone tell me of a significant update or addition in this version that makes it worth being a new minor version?
Nope.. but to ask another question - aren't people more excited about .NET Core than (what is probably now 'legacy') .NET 4.x.x? I know it can be an almost impossible job to get companies to invest in big changes, but as developers we usually like to jump onto the next big thing.. Personally I like the new possibilities for .NET Core (cross-platform development, containerisation (if that's even a word :)), additional built-in features) - all my own new .NET projects are .NET Core. What are the rest of you doing? Sticking with legacy or putting steps in place to move to Core?
Now is it bad enough that you let somebody else kick your butts without you trying to do it to each other? Now if we're all talking about the same man, and I think we are... it appears he's got a rather growing collection of our bikes.
i will not be moving to core until they have entity framework working at least as well as it does in 4.6.2
-
i will not be moving to core until they have entity framework working at least as well as it does in 4.6.2
Well we could do with automatic migrations but it seems fine apart from that..
Now is it bad enough that you let somebody else kick your butts without you trying to do it to each other? Now if we're all talking about the same man, and I think we are... it appears he's got a rather growing collection of our bikes.
-
I just downloaded and installed .NET version 4.7. Still trying to figure out what's new in version 4.7. I wish Microsoft would put an "executive summary" of differences in new versions on the web.
Get me coffee and no one gets hurt!
There is a well-written series of articles by Jonathan Allan on InfoQ that has been covering the new "features." Kent is often citing these on the "Insider News" forum. Start here: [^]. Maybe examine: [^]. cheers, Bill
«Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and it may be necessary from time to time to give a stupid or misinformed beholder a black eye.» Miss Piggy
-
There is a well-written series of articles by Jonathan Allan on InfoQ that has been covering the new "features." Kent is often citing these on the "Insider News" forum. Start here: [^]. Maybe examine: [^]. cheers, Bill
«Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and it may be necessary from time to time to give a stupid or misinformed beholder a black eye.» Miss Piggy
-
4.6, was changed to, 4.7. Can't you see?
The shit I complain about It's like there ain't a cloud in the sky and it's raining out - Eminem ~! Firewall !~
-
Forogar wrote:
Can anyone tell me of a significant update or addition in this version that makes it worth being a new minor version?
Nope.. but to ask another question - aren't people more excited about .NET Core than (what is probably now 'legacy') .NET 4.x.x? I know it can be an almost impossible job to get companies to invest in big changes, but as developers we usually like to jump onto the next big thing.. Personally I like the new possibilities for .NET Core (cross-platform development, containerisation (if that's even a word :)), additional built-in features) - all my own new .NET projects are .NET Core. What are the rest of you doing? Sticking with legacy or putting steps in place to move to Core?
Now is it bad enough that you let somebody else kick your butts without you trying to do it to each other? Now if we're all talking about the same man, and I think we are... it appears he's got a rather growing collection of our bikes.
Brent Jenkins wrote:
Nope.. but to ask another question - aren't people more excited about .NET Core than (what is probably now 'legacy') .NET 4.x.x?
Nope. I'll get excited when CORE is debugged and develops real traction in the industry. It remains to be seen if .NET 4.x.x is legacy ... CORE has a long way to go to make that happen. Earlier in my career I jumped on new things immediately, but my enthusiasm for learning things that will go the way of the dodo has waned. My wake is littered with projects that died when the technology they were implemented in failed to gain industry traction ... no need to seek to add to that collection, it will happen all on its own. ;P
-
Brent Jenkins wrote:
Nope.. but to ask another question - aren't people more excited about .NET Core than (what is probably now 'legacy') .NET 4.x.x?
Nope. I'll get excited when CORE is debugged and develops real traction in the industry. It remains to be seen if .NET 4.x.x is legacy ... CORE has a long way to go to make that happen. Earlier in my career I jumped on new things immediately, but my enthusiasm for learning things that will go the way of the dodo has waned. My wake is littered with projects that died when the technology they were implemented in failed to gain industry traction ... no need to seek to add to that collection, it will happen all on its own. ;P
BryanFazekas wrote:
Earlier in my career I jumped on new things immediately, but my enthusiasm for learning things that will go the way of the dodo has waned. My wake is littered with projects that died when the technology they were implemented in failed to gain industry traction ... no need to seek to add to that collection, it will happen all on its own. ;-P
I can understand that, but it looks like .NET Core is the preferred (and IMO logical) direction from Microsoft. I don't jump at every new technology announced but with .NET Core 2 due to be released I'd say it that makes sense for anyone currently involved with ASP.NET to take a very close look at it, otherwise you may well end up "going the way of the dodo" :laugh:
Now is it bad enough that you let somebody else kick your butts without you trying to do it to each other? Now if we're all talking about the same man, and I think we are... it appears he's got a rather growing collection of our bikes.
-
BryanFazekas wrote:
Earlier in my career I jumped on new things immediately, but my enthusiasm for learning things that will go the way of the dodo has waned. My wake is littered with projects that died when the technology they were implemented in failed to gain industry traction ... no need to seek to add to that collection, it will happen all on its own. ;-P
I can understand that, but it looks like .NET Core is the preferred (and IMO logical) direction from Microsoft. I don't jump at every new technology announced but with .NET Core 2 due to be released I'd say it that makes sense for anyone currently involved with ASP.NET to take a very close look at it, otherwise you may well end up "going the way of the dodo" :laugh:
Now is it bad enough that you let somebody else kick your butts without you trying to do it to each other? Now if we're all talking about the same man, and I think we are... it appears he's got a rather growing collection of our bikes.
Brent Jenkins wrote:
I can understand that, but it looks like .NET Core is the preferred (and IMO logical) direction from Microsoft.
I agree, it makes sense for Microsoft to go multi-platform. In the current environment, it's idiocy for them not to. But that doesn't meant that CORE will be successful. Microsoft, Google, (name any large IT products company) all have failed product lines. Granted, people jumping on CORE will ultimately contribute to making it successful ... but I won't be one of them. Too lazy, I guess. :laugh:
Brent Jenkins wrote:
I don't jump at every new technology announced but with .NET Core 2 due to be released I'd say it that makes sense for anyone currently involved with ASP.NET to take a very close look at it, otherwise you may well end up "going the way of the dodo"
Your point is well taken -- IT people should keep up with technology, else we end up unemployable when our favored technology finally dies. And they all die ... eventually. But some fight going out: In 1981 a college professor told me that there was absolutely no point in learning COBOL as the language would be completely dead within 5 years. I have a buddy who has come out of retirement at least 3 times that I know of (he gets bored) for COBOL contracts. No one has managed to stake the COBOL vampire yet ... far too many legacy applications. In a related thread, VB6 is still alive and well, despite many reports of its death. VS6 can be installed under Win10 and there are thousands of active VB6 applications in production around the world; VB6 is consistently 12th or 13th on various lists of "most popular languages". I have a feeling VB6 will last like COBOL has ... especially since VB6 is alive and well under the assumed name "VBA" in every Microsoft Office product (plus other non-MS products). That said, I'm relatively happy in the C# world, not living in a shrinking niche. :)
-
Brent Jenkins wrote:
I can understand that, but it looks like .NET Core is the preferred (and IMO logical) direction from Microsoft.
I agree, it makes sense for Microsoft to go multi-platform. In the current environment, it's idiocy for them not to. But that doesn't meant that CORE will be successful. Microsoft, Google, (name any large IT products company) all have failed product lines. Granted, people jumping on CORE will ultimately contribute to making it successful ... but I won't be one of them. Too lazy, I guess. :laugh:
Brent Jenkins wrote:
I don't jump at every new technology announced but with .NET Core 2 due to be released I'd say it that makes sense for anyone currently involved with ASP.NET to take a very close look at it, otherwise you may well end up "going the way of the dodo"
Your point is well taken -- IT people should keep up with technology, else we end up unemployable when our favored technology finally dies. And they all die ... eventually. But some fight going out: In 1981 a college professor told me that there was absolutely no point in learning COBOL as the language would be completely dead within 5 years. I have a buddy who has come out of retirement at least 3 times that I know of (he gets bored) for COBOL contracts. No one has managed to stake the COBOL vampire yet ... far too many legacy applications. In a related thread, VB6 is still alive and well, despite many reports of its death. VS6 can be installed under Win10 and there are thousands of active VB6 applications in production around the world; VB6 is consistently 12th or 13th on various lists of "most popular languages". I have a feeling VB6 will last like COBOL has ... especially since VB6 is alive and well under the assumed name "VBA" in every Microsoft Office product (plus other non-MS products). That said, I'm relatively happy in the C# world, not living in a shrinking niche. :)
To be fair, there are going to be a lot of legacy (everything up to .NET 4.x) .NET systems in use for decades, particularly in large organisations, banks, etc.. I still get to work on active .NET 2.0 projects with no plans to upgrade, change or replace them in the near to medium future. We'll be busy for a long time :)
Now is it bad enough that you let somebody else kick your butts without you trying to do it to each other? Now if we're all talking about the same man, and I think we are... it appears he's got a rather growing collection of our bikes.
-
Brent Jenkins wrote:
Nope.. but to ask another question - aren't people more excited about .NET Core than (what is probably now 'legacy') .NET 4.x.x?
Nope. I'll get excited when CORE is debugged and develops real traction in the industry. It remains to be seen if .NET 4.x.x is legacy ... CORE has a long way to go to make that happen. Earlier in my career I jumped on new things immediately, but my enthusiasm for learning things that will go the way of the dodo has waned. My wake is littered with projects that died when the technology they were implemented in failed to gain industry traction ... no need to seek to add to that collection, it will happen all on its own. ;P
My sentiment exactly.
Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend; inside of a dog, it's too dark to read. -- Groucho Marx
-
I just downloaded and installed .NET version 4.7. Still trying to figure out what's new in version 4.7. I wish Microsoft would put an "executive summary" of differences in new versions on the web.
Get me coffee and no one gets hurt!
[
Release notes from Github
](https://github.com/Microsoft/dotnet/tree/master/releases/net47/README.md)as well as the blog postannouncing it.
Idaho Edokpayi
