Page 3 of 3
Posted: Mon Nov 06, 2006 9:49 pm
by utopiomania
Trond wrote
Because .Net applications are unnecessarily slow.
I agree, they are slow on my PC too, but it might change quickly with new hardware.
Someone mentioned 20Mb or something, but the .NET 2.0 framework installed here is 122Mb.
But, on the other hand, the j2SE Java runtime installed is 150Mb, openOffice.org is 214Mb,
(and slower than most apps) so I guess MS isn't that bad after all, are they?
I mean, can we avoid the .NET framework? As I understand it it will be installed with
Vista, and that means a majority of users will have it installed in a not too distant
future regardless of what we think of it
Posted: Mon Nov 06, 2006 10:54 pm
by Kaisen2100
utopiomania wrote:
I mean, can we avoid the .NET framework? As I understand it it will be installed with
Vista, and that means a majority of users will have it installed in a not too distant
future regardless of what we think of it
It is true ... Vista will have .net installed ... so ... an application that runs in .net today ... wil run in Vista too ...
I think it is impossible to avoid using the .Net Framework ... it is like Linux people ... i like linux ... everybody likes linux ... but later or sooner you will use windows for something .. games, office ... someday, somewhere you will use linux...
You cannot avoid it
... so ... .net Framework is here to stay
Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 5:47 pm
by cabaptista
Yes,
I use .NET Framework, day after day at my work.
Good Stuff.
Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 5:57 pm
by srod
Where's the fun in programming .Net? Damn thing almost writes the program for you!
@utopiomania: the framework may well be 120+ mb, but the redistributable (common language runtime etc.) required to run apps is just over 20 mb.
Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 9:27 pm
by Shannara
.NET 3.0 was released yesterday. You can download it on the Microsoft Downloads site. Both the SDK (1.1GB) and Redistributable (52MB) are available.
Posted: Wed Nov 08, 2006 10:19 am
by Num3
I have both installed, because Microsoft didn't make the versions backwords compatible...
So some apps REQUIRE .net 1.0 even if i have 2.0 !!!
Posted: Wed Nov 08, 2006 11:34 am
by srod
Bloody hell, the redistributable is now 52 mb!!!
Posted: Wed Nov 08, 2006 4:40 pm
by Trond
srod wrote:Bloody hell, the redistributable is now 52 mb!!!
Compressed.
Posted: Wed Nov 08, 2006 5:21 pm
by Num3
Trond wrote:srod wrote:Bloody hell, the redistributable is now 52 mb!!!
Compressed.
Posted: Wed Nov 08, 2006 9:20 pm
by Kaisen2100
Ok ... if don't like .Net Framework ... then take a look at this ...
http://www.kbasic.com/ ... COOOOOOOOOL!!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted: Wed Nov 08, 2006 9:29 pm
by srod
K-basic is interpreted and I can't get a good idea of how many controls it offers?
Not convinced by that one although I do keep a passing eye on it.
Posted: Wed Nov 08, 2006 9:42 pm
by Kaisen2100
i will take a deeper look at kbasic. I am at work now and cannot see if it is good or interpreted or whatever ... tonight i will see if it is a good option or not ... but anyway ... its a good tool (i think) ...