Re: Peace between Native and .NET freaks (a proposal)

From: Brent S. (brentatatmosoftdotcom)
Date: 01/19/05 

Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 10:54:21 -0700

"Jim Cooper" <jim@falafelsoft.com> wrote in message
news:41ee3e7b$1@newsgroups.borland.com...
>
> > - Why should someone want to port something to .NET? Where's the
> > reason?
>
> To take advantage of something that was only available in .NET

I can't imagine anything which will be available only in .NET.

> (or possibly preparing for that).

So you admit there is nothing now?

> To futureproof their code.

.NET will only be the future if it is widely accepted. It will be accepted
only if they don't upset all of thier customers. Their customers(developers
are customers too) will only be happy with backward compatability, fast
execution, and a lack of stringent OS requirements.
.NET has no compelling benefits for customers who are not developers.
Marketing cannot make up the gap.

> To make code available on another platform supporting .NET (eg the CF)

I'll believe it when I see it. MS wants to sell MS operating systems.

> To make code available to an ASP.NET application

Ok... Good point. This is .NETs place.

>
> > - Why should a developer accept an additional layer containing bugs
> > between the system and the app?
>
> Like the VCL, you mean? :-)

The VCL is not a layer, and you have the source. Not exactly the same thing
is it?

>
> > - Where is the reason to change the API at all?
>
> Coz it's crap
Ok. Change the API... (no one really cares apart from customers demanding
backward compatability) Its not the API that I care about, but the ability
to sidestep all of the .NET garbage and continue to write native code, and
see what it compiles to.

>
> > (oh, yes I know: M$ only needs to maintain one code base for MAC-OS and
> > Windows.
>
> And exactly how will .NET help there?
You said above: " To make code available on another platform supporting
.NET"
Your right though, .NET won't help you.

>
> > Whats in there that could not be implemented in Native API?
>
> Right now with released MS stuff, nothing. In the future we're assured
> that will change.

Yes... Nothing... and since MS has to buy innovation now days a lot of it
will have to be ported after they buy it. Innovation will continue in and
out of .NET.

>
> I wouldn't recommend anyone port anything to .NET without a good reason.

Still waiting for the reason.

Your argument in a nutshell:
1. .NET will be worth developing for because one day they will have neat
stuff that is only in .NET.
2. .NET is the future because MS says so.
3. We might get platform portability.
4. ASP.NET is cool.
</argument>

3 out of 4 are promises/threats (2 is a threat). ASP.NET is cool.
So for today only (4) is true.

Brent S.

Relevant Pages