Sign in to follow this  
Rob Loach

[.net] Vista and the .NET Framework

Recommended Posts

I think Microsoft found their schedule being pushed back and back, that Microsoft had more native programmers than managed programmers, that Microsoft had this huge library of pre-existing code that was just begging to be used, and that Microsoft made the only decision it could: get the job done rather than fulfill public relations' promises to the managed programmers of the world.

That said I'm rather sorry to see this occur. I really think the system stability could be improved a great deal by introducing managed components to a few key areas, all in the user arena, and I think that - long term - this stability is something that is more desirable than a product launch deadline.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't mind very much wether the core componentes of Vista uses .NET or not.

I'm more concerned if they choose not to install the .NET runtimes by default.

This will cause a whole lot of people being unable to enjoy games and applications using .NET technology, because they do not know how to install it. And if you want your work to be widespreaded, people must be able to run things you've made; without demanding them to install 30 megs of runtimes.

Since they most probably will include the .NET runtimes on a default installation, I'm not worrying too much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by Enselic
Since they most probably will include the .NET runtimes on a default installation, I'm not worrying too much.


They included the 1.1 Framework with Windows Server 2003 but not the 1.0 Framework. Will Vista only include the 2.0 Framework, leaving 1.1 applications to hang?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by Talonius
They included the 1.1 Framework with Windows Server 2003 but not the 1.0 Framework. Will Vista only include the 2.0 Framework, leaving 1.1 applications to hang?

I'd be very surprised if the don't include all versions of the framework. I mean, the percentage in diskspace of the whole installation can't be high.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I just finished a contract at Microsoft testing on a component that is built using C# and managed code. It is a fairly integral service, and I know that others are also following this route and that a lot of code is being ported to c#. I'm sure that Microsoft is very well committed to migrating to .net. Maybe not all at once, but they are moving in that direction. Moving back to unmanaged code is a step in the wrong direction for the future. Managed code will be more portable and just as efficient moving forward. It also has a cleaner and more modern api to use.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I would wonder about this...

They seem to suggest that VisualStudio.net does not use managed code, but this is simply untrue. Yes it won't be 100% managed code, thats completly unreasonable. The UI is (afaik) completly windows forms based for example.

It makes me wonder if they are counting entirly managed assemblies only? I remember watching channel 9 a while ago, the shell team, saying all the file association objects that generated file previews were managed... At least thats what I remember them saying.

I didn't have a chance to read the entire article (1am here) but found no reference to C++/Cli...?

did I miss something?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jeff Atwood has posted a bit of commentary on this article on his blog here. He basically concludes that although MS may have changed their minds about writing parts of Vista in managed code it doesn't mean they have no faith in the .Net platform with respect to their own software (offering XP Media Centre edition as an example).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Microsoft definitely uses .NET. The new Hotmail beta is written in .NET, as is Avalon (Windows Presentation Foundation) and Indigo (Windows Communication Foundation). The new XPS document format is entirely .NET. Visual Studio is partially written in .NET (just take a look at all the assemblies it installs, and the 2005 refactoring UI is a .NET form, as is the 2003 C#/VB.NET project properties). SQL Server 2005 lets you write stored procedures in a .NET language. Monad is written in .NET.

It's really bizarre when people think Microsoft is afraid of using .NET. That's not what I'm seeing at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They are obviously not commited to actually coding the new OS features in pure managed code (probably due to time constraints, and problems that arise which they already know how to solve in unmanaged situations) ... but they are commited to providing a .NET API to the entire API. It may not work out that way (time constraints and all), but the MS goal that has not wavered is that a programmer should be able to write a 100% managed .NET program for Windows Vistas native library, and have access to every OS feature they could need (obviously you won't have access to every feature in cases where the new API replaces an old, they are highly unlikely to provide .NET access to the older depricated API) ...

For instance their Managed DirectX initiative shows how they most likely intend to do this ... an API that is by its nature unmanaged, but going forward with an eye towards managed clients.

It is not just that they have backed up due to cost or other reasons either ... part of it has to do with client demands - The .NET comminitity can and does consume COM objects all the time, and provide wrappers around C APIs very easily - the COM and C communities do not however have similar ease of translation from APIs that would be built using advanced .NET features (reflection anyone?).

So the only way MS can really please everyone is to provide the dual access system - whichever way they implement the internals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this