Re: Chrome unveiled to the public

Craig Stuntz [TeamB] wrote:
Satya wrote: 
SQL Server 2005 is not devloped in .NET
Neither Longhorn.

"Hosting .NET" is not "Developed in .NET" 


	You're wrong on both counts. Portions of both Longhorn and SQL Server
2005 are developed *in* .NET. Not 100% -- or even most -- of either
one,


I thought neither SQL Server 2005 nor Longhorn are .NET applications.

Btw, (according to your % theory), what qualifies an application to be called as a .NET application?
Just developing a part of the functionality or a new module in .NET!?
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Proof that Microsoft said Lognhorn will be based on .NET
    ... Longhorn is based on the .NET Framework so if you get on there today it's gonna make it much easier for you to get into Longhorn when it's available." ... The entire article, including the quoted paragraph, is specifically talking about *application development*, IOW, everything they are doing in Longhorn *for developers* is based on .Net. ... though this whole process with you and other teamB ... if anything needs to stop it's TeamB members criticizing ...
    (borland.public.delphi.non-technical)
  • Re: The Dirty Little Secret about Longhorn
    ... Wayne Niddery [TeamB] wrote: ... > Blatant about what - that the Longhorn OS itself would be .Net ...
    (borland.public.delphi.non-technical)
  • Re: What Id Like to See in Delphi
    ... Craig Stuntz [TeamB] wrote: ... BTW, we would have none of these problems if the decision to make ... Leave the rest of the address intact ...
    (borland.public.delphi.non-technical)
  • Re: installation woes
    ... Joanna Carter (TeamB) wrote: ... > moving in then you are going to have to get used to .NET as many ... > features in the Longhorn version of Windows are only available ...
    (borland.public.delphi.non-technical)
  • Re: Poll 2: Would you buy another version of Delphi32?
    ... > hype, btw). ... but still a big download. ... Rudy Velthuis (TeamB) ...
    (borland.public.delphi.non-technical)