4 ms·
> to .NET Core and then to .NET 5+ Just to nitpick. Core -> 5+ was not really a transition. Just a rename to drop the word "Core". Core is still itself, stil
by foobarbaz33 4y ago
> to .NET Core and then to .NET 5+
Just to nitpick. Core -> 5+ was not really a transition. Just a rename to drop the word "Core". Core is still itself, still Core, just no longer called Core.
The old .NET is frozen at version 4.8. So Microsoft felt there was no longer a need to refer to Core as "Core" once it hit version 5+. Maybe a bit premature as the old .NET is still in heavy use. Now it's always unclear which .NET someone is talking about because they say ".NET" which may refer to the old .NET or maybe the new .NET formerly known as "Core".
- Kwpolska 4y agoThey went from .NET Core 3.1 to .NET 5 and a yearly release cadence. The idea with .NET 5+ was also to unify the platform with support for building Windows desktop apps (WinForms/WPF) and mobile apps (Xamarin/MAUI).