Re: Regarding Dot NET
Vincent wrote:
>
> cklester wrote:
> >
snip
> >
> > > Windows won't be so inferior to Linux anymore.
> >
> > That's a good one, V!!! <wiping tears>
> >
>
> Well ofcourse you would disagree if your anti-microsoft. But the fact is
> Microsoft
> is working hard to greatly improve security, and realibilty of their future
> OSes. It
> may not turn out as quite as strong as some Linux or BSD distros, but it sure
> is a
> huge welcome to Windows users. It is also important to point out that the
> biggest reason
> Windows has these problems is become it is by far the most widely used
> operating system.
> I'm sure there would be many more problems if all this malicious software was
> targeted
> on Linux and BSD systems.
A lot of it is. BSD is used by most commercial web servers and would be the
prime target for malicious code if you wanted to interfere with a large company's
buisness. Yet BSD has still survived these past 30 years being the most secure
and stable OS available outside of the government.
> > > That will prevent Linux or BSD from ever dominating the desktop domain.
> >
> > I think (and hope) that Vista is too little too late. M$ does have a hold
> > on the personal desktop, but with more and more corporations switching to
> > Linux/BSD, I think that marketshare will erode over the course of the next
> > 10-20 years. That's good news for the generation below me. :)
>
> That may be true currently, but once Vista is released at the end of 2006, I
> suspect
> that outlook will change. But currently the fact alone that 95% of new
> computers come
> with Windows pre-installed, and the fact that I cant go to just any computer
> retail
> store, and purchase Linux is a poor indication of your point. Stores dont want
> to sell
> software that you can legally get for free elsewhere.
You can get copies of SuSE, Novell, and Red Hat Linux at Best Buy and Staples.
> 10 to 20 years from now, Windows will probably be a completley different
> entity, not
> even called Windows. Vista may be a little too late, but Microsoft will spend
> billions
> of dollars in marketing to get back in the game. Microsoft has huge amount of
> power
> because because of its money. Billions of dollars is little more than
> ice-cream money
> to Microsoft.
> Microsoft has had a long history of falling behind and then catching up. In
> the end
> the one with the most money always wins.
>
> >
> > > There could be an Euphoria.NET, but it would have to become a full object
> > > oriented
> > > language.
> >
> > Can you tell me why or point me to relevant articles?
>
> Well there could be an Euphoria to MSIL translator, but since the language
> isnt even
> OO, having the programmer handle .NET namespaces, classes, objects, etc. would
> be a
> big problem now wouldnt it. Anything is possible, but if it was done it would
> be an
> awful hack that everyone would want to avoid.
You wouldn't need to. It's completely possible to write a Euphoria (or any other
language) interpreter and have the user never even know it's using .NET.
> >
> > > I probably would still prefer C# over Euphoria.NET anyway, because of the
> > > support for pointers and structures.
> >
> > Is it because I come from a non-pointered, non-structures programming
> > language
> > background that I don't find the lack of these to be issues?
>
> Try VB.NET, unsafe code isnt possible in that language. You cannot use
> pointers, or
> any advanced memory handling. Operator overloading, and generics are new for
> version
> 2005. Most programmers like the terse syntax, and pointers of the C derivents.
> It makes
> them feel better about themselves, as if they were smarter. C# is a much more
> popular
> language than VB.NET and infact its alarming Microsoft.
Actually, last I checked http://www.tiobe.com/tpci.htm 6% of all programmers use
VB whereas only 3% use C#.
The thing I don't know if you realize is that no one's going to switch to .NET
immediately. Companies still need to make their stuff backwards compatible and
rarely completely reengineer their software unless they have to. In fact, I
HIGHLY doubt that by 2008 everybody will be using .NET. Plus Microsoft is well
know for their hyping the "new technology of the future" and end up going back to
what they've done before. The hyped OS/2, tried to get a new internet protocol
they designed standardized (and Bill Gates got laughed out of the commitee while
doing so), and said they'd never add DOS compatability to NT (which they
eventually did for backwads compatability). I expect MS to get a LOT of angry
customers if they don't handle this well.
Also, in regards to your last post, why no mention of Apple and Mac OS X? That's
probably MS's biggest competitor right now (and IMO have a much better product).
The Euphoria Standard Library project :
http://esl.sourceforge.net/
The Euphoria Standard Library mailing list :
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/esl-discussion
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
