What the heck is it? Is it a technology, a strategy, a protocol, or what? I realize that gallons of words have been written about it all over the internet, but everything I read sounds like it was written by MS’s marketing department. I am hoping for a lucid explanation. Thanks.
C’mon folks, help me out here. The thread on measuring the speed of flatulence is in its second page, and I can’t even get a single response on what appears to be the most important development in the history of the universe. Somebody throw me a bone!
Bump…
It’s a marketing strategy. It involves a lot of different products like C#, J#, VB.Net, etc. Microsoft is web-enabling a lot of apps, changing some of the underlying protocols that Windows uses, moving a lot of the messaging to XML, and generally fluffing things up for new release.
.NET is not any one specific thing. Rather, it’s an umbrella that covers the overall direction Microsoft is moving.
The base idea is a unified computing experience. Thigs will interact more dierectly with each other.
OS’s Apps, Programing languages, protocols, handheld devices. Basically the idea is across the board unified compatibility to make computing a less frustrating experience while still retaining the power and capability of higher end functions.
Long time Microsoft developer here (I don’t work for Microsoft but develop for Windows using 100% Microsoft products).
As far as I can tell “.NET” is mainly a marketing term. With Microsoft it’s always a bit hard to separate the hype from the substance (not knocking them, I’m a fan) - cf. OLE/ActiveX/COM. I bet there are technical types within Microsoft wringing their hands at what the ‘suits’ do with their ideas. Whatever happened to “Windows DNA” ??
The cynical side of me says “.NET” is Microsoft’s attempt to leap onto the Internet bandwaggon (albeit several years too late) - “Look how Internet ready we are! Even our strategy is called ‘.NET’!” It’s pretty well known that they were slow to realize the importance of the Internet, and have lagged their competitors accordingly.
I have heard that “.NET” is actually a runtime spec (a la Java) that allows components, written in various languages, to talk to each other, as long as they conform to the “.NET” standard. The flagbearer for “.NET” seems to be C# (“C sharp”) - Microsoft’s next iteration “C” like language. C# seems to be their answer to Java, and incorporates many ideas from Java.
Of course you can find all the technical specs you want at msdn.microsoft.com but that is my subjective take on it.
Thanks, but maybe an example here would be helpful.
-
-
- Bill Gates made a press release today claiming that MS has just discovered that Afghanistan hackers had recently intruded into the .net project producing bloated code, gaping security holes, an ornerous registration process and as-yet-uncounted bugs. - MC
-
for example the .NET philosophy is built into windows XP – it offers to set up an e-mail address for you (hotmail) and automatically sign up for MSN messenger. When you log into windows XP it automatically (if you have broadband) checks your e-mail for you.
One of the core features of .NET is web services, which are very hot in the venture funded world right now. (which is something really, considering the current state of venture funding in general).
Web services are basically a way that services over the web can integrate together quickly and easily. The thought is that web services promise to be a new way of quickly and easily finding and connecting disparate services across the internet. Some key words to search for are SOAP, WSDL, UDDI, XML and “Web Services”
Well, to nitpick, .Net is intended to avoid an onerous registration process. You simply put your program on any computer that’s got the .Net runtime installed, and it will run, without you having to register your components (and potentially mess up other programs using the same components.) <— this is known as DLL hell, and if .Net does as advertised and cures it, I for one will be an extremely happy bunny.
It’s also intended to be a common framework, with a “target” Intermediate Language that any compiler can be written to produce code for. So you could write a COBOL compiler to produce IL (though you’d have to be very sick :D), or write a .Net framework for Linux that interprets the IL.
Here’s a wee bit of the party line from one of the architects: http://www.mcpcentral.com/ViewArticle.asp?ArticleId=9&PageNo=1
My only gripe so far is with the names they’ve used. Have you ever tried to Google for .Net or C#? Hrmmph!
Well, to nitpick, .Net is intended to avoid an onerous registration process. You simply put your program on any computer that’s got the .Net runtime installed, and it will run, without you having to register your components (and potentially mess up other programs using the same components.) <— this is known as DLL hell, and if .Net does as advertised and cures it, I for one will be an extremely happy bunny.
It’s also intended to be a common framework, with a “target” Intermediate Language that any compiler can be written to produce code for. So you could write a COBOL compiler to produce IL (though you’d have to be very sick :D), or write a .Net framework for Linux that interprets the IL.
Here’s a wee bit of the party line from one of the architects: http://www.mcpcentral.com/ViewArticle.asp?ArticleId=9&PageNo=1
My only gripe so far is with the names they’ve used. Have you ever tried to Google for .Net or C#? Hrmmph!
My first double-post. Ugh! Really dilutes the force of one’s argument, doesn’t it?
That is; a new name for what they’ve always done. Assimilate, monopolize and maximize profit. MS will tell you anything you want to hear about .NET, but ultimately it’s all about keeping other companies off of their platform and locking the user into their products and services. Which is fine if you’re happy with everything Microsoft produce and have no worries about a single company increasing its dominance in a important part of more and more people’s lives. But a pain in the neck if you prefer things differently.
Ever tried telling a MS OS that actually, no, you don’t want to use Outlook and would prefer it not to be on your computer at all? It’ll fight you every step of the way. It’ll reinstall itself at the slightest excuse without letting on. Now imagine telling XP that you don’t want .NET to be your internet access or interfere in anyway. I very much doubt it’ll be easy.
Bah. Hate it when that happens.