Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Microsoft takes .NET open source and cross-platform

news.microsoft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

511–520 of 937 posts

Re: Microsoft takes .NET open source and cross-platform

#511

Post by tzs »

jacquesm wrote: post #147
OWaz wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seeing comments like this “I'll never switch back to MS for what they've done in the past” always reminds me of this post from Hanselman http://www.hanselman.com/blog/MicrosoftKilledMyPappy.aspx

- Stacker - Netscape - SCO And many others besides. Companies have reputations just like people do (that's why we call them 'incorporated') and just like you can lose your trust in a person you can lose your trust in a corporation. This is not about Microsoft just doing 'stupid stuff sometimes' it is about institutionalized criminal behavior sanctioned at the highest level of one of the largest software companies in…

> - Netscape

If you are referring to Microsoft's bundling of IE, that did not kill Netscape. It just buried the rotting corpse.

Before IE was bundled with Windows, it was sold in stores as a boxed product, right next to Netscape's boxed product. Going head to head in retail software stores (Egghead, CompUSA), IE massively outsold Netscape. This is what killed Netscape.

The reason IE outsold Netscape at retail was simple--it was a much better browser. Netscape introduced a lot of proprietary tags, which Microsoft included in IE. Microsoft also introduced proprietary tags, which Netscape often ignored. For the end user, the result was simple: IE correctly rendered more pages than Netscape. It was also better on resource usage, if I remember correctly, which was a much bigger deal then than it is now.

Re: Microsoft takes .NET open source and cross-platform

#513

Post by MichaelGG »

alkonaut wrote: post #401

I have been working with .NET for 11 years since 1.0beta (On the same application, i.e. have been continously pushing a massive codebase through every released version of the framework yet!), so to me this so huge. It has felt like I would have to go do Javascript, or go back to java, if I wanted to leave the .NET ecosystem or do something radically different. Not anymore. Feels like not just Windows-based server (as…

So, you'd rewrite in JavaScript versus dealing with Mono?

Re: Microsoft takes .NET open source and cross-platform

#514

Post by NicoJuicy »

sremani wrote: post #112
jacquesm wrote: post #77

It's funny how Nadella has moved the needle more for developers in 9 months than Ballmer did in the last decade or so, and all that without running around like a madman too. Pretty good. I'll never switch back to MS for what they've done in the past but it is nice to see them try hard to become a nicer player in the software eco-system. Google and Apple need some other party to keep them sharp, it might as well be MS…

I am sure Nadella deserves credit, but I think the real genius behind this is ScottGu. Whoever it is, its a welcome change.

Don't forget Scott Hanselman... I don't think this all would have been possible without any of these persons though. They all deserve some respects.. Even the ones who aren't always visible or the ones who already left Microsoft ( Eg. Phil Haack has made the switch to Github probably because of his opensource work in Microsoft)

They started opensource within Microsoft under Ballmer, so he deserves some respect to. But i'm sure Nadella is making more room for improvement and betting more "all-in"

I just know some people at Microsoft use *nix tools all the time, Asp.Net MVC took over some awesome RoR features, they integrated NodeJS, LocalDB is the alternative for SQLLite and etc...

Microsoft does everything it can to integrate good features and they won't go away anytime soon. They also have the best compatibility in any programming language i know (with .Net) to be a safe bet for businesses...

Hell, even VB6 still works (any Windows Server and a RDP connection) and that has been released in 1998 => 16 years ago!

Re: Microsoft takes .NET open source and cross-platform

#515

Post by runjake »

jacquesm wrote: post #344
freehunter wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At this point there is literally nothing Microsoft can do to win these people over. They've done everything they could do short of porting the Windows UI to Linux (and even then... this and Powershell brings it pretty close). They're a huge contributor to open source, they support Linux pretty heavily on Azure, they open sourced their .NET as seen here, they listened to their customers on Windows 10, they're doing gr…

> That was 20 years ago. Fucking get over it. Microsoft sure has. Some stuff from 2014, maybe that will help you to see that Microsoft has definitely not 'gotten over it': https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8596869 And that's just a very limited list.

This is a fairly weak and circumstantial list, in my opinion.

Also, name a player that isn't equally or more abusive? If you mention Apple, Google, or Amazon, I'm going to disagree.

Re: Microsoft takes .NET open source and cross-platform

#516

Post by Rezo »

tomp wrote: post #49

I want to believe this, but I just don't. .NET is so much more than just the core libraries. There will be a long time until it's on the same level as Java. I hope Microsoft proves me wrong, of course (C# is an awesome language, F# is not bad either), but I will believe this when I see a distribution of Visual Studio running both on Mac/Linux and on Windows (i.e. the same executable, same as Java).

IntelliJ is written in Java, but has entirely separate distributions for each supported OS. As an user of the app, why would I care if it's the same executable?

Even as a developer, cross-platform binary compatibility doesn't enter my top 10 list of important things for a programming language. Java is paying a pretty hefty price in language features (like type erasure) because things originally compiled for Java 1.2 still has to work on the Java 8 runtime. Is it really worth it?

Re: Microsoft takes .NET open source and cross-platform

#518

Post by useerup »

archagon wrote: post #7

Does this mean that Mono will no longer be necessary for cross-platform C# use?

Mono (the code) and .NET Core will merge (per Scott Hanselmann)

Microsoft will (in partnership with Mono the project) ensure that .NET core and server stacks run on Linux and OS X.

They've just demonstrated deploying an ASP.NET MVC5 application on Linux, running inside a (Linux) Docker container and being remotely debugged from Visual Studio on Windows. Which seems to indicate that they are already pretty far down that road.

Re: Microsoft takes .NET open source and cross-platform

#519

Post by jakevn »

hokkos wrote: post #490
jakevn wrote: post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[SerializableAttribute] [ComVisibleAttribute(false)] public class Dictionary : IDictionary , ICollection >, IDictionary, ICollection, IReadOnlyDictionary , IReadOnlyCollection >, IEnumerable >, IEnumerable, ISerializable, IDeserializationCallback Both languages can be difficult to decipher. I do find that Scala's syntax is much more flexible, which can lead to more stumbling when trying to read code.

It is easier, there is only one concept to understand : generics, with scala you must understand generics, co and contra-variance, implicits.

That's true.

A talented C# dev will need to know co/contravariance as well as implicits considering they also exist in C#.

In Scala, being familiar with these concepts is practically a necessity, though.

Re: Microsoft takes .NET open source and cross-platform

#520

Post by ssmoot »

jbooth wrote: post #303
saosebastiao wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Funny, I find c# much harder to read. Its almost as if it is easy to understand code for languages you know well, and harder to understand code for languages you don't.

You find C# harder than this? trait SeqLike[+A, +Repr] extends Any with IterableLike[A, Repr] with GenSeqLike[A, Repr] with Parallelizable[A, ParSeq[A]] { self => or def :+[B >: A, That](elem: B)(implicit bf: CanBuildFrom[Repr, B, That]): That

If you want to make a compelling argument to anyone that actually knows Scala, you need to drop the idea you can make it with scala.collections. Find another altar. This is a complete non-issue for the day-to-day Scala developer.

Outside of some pretty extreme examples (scalaz maybe), I don't think I've actually ever seen someone else's source that implemented a custom collection.

And you're purposefully trying to confuse people by digging into what might as well be "internal" signatures.

What do the actual, official docs say about SeqLike :+ ?

  > def :+(elem: A): Seq[A]
  > [use case] A copy of this sequence with an element appended.
Oh wow. Why does that look so much simpler than what you posted? Could it be you're exaggerating for effect and disingenuously implying that Scala developers will be routinely faced with the challenge of trying to parse such signatures? Of course you are.

Can you dig down further and find the CBF signature? Yes. Do you need to for anything outside of spreading FUD? Nope. Is it a bad thing that it shows how the sausage is made underneath the covers? I don't think so.

Post reply on HN