Page 2 of 9 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 81

Thread: So, Microsoft just open sourced most of .NET...

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,296

    Default

    This may not be anything so sinister. This may just be part of a longer-term plan to phase out .net. We may eventually see it dumped onto either xamarin or a separate foundation, with it no longer getting any special attention from Microsoft. They can't do that all at once, it would piss of developers too much, but if they do it slowly, reducing its emphasis and chipping away bits and pieces, they may think they can get away with it.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Linuxland
    Posts
    5,269

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TheBlackCat View Post
    This may not be anything so sinister. This may just be part of a longer-term plan to phase out .net. We may eventually see it dumped onto either xamarin or a separate foundation, with it no longer getting any special attention from Microsoft. They can't do that all at once, it would piss of developers too much, but if they do it slowly, reducing its emphasis and chipping away bits and pieces, they may think they can get away with it.
    How is planned obscolescence not sinister?

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    421

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 0xBADCODE View Post
    Nope. Its too little and too late. And only morons would trust MS (due to their previous actions). You see, .NET even lacks even just standard widgets set which can be used by everyone to create truly crossplatform apps. On windows there're WinForms and WPF. For Linux there is GTK#. You see, there is no common set of widgets devs can use to make crossplatform program. EPIC FAIL. I do not see where this blatant idiocy got fixed. MS just did some lame PR and opensourced some crap nobody really needs. Would not help 'em and their footpads too much. Opensource is not about giving free garbage from your pocket. Its about free and open collaboration. That's where MS suxx so hard. They have virtually no idea how it supposed to work. Their overbloated and useless .NET stuff is going to crash. Looks like they're getting idea, he-he-he.

    Seriously,
    1) If someone want to make crossplatform desktop app, they would be better trying Qt. It works virtually everywhere, haves same set of widgets for most platforms and so you do not have to rewrite half of program to support new platform - its really up to library itself to get idea how to provide it usual widgets made of platform specific stuff. With .NET you simply can't do that as there is no common widgets set. And rewriting half of your program just to port it to new platform is an blatant idiocy as of 2014.
    2) If someone want something non-speed critical and networked, HTML5 would be their bet. Interestingly MS isn't required here and does not really defines future. Their silly attempt with metro is just EPIC FAIL one more time. Not to mention they shown their .NET footpads that .NET is about to die as it can't be good in anything. Neither it suited for crossplatform desktop/native programs, nor it good for web.

    Tbh I havent seen examples where .NET would actually help devs to achieve their goals and would do something good in long term. It rather causes ton of headaches and binds you to windows. It suxx as of 2014 if someone haven't got it yet.
    after so long comment, so short answer. qyoto

    and no it doesn't tie you to windows. i develop commercial apps that need to run on all 3 platforms and so far... i never booted into anything but linux for development

  4. #14

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TheBlackCat View Post
    This may just be part of a longer-term plan to phase out .net.
    What does Microsoft replace .net with?

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    421

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TheBlackCat View Post
    This may not be anything so sinister. This may just be part of a longer-term plan to phase out .net. We may eventually see it dumped onto either xamarin or a separate foundation, with it no longer getting any special attention from Microsoft. They can't do that all at once, it would piss of developers too much, but if they do it slowly, reducing its emphasis and chipping away bits and pieces, they may think they can get away with it.
    well, dumping it on xamarin or the fact they would change their mind doesn't change one thing. .net is awesome framework and once you free something, only thing there is, is the fact that you can distance your self, project can thrive with or without you

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    421

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by curaga View Post
    How is planned obscolescence not sinister?
    there is a big difference between dropping a project where you were sole holder and controller of the code (visual basic) and dropping public project. in case of closed one it simply dies and no matter how much its users would like some way to continue it... there isn't one, in case of another project only loses one contributor, while project it self can still thrive if there is a traction.

    stopping contributing to public project is nothing sinister, if there is a community it will live as nothing ever happened

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    421

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by beetreetime View Post
    The fact that released it under apache 2.0 and not true copyleft licenses like GPL and AGPL clearly shows how hypocritical they are. It shows that M$'s claim of freely .NET is nothing but bullshit. Nothing can be more clear. they will take all the changes made by developers on the Open source version and make their next version closed.

    It's so obvious, only those who are dumb or are proprietary f*&ks can't see it.
    so... eclipse and apache are hypocritical? @.@' there is a reason why so many libs are GPL/LGPL instead of just GPL. but, based on your expressive language it is obvious you need to grow up 1st. then you might realize why GPL only is not possible in many cases

    but, let me indulge you
    - let's say i made super duper awesome contribution and published it as open source where MS takes it and ... closes it? how? my source is still there and is still under license where anyone can use it
    - so, lets say they make next version closed again... does that suddenly makes current not open or stopping to work?

    i'm very conscious in those departments most of the time. and all my development went under ECMA covered parts (.net 2). strangely, there was not one moment when i would feel like something was missing. ok, there were few times when i knew "oh, this could be so much simpler", but most of the time i didn't notice one thing. my apps still worked with current .net on ms and worked with mono on linux and osx.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    350

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by beetreetime View Post
    The fact that released it under apache 2.0 and not true copyleft licenses like GPL and AGPL clearly shows how hypocritical they are. It shows that M$'s claim of freely .NET is nothing but bullshit. Nothing can be more clear. they will take all the changes made by developers on the Open source version and make their next version closed.

    It's so obvious, only those who are dumb or are proprietary f*&ks can't see it.
    Apache 2.0 is a GPLv3-compatible license with a patent grant. What's *wrong* with Apache 2.0?

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    421

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by directhex View Post
    Apache 2.0 is a GPLv3-compatible license with a patent grant. What's *wrong* with Apache 2.0?
    *joke* for one thing... if it was GPL, we could see shitload of funny stories where Stallman demanded they rename them selves to GNU/.Net

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by litfan View Post
    We aren't mono haters. We're people that have been burned by MS in the past by its "embrace, extend, extinguish" policies. They are not to be trusted. They have made half gestures like this in the past.

    Fool us once, shame on them. Fool us twice, shame on us.
    The bit of irony here is that it was Oracle that ended up filing a lawsuit over patent claims on Java. Should everyone stop using Java because Oracle is a litigation-happy company?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •