The Masters Of Spin Are At It Again
-
Just curious... :) Why do you need to see one large, complex app do everything in order to be convinced? The UI pieces are straight windows with a little wrapping to make it fit in the .NET framework. No speed problems there (unless you get some inhuman user that can move and click faster than the OS can redraw a window.) As far as being well-designed and user-friendly, that's up the the programmer, not the framework or language (at least in this case). In fact, the ease of adding the more complex controls makes me think that it is more likely for an individual developer to have user-friendly UI in a C# app, than in a traditional C++ app. I've been using VC++ for almost 4 years professionally, and it's been my absolute favorite language for at least that long. But, I finished my first C# Windows (not web-based) app yesterday (it only took 1 day). It is a game of "Reversi", and works just as well and as quickly as the C++ version would have. In the process of writing it, I learned quite a bit about the .NET structure -- and I can't help but think that I'll be using it again for something more important. ;) It appears to be (at least in part) a well thought out object oriented wrapper to the APIs available in Windows. John
The company I work for went down the road of Borland's Builder because someone was able to design a simple application "In half the time it took to do it in Visual C++". I think one of the real tests for C# is whether it can scale as well as a C++ application. "Harland Pepper, would you stop naming nuts" - Harland Pepper
-
The company I work for went down the road of Borland's Builder because someone was able to design a simple application "In half the time it took to do it in Visual C++". I think one of the real tests for C# is whether it can scale as well as a C++ application. "Harland Pepper, would you stop naming nuts" - Harland Pepper
You're right, that's something I'm waiting to find out myself. Choosing the right tool for the right job is always important. But the post I responded to seemed to be focusing on the UI, and I can't imagine that being an issue. John
-
I'd be thinking the Java guys will find C# much more palatable - especially with the effort MS is putting into JUMP. cheers, Chris Maunder (CodeProject)
Did you hear Don Box's keynote speech at Conference.NET? (available on the DDJ website). His words on JUMP were "Guaranteed, it will convert HelloWorld really well. For everything else, it will suck." :-D CodeGuy http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wtl
-
to make a buck like MS more like to make a buck off MS i'm a firm believer that the antitrust suit would not have happened if MS had been paying their dandgeld to the DC moneywhores. if there had been an MSPAC pumping some portion of Microsoft's billions inside the beltway then Sun, AOL and Oracle would have had to put up much more money to sick the DOJ on MS. I'm waiting for the companion piece from Jim "look what MS did to my company" Barkesdale. ;)
i admit my biases: i am specialized in ms products, so my bread and butter comes with their continued success. i just hate that the corporate wars are being waged using the executive branch of our government. -John
MS should have gone to the Congressional PIMP, he's the man ! http://www.theawfultruth.com/pimp/
-
Just curious... :) Why do you need to see one large, complex app do everything in order to be convinced? The UI pieces are straight windows with a little wrapping to make it fit in the .NET framework. No speed problems there (unless you get some inhuman user that can move and click faster than the OS can redraw a window.) As far as being well-designed and user-friendly, that's up the the programmer, not the framework or language (at least in this case). In fact, the ease of adding the more complex controls makes me think that it is more likely for an individual developer to have user-friendly UI in a C# app, than in a traditional C++ app. I've been using VC++ for almost 4 years professionally, and it's been my absolute favorite language for at least that long. But, I finished my first C# Windows (not web-based) app yesterday (it only took 1 day). It is a game of "Reversi", and works just as well and as quickly as the C++ version would have. In the process of writing it, I learned quite a bit about the .NET structure -- and I can't help but think that I'll be using it again for something more important. ;) It appears to be (at least in part) a well thought out object oriented wrapper to the APIs available in Windows. John
Well, the deal is this. I guess it does not really surprise me that you could write a desktop app with C# "as well and as quickly" as with C++. I mean, I would hope they had acheived at least that much. But that's not really what .net or C# are for is it? Or am I missing something? I thought that all this great new stuff was spcifically to produce web based apps. I mean, we can already produce desk top apps. Can't we? It is specifically the web stuff that I am referring to. Could I play your Reversi game (if it were web based )on the web as well as I could on my desktop? If not, why would I want a web version rather than your slick desktop version. I am just not convinced that users are going to want slow clunky web apps with bad interfaces, and I've seen none with good interfaces, just to save them the time it takes to install an app designed to run specifically on their hardware. And I don't think that they are going to buy the argument that it saved a lot of development time because it runs on everyone elses hardware too. I want it to take maximum advantage of the hardware I spent so much money on. I don't care about the guy down the street trying to use it on a Mac or a Linux machine or whatever. Its the vision thing, I suppose I just do not get it.:)
-
Did you hear Don Box's keynote speech at Conference.NET? (available on the DDJ website). His words on JUMP were "Guaranteed, it will convert HelloWorld really well. For everything else, it will suck." :-D CodeGuy http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wtl
He's a ray of sunshine, isn't he :D I spoke to Tony Goodhew about it last week so I'll get my notes together and write up something about it. Short version is that it will work really well on J++ but will degrade in performance as you move to other implementations. No one's gonna know till it's out, or till be see beta versions (early next year) cheers, Chris Maunder (CodeProject)
-
Well, the deal is this. I guess it does not really surprise me that you could write a desktop app with C# "as well and as quickly" as with C++. I mean, I would hope they had acheived at least that much. But that's not really what .net or C# are for is it? Or am I missing something? I thought that all this great new stuff was spcifically to produce web based apps. I mean, we can already produce desk top apps. Can't we? It is specifically the web stuff that I am referring to. Could I play your Reversi game (if it were web based )on the web as well as I could on my desktop? If not, why would I want a web version rather than your slick desktop version. I am just not convinced that users are going to want slow clunky web apps with bad interfaces, and I've seen none with good interfaces, just to save them the time it takes to install an app designed to run specifically on their hardware. And I don't think that they are going to buy the argument that it saved a lot of development time because it runs on everyone elses hardware too. I want it to take maximum advantage of the hardware I spent so much money on. I don't care about the guy down the street trying to use it on a Mac or a Linux machine or whatever. Its the vision thing, I suppose I just do not get it.:)
Also the Java guys think that large applications are dead. They point out that future applications will be distributed on cellphones,credit cards, toasters, PDAs, wearable computers, refrigerators, condoms etc.. Then they go back to their real job and open up Autocad :-D
-
Check this out According to Evans Data Corporation, the Java programming language will surpass both Microsoft's Visual Basic and C++ next year to become the most popular language in use by developers. Software based on Java technology continues to roll out from hundreds of companies, including many of the most recognized names in the industry. I am getting scared. I don't mind Java surpassing VB but i don't want it to surpass c++.:(( It gives me a headache. :mad:
I thought I would share this response I recieved on this topic: --------------------------------------------------------------- There is a report out stating that Java’s growth will outstrip C/C++ growth in the next year; I would like to clarify the picture as follows: 1. At the root of Evans's study is a methodology that is, at best, prone to unreliable results. MS Corp research team looked at it several times and has volunteered to help Evans make it more reproducible, but Evans has not yet shown interest. Historically Evans uses targeted sampling approach to reach respondents. Specifically, Evans mostly uses publication subscriber lists as their sampling sources. In addition, subscriber list is a moving target from study to study. Evans stopped using the list from CMP (a publisher of several tech magazines) when CMP decided not to sell Evans the list. In the Spring 2001 study, Evans used subscriber lists from SD Times, CD ROM Guide, SIGS, Cramsession/developers, Intranets.com, and Internet Address Finder. The next Fall 2001 Study will use difference list(s). 2. Evans sampling approach is problematic from two perspectives. First, by using subscriber lists, the study automatically excludes those majority who are non-subscribers to these publications and, therefore, violates one of the fundamental principles of survey research that each survey subject (professional developer in this case) should have equal probability to be included in the sample. Secondly, the subscriber list itself is a moving target and varies from study to study. This could affect data consistency and make data trend less meaningful. 3. Beyond that, there are other issues with Evans's data: - A simple question “Are you a professional software developer” is asked at the beginning of the survey to qualify a respondent. This allows respondents to self-select. In addition, non-professional developers (e.g. hobbyists and end-user developers) are likely to be included. - Language usage is captured by the question “What percent of your programming time do you spend using the following languages TODAY?” Respondents can give an answer between 0-100%. If someone spends 1% of time on a language, the person is still counted as the user of that language. To make it short, Evans's methodology is not as rigorous as we would like. More rigorous studies such as our Dev Tracker (soon to be launched in SA) and the IDC study have much more reasonable, reproducible, and reliable numbers. If a customer asks abo
-
Well, the deal is this. I guess it does not really surprise me that you could write a desktop app with C# "as well and as quickly" as with C++. I mean, I would hope they had acheived at least that much. But that's not really what .net or C# are for is it? Or am I missing something? I thought that all this great new stuff was spcifically to produce web based apps. I mean, we can already produce desk top apps. Can't we? It is specifically the web stuff that I am referring to. Could I play your Reversi game (if it were web based )on the web as well as I could on my desktop? If not, why would I want a web version rather than your slick desktop version. I am just not convinced that users are going to want slow clunky web apps with bad interfaces, and I've seen none with good interfaces, just to save them the time it takes to install an app designed to run specifically on their hardware. And I don't think that they are going to buy the argument that it saved a lot of development time because it runs on everyone elses hardware too. I want it to take maximum advantage of the hardware I spent so much money on. I don't care about the guy down the street trying to use it on a Mac or a Linux machine or whatever. Its the vision thing, I suppose I just do not get it.:)
All of the web-related stuff is a significant part of the .NET vision. But, it would be called ASP.NET. There is a Lot of other stuff involved in .NET. (Normal apps can be written well and more quickly with the .NET Framework; cross-language inheritance, code-reuse, and debugging; cross-platform execution when the CLR is ported; etc.) So even if you are right about ASP.NET, don't lump the several other parts of .NET in with it. BTW, Chris M. things ASP.NET makes normal web sites much easier to develop. So it seems that even if web application UI was a big thrust of ASP.NET and it does end up clunky, it won't keep people from using it on the web for all of the other reasons. John P.S. I just realized that you might be referring to "web apps" as UI applications where the idea you're referring to might be the Internet service concept. (i.e. other web sites and/or desktop apps call methods exposed by the web site) P.P.S. Who'd have thought I'd turn into a .NET semi-evangelist? :eek:
-
All of the web-related stuff is a significant part of the .NET vision. But, it would be called ASP.NET. There is a Lot of other stuff involved in .NET. (Normal apps can be written well and more quickly with the .NET Framework; cross-language inheritance, code-reuse, and debugging; cross-platform execution when the CLR is ported; etc.) So even if you are right about ASP.NET, don't lump the several other parts of .NET in with it. BTW, Chris M. things ASP.NET makes normal web sites much easier to develop. So it seems that even if web application UI was a big thrust of ASP.NET and it does end up clunky, it won't keep people from using it on the web for all of the other reasons. John P.S. I just realized that you might be referring to "web apps" as UI applications where the idea you're referring to might be the Internet service concept. (i.e. other web sites and/or desktop apps call methods exposed by the web site) P.P.S. Who'd have thought I'd turn into a .NET semi-evangelist? :eek:
Fair enough. I've just been very underwhelmed by anything that I've used so far that purports to be a "web app". I'm just not sold on the concept of running apps over the internet whether with .net,java or whatever. If .net resolves that *and* provides a decent general app development environment - than I'm all for it :)