4 ms·

Funny, and I was wondering why so much people still insist in using .NET ... Personally I avoid .NET like the plague, after learning it first of course (not fo

by speeder 13y ago

Funny, and I was wondering why so much people still insist in using .NET ... Personally I avoid .NET like the plague, after learning it first of course (not for servers, I don't do server side stuff) because of its horrible windows dependancy, and mono is NOT a adequate substitute.

aespinoza 13y ago
.Net is amazing, you really should check it out more. But I do agree, the dependency on windows is really killing it. And mono is definitely not an adequate substitute in the current state of things. I would to see Xamarin push for .Net on the server more, than just Mobile and Mac. Maybe that is something we should do, as our product is full .Net in the server space.
_random_ 13y ago
Simply because C# is the best modern C-derived language. And Visual Studio is the best modern IDE.
Zigurd 13y ago
About 13 years ago I was writing mobile apps in C# with a toolchain that didn't crash as often as Eclipse and, at the time, ran about 20X faster, and I was running those apps on a device with something like a modern smartphone form factor, although the phone was separate, and using a real-ish browser, over GPRS, with Windows CE and NETCF. It's not .NET technology that sucked in the years between when I was doing that and when Android was released. It was the failure to capitalize on .NET in mobile. WP8 still isn't as architecturally elegant as Android. Android's userland is all based on instances of the Dalvik VM. The CLR does not play that kind of central role in WP8.
- _random_ 13y ago
  Another fun fact is that CLR (well Mono) runs faster on Android then Java.
  - Zigurd 13y ago
    Be careful of those comparisons. I expect a port of Hotspot to ARM would beat the snot out of Dalvik on any synthetic benchmark. It would also use up your battery doing it. Dalvik was designed for small battery powered devices from the beginning. In early versions of Android the advantage it held over Java VMs is that Dalvik bytecode is (claimed to be) half as big and twice as fast to interpret compared to Java bytecode. A useful comparison would have to, at least, take into account battery efficiency, if not space efficiency, how much you can get away without using native code, etc. Then there are issues of how the VM is used. The CLR in Windows Phone is, AFAIK, not used for a middleware layer the way it is in Android. That is, a lot of the Android APIs are implemented in Java and run in a Dalvik VM instance.

by speeder 13y ago

aespinoza 13y ago

.Net is amazing, you really should check it out more. But I do agree, the dependency on windows is really killing it. And mono is definitely not an adequate substitute in the current state of things. I would to see Xamarin push for .Net on the server more, than just Mobile and Mac. Maybe that is something we should do, as our product is full .Net in the server space.

_random_ 13y ago

Simply because C# is the best modern C-derived language. And Visual Studio is the best modern IDE.

Zigurd 13y ago

About 13 years ago I was writing mobile apps in C# with a toolchain that didn't crash as often as Eclipse and, at the time, ran about 20X faster, and I was running those apps on a device with something like a modern smartphone form factor, although the phone was separate, and using a real-ish browser, over GPRS, with Windows CE and NETCF. It's not .NET technology that sucked in the years between when I was doing that and when Android was released. It was the failure to capitalize on .NET in mobile. WP8 still isn't as architecturally elegant as Android. Android's userland is all based on instances of the Dalvik VM. The CLR does not play that kind of central role in WP8.

_random_ 13y ago
Another fun fact is that CLR (well Mono) runs faster on Android then Java.
- Zigurd 13y ago
  Be careful of those comparisons. I expect a port of Hotspot to ARM would beat the snot out of Dalvik on any synthetic benchmark. It would also use up your battery doing it. Dalvik was designed for small battery powered devices from the beginning. In early versions of Android the advantage it held over Java VMs is that Dalvik bytecode is (claimed to be) half as big and twice as fast to interpret compared to Java bytecode. A useful comparison would have to, at least, take into account battery efficiency, if not space efficiency, how much you can get away without using native code, etc. Then there are issues of how the VM is used. The CLR in Windows Phone is, AFAIK, not used for a middleware layer the way it is in Android. That is, a lot of the Android APIs are implemented in Java and run in a Dalvik VM instance.