.NET making Win32 obsolete...eventually?

Discussion in 'MCAD' started by Leonard, Jan 14, 2004.

  1. Leonard

    Leonard Guest

    Hi all

    Please don't laugh at such a silly question, but is .NET
    going to replace existing Win32 programming? In the
    future are we going to be downloading .NET versions of
    applications such as MS Office, Outlook, Adobe Acrobat
    and Photoshop that run under the CLR? And if not, then
    why should we bother looking at adopting .NET for our
    programs? It is JIT compiled before being run, so isn't
    it slower than a native Win32 program?

    This is not posted to offend, I honestly don't
    understand. Please help.
     
    Leonard, Jan 14, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. In news: 0a5001c3da7a$770b9960$,
    Leonard <> wrote:
    > ...is .NET
    > going to replace existing Win32 programming?


    Longhorn will replace Win32.

    From http://www.longhornblogs.com/jlowy, "But to me, the single most
    important facet of Longhorn is its promise to replace the aging (decaying?)
    and overly-complex Win32 API. "

    From http://www.gartner.com/DisplayDocument?doc_cd=118261, "WinFX will
    re-integrate the "managed code" concept introduced with the .NET Framework
    with the underlying OS - the entire Longhorn WinFX developer API will be
    based on managed code. Moreover, WinFX will replace Win32, which will be
    relegated to "legacy" platform status (just as Win32 relegated DOS/Win16)."

    --
    Cindy Winegarden MCSD, Microsoft Visual FoxPro MVP
    www.cindywinegarden.com
     
    Cindy Winegarden, Jan 14, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Leonard

    Hermit Dave Guest

    yes that would be the goal....
    unfortunately you cannot change millions of lines worth of code in a day...
    so right now.. .net api's are kinda wrappers.
    in the next release you would potentially have a lot of executive services
    exposing .net api.
    yes you will see all programs run under clr or as unmanaged code... in
    future...
    the reason for adopting .net is simple... it has a very simple programming
    model.
    it provides interop between languages to a level that was never present
    before...
    try using win32s from c++ and the same api from VB.... the efford required
    is different and sometimes its a real pain...
    with .net any language can use any api in the same manner...

    as for compilation of .net app...
    you have the option of what sort of compilation you would like for the app
    you install.
    you can chose install time compilation which would create a native copy (but
    doesnt do any optimisations.. would result in a bigger memory map)
    or you have a JIT compiled version (the JIT would compile the app or parts
    of it that are needed.. reduces the memory map and JIT compilation can
    perform optimisations on how to make it faster)



    --

    Regards,

    HD
    "Leonard" <> wrote in message
    news:0a5001c3da7a$770b9960$...
    > Hi all
    >
    > Please don't laugh at such a silly question, but is .NET
    > going to replace existing Win32 programming? In the
    > future are we going to be downloading .NET versions of
    > applications such as MS Office, Outlook, Adobe Acrobat
    > and Photoshop that run under the CLR? And if not, then
    > why should we bother looking at adopting .NET for our
    > programs? It is JIT compiled before being run, so isn't
    > it slower than a native Win32 program?
    >
    > This is not posted to offend, I honestly don't
    > understand. Please help.
    >
     
    Hermit Dave, Jan 14, 2004
    #3
  4. Leonard

    David Guest

    ..NET is an improved programming model. Languages in .NET are pretty much
    equal. For VB programmers (like myself) this opens up more possibilities
    for what our programs can do and also provides a true object orientated
    development environment.
    The disconnected approach to database development (ADO.NET) is a big
    improvement on VB6 database access. .NET user structured error handling -
    VB6 error handling can be messy!
    Also for the VB developers that upgrade there skills, it is much easier for
    them to switch onto another .NET language such as C#.

    I've been programming in .NET for about a year now. I certainly wouldn't go
    back.

    "Leonard" <> wrote in message
    news:0a5001c3da7a$770b9960$...
    > Hi all
    >
    > Please don't laugh at such a silly question, but is .NET
    > going to replace existing Win32 programming? In the
    > future are we going to be downloading .NET versions of
    > applications such as MS Office, Outlook, Adobe Acrobat
    > and Photoshop that run under the CLR? And if not, then
    > why should we bother looking at adopting .NET for our
    > programs? It is JIT compiled before being run, so isn't
    > it slower than a native Win32 program?
    >
    > This is not posted to offend, I honestly don't
    > understand. Please help.
    >
     
    David, Jan 14, 2004
    #4
  5. Leonard wrote:

    > Hi all
    >
    > Please don't laugh at such a silly question, but is .NET
    > going to replace existing Win32 programming? In the
    > future are we going to be downloading .NET versions of
    > applications such as MS Office, Outlook, Adobe Acrobat
    > and Photoshop that run under the CLR? And if not, then
    > why should we bother looking at adopting .NET for our
    > programs? It is JIT compiled before being run, so isn't
    > it slower than a native Win32 program?
    >
    > This is not posted to offend, I honestly don't
    > understand. Please help.


    I've heard from Microsoft insiders that the Office team refuses to
    rewrite Office in .NET. In fact, I also heard they still use Borland
    compilers.
     
    General Protection Fault, Jan 14, 2004
    #5
  6. I know this because my gay lover works in Redmond.


    >-----Original Message-----
    >Leonard wrote:
    >
    >> Hi all
    >>
    >> Please don't laugh at such a silly question, but

    is .NET
    >> going to replace existing Win32 programming? In the
    >> future are we going to be downloading .NET versions of
    >> applications such as MS Office, Outlook, Adobe Acrobat
    >> and Photoshop that run under the CLR? And if not, then
    >> why should we bother looking at adopting .NET for our
    >> programs? It is JIT compiled before being run, so isn't
    >> it slower than a native Win32 program?
    >>
    >> This is not posted to offend, I honestly don't
    >> understand. Please help.

    >
    >I've heard from Microsoft insiders that the Office team

    refuses to
    >rewrite Office in .NET. In fact, I also heard they still

    use Borland
    >compilers.
    >
    >.
    >
     
    General Protection Fault, Jan 16, 2004
    #6
  7. Leonard

    Hermit Dave Guest

    you are such an attention freak you know... lol

    --

    Regards,

    HD
    "General Protection Fault" <> wrote
    in message news:011b01c3dc59$bc2d20a0$...
    > I know this because my gay lover works in Redmond.
    >
    >
    > >-----Original Message-----
    > >Leonard wrote:
    > >
    > >> Hi all
    > >>
    > >> Please don't laugh at such a silly question, but

    > is .NET
    > >> going to replace existing Win32 programming? In the
    > >> future are we going to be downloading .NET versions of
    > >> applications such as MS Office, Outlook, Adobe Acrobat
    > >> and Photoshop that run under the CLR? And if not, then
    > >> why should we bother looking at adopting .NET for our
    > >> programs? It is JIT compiled before being run, so isn't
    > >> it slower than a native Win32 program?
    > >>
    > >> This is not posted to offend, I honestly don't
    > >> understand. Please help.

    > >
    > >I've heard from Microsoft insiders that the Office team

    > refuses to
    > >rewrite Office in .NET. In fact, I also heard they still

    > use Borland
    > >compilers.
    > >
    > >.
    > >
     
    Hermit Dave, Jan 16, 2004
    #7
  8. General Protection Fault wrote:

    > I know this because my gay lover works in Redmond.


    Ha ha. Nice job.

    Check the headers -- that wasn't me.
     
    General Protection Fault, Jan 19, 2004
    #8
  9. Leonard

    Hermit Dave Guest

    true... guess someone was taking the mick...
    :)

    --
    Regards,
    HD
    Once a Geek.... Always a Geek
    "General Protection Fault" <> wrote
    in message news:%23TrJ$...
    > General Protection Fault wrote:
    >
    >> I know this because my gay lover works in Redmond.

    >
    > Ha ha. Nice job.
    >
    > Check the headers -- that wasn't me.
     
    Hermit Dave, Jan 20, 2004
    #9
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Tony Spadaro

    Re: Digital bodies eventually reaching Film body prices?

    Tony Spadaro, Sep 4, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    13
    Views:
    545
    Tony Spadaro
    Sep 6, 2003
  2. DVDfanatico

    Will the Net make DVD's obsolete?

    DVDfanatico, Feb 8, 2004, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    16
    Views:
    808
    Ryan E.
    Feb 9, 2004
  3. Dr. Jai Maharaj

    FILM 90% OBSOLETE? <> <>

    Dr. Jai Maharaj, Jul 15, 2005, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    913
    Michel Hafner
    Jul 21, 2005
  4. D@Z
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    878
    Liza Smorgaborgsson
    Jan 30, 2006
  5. jamesa01
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    499
    Steve
    Feb 27, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page