Moving to .Net

[Tom Bennet]

How many of you are planning to make a switch to .Net. I'm in no way promoting
it, I was just interested to see. If you are switching, why? It looks to
me (and I have studied it fairly well) to be a Java ripoff that adds some
nice features (native compilation upon JIT to name one).

Thanks,

Tom Bennet

[mark]

Tom,
Not sure if this is best to get a good sampling.

For me, I will/am investigate(ing) it(C#) and will probably use it(but not
switch) because customers will want it - and it seems like it will improve
the areas in which VS lacks. It will not be perfect and neither is Java.
I currently use VB and Java (started out with vb and moved to Java - Love
It(java)!).

Mark


"Tom Bennet" <tbennet@none.com> wrote:
>
>How many of you are planning to make a switch to .Net. I'm in no way promoting
>it, I was just interested to see. If you are switching, why? It looks
to
>me (and I have studied it fairly well) to be a Java ripoff that adds some
>nice features (native compilation upon JIT to name one).
>
>Thanks,
>
>Tom Bennet

[Tom Bennet]

Mark,

Thanks for replying none the less.

Tom

"mark" <mknuttall@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>Tom,
> Not sure if this is best to get a good sampling.
>
>For me, I will/am investigate(ing) it(C#) and will probably use it(but not
>switch) because customers will want it - and it seems like it will improve
>the areas in which VS lacks. It will not be perfect and neither is Java.
> I currently use VB and Java (started out with vb and moved to Java - Love
>It(java)!).
>
>Mark

[Paul Clapham]

At present we are not planning to switch to .Net. This is because we
already have a framework where we can build dynamic web components, it
works, so there is no reason to stop and wait for something that won't be
usable until next year. I have to laugh at what I'm seeing in the Visual
Basic magazine I get, though. The latest issue has an article on when you
should use a String and when it's better to use a StringBuilder object
(that's StringBuffer to you Javaphones), and earlier issues have explained
that it's possible to decompile .Net objects and what are the ramifications
of that... and so on. Java ripoff? I'm more charitable, I just think that
they have learned the lessons taught by Java.

PC2

"Tom Bennet" <tbennet@none.com> wrote in message
news:3b36ab5f$1@news.devx.com...
>
> How many of you are planning to make a switch to .Net. I'm in no way
promoting
> it, I was just interested to see. If you are switching, why? It looks to
> me (and I have studied it fairly well) to be a Java ripoff that adds some
> nice features (native compilation upon JIT to name one).
>
> Thanks,
>
> Tom Bennet

[Rajkamal Gopinath]

Hi Paul.

Thanks for giving that kind of hope.. but let me clear you some of my own
doubts...

Microsoft has the biggest Operating System Market as well as Applications...
most of the time they dictate what they want to push and pull.. I am not
biased here.. but what I wish to suggest is that, if you see the products
they have developed..they imitate or buy other company's software with a
good & easy to use interface.. and also with their OS Market they always
take the plunge...

example :-

Powerbuilder vs Visual Basic
Novel vs NT
WordPerfect & Lotus vs Office
Sybase vs SQLServer
OS2 vs Windows

as you have mentioned they have developed an equivalent form of Java...(Most
people deny it, but the concept is exactly the same ) which they call it
in way they feel like.. I don't find any differences in them.. because it
imitates and highlights from what java is now. Well in that case what is
future of Java...

I would also ask one more doubt.. Did Swing really take off when it comes
to Desktop Applications..

You won't believe Paul.. there are some Training Center which says.. Java
is Dead.. for their own propaganda.. but all over,there is general feeling
that there is no growth for those who stick on to Java...

I would be glad to hear anything from you

Thanks in Advance


Rajkamal


















"Paul Clapham" <pclapham@core-mark.com> wrote:
>At present we are not planning to switch to .Net. This is because we
>already have a framework where we can build dynamic web components, it
>works, so there is no reason to stop and wait for something that won't be
>usable until next year. I have to laugh at what I'm seeing in the Visual
>Basic magazine I get, though. The latest issue has an article on when you
>should use a String and when it's better to use a StringBuilder object
>(that's StringBuffer to you Javaphones), and earlier issues have explained
>that it's possible to decompile .Net objects and what are the ramifications
>of that... and so on. Java ripoff? I'm more charitable, I just think that
>they have learned the lessons taught by Java.
>
>PC2
>
>"Tom Bennet" <tbennet@none.com> wrote in message
>news:3b36ab5f$1@news.devx.com...
>>
>> How many of you are planning to make a switch to .Net. I'm in no way
>promoting
>> it, I was just interested to see. If you are switching, why? It looks
to
>> me (and I have studied it fairly well) to be a Java ripoff that adds some
>> nice features (native compilation upon JIT to name one).
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Tom Bennet
>
>

[Rob Abbe]

Personally, I think that the outlook for Java is bright. Java is exploding
on to wireless phones and PDAs, most major wireless companies have licensed
Java technology. Java is strong in the enterprise as well and there have
been vast improvments in the client.

I wish that Sun would do a little more to promote Java, similar to the way
MS promotes Windows. If Java should be completly beaten, it will be the
MS marketing machine and not the MS technology it's self that does it in.
As to .Net being a Java rip off, I feel that's mostly true, however Java
does borrow a few things from SmallTalk

Rob Abbe


"Rajkamal Gopinath" <funkamal@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>Hi Paul.
>
>Thanks for giving that kind of hope.. but let me clear you some of my own
>doubts...
>
>Microsoft has the biggest Operating System Market as well as Applications...
>most of the time they dictate what they want to push and pull.. I am not
>biased here.. but what I wish to suggest is that, if you see the products
>they have developed..they imitate or buy other company's software with a
>good & easy to use interface.. and also with their OS Market they always
>take the plunge...
>
>example :-
>
>Powerbuilder vs Visual Basic
>Novel vs NT
>WordPerfect & Lotus vs Office
>Sybase vs SQLServer
>OS2 vs Windows
>
>as you have mentioned they have developed an equivalent form of Java...(Most
>people deny it, but the concept is exactly the same ) which they call it
>in way they feel like.. I don't find any differences in them.. because it
>imitates and highlights from what java is now. Well in that case what is
>future of Java...
>
>I would also ask one more doubt.. Did Swing really take off when it comes
>to Desktop Applications..
>
>You won't believe Paul.. there are some Training Center which says.. Java
>is Dead.. for their own propaganda.. but all over,there is general feeling
>that there is no growth for those who stick on to Java...
>
>I would be glad to hear anything from you
>
>Thanks in Advance
>
>
>Rajkamal

[Rob Abbe]

Tom,

I hope you're not trying to start a holy war in this NG.

.Net will be an important platform. If you know Java then you should have
no problem learning C# as there are many similarities as I'm sure you may
be aware. It was hard for me to not feel a littled betrayed by the way they
(MS) are handling the VB6 to VB.Net shift, since I have a ton of VB code
that may have no future. But once I cooled off and left out emotion in my
evaluation, it was easy to see that .Net will mature into somthing special
as Java has. To answer your question directly, I will use C# (not VB) only
when requested by a customer. Everything else will be Java.

Rob Abbe

"Tom Bennet" <tbennet@none.com> wrote:
>
>How many of you are planning to make a switch to .Net. I'm in no way promoting
>it, I was just interested to see. If you are switching, why? It looks
to
>me (and I have studied it fairly well) to be a Java ripoff that adds some
>nice features (native compilation upon JIT to name one).
>
>Thanks,
>
>Tom Bennet

[Edgar Sanchez]

We work in Ecuador, Southamerica doing both outsourcing to the U.S. and local
development. I have to say that the american market for Java is alive and
well for us, while .Net is just a promise. On the other hand, the local market
has no Java corporate champion and here Microsoft is king (with some heat
from Oracle, but they are just interested in pushing their db). So .Net will
win the market down here in the mid-term and I guess MS marketing will get
a sizeable portion of the american market also. The bottom line for us? We
are not abandoning Java any time soon, but we are learning C# (which is actually
pretty easy for our Java pros), so in the mid-term I guess we will be 50-50.
As I read in another NG we should be happy because finally the O-O paradigm
has been totally embraced meaning better and more flexible systems will come
to life, the specific O-O language you use is not that important, especially
if you consider nice things like SOAP.

Edgar Sánchez
CTO
Objeq S.A.
http://www.objeq.com

PS. What we think will never happen is that we will migrate something written
in Java to C#

"Rob Abbe" <rabbe@mn.rr.com> wrote:
>
>Tom,
>
>I hope you're not trying to start a holy war in this NG.
>
>.Net will be an important platform. If you know Java then you should have
>no problem learning C# as there are many similarities as I'm sure you may
>be aware. It was hard for me to not feel a littled betrayed by the way
they
>(MS) are handling the VB6 to VB.Net shift, since I have a ton of VB code
>that may have no future. But once I cooled off and left out emotion in
my
>evaluation, it was easy to see that .Net will mature into somthing special
>as Java has. To answer your question directly, I will use C# (not VB) only
>when requested by a customer. Everything else will be Java.
>
>Rob Abbe
>
>"Tom Bennet" <tbennet@none.com> wrote:
>>
>>How many of you are planning to make a switch to .Net. I'm in no way promoting
>>it, I was just interested to see. If you are switching, why? It looks
>to
>>me (and I have studied it fairly well) to be a Java ripoff that adds some
>>nice features (native compilation upon JIT to name one).
>>
>>Thanks,
>>
>>Tom Bennet
>

[Wilco Boumans]

Great! Decompilation in .NET means you can re-write your old VB stuff,
compile it, decompile it in C#. Gets rid of all incorrect comments in
your sources too. Love it... ;-)

Wilco

"Paul Clapham" <pclapham@core-mark.com> wrote:
>At present we are not planning to switch to .Net. This is because we
>already have a framework where we can build dynamic web components, it
>works, so there is no reason to stop and wait for something that won't be
>usable until next year. I have to laugh at what I'm seeing in the Visual
>Basic magazine I get, though. The latest issue has an article on when you
>should use a String and when it's better to use a StringBuilder object
>(that's StringBuffer to you Javaphones), and earlier issues have explained
>that it's possible to decompile .Net objects and what are the ramifications
>of that... and so on. Java ripoff? I'm more charitable, I just think that
>they have learned the lessons taught by Java.
>
>PC2
>
>"Tom Bennet" <tbennet@none.com> wrote in message
>news:3b36ab5f$1@news.devx.com...
>>
>> How many of you are planning to make a switch to .Net. I'm in no way
>promoting
>> it, I was just interested to see. If you are switching, why? It looks
to
>> me (and I have studied it fairly well) to be a Java ripoff that adds some
>> nice features (native compilation upon JIT to name one).
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Tom Bennet
>
>

[Mark Miller]

"Tom Bennet" <tbennet@none.com> wrote:
>
>How many of you are planning to make a switch to .Net. I'm in no way promoting
>it, I was just interested to see. If you are switching, why? It looks
to
>me (and I have studied it fairly well) to be a Java ripoff that adds some
>nice features (native compilation upon JIT to name one).
>
>Thanks,
>
>Tom Bennet

When Microsoft lost the right to use the Java name, they announced they were
going to continue development of the language, just calling it a different
name. So it should come as no surprise that they came out with C#, which
is very close to Java. Just think of it as Visual J++ 7. What I didn't
expect is they were going to take the whole VM concept and generalise it
so that any language could compile to byte code (MSIL) and use the same API.
I've seen this happen a little bit with Java. There have been other languages
developed that will compile to Java byte code and can run on a Java VM, but
I haven't seen too much of this. Perhaps Sun doesn't promote it?? Anyway,
I think it's obvious Microsoft followed Java's lead, seeing promise in the
basic tenets of its technology.

I am biased towards .NET mainly because of my bad past experience with Java.
I worked with JDK 1.1 about 3-1/2 years ago. The tools were not mature
and the promise of zero crashes and "write once, run anywhere" did not bear
out. It crashed at least as often as did Windows, and when I say so, I mean
the VM, not the Java app. itself. And we tended to get resource leaks (in
place of memory leaks), because sometimes we forgot to call the Close() method
on an object controlling an external resource, and the VM we were using did
not guarantee that finalize() methods would be called. Applets did not seem
to work equally well across browsers, and in general, Java was too slow.
So we ditched the technology altogether.

Since then Swing and JEB have come out and I'm sure the technology has improved.
I just haven't had a chance to see it. In the meantime I switched to C++/MFC
on Windows and have been content.

I've been impressed with .NET because I've had the opportunity to try out
their Beta 1 and for the most part it worked as advertised. I hope I get
the chance to use it someday, but as has been said, its final release won't
come until next year. What most impresses me about .NET is they really cleaned
up the accessing of COM, which used to be done a different way depending
on what language was used, and it was not always in an intuitive fashion.
They have extended the component access concept to objects on the Internet
(web services). It's probably similar to Java's technology for remotely
accessing objects (called JRI?), except it uses XML to transmit data between
the object and the client. Your code doesn't have to deal with the XML.
You access the remote object as though it were local to your program.

I'm interested in looking at Java again mainly because I'm looking for work
now and the market for C++ Windows coding seems to have really dried up here
in Colorado.

---Mark
mmille10@home.com

[Jerry]

Your right...It's because you were using JDK 1.1 The tools were not as mature
then, as they are now...But so what, that will be the same situation with
.Net (those tools are not mature either), so will you abandon .Net because
of this, as you did Java?

Doesn't sound like a good reason to me...


As for me, I am having a great time with Java, have stuck with it long enough
to see it mature, gain momentum, and become a much easier environment to
work in, and have benefited from. Java definitley puts the bread & butter
on our family table. I have no plans to switch to .Net, although I might
learn C# just to create standalone executables (but have no use for .Net
environment). It will take a number of years for .Net to become mature (and
I mean way past 2002!). It will not be "business-ready" until then (who
cares if a number of business use it now, because there are still many serious
issues with it that need to be worked out, and this will indeed take years--
you don't invent a language in 1 or 2 years!).

I see C# and .Net as another example of MS mimicry. After bashing the Network
Computer (NC), they now promote this with .Net! Why learn a language and
runtime of a technology that only is a "follower" of Java, mimics Java?


That's my two cents worth...


\J.M.







"Mark Miller" <mmille10@home.com> wrote:
>
>"Tom Bennet" <tbennet@none.com> wrote:
>>
>>How many of you are planning to make a switch to .Net. I'm in no way promoting
>>it, I was just interested to see. If you are switching, why? It looks
>to
>>me (and I have studied it fairly well) to be a Java ripoff that adds some
>>nice features (native compilation upon JIT to name one).
>>
>>Thanks,
>>
>>Tom Bennet
>
>When Microsoft lost the right to use the Java name, they announced they
were
>going to continue development of the language, just calling it a different
>name. So it should come as no surprise that they came out with C#, which
>is very close to Java. Just think of it as Visual J++ 7. What I didn't
>expect is they were going to take the whole VM concept and generalise it
>so that any language could compile to byte code (MSIL) and use the same
API.
> I've seen this happen a little bit with Java. There have been other languages
>developed that will compile to Java byte code and can run on a Java VM,
but
>I haven't seen too much of this. Perhaps Sun doesn't promote it?? Anyway,
>I think it's obvious Microsoft followed Java's lead, seeing promise in the
>basic tenets of its technology.
>
>I am biased towards .NET mainly because of my bad past experience with Java.
> I worked with JDK 1.1 about 3-1/2 years ago. The tools were not mature
>and the promise of zero crashes and "write once, run anywhere" did not bear
>out. It crashed at least as often as did Windows, and when I say so, I
mean
>the VM, not the Java app. itself. And we tended to get resource leaks (in
>place of memory leaks), because sometimes we forgot to call the Close()
method
>on an object controlling an external resource, and the VM we were using
did
>not guarantee that finalize() methods would be called. Applets did not
seem
>to work equally well across browsers, and in general, Java was too slow.
> So we ditched the technology altogether.
>
>Since then Swing and JEB have come out and I'm sure the technology has improved.
> I just haven't had a chance to see it. In the meantime I switched to C++/MFC
>on Windows and have been content.
>
>I've been impressed with .NET because I've had the opportunity to try out
>their Beta 1 and for the most part it worked as advertised. I hope I get
>the chance to use it someday, but as has been said, its final release won't
>come until next year. What most impresses me about .NET is they really
cleaned
>up the accessing of COM, which used to be done a different way depending
>on what language was used, and it was not always in an intuitive fashion.
> They have extended the component access concept to objects on the Internet
>(web services). It's probably similar to Java's technology for remotely
>accessing objects (called JRI?), except it uses XML to transmit data between
>the object and the client. Your code doesn't have to deal with the XML.
> You access the remote object as though it were local to your program.
>
>I'm interested in looking at Java again mainly because I'm looking for work
>now and the market for C++ Windows coding seems to have really dried up
here
>in Colorado.
>
>---Mark
>mmille10@home.com
>

[Mark Miller]

"Jerry" <jerrym@earthlink.com> wrote:
>
>
>Your right...It's because you were using JDK 1.1 The tools were not as mature
>then, as they are now...But so what, that will be the same situation with
>.Net (those tools are not mature either), so will you abandon .Net because
>of this, as you did Java?
>
>Doesn't sound like a good reason to me...

Perhaps you didn't read my whole message, but I expressed an openness to
take another look at Java. I said I just hadn't had the opportunity to do
that. It depends on what my employer wants me to use, or I can convince
them I should use.

I do "dis" Sun for overhyping Java at the time. They said in 1997, not a
few years from then, that companies who used Java technology, and the developers
who worked for them, would no longer have to worry about those weird crashes
and memory leaks that so frustrated their customers, and that if you wrote
for Java, your programs could be written *once* and run on any platform for
which there was a VM AND (this is key) they would run the same with no platform-related
incompatibilities. Sure, whatever...

Perhaps I'm being naive and Microsoft is overhyping its product the same
way. But at the time it pissed me off nevertheless. It's the same when
you're the developer and the other guy is the customer. If you overpromise
and don't deliver on it, the customer is left with a bad impression of you
no matter what the technical merits are.

>
>As for me, I am having a great time with Java, have stuck with it long enough
>to see it mature, gain momentum, and become a much easier environment to
>work in, and have benefited from. Java definitley puts the bread & butter
>on our family table. I have no plans to switch to .Net, although I might
>learn C# just to create standalone executables (but have no use for .Net
>environment). It will take a number of years for .Net to become mature
(and
>I mean way past 2002!). It will not be "business-ready" until then (who
>cares if a number of business use it now, because there are still many serious
>issues with it that need to be worked out, and this will indeed take years--
>you don't invent a language in 1 or 2 years!).
>
>I see C# and .Net as another example of MS mimicry. After bashing the Network
>Computer (NC), they now promote this with .Net! Why learn a language and
>runtime of a technology that only is a "follower" of Java, mimics Java?
>
>
>That's my two cents worth...
>
>
>\J.M.

The reason we ditched Java had nothing to do with me. I wanted to stick
with it because it did have redeeming qualities, despite the gap between
the reality and the sales pitch. We were a C/Unix/Windows house and were
looking at Java as a way to improve our engineering processes. It didn't
look like it was going to work out at the time, so management decided we
weren't going to use it, and we went back to using C.

The company ended up going back to Java a couple years later (1999), several
months after I left my job, and they are still using it to this day. Even
then they ran into significant difficulties with the VM environment (too
slow even with a JIT), and with the tools they were using, but they decided
to stick with it this time.

I think the reason had to do with the form of the project. When I was working
with Java in 1997, I was trying to create an applet that would access business
data as a part of a web solution (as opposed to traditional client/server).
One of the requirements is it had to work across browsers. That opened
up a WHOLE mess of worms...so much so I think it was the main reason it was
decided we weren't going to use it. When they went back to Java, it was
to rewrite their client, stand-alone app. This worked out better because
they could control the VM the customer used.

If you're satisfied with Java and see a good future in it, I agree. There's
no reason to learn C#. I think the main appeal of .NET is to people like
me who have a familiarity with Microsoft's development tools and languages,
since it introduces new technologies in a familiar package and allows one
to use their existing Visual C++, VB, and ASP code with it.

---Mark
mmille10@home.com