From what I learned on MS site some time ago, there's only 1 real language, being c#, that truly employs all of .NET features, all the others use but subsets. MS provided VB.NET as not to scare off current VB programmers with a learning curve that would seem too steep.

If you're using .NET I see no reason to use anything else but C#.

.NET usage will probably augment, but only once it's soundly installed on say 90% of windows userbase by OS install.
3MB shareware with 90MB runtime? doesn't look good.
Posted on 2003-03-09 12:17:12 by Hiroshimator

By the way, do you have any links to a complete reference of all those .NET namespaces/classes?
Posted on 2003-03-09 13:07:39 by Maverick
the .NET SDK has the whole thing, IIRC (except i haven't had time to re-install it since i got my new computer)

But on-line, this may be what you're looking for :)
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/netstart/html/cpframeworkref_start.asp
Posted on 2003-03-09 22:45:19 by jademtech

Thanks. :)
Posted on 2003-03-10 03:05:56 by Maverick
YES, .Net will succeed. And NO, MS did not "bet the company on it", at least not as much as they would have you believe. How much cash do they still have in the bank? US$40 billion? With that cash reserve they can change direction any time they want.

I am using .Net day in, day out. I have to say that the combination of ASP.Net, ADO.Net and compiled server-side code makes it a breeze to create "thin client" style apps for large coporates. If only this technology was around 3 yrs ago when "thin client" was the next big thing.

Overall, i like it. It is an attempt to tie together several different areas of programming. To use it properly, you still need to know as much as you ever did, making a complex app hasn't really got any simpler.
Posted on 2003-03-10 05:40:27 by sluggy

.NET VM is an almost perfect clone of JVM, what a lack of fantasy they had.

Some say that .NET won't be that slow because most of the times it executes namespace/class code, thus potentially native code, not MSIL code.

But this is another problem itself.. under .NET, programmers will have to rely on the quality of code provided by Microsoft in those namespaces/classes, and thus the difference between a skilled programmer and a beginner will be flatted.. and the final quality of code will entirely depend on Microsoft.
This goes down to very low-level things as queues, stacks, text to integer conversion, etc.. thus the real impact on performance is obvious.

If one is not satisfied with the quality of Microsoft namespaces/classes, the option will be to make them himself/herself, in the even slower MSIL.

IMHO the world needs .NET as it needs Bush or bin Laden.. i.e. very little.

We're heading back to the past with .NET, and for no good reason.
Microsoft should optimize and improve the real-time usefullness (if any) of Windows.. not make things even worse in this regard. Having a 50 GHz CPU won't help, when you've to rely on Microsoft programmers and their "amazing" solutions to bring on progress.

Things like DirectX, although largely imperfect, helped and were heading to the right direction.. .NET instead will make things ridicolously inefficient. I sure hope it won't be enforced as a "solution for all problems".
Posted on 2003-03-10 07:46:43 by Maverick