Tom Shelton
6/20/2012 4:18:00 PM
Mayayana used his keyboard to write :
> I'm continually surprised by the longevity of two
> fundamental misperceptions on the part of DotNetters:
>
> 1) That MS was going to going to dump COM "any
> day now" and turn Windows into a pure Java clone
> with no base OS.
>
While I can understand how you labor under that misconception, it isn't
true. COM is a fundamental part of the windows OS - just as it is in
..NET. The difference is that COM is not upfront and in your face in
..NET like it is in VB.CLASSIC (unless you want it to be).
> 2) That .Net was going to be cross-platform. (I used
> to have a 1996 VBScript book that confidently proclaimed
> VBS and ActiveX would be browser standards very soon.)
>
..NET was never going to be "cross-platform" from the standpoint of
non-MS OS. .NET is ms's implementation of the clr standard. However,
it is cross platform from the standpoint of supporting different
architectures and ms operating systems. x86, x64, and ARM currently.
There are implementations for other os's though, mono and dotGNU (a
fact that the author of the article got wrong - there are in fact two
oss implmentations)
> As I understand it, .Net was created and marketed
> primarily to help sales of Windows server by competing
> with Java server-side, and secondarily to begin moving
> 3rd-party programmers out of the API.
>
Simply not true. I don't know why you would continue to make that
assertion, when the built in support for calling external APIs is
better than what you have in vb.classic?
Native cdecl support
Native unicode api support
Native support for unions
Better callback support
etc, etc
There are some finally some restrictions in windows 8 metro apps with
regard to win32 api calls. There are reasons for this - mainly
stability and battery life on low-power devices.
> A telling line is this:
> "Imagine for a moment that Microsoft hadn't forced
> us all to use .NET"
>
I don't remember anyone being forced to move to anything. As you are
well aware, VB6 still works. C++ still works and a myrid of other 3rd
party tools and languages.
> For me it evokes an image of cartoon sheep at the edge
> of a cliff. One is turning back to the shepherd, with just the
> faintest hint of hesitation: "Yo, are you sure this is the way
> we're supposed to go?"
>
> But I suppose it's not really so different from the VB6ers
> in 2001, speechless in the recognition that they were not
> the customer, but rather part of the product.
If you are comming to that conclusion from the reference article -
written almost a year ago - you should be aware that it's almost
complete rubbish. .NET is just as alive now as it was 10 years ago -
are things evolving? Sure. That's a good thing.
--
Tom Shelton