6 ms·
Parent post was confusingly worded. he's saying windows as a programming platform is dead. You can keep .Net and Java, its just going to be .Net core and Java
by ep103 8y ago
Parent post was confusingly worded.
he's saying windows as a programming platform is dead. You can keep .Net and Java, its just going to be .Net core and Java, and its going to run on linux machines.
Its a matter of time until Visual Studio runs on linux, but that's the direction they're heading. Visual Studio Code already does
- scarface74 8y agohe's saying windows as a programming platform is dead Not exactly. I'm saying that Windows as a deployment platform is dead. You can keep developing on Windows and deploy to Linux. I do it all of the time.
- addicted 8y agoI'm not convinced this is the case. MS is developing various alternatives to Linux, such as a CLI only version, and a version with a different faster kernel. But I agree that frameworks which can ONLY deploy to Windows (.Net Framework) will die in favor of those that are cross platform (.Net Core).
- scarface74 8y agoWhat competitive advantage does Microsoft gain by having a non GUI server OS? That just becomes a more expensive server OS than Limux.
- pjmlp 8y agoTooling and Windows still does a couple of things better than most UNIXes.
- manigandham 8y agoWindows Server Core 2016 has barely any usage. Nano Server came and died, basically being an empty shell that can only be a base image for Windows containers. Linux won a long time ago and is so far ahead in tooling and ecosystem support that it just isn't worth it to compete in the server OS space. And that's better for everyone since we can consolidate effort and products.
- pjmlp 8y agoI don't fully agree that a Linux monoculture, or even a POSIX one, is better for everyone. Like every monoculture things either stagnate, or we start getting features just to work around botherom instead of actual innovation.
- rblatz 8y agoI wouldn't be surprised to see VS Code replacing VS entirely. Visual Studio is built on WPF and it's probably as massive of an effort to port all that over as it is to bring Code up to snuff.
- pjmlp 8y agoThe Electron pleasure. I tremble to imagine how many cores and GBs would be needed to have VSCode with the same capabilities of Visual Studio Ultimate, while running at comparable performance.
- nicoburns 8y agoVSCode has performance sensitive bits (such as file search) written in Rust and (I believe) C++, so it's not out of the question...
- pjmlp 8y agoI am forced to use it in a couple of projects and fast it is not. Specially when comparing with the likes of Sublime, which I gladly payed for.
- thrower123 8y agoWill never, ever happen. Electron is not feasible, and moreover, the VS team is not going to rewrite all their funcionality, when they can't even give us a 64 bit VS.
- untog 8y ago> when they can't even give us a 64 bit VS Wouldn't that encourage a switch to a totally new system? If you have to do a ton of ground-up work to get VS working 64 bit, you could argue you as well expend the same effort in getting VS Code to a level where it can be used instead of VS.
- thrower123 8y ago
- svick 8y agoVisual Studio depends heavily on WPF and COM. I don't think it's going to be running on Linux anytime soon.
- scarface74 8y agoThere is already a version for Mac from Microsoft. https://visualstudio.microsoft.com/vs/mac/ https://visualstudio.microsoft.com/vs/mac/ And there is always JetBrains Rider for Linux https://www.jetbrains.com/rider/ https://www.jetbrains.com/rider/
- wilsonnb3 8y agoVisual Studio for Mac is just Xamarin Studio rebranded, not really related to VS for windows.