26 Sep
2011
26 Sep
'11
5:41 p.m.
On 26/09/11 7:46 PM, David Griffith wrote:
On Mon, 26 Sep 2011, Dave McGuire wrote:
How gullible are people? I mean what did you think it was FOR?
"Cross-platform" is absolute anathema to MS. Their desires are
totalitarian, period. They want to tax every computer sold. Oh, look!
Almost there!
--Toby
On 09/26/2011 12:59 PM, Fred Cisin wrote:
Heh. It's obviously an attempt at creating lots and lots of vendor
lock-in, and an attempt to be a better Java than Java. The former has
succeeded all over the place.
The thing that has always bugged me about .NET is that MS billed it as
cross-platform, then turned right around and made crucial libraries
Windows-only.
Well the
problem is that both their new Lightswitch& upcoming Visual
Studio 2011 products both fully support the .Net environment. To me,
the
only thing that would make .Net better is if the stupid compiler
actually
generated native code instead of that runtime crap.
Will people be offended if I call that MS-P-code?
It's obviously for trying to create multi-platform aps.