Wasn't the original intent for .net to be for creating web services? On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 3:47 AM, Katherine Moss <katherine.m...@gordon.edu>wrote:
> Then why are the majority rather than the minority of windows 8 modern > apps (I hate that term when talking about computers and servers, belongs on > a mobile phone), nearly all written in pure HTML5 and JS? Where’s the C# > or VB in them? And touting HTML5 and JS more than the .net framework > sounds more like a kill-off rather than an enhancement. **** > > ** ** > > *From:* ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto: > ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] *On Behalf Of *Arjang Assadi > *Sent:* Wednesday, April 10, 2013 6:12 AM > > *To:* ozDotNet > *Subject:* Re: [OT] Surface RT or Surface Pro?**** > > ** ** > > Not taken over but augmented with, .net still reigns supreme, js and html > allow one to rich the poorest of places in terms of OS and framework. > Knowing knockout, backbone etc. is a must for any .net programmer.**** > > ** ** > > On 10 April 2013 19:15, Bec Carter <bec.usern...@gmail.com> wrote:**** > > .net taken over by html and js? Haha looks like the pendulum is swinging > back again....**** > > ** ** > > On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 4:57 AM, Katherine Moss <katherine.m...@gordon.edu> > wrote:**** > > I disagree, still. WPF was expanded for instance, from versions 4.0 to > 4.5 of the .net framework significantly from what I can tell from MSDN. > And besides, since Windows 8 modern apps are so limited in their feature > set compared to what we know currently today, I sort of consider Microsoft > a little crazy for thinking that everyone’s going to accept less than what > they have now. And that’s what scares me about the “Gemini” update for > Office coming in the future since in order to metro-ize Office completely, > according to sources of Mary Joe Fowley on All About Microsoft over at > ZDNet, she says that what people are telling her is that the update will be > a subset of the current feature set. And that’s what gets me; what about > enthusiasts who need more than just a Fisher Price version? What if we > want all of the cool features? What is Microsoft telling us to do, never > move on because they are interested in depleting stuff? **** > > And then in terms of .net being taken over by HTML and JavaScript? How > much more 1990’s can you get? Come on, jees. I’ll never accept a version > of Windows or it’s successors without .net installed and living in some > form. **** > > **** > > *From:* ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto: > ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] *On Behalf Of *Scott Barnes > *Sent:* Monday, April 08, 2013 11:27 PM**** > > > *To:* ozDotNet > *Subject:* Re: [OT] Surface RT or Surface Pro?**** > > **** > > Its legacy simply because no investment will be put into it. Windows XP is > legacy even though I still see people inside a Fortune 500 company right > now using at as a desktop OS. **** > > **** > > Silverlight/WPF concepts and IP were consolidated and rehydrated into the > Windows 8 XAML "runtime" so in a way Legacy would also imply that the vNext > is the "new" and the older version are the old (just like Silverlight 2 is > legacy vs Silverlight 4). The problem is Microsoft didn't understand what > the notion of a "messaging framework" is in terms of Marketing and so they > left that part out creating this whole conversation right now around Legacy > true/false. > > Its also legacy because of the uncertainty in a lot of > enterprise/companies around the "AS-IS" futures they've in turn suspended > investment or looking to shift to a HTML5 deployment model or are open to > new ideas around next bets. That's not to say a new project isnt created > every 5secs in WPF/SL today... it's just not advertised and creates this > whole "is it alive or isnt it" question.**** > > > **** > > --- > Regards, > Scott Barnes > http://www.riagenic.com**** > > **** > > On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 2:55 AM, Katherine Moss <katherine.m...@gordon.edu> > wrote:**** > > I don’t know why people keep calling stuff like WPF and Win32/64 > applications “old and legacy”. I still see people using WPF all the time, > so obviously it’s still got some spirit in it. **** > > **** > > *From:* ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto: > ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] *On Behalf Of *Arjang Assadi > *Sent:* Monday, April 08, 2013 2:14 AM**** > > > *To:* ozDotNet > *Subject:* Re: [OT] Surface RT or Surface Pro?**** > > **** > > RT totally rocks, since I got it haven't put it down, it is just pure > awesome.**** > > It is light, app switching and screen splitting are so easy.**** > > **** > > Since I got one I cant remember a day I didn't have it in my hand, most of > times without the cover.**** > > **** > > I would like a Pro for alternative set of reasons, but RT will still be > lighter.**** > > **** > > Regards**** > > **** > > Arjang**** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > On 2 April 2013 10:49, James Chapman-Smith <ja...@chapman-smith.com> > wrote:**** > > Hi Folks,**** > > **** > > I'm thinking about getting myself either a Surface RT or a Surface Pro (or > maybe some other alternative). Every time I think about it I convince > myself that one is better than the other but then the next time I flip.*** > * > > **** > > What are everyone's thoughts?**** > > **** > > Should I get a Surface RT or a Surface Pro? Should I get a surface at all? > How much memory should I get?**** > > **** > > I thank you for your well thought out ideas in advance.**** > > **** > > Cheers.**** > > **** > > James.**** > > **** > > **** > > ** ** > > ** ** >
