4 ms·
I can see that being a problem. Let me try to explain: * We've concrete .NET platforms, such as .NET Framework, .NET Core, and Xamarin. They are the moral equi
by terrajobst 10y ago
I can see that being a problem. Let me try to explain:
* We've concrete .NET platforms, such as .NET Framework, .NET Core, and Xamarin. They are the moral equivalent of Linux distributions.
* With .NET Standard we now have shared specification that dictates which APIs all these platforms have to implement. That's the moral equivalent of POSIX.
- tobltobs 10y agoAnd where does fit UWP into this picture? Or what should I use if I want to develop apps for Window Store (or whatever the current name is for that).
- WorldMaker 10y agoThe .NET stack in UWP is essentially .NET Core
- Kipters 10y agoUWP is a native framework based on COM. Windows 10 apps use .NET Core (compatible with .NET Standard 1.4) and can access UWP APIs through bindings
- crudbug 10y agoYes, this was exactly my point. The elements are present, just that the way naming is done is very confusing. The different distribution/namespaces should have clear goals without any naming confusions.