.NET vs Java (Windows service development)
in [Visual Basic]
|
Prev: Delay Methods
Next: VB Community Transition
From: Karl E. Peterson on 22 Jul 2010 15:22 on 7/22/2010, DickGrier supposed : > I think you are being stubborn. Heh, well, that has been known to happen, sure. > The dependency already is there -- it is > part of the OS, at least for this (.NET) discussion. No it's not. Been a long time since you ran XP, maybe? The great bulk of machines out there, especially in the Enterprise, are still running it and will be for some time to come. The various .NET frameworks all need to be specifically installed on that platform, and in many Enterprise situations (again) they're not. There are lots of IT departments that are busy enough just patching all the actual security holes already present, to bother implementing a push on optional bloat. > It certainly doesn't affect performance, except on the boundary, > where C/C++ are appropriate. I guess I do have a tendency to see drivers and services as *** by definition *** on the boundary, yeah. They must be there, so they *must* be as optimized as any piece of code on the box. If a service isn't written to those standards, it doesn't deserve to be installed. > I've never deployed the .NET Framework. Me either. ;-) -- ..NET: It's About Trust! http://vfred.mvps.org
From: Karl E. Peterson on 22 Jul 2010 15:23 Ulrich Korndoerfer pretended : > It was not worth it and I deinstalled it. <AOL> -- ..NET: It's About Trust! http://vfred.mvps.org
From: Tom Shelton on 22 Jul 2010 19:49 Karl E. Peterson expressed precisely : > on 7/22/2010, DickGrier supposed : >> I think you are being stubborn. > > Heh, well, that has been known to happen, sure. > >> The dependency already is there -- it is part of the OS, at least for this >> (.NET) discussion. > > No it's not. Been a long time since you ran XP, maybe? The great bulk of > machines out there, especially in the Enterprise, are still running it and > will be for some time to come. The various .NET frameworks all need to be > specifically installed on that platform, and in many Enterprise situations > (again) they're not. There are lots of IT departments that are busy enough > just patching all the actual security holes already present, to bother > implementing a push on optional bloat. > And that's where I think your wrong... Especially in Enterprise situations. I work with a company that has many 10's of thousand employees all over the world - our standard xp image contains the .net framework. Before this job I worked for a company that serviced the timeshare, hotel, and condo markets. They had some very large customers, some of whom I know you know. Again, 10's of thousands of users on xp machines. ..NET is used in to many enterprise situations for that to be the case.... Seriously, unless you can back that up with hard numbers, I'm going to call BS :) -- Tom Shelton
From: DickGrier on 23 Jul 2010 11:46 No, I use is occasionally. Take a look at your XP(s). Do you have SP3 installed? Is the .NET framework present? If not, there is something funny going on. -- Richard Grier, Consultant, Hard & Software 12962 West Louisiana Avenue Lakewood, CO 80228 303-986-2179 (voice) Homepage: www.hardandsoftware.net Author of Visual Basic Programmer's Guide to Serial Communications, 4th Edition ISBN 1-890422-28-2 (391 pages) published July 2004, Revised July 2006.
From: Henning on 23 Jul 2010 11:57
Why is that? I have SP3, and no .net. /Henning "DickGrier" <dick_grierNOSPAM(a)msn.com> skrev i meddelandet news:%23V03F5nKLHA.4312(a)TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... > No, I use is occasionally. Take a look at your XP(s). Do you have SP3 > installed? Is the .NET framework present? If not, there is something > funny going on. > > -- > Richard Grier, Consultant, Hard & Software 12962 West Louisiana Avenue > Lakewood, CO 80228 303-986-2179 (voice) Homepage: www.hardandsoftware.net > Author of Visual Basic Programmer's Guide to Serial Communications, 4th > Edition ISBN 1-890422-28-2 (391 pages) published July 2004, Revised July > 2006. |