Today, some people have repeatedly tried, talking about .NET trust crisis. In fact, I have already said in "In such a world, no one will not be dizzy", but today I have seen a few related articles, I added it again.
Short long after I wrote ".Net myth", I accidentally saw it for more than a year before, some people said:
MS push. Net maximum resistance will not be from the outside, but from MS own native windows.
I have been holding this point in three years. At the beginning, MS advocates a lot of things to achieve in .NET, most of them have not been implemented.
Zhou Xingxing sent a "Microsoft Scott Hanselman Speech" in the .NET architect Scott Hanselman. It also talks about this issue, that is, MS is not possible to use .NET completely replaced the current trest Windows, can only use a .NET's Wrapper to pack the native API, this is also a last month Richard indignant. One reason for Chinese version). So I can understand the anger of Richard, because in some extent, he is like a certain day, suddenly found it being cheated by a well-planned myth.
.NET is indeed very strong in many ways, but it must also be seen, it is not so wonderful. So I wrote ".NET myth" and finally said:
I don't want to prove that .NET is nothing, but it will also do not say so good. If you want to work for technology selection, please think twice.
Longhorn is constantly postponed, and Winfs will not be published in it, Avalon and Indigo will be released separately. From a technical point of view, these things themselves can also be achieved, and it is possible to achieve better.
For example, Richard said, .NET did not attract a lot of VB users, while Java users were more dismissed. As far as I personally understand, there are many Delphi developers to go to .NET, and the most important reason is probably rushing on Anders, habits to use the Dongdong to develop.
In fact, I pulled so much, nothing more than a purpose, I want to prove that at least in the next few years: native development is impossible to be completely replaced by .NET.
Three years ago, even a friend who used Delphi turned to .NET. Many people also recommend me to turn, but I have to turn to Java, turn. Net is embarrassed to say hello - I will give a lot of questions about .NET, and firmly believe that .NET is difficult. Replace native development.
Later, there were .NET's support to tell me: Future Windows will use .NET, without WindowsAPI, .NET application performance will exceed native applications, especially WindowsAPI, may be replaced by the simulation.
I have been very skeptical. Is it necessary to become .NET app? Includes games, graphics images, animations, 3D ...? ? ?
Those people are very affirmatively: Yes! ! ! Even DirectX will also use .NET.
But I still will be suspicious.
The facts of the three years have proved that MS is not so stupid: abandoning the original WINDOWS, reusing it. Net. The current situation is gradually clared, and Windows cannot be rewritten with .NET to rewrite, .NET application can not exceed native applications - unless you use a better machine.
Here is the latest information about Longhorn, pay attention to it on hardware requirements. The author is finally said:
Oh, it is not a bit BT, but not nervous, Longhorn will come out in 2006, and everyone's machine should meet the requirements. TMD dog P is not available. Next year is 2006, Windows 2000 is out of 1999, but the machine bought by the mainstream configuration in 1998, it can run well. But use the mainstream configuration of this year to run Longhorn try.
BTW: If the machine will be running without LONGHORN, MS is not sponsored?
When Longhorn's popularization, I don't know when I'm going, so I said .NET wants to replace native applications, still earlier.
In fact, Meng Rock is very right, .net is originally a good idea, just thinking that it is nothing, the result can only be lost. Initially .NET called COM 2.0 is a more difficult to lead to confusion, and there is a more accurate positioning. There is also as ASP.NET is also good, regarding a relatively successful web development technology. For example, I still like this .Text implementation .Text.
If .NET can focus on these advantages, it is actually doing very good.
