Python.NET, MONO and Visual Studio etc.

[Steve Holden]

"Xavier Defrang" <xavier at perceval.net> wrote ...
>
[ ... ]
>
<warning>this message contains opinions defining an extreme point of
view</warning>

> This is almost off-topic but since you guys are talking about that .NET
> thing, I'd like just to ask anyone in here : WHAT THE HELL IS .NET???
>
A rehashing of twenty-year-old software ideas by the largest force in the
industry to maintain their revenue base in the face of customers reluctant
to "upgrade" from one inadequate product to another (can we say "poor
security"?).

> I don't want any fancy buzzwords or corpspeak crap.  I just want a clear,
> step-by-step explanation of what it is and what should I believe it's the
> revolution MS claim it is.  Why are people investing bucks in developping
> .NET software when nobody can clearly see what it is.

For the same reason they invested in OLE when it too was smoke and mirrors.
They have been fed fear, uncertainty and doubt by Microsoft for so long that
they are no longer capable of saying "Sorry, that's not for me, I'm going to
do something else that makes more sense for my organisation". If Microsoft
are doing something, the reasoning goes, then everyone will be doing it and
so I should too.

To be fair to Microsoft, .NET has some good ideas in it: the common language
runtime that supports a common (MSIL) intermediate language for all compiled
languages and adapts it to the particular hardware as required is neat,
though not new. It also contains better (though not perfect) solutions to
the software versioning problem, allowing several different versions of
support libraries to be incorporated into different software products
without conflict. Possibly even better than Unix shared library versioning,
whihc has been around for fifteen years now.

>
I'm surrounded by
> skilled web and software architects and absolutely none of them has a
> clear idea about this "next generation"
framework/platform/strategy/initiative.  For me, .NET just looks like a
> new branding strategy for all MS development product line.  What's .NET
> but a mix of buzzwords and the deployment of big brotherish SOAP-enabled
> services?
>
Well, that comes close. The really ironic thing is that most of the
"technologies" Microsoft are attempting to embrace with .NET could have been
incorporated into their product line at any time they had the imagination to
do it. There is no fundamentally new technology in .NET.

> Any explanation of link to valuable online resource are more than
> welcome...
>
You'd better take a look at Microsoft's site. As they understand it better,
so will the rest of the world :-) .NET? Just say "no".

devil's-advocate-ly y'rs  - steve
--
http://www.holdenweb.com/