Would we see Mac .NET?

I have a feeling we will. Microsoft knows that there will be a lot of new Mac users if Apple plays their cards right. And Microsoft really doesn't care about Windows on the desktop as much anymore. Their main goal is to get every server in the world running NT and .Net. So, if they open up their .Net to work on more OSes, then that means more people will use and pay for their services, so in the long run they make money from Mac users and Windows users, and the profit from Windows XP is lower than the total .Net income.

They think in Money, not Mac vs. Windows. :D
 
Come on guys and gals. We really are pretty hard on Microsoft. I mean, sure, Windows DOES suck generally, but tere area a couple of good features, Office v.X is excellent, and Internet Explorer, for all its problems, is actually pretty good.

Please don't think I'm a Microsoft fan! I dislike Bill Gates, but they have helped Apple. Very few people who use macs now would if they couldn't use IE or Word, would they?

And in the end, it is just a computer, right?

~*~*~*~*~*~

And as to seeing .NET? Of course we will, but that doesn't mean it will become the standard, or incorporated into MacOS, like it is with WinXP.
 
Hmmm..

IE --> Omniweb (so much better)

word... ok, but if it's really a must to have NO microsoft software, use Appleworks.

You can live without microsoft, i'm pretty sure about that.




senne.
 
ok, but here is my problem... i am doing fine with all my programs installed on my computer. how is dot net going to improve the way i work, make money, use a computer? i like computers the way they are now. if dot net can bring something new and better to the table sure, but i can't imagine how many more improvements can be made to the software i am currently using. all i am now waiting for is os x photshop and dreamweaver os x. again waht exactly will dot net offer me that will be better than these tools?
 
If you ask me, the theory behind .NET is one of the greatest things ever invented. It is what Java should have been. The problem - if you ask me - is that Microsoft is doing it. I am not bashing on Microsoft all the time, but I know how they run their business. Banning Sony from the CeBit proved me once again why I dislike them. And I fear the same for .NET. Java was developed be platform independant so that different OSes can run applications without the need to recompile them. That it is dog slow and thus nearly only is used in the web is known. .NET looks promising, but MS will certainly again use it to strengthen their monopoly. Then again, the Mac BU already said they are not willing to adapt .NET.
Next week, again, there is the C2000 forum in Germany. C2000 is the main distributor of nearly everything IT in Germany, including companies like MS, Apple, IBM, 3Com, Acer, Adobe, APC, ASUS, AVM, Computer Associates, Corel, Compaq, Creative, Epson, Guillemot, Intel, Kingston, Novell, Plextor, Samsung, Sony, WACOM etc.
Most of the products of these companies are logistically handled and distributed by C2000 (now named Tech Data) and once a year, the company holds a forum for it's distributers. It's closed for "common people". I am looking forward. Allthough Apple is not going to hold a speec this year like it did last year, Microsoft will hold a 2 hour speech about .NET. I am very interested to hear how the sell the idea of .NET to the distributors of their products...and how other companies will react...

...and again I am exited to drink with the Apple Germany guys after the show like last year, who demonstrated me 10.0.3 one week before it was available :)...maybe I can get them so drunk, they show me 10.2 ???

We'll see...:D
 
.NET seems to be a lot of different things, on one hand it is a sort of unification of all the existing M$ development languages, on the other it is (total?) integration with services like passport (big brother?), M$ also seems to be naming any new version of anything they ship .NET.

What little I know about .NET involves the "common language runtime" M$ is implementing as an intermediate step between all their development languages and machine code. If you write C#, VB, or whatever it gets compiled to the same CLR which is converted to machine instructions as it is run (thus VB.NET C++.NET, etc.). I suppose someone could write a runtime processor that executed the .NET CLR into Moto machine code, I won't hazard a guess about the cost/benefit ratio of such an endeavor. I'm sure Adobe would love to write one version of PhotoShop, but would anything written in such a fashion not run like a dog? Or take advantage of processor specific advantages like AltiVec?
 
why would you diss .net its an amazing all in one Development Enviroment, why wouldnt you like that available on the mac platform, you dont seem to have to many other good ones to choose from, do you?
 
Because it's a closed, proprietary system for use to leverage their monopoly power higher and higher. Java seems to be a good cross-platform system, and it runs on more than Windows. There's no garuntee all .net stuff (or any for that matter) will run on a Mac. I doubt we'll ever see an open source version of it that'll run on Linux.
 
Originally posted by FrgMstr
why would you diss .net its an amazing all in one Development Enviroment, why wouldnt you like that available on the mac platform, you dont seem to have to many other good ones to choose from, do you?
Click to expand...

really? since when has microsoft started to be so giving and sharing? -- check your strings, pupet.
 
What I don't understand is why would Microsoft adopt a programming model using CLR when they seem to be disinterested in porting the runtime environment to other OS'es?

I'll wait to see what software Microsoft ships that actually runs in the CLR. Remember when Microsoft was pushing the usage of MFC when they themselves shied away from it? This definitely has that taint... I'll be impressed if Microsoft ships SQL Server or Exchange Server and have them run in the CLR adequately.

-B
 
Originally posted by vic
ok, who are you talking to?
Click to expand...

He's talking to no one. It's frgmstr, he doesn't know what he's talking about but has to object, that's all. Ignore him and he will be silent again.
 
According to an article I was reading in the March ACCESS-VB-SQL Advisor, M$ is even implementing the CLR in their upcoming SQL Server (code named Yukon, oh that's too easy, due mid-2003).
You will no longer be required to use Transact-SQL to write SQL Server stored procedures, triggers, and user-defined functions. You'll be able to create these objects using any of the .NET languages—VB.NET, C#, C++, or even COBALT.NET—and compile them into .NET assemblies. These assemblies will be deployed inside a SQL Server database and run by the CLR, which will be hosted inside the SQL Server memory space.

One important benefit of relying on the .NET Common Language Runtime is that is can verify that all code hosted by SQL Server won't cause any memory usage errors that would bring down the server.... The goal of the SQL Server design team is that all .NET code executing in SQL Server will be at least as safe, secure, scalable, and fast as Transact-SQL...
Click to expand...
I won't hold my breath until phatsharpie is impressed.
 
<unwarranted rant>
By the way, I don't know if FrgMstr was implying that I was "dis"ing .NET, (I thought my comments were pretty neutral), but one thing I will "dis" is M$ IDEs. I occasionally use VB & InterDev, and would almost rather use WordPad. These real estate hogging apps give room to every imaginable window, panel and oversized button except for the code. Now, I'm no Windows power-user by any means (so there might be something I'm missing), but if I make the text small enough to see a good amount of code on my screen, it becomes too difficult to read.
</unwarranted rant>
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top