3 ms·

I mean .NET Core is targeting Linux, is that really a sign of mismanagement? And to your second point.. I mean you're comparing concepts at very different leve

I mean .NET Core is targeting Linux, is that really a sign of mismanagement? And to your second point.. I mean you're comparing concepts at very different levels of a stack. Your list includes a language runtime, a web framework, an OS specific application format/framework? It's like saying "Java, HotspotVM, JavaFX, Tomcat, Android APK, Vert.X"... In reality it's ".NET Core and .NET Framework". And while there have been some growing pains as the term .NET became overloaded, it's always been clear .NET Core is where they want people to be, .NET Framework exists because migration to a new platform wasn't going to happen overnight. Every year there's more and more .NET Core compatibility, they've done a good job with .NET Core so more people are willing to use it (and port packages to it) https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/standard/choosing-core-framework-server https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/standard/choosing-co...

pjmlp 6y ago
Naturally I am comparing all levels of the stack, as I mention on my comment a language alone is useless. Yes, the future is .NET Core, however pretending that outside Windows it can match Java offerings just reveals a complete lack of knowledge of all kinds of platforms that have Java support available for them. Guys like PTC, Aicas, Gemalto, microEJ doing embedded real time Java, selling M2M devices, IBM and Unisys mainframes, 80% of the mobile world (even if it is an adulterated flavour of coffee), smartcards, blue ray players, healthcare and TV settop boxes, kiosks and plenty of other use cases. .NET is catching up with 25 years of Java doing cross platform development, while anything that came out of Redmond has been mostly Windows only for 20 years. .NET Core only supports the three major mainstream OSes, zero support for anything else, and has the growing pains of a platform where plenty of third parties are yet to release anything on Core. Sitecore just released their first version on .NET Core earlier this month, and I don't see anyone rushing to upgrade. Doing WPF, Forms? Good luck with many GUI component libraries. Apparently the designers are going to miss .NET 5 for full stability. The beautiful thing with being a polyglot consultant is that I don't have to convince myself that I am using the best stuff as "Developer X", I just use whatever stack the customer asks for and then move on.
- GordonS 6y ago
  > .NET Core only supports the three major mainstream OSes, zero support for anything else This is true, but this level is support for the majority of use cases. I do personally find it very annoying that refuse to support 32-bit Linux tho. > has the growing pains of a platform where plenty of third parties are yet to release anything on Core This was true a few years ago, but certainly isn't now. I honestly can't even remember when I last tried to use a library that didn't have dotnet Core support.
  - pjmlp 6y ago
    I can give you several examples, you can start with Sitecore and SharePoint.
    - GordonS 6y ago
      I don't doubt there are examples, but they are surely in the minority nowadays. Also worth noting that anything built for dotnet framework 4.6.2+ (4.6.2 was released in 2016) will run just fine under Core CLR.
      - pjmlp 6y ago
        No it won't, because .NET Core doesn't support everything from .NET Framework, like WCF server happily running on 4.7.2. Here is another example, Oracle drivers for .NET Core only support a subset of their capabilities on Core. I can keep feeding examples of stuff that is actually relevant for Fortune 500's, which Microsoft keeps out of their .NET Core marketing or just hand waves as yet another porting effort, as if we didn't had better ways to spend our money.
        BoorishBears 6y ago
        You can keep feeding off examples of the subset of Fortune 500s that refuse to compete for top talent in the wider market and instead try and keep zombie projects shuffling because of their mismanagement using contractors and outsourced labor... they also tend to have the kind of engineering culture that pushes away innovators, treats development as a cost center, and generally avoid investment in any sort of long term growth of their talent... But yeah, why compete with the rest of the Fortune 500 that hire top talent to build out new systems... when you can pay a "fixer" who prides themselves on self-flagellation keeping legacy systems with no source targeting platforms designed for computing as it existed decades ago (that only exist because of gross mismanagement and a general view of development as a cost center)? What's interesting to me is someone would actually try to hold this up this dance as something the rest of the tech industry should aspire to uphold lol. Maybe because it makes for less "war stories" deep in the bowels of decade old systems with no documentation successfully migrated to the latest Jenga block in their leaning towers? Imagine if other fields worked like this "Our materials science company prides itself on only releasing plastics that can be molded using what was state of the art 20 years ago" "Our competitor Macrohard insists on occasionally releasing new plastics that are stronger and cheaper to develop with, but we cater to those shops that refuse to invest in techs who know newer processes!"

pjmlp 6y ago

Naturally I am comparing all levels of the stack, as I mention on my comment a language alone is useless. Yes, the future is .NET Core, however pretending that outside Windows it can match Java offerings just reveals a complete lack of knowledge of all kinds of platforms that have Java support available for them. Guys like PTC, Aicas, Gemalto, microEJ doing embedded real time Java, selling M2M devices, IBM and Unisys mainframes, 80% of the mobile world (even if it is an adulterated flavour of coffee), smartcards, blue ray players, healthcare and TV settop boxes, kiosks and plenty of other use cases. .NET is catching up with 25 years of Java doing cross platform development, while anything that came out of Redmond has been mostly Windows only for 20 years. .NET Core only supports the three major mainstream OSes, zero support for anything else, and has the growing pains of a platform where plenty of third parties are yet to release anything on Core. Sitecore just released their first version on .NET Core earlier this month, and I don't see anyone rushing to upgrade. Doing WPF, Forms? Good luck with many GUI component libraries. Apparently the designers are going to miss .NET 5 for full stability. The beautiful thing with being a polyglot consultant is that I don't have to convince myself that I am using the best stuff as "Developer X", I just use whatever stack the customer asks for and then move on.

GordonS 6y ago
> .NET Core only supports the three major mainstream OSes, zero support for anything else This is true, but this level is support for the majority of use cases. I do personally find it very annoying that refuse to support 32-bit Linux tho. > has the growing pains of a platform where plenty of third parties are yet to release anything on Core This was true a few years ago, but certainly isn't now. I honestly can't even remember when I last tried to use a library that didn't have dotnet Core support.
- pjmlp 6y ago
  I can give you several examples, you can start with Sitecore and SharePoint.
  - GordonS 6y ago
    I don't doubt there are examples, but they are surely in the minority nowadays. Also worth noting that anything built for dotnet framework 4.6.2+ (4.6.2 was released in 2016) will run just fine under Core CLR.
    - pjmlp 6y ago
      No it won't, because .NET Core doesn't support everything from .NET Framework, like WCF server happily running on 4.7.2. Here is another example, Oracle drivers for .NET Core only support a subset of their capabilities on Core. I can keep feeding examples of stuff that is actually relevant for Fortune 500's, which Microsoft keeps out of their .NET Core marketing or just hand waves as yet another porting effort, as if we didn't had better ways to spend our money.
      - BoorishBears 6y ago
        You can keep feeding off examples of the subset of Fortune 500s that refuse to compete for top talent in the wider market and instead try and keep zombie projects shuffling because of their mismanagement using contractors and outsourced labor... they also tend to have the kind of engineering culture that pushes away innovators, treats development as a cost center, and generally avoid investment in any sort of long term growth of their talent... But yeah, why compete with the rest of the Fortune 500 that hire top talent to build out new systems... when you can pay a "fixer" who prides themselves on self-flagellation keeping legacy systems with no source targeting platforms designed for computing as it existed decades ago (that only exist because of gross mismanagement and a general view of development as a cost center)? What's interesting to me is someone would actually try to hold this up this dance as something the rest of the tech industry should aspire to uphold lol. Maybe because it makes for less "war stories" deep in the bowels of decade old systems with no documentation successfully migrated to the latest Jenga block in their leaning towers? Imagine if other fields worked like this "Our materials science company prides itself on only releasing plastics that can be molded using what was state of the art 20 years ago" "Our competitor Macrohard insists on occasionally releasing new plastics that are stronger and cheaper to develop with, but we cater to those shops that refuse to invest in techs who know newer processes!"