Announcing September 2016 Updates for .NET Core 1.0
blogs.msdn.microsoft.com
Announcing September 2016 Updates for .NET Core 1.0
1–10 of 31 posts
Re: Announcing September 2016 Updates for .NET Core 1.0
#2It's great to see the HN community responding positively to news about .NET/Mono and related tech. I've been working with C#/.NET since 2008 and always felt it's a vastly superior platform to Java in every way. It's a shame it is taking so long for the wider tech community to realise this.
Re: Announcing September 2016 Updates for .NET Core 1.0
#3I’m sad about the name of applyPatches. If it’s something that should never be needed and is a security risk, it should have a dangerous name and/or value. e.g. make it a string value that needs to be exactly "No, even though I know that this is a bad idea and promotes insecurity; I have read http://example.com/ and really need this." to turn off patches.
Re: Announcing September 2016 Updates for .NET Core 1.0
#4It's great to see the HN community responding positively to news about .NET/Mono and related tech. I've been working with C#/.NET since 2008 and always felt it's a vastly superior platform to Java in every way. It's a shame it is taking so long for the wider tech community to realise this.
It's because of Classic ASP stigma attached to it so whenever you tell people you're working with .NET they think about `runat=server` and *.aspx BS.
Even now when I tell some people that .NET is very simple, fast and runs on osx/linux they are like "Really!? No way bla bla."
Re: Announcing September 2016 Updates for .NET Core 1.0
#5It's great to see the HN community responding positively to news about .NET/Mono and related tech. I've been working with C#/.NET since 2008 and always felt it's a vastly superior platform to Java in every way. It's a shame it is taking so long for the wider tech community to realise this.
As an outsider (largely worked with PHP/Java codebases, recently started C#/.NET Core), the naming conventions are awful. I'm still not sure what the differences are between:
* ASP.NET
* .NET MVC
* .NET 4.5
* .NET WCF
* WPF
It's a nebula of names, but I've been ridiculously productive while trying to grasp .NET core. I'm currently trying to make a job to take DB data and dump it on Elasticsearch. It honestly feels like PHP7 with async, it's great
Re: Announcing September 2016 Updates for .NET Core 1.0
#6It's great to see the HN community responding positively to news about .NET/Mono and related tech. I've been working with C#/.NET since 2008 and always felt it's a vastly superior platform to Java in every way. It's a shame it is taking so long for the wider tech community to realise this.
It's because of Classic ASP stigma attached to it so whenever you tell people you're working with .NET they think about `runat=server` and *.aspx BS. Even now when I tell some people that .NET is very simple, fast and runs on osx/linux they are like "Really!? No way bla bla."
Nitpicking, but "runat=server" and *.aspx are not "Classic ASP". They are ASP.NET Webforms features. "Classic ASP" is what came before ASP.NET
Re: Announcing September 2016 Updates for .NET Core 1.0
#7It still does not work on Fedora 24 :-(
Re: Announcing September 2016 Updates for .NET Core 1.0
#8It's great to see the HN community responding positively to news about .NET/Mono and related tech. I've been working with C#/.NET since 2008 and always felt it's a vastly superior platform to Java in every way. It's a shame it is taking so long for the wider tech community to realise this.
As an outsider (largely worked with PHP/Java codebases, recently started C#/.NET Core), the naming conventions are awful. I'm still not sure what the differences are between: * ASP.NET * .NET MVC * .NET 4.5 * .NET WCF * WPF It's a nebula of names, but I've been ridiculously productive while trying to grasp .NET core. I'm currently trying to make a job to take DB data and dump it on Elasticsearch. It honestly feels li…
* .NET 4.5 = v4.5 of the .NET framework
* ASP.NET = Web subsystem of the .NET framework.
* ASP.NET MVC = MVC framework that is part of ASP.NET (not ".NET MVC")
* WCF = Communications subsystem of the .NET framework (not ".NET WCF")
* WPF = Presentation layer subsystem of the .NET framework
Re: Announcing September 2016 Updates for .NET Core 1.0
#9Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's because of Classic ASP stigma attached to it so whenever you tell people you're working with .NET they think about `runat=server` and *.aspx BS. Even now when I tell some people that .NET is very simple, fast and runs on osx/linux they are like "Really!? No way bla bla."
Nitpicking, but "runat=server" and *.aspx are not "Classic ASP". They are ASP.NET Webforms features. "Classic ASP" is what came before ASP.NET
*.aspx is definitely ASP.NET, but Classic ASP also had runat=server silliness.
Re: Announcing September 2016 Updates for .NET Core 1.0
#10It's great to see the HN community responding positively to news about .NET/Mono and related tech. I've been working with C#/.NET since 2008 and always felt it's a vastly superior platform to Java in every way. It's a shame it is taking so long for the wider tech community to realise this.
As an outsider (largely worked with PHP/Java codebases, recently started C#/.NET Core), the naming conventions are awful. I'm still not sure what the differences are between: * ASP.NET * .NET MVC * .NET 4.5 * .NET WCF * WPF It's a nebula of names, but I've been ridiculously productive while trying to grasp .NET core. I'm currently trying to make a job to take DB data and dump it on Elasticsearch. It honestly feels li…
It basically comes down to named groupings of assemblies. They are really just marketing terms. I consider the .NET Framework to encompass all .NET assemblies shipped by Microsoft in the System and sometimes Microsoft namespaces. The ones you listed are simply groupings that Microsoft considers important enough to create project templates for, have forums dedicated to each, produce examples for, etc.