> .NET is for Windows yes, mono exists, but the language is created and steered by Microsoft for windows. you can also run a lot of windows apps with WINE,

> .NET is for Windows yes, mono exists, but the language is created and steered by Microsoft for windows. you can also run a lot of windows apps with WINE, but that's not gonna make me write windows apps for Linux. > It’s slower than Node/Python/Go/Rust literally never heard this complaint, and the first 2 languages have never held the torch of being fast. > It’s a legacy platform as I understand, it's pretty actively developed and gets newer features more regularly than Java, but again, it's a Microsoft language. > The tooling is expensive Of course you can write and compile C# with other tools. This is the same strawman as #1. > .NET isn’t open source friendly TFA said that Microsoft is friendly to OSS since Ballmer retired. K. > It’s for boomer enterprise development This is a stupid argument. Another strawman. Look, I'm not arguing the merits or tech of the dot Net platform or C# or anything there. By and large, I think it's a good platform, but it's Microsofts baby, so setting up a bunch of strawman arguments for why non MS platforms should adopt a proprietary tech from a company that is overall hostile to open source efforts just comes across as corporate propaganda.