Adriaan van Os wrote: > Vinzent Hoefler wrote: > >> Bisma Jayadi wrote: >> >>> IMO, .Net is just a bussiness buzz from M$ to attract their customers >>> and prevent them from switching to Un*x systems. Speaking >>> technically, I saw nothing new in the .Net technology. It's just a >>> combination of Java (on the system architecture) and Delphi >>> technology (on the system language), with extra resource requirements >>> as the consequences. :p >> >> Frankly, all that stuff is still early 80s technology at best. Back then >> they just hadn't the computing power to actually do it. >> >> Information technology hasn't changed too much since then. They just >> invented a lot of new TLAs[0]. The only question is who has the better >> sales people hired. > > From slashdot <http://it.slashdot.org/it/06/03/16/0015253.shtml> > > In a classic example of "Do as I say, not as I do", Richard Grimes > analyses the ratio of native to managed code in Microsoft's upcoming > Vista Operating System. According to the analysis at Microsoft Vista and > .NET, "Microsoft appears to have concentrated their development effort > in Vista on native code development. Vista has no services implemented > in .NET and Windows Explorer does not host the runtime, which means that > the Vista desktop shell is not based on the .NET runtime. The only > conclusion that can be made from these results is that between PDC 2003 > and the release of Vista Beta 1 Microsoft has decided that it is better > to use native code for the operating system, than to use the .NET > framework."
I know this analysis but before I throw it into a discussion I wanted to wait for the Vista release if it's the same :) _______________________________________________ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
