Microsoft .NET

Microsoft.NET

Introduction.

Microsoft spent 40,000 man-years in developing .NET. Never before has any software-company spent such an amount of time and money in a new technology and development-environment. Only the future will tell if it's been worth it.

Philosophy.

.NET is totally language- and platform independent: even a Linux-version is being worked on. Using the .NET-environment, one can develop software for pc, internet and palmtop pc's.

.NET is developed following a strict hierarchy: software should consist of components, and these components should be there where they are necessary.

How it works.

In short: .NET is an initiative that could turn the internet into a new OS.

Imagine .NET as a new OS in development that runs on all computers connected to the internet worldwide.
A pc nowadays has a 32-bit databus (moving towards 64). The internet can also be seen as a databus, turning all computers into one huge supercomputer. The .NET-'databus' will not transport bits though. It will transport XML, using SOAP (Simple Object Access Protocol).
To make an OS like that grow, you need an 'organic' infrastructure; such an infrastructure is what .NET offers. Within that structure, there'll also be room for webservices and components developed with other technologies. All MS does, is offer an infrastructure.

Quote:

---

Rather than targetting a particular hardware/OS combination, programs will instead target ".NET", and will run wherever .NET is implemented.
.NET is also the collective name given to various bits of software built upon the .NET platform. These will be both products (Visual Studio.NET and Windows.NET Server, for instance) and services (like Passport, HailStorm, and so on).

---

Components - down-top.

CLR (the basis).

The .NET framework is developed to make advanced web-technologies available to the 'normal' developer. The .NET framework consists of CLR (Common Language Runtime) as a basis, with the Base Class Library on top of that. You could compare the CLR to the Java Virtual Machine: a layer that guarantees platform-independency.
The CLR is -unlike the Java Virtual Machine, which is an interpreter- a compiler, making its prestations significantly faster.
On top of that, any programming language can be used to adress the CLR.

Base Class Library.

The Base Class Library makes programming distributed software-systems a lot easier than it used to be. The BCL is packed with a lot of functionality, based on object-orientation. It's an 'open design', meaning that new classes can be added by third parties. Impact: whatever you think MS screwed up, you can make better.

XML and the SOAP-protocol.

XML will be .NET's universal exchange-language, using the new SOAP-protocol. XML is a format for representing data that can be read and used by humans. Web services use XML to provide a machine interface. SOAP is a protocol for supporting the communication of Web services transactions over HTTP or other protocols, similar to RPCs (Remote Procedure Calls).

XML Web Services / Web Forms / Windows Forms.

Verisign on the advantages of Web Services.

.NET versus J2EE (Java 2 Enterprise Edition).

According to Gartner and IDC (the two major marketing-research-companies worldwide), there will only be two major technologies left in a couple of years: .NET, developed by Microsoft; and J2EE, developed by Sun Microsoft, in co-operation with, amongst others, IBM.

Sun Microsystems on .NET vs. J2EE
Microsoft on .NET vs. J2EE


Hyper-links

This intro to .NET was partially based on an article in a Dutch magazine, and the following links:

Microsoft on .NET
ArsTechnica
SOAP-protocol
Verisign on the advantages of Web Services - PDF
Sun Microsystems on .NET vs. J2EE
Microsoft on .NET vs. J2EE

Nice .NET introduction.

I think the introduction would be incomplete without a mention of the .NET initiative on the Linux platform : the Mono project.

The big question is is it gonna just be another fad like ASP or JSP ?

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by redgore
The big question is is it gonna just be another fad like ASP or JSP ?

---

Well, the conceptualization of .NET is at a much much wider scale than individual technolgies like ASP/JSP. Still, with the amount of zeal Microsoft is putting into .NET, it looks like they are totally banking on it to be succesful. And it should be, as looking at .NET framework, it does come out that a lot of thinking has gone into .NET frameework before they brought it out. There hasn't been any opposing reaction to .NET (not even from the Linux arena) except from Sun and Oracle (both have their reasons : commitment to J2EE ).

C#....sigh...It won't take long for programmers to relegate C# to being 'just a derivative of C', which is what it is...
Java2, on the other hand, is a convenient ploy, used by MS to 'grasp the future' of technology.

Just wait for C#+ and Java3#....sad...

Ouroboros

Ed. Don't forget that MS, relatively recently, had a big tussle with Macromedia about Shockwave and Flash....expect the next incarnation of .NET to bring a substitute for them...

I will and will never support the .NET for these reasons. Mainframes used to run all programs usually deep within the heart of very large corps and Edu's. PC's changed that and enabled small corps and private companys down to end users control gave them equal power. This .Net is a return to those days when people will not be empowered. Technology gave us the PC the box on my desk at one time filled a room. Now that the hardware is there the only way to return power to any Multi-National Corp, the power to the elete is then to control the software, Dot Net is about an end user using their own money to buy hardware, for the right and yes the privalage to give World Corps to even turn them on to send an email to Ante Bea and we get to pay them for this? Dot Net is about taking public domain, property the wealth of humanity as a collective enity and letting one company profit from it. Tell me then when and by what right since most if not of all computing having been developed at the public expense, do Dot Net or for that matter any item belonging to the people gives them this right? M$ did not know what a TCP/IP protocol stack was before about 1997 and they now hold the furture? Me thinks NOT!

Palemoon > Trust me, MS doesn't need your support. This may come as a surprise, but MS is a multinational capitalist company. Their only goal is making money. You say you won't support .NET, but are you willing to support IBM and Sun? I don't know, but I'm pretty sure their only goal is making money also... You're one of those l33t people who say M$ instead of MS... I don't know, but I wouldn't mind people replacing all S's (4 of them) in my name with $'s.
Or maybe you're just one of those people that want to go back to the times when you had to use Petzold's Windows-API bibe (covering about 600 Windows API's)?
MS is giving you an opportunity. They're not forcing you to choose for them. Sun/IBM are giving you an alternative for MS's opportunity. They're not forcing you to choose for them either.
And where did you get that statement that MS didn't know what a TCP/IP protocol stack was before 1997?

PS: IBM mainframes rule.

The newest programming languages should always be better than their predicessors. With new inovations in the way the language is writen makes it look better and should function better. .Net is the prettiest and cleanest language I've seen, I havn't used it enough to determine functionality but from what negative described it as it should be close to as functional as java (if they come up with more class librarys then it could surpase java in functionality, but that's just cause java is 7 years old). Just because it's produced by microsoft doesn't make it a bad language.

M$ is well known for confusing the OS layer with the Application layer. Bill is not a programmer never has been or will be is a business man nothing more or less. I am only a person Negative that suports a business that has a few Mil on a few boxes not real big but Reality. Because the basic fundementals of layers of OS then becomes the arguement. True M$ took a business man not a programmer to advantage of laws look at any EULA. I make a living pay for the kids eldest has a Master Degree, you think I want to leave all this to him this mess? In business I look at company needs contracts is part of my job as Admin to advise are they happy NO cause they pay a chunk of change for M$ stuff that did what never should be done back in my days mix the OS layer with the application layer the ROOT of problems. Yes I hope you Eruo's reel them in cause in the States we do best we can and they have lots of bucks and well they take full advantage that is M$ of current events here. We are not so far apart Negative, only in you look at me as being old and not knowing, I look at you and am amazed :) Choose a battle well not at anyones but your calling and then you must stand either right or wrong take the blows. Take those blows as you must then look about and see if they were of benefit to yourself your family and the people called your community. The most wealth man I knew had little money.

Not sure what to make of palemoon's last post... Got a little too confusing trying to follow his english.

I've got a love/hate relationship with Microsoft. Their habit of taking standard protocols and "improving" them to the point that they no longer work with the origional standard is annoying. But they are getting better. Win2k is a huge improvement over NT 4.0. Now I can look at a server without it requiring a reboot. I'm hoping the .Net servers will be another step in the right direction.

As far as complaining about their business practices... I haven't noticed Sun, IBM or anyone else give many freebies. They all get very proud of their products and think you ought to pay some substantial cash to run them. Businesses all have one goal, make money.

Palemoon it doesnt matter if Microsoft cant program Theyt have a monopoly which is hard to break. I am no stranger to using microsoft for that one reason. I actually support .NET it will hopefully bring another standard for on and off net content. Lets just hope it doesnt elliminate new developers.

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by redgore
Lets just hope it doesnt elliminate new developers.

---

Unfortunately, that's what I see happening down the road. Hell, I've downloaded the Admin Tools for the .NET architecture, just to play around with...and I run W98! Certainly M$ is good at what they do, and I use one of their OS's on a daily basis, but I see a bigger monopoly suit coming down the road...
It's a good idea to get familiar with a good indie OS, just in case you get too frustrated to deal with the integration of all plug-ins and shovelware into the future Win releases...(how often do you want your screen popping up update information for multitudes of components in WinXP2?)

Ouroboros

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by Negative
[B]Microsoft.NET

Introduction.

Microsoft spent 40,000 man-years in developing .NET. Never before has any software-company spent such an amount of time and money in a new technology and development-environment. Only the future will tell if it's been worth it.

Philosophy.

.NET is totally language- and platform independent: even a Linux-version is being worked on. Using the .NET-environment, one can develop software for pc, internet and palmtop pc's.

.NET is developed following a strict hierarchy: software should consist of components, and these components should be there where they are necessary.

How it works.

In short: .NET is an initiative that could turn the internet into a new OS.

Imagine .NET as a new OS in development that runs on all computers connected to the internet worldwide.
A pc nowadays has a 32-bit databus (moving towards 64). The internet can also be seen as a databus, turning all computers into one huge supercomputer. The .NET-'databus' will not transport bits though. It will transport XML, using SOAP (Simple Object Access Protocol).
To make an OS like that grow, you need an 'organic' infrastructure; such an infrastructure is what .NET offers. Within that structure, there'll also be room for webservices and components developed with other technologies. All MS does, is offer an infrastructure.

---

OK...heres the view from the street. I worked closely (through a sub-contractor) with MS on the initial roll out of their .NET based products in a support position, so I am familier with the technology and goals involved here. While MS does provide the infrastructure, they also develop products that use the infrastructure, so don't be disillusioned about their motives for .NET. What .NET is at its core is a new stream of revenue for MS and other companies who develop .NET products. I'm not condemning or condoning here, I just want to make sure that my fellow AO members understand the philosophy behind .NET. The purpose of this business model is to sell software as a service where the end users pay a monthly or annual fee to access the actual program, which resides on a server farm in Redmond (or wherever the developer chooses to host the application). Using this method, the actual code for the program does not reside on the clients machine, it is accessed through a browser via the internet. For real world working examples, look at MS bCentral or the Sharepoint services offered through Office XP. One of the main drawbacks of this strategy is that in a business application all data resides on a remote server that is inaccessable if for some reason internet access is temporarily unavailable. Sorry if I've insulted anyone with this response, I just want to make sure that we all understand that altruism on a corporate level is a myth and no company will provide technology without a way to get revenue in return for its efforts.

I suppose my only point is sure M$ dosen't need my support. But give M$, SUN, etc what I do see is a general push to take public funded research and turn it into a profit for their self or share holders. TCP/IP is used in all of this stuff out here it is sort of like one company having rights and ownership to the dial tone on telephones, only out here you won't get a dial tone because in order for your system to even boot up it needs to phone home, and EULA's take aways all ones rights and absolves the mfg of any fault. All of this .NET can be done right now and .NET means yst another standard only this time someone own exclusive rights to it by default their OS is loaded on 94% of the computers made. Yes most diffcult to break that stangle hold M$ has, but it can and should be broken. If I must support .NEt it will be only because I need to make a living, but the move by M$ or any rival to reduce the open nature of the Web and steal public ownership is wrong, impinges freedom of choice, and reduces freedom of speach. As someone here truthfully noted even the service pack one for XP and it's EULA (do your own search) give M$ the right to do anything they want to your computer without telling you, .NET is just going to be a further expansion on that EULA. As AllenB said it is all about money and does M$ deserve or can it be trusted or any company that is for profit the exclusive rights to dominate the WEB?