Google Chrome

[VectraMan]

.NET is pretty shoddy technology as currently implemented, despite all the attempts to patch it up. I realise that they were initially stuck with building it as a hack on top of the Win32 API, and therefore it couldn't be expected to be perfect in the first iteration. The problem is that they thought it would replace the Win32 API very rapidly, yet nearly a decade later, it's still reliant on, guess what... the Win32 API.

How else should it work? I guess MS could have linked the .NET runtime more into the lower levels of the OS, but I'm not sure that gains you anything over using the Win32 API. Or are you talking about things like the Windows controls and messaging system, because I thought .NET had its own, and isn't relevant to ASP .NET anyway.

[blacjac]

No he's not. Although he is right about some of the other stuff



I think that's very, very unfair. The .NET environment is the best development platform I've used on an M$ platform, and I've used most of them since Windows 3.0 (VB, C/C++, Java, etc.). It's not perfect, and it may be bloated in places, but shoddy it is not.

The development environment and the development technology are 2 different things.

I think nickfitz was having a pop at the .Net technology, rather than Visual Studio.....

[voodooflux]

The development environment and the development technology are 2 different things.

No kidding

I think nickfitz was having a pop at the .Net technology, rather than Visual Studio.....

I was using "environment" to refer to both (as my comments apply to both equally) although I did use the more applicable term "platform" later on.

[Dark Black]

Sorry.... I've rather pulled this a tad off topic...

Since I'm here .. Agree about Java being flawed by not having a native compiler. IMHO that was a big mistake because as a language it was (is) spot on.

Visual Studio was great upto and including version 6. The .NET version are horrible, bloated and slow on anything more than a few years old.

Don't get me started on COM... I'd like to give whoever came up with that a damn good kicking....

Marginally back on topic - I find the Portable Apps version of Firefox works nicely and is also quick to load

[voodooflux]

Sorry.... I've rather pulled this a tad off topic...

Just a smidge

Visual Studio was great upto and including version 6. The .NET version are horrible, bloated and slow on anything more than a few years old.

Tried running NetBeans or Eclipse on such hardware? Welcome to slowsville. Squared.

Out of interest what was the last version of Visual Studio .NET you tried? I had to use Visual Studio 6.0 the other day to do some maintenance on a VB 6.0 app - I was relieved to finally return to the comfort of VS2008.

[Dark Black]

Tried running NetBeans or Eclipse on such hardware? Welcome to slowsville. Squared.

Out of interest what was the last version of Visual Studio .NET you tried? I had to use Visual Studio 6.0 the other day to do some maintenance on a VB 6.0 app - I was relieved to finally return to the comfort of VS2008.

Eclipse runs ok on my 1Gig Athlon.

VS.NET 2005 I think.... it was horrible!

[voodooflux]

Eclipse runs ok on my 1Gig Athlon.

VS.NET 2003 I think.... it was horrible!

Eclipse was always my preference over NetBeans, and it did have the performance edge - possibly due to its use of SWT. I still have painful memories of slowness though.

[VectraMan]

Eclipse runs ok on my 1Gig Athlon.

VS.NET 2005 I think.... it was horrible!

I'm using VS2005 on a project that ultimately needs to be compiled on VC6, because I much prefer the environment. It's a bit slow debugging, and uses more memory than you can possibly imagine, but there's enough other good things that make up for it. I was less fond of 2003 when I had to use that.

Sorry, more OT again.