Microsoft .NET Core 2.0 For Linux Released; Redhat Will Bundle Microsoft's .NET (zdnet.com)
185
Billly Gates writes: Microsoft recently released Visual Studio 15.3 for Windows and Visual Studio 7.1 for Mac with .NET core 2.0. In addition to porting Microsoft Code and SQL Server to Linux, they have ported .NET. Redhat will bundle .NET in their software offerings instead of relying on Mono. .NET core is Microsoft's open-source .NET platform which is not based off Mono and available for Linux, Mac, and Windows here.
That's it. (Score:5, Funny)
I think I will repent, while I still have a chance.
Linux has been becoming Windows for a while now. (Score:5, Interesting)
Long time Linux users will have seen exactly what's been happening: Linux has been slowing discarding its UNIX heritage, and has been becoming more Windows-like for a while now.
During its early years, we saw Linux tend to imitate Solaris, and to a lesser extent the other commercial UNIXes. But as they've faded away, we've seen Linux become more and more Windows-like.
Linux-oriented desktop environments like KDE and GNOME were the most obvious examples. They were clearly inspired by Windows, rather than UNIX desktop environments like CDE or NeWS or IRIX Interactive Desktop. GNOME 3 resembles the Windows Metro ideology.
Systemd has really accelerated the process. It brings ideas like binary logging and a monolithic architecture from Windows to Linux, for example. These are ideas that totally contradict with the traditional UNIX way of doing things.
Now the availability of .NET Core on Linux makes it even more Windows-like.
People familiar with FreeBSD and Solaris will see the differences clearly. Linux used to be a lot more like them than it was like Windows. But if you use a modern Linux distro today, it'll often feel closer to Windows than it will to FreeBSD or Solaris.
This is why we've seen so many long time Linux users move away from Linux, in favor of the *BSDs or macOS. When these people starting using Linux, often back in the 1990s, they used it because of how it adhered to the UNIX way of doing things. But now that so many modern Linux distros don't do this, these users have had to find better alternatives. So now they use FreeBSD, or OpenBSD, or NetBSD, or DragonflyBSD, or macOS. All of those OSes provide a much truer UNIX-like experience than Linux tends to these days.
Re: Linux has been becoming Windows for a while no (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
You clearly haven't used Gnome 3.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Linux has been becoming Windows for a while no (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Spanish and English are pretty far apart on the language tree. English is a Germanic language, and Spanish is a romance language derived from Latin. You have to go all the way back to Indo-European to find a common root, which IIRC is a theorized language as it's so far back there's no records about it. English does borrow a lot from the romance family through the Normal influence, which is French.
One huge difference between English and Spanish is the information density [imgur.com]. They're almost at opposite ends
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Spanish speakers tend to speak more quickly than their English-speaking counterparts, so the information rate in the spoken language is comparable
Actually, the whole point of that research paper was that *all* human languages seem to have roughly equivalent information rates, because ones with poorer information density make up for it with higher speaking rates. My point in bringing it up was only to show that Spanish and English really are very different languages as seen by the information density.
Re: (Score:2)
This is being driven by Microsoft, not RedHat. Mono started out based on the assumption that - because it's Microsoft (yes, it was that long ago), .NET would end up snaring a huge developer share, and Linux would wither if C# developers couldn't code for it. But since then, the internet changed a few things. Yes, there are still C# developers, but they're not the majority. Microsoft wants to lure developers to it's Azure cloud, and needs to support Linux for that to happen.
I.e., the assumption today is
Re: (Score:2)
Long time Linux users will have seen exactly what's been happening: Linux has been slowing discarding its UNIX heritage, and has been becoming more Windows-like for a while now.
Long time Linux user here - I have been using linux since the days of Slackware on 80+ floppies, when the kernel version was 0.9. I don't think Linux is becoming Windows like - it is more like Windows is coming around to the fact that the UNIX model is in fact the better one. What we have been seeing is that there are more Windows style applications - the graphical desktop on Linux is still only an application layer, thankfully, and can be left out without much loss of functionality (OK, maybe I'm exaggerat
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think Linux is becoming Windows like - it is more like Windows is coming around to the fact that the UNIX model is in fact the better one.
They both borrow features from each other. However, there have been some pretty big changes to Linux that would have sounded like the signs of the apocalypse. For example (in no particular order): .NET from Microsoft (not just mono, which I equate to wine, but provided by Microsoft and shipped with RHEL!?!?!)
* ACL's
* selinux
* systemd init
* dbus
* gconf (and gsettings / dconf)
* pulse audio
* graphical boot
*
* merged desktop displays (instead of 0.0 and 0.1; aka xinerama, etc)
* binary logs (systemd)
* etc
Sadly, I
Re: Linux has been becoming Windows for a while no (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Go back 5-10 years and look at how VB was used and abused by self defined "programmers" who were accountants, MBA, engineering managers, and even some VP's. Their applications sometimes "worked", but usually under the umbrella of "just because you could doesn't mean you should".
I'd wager .NET is just v2.0 of this issue. Easy to use programming languages do not make people _good_ programmers. Just as a new cheap motorcycle doesn't make people good riders, or a new type of firearm doesn't make an untraine
Re: (Score:2)
look at how VB was used and abused by self defined "programmers" who were accountants, MBA, engineering managers, and even some VP's
YEARS ago an engineer I worked with spent two years working on an elaborate script in Excel. It was his masterpiece and then we upgraded to Office 95 which ditched the excel macro engine for VBA. He was crushed.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
As a long time UNIX user, I find the idea that BSD, macOS, CDE, or NeWS represent "the UNIX way" ridiculous.
Re: (Score:2)
Wasn't KDE 'inspired' by CDE - at very least in terms of its acronym. But seriously, CDE was kind of Windows-like in its day. It's just that it was modeled after Windows 3. But then Windows 3 may well have been modeled after Unix GUIS from that period...
I hope that MS acquires Red Hat. (Score:4, Insightful)
I really hope that MS acquires Red Hat sometime soon.
I think that it would actually be the best thing for the Linux community if that happened.
Ideally it would be a huge wake-up call to Debian, and by extension Ubuntu. I don't think they'd want to deal with systemd, GNOME 3, and other software if it were primary developed by a MS-owned entity or a division of MS.
The ideal outcome of that would be Debian immediately ditching systemd in favor of OpenRC (or even sysvinit), along with GNOME 3 and GTK+ being ditched in favor of KDE and Qt.
If that happened, then Linux would regain what it has lost over the last decade. It would restore the reliability and trust we used to have in Linux, but that has been draining away with the rise of GNOME 3, GTK+ 3, and systemd.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
If that happened, I'd be switching everything over to some flavor of BSD in the shortest amount of time possible.
Re:I hope that MS acquires Red Hat. (Score:5, Interesting)
Microsoft started off reselling Xenix which later became Santa Cruz Operations (SCO), we know where that went.
Microsoft partnered with IBM on development of OS/2 from 1985-1989 then split up in 1990 when Windows 3.0 took off, but later they released the first version of Windows NT (originally named NT OS/2) which at the time had a few error dialog boxes still referring to OS/2. Dave Cutler of VMS fame led the team that developed Windows NT (some suggest WNT is a play on VMS++) . Where are VMS and OS/2 used today?
Microsoft partnered with Sybase, then split the partnership in 1993 retaining a copy of the source code and released SQL Server which was identical to Sybase 4.2. Where's Sybase today?
In 1995 Microsoft licensed Spyglass Mosiac and released it as Internet Explorer. There was an "auditing dispute" and MS paid Spyglass $8 million. Where is Spyglass today?
Microsoft licensed Java from Sun then immediately added Windows specific extensions to it. McNealy, being absolutely rabid over beating Bill Gates sued and won, so Microsoft created the Windows only .Net platform and for a while renamed their Java version as J++. Of course now Sun is gone but that was due to Sun, not Microsoft.
In 2005 GO filed an antitrust lawsuit against Microsoft alleging MS developers stole technology after signing an NDA. In 2008 Microsoft's Tablet PC was found to infringe on GO's patents. Where's GO today?
So I read this and I see Microsoft continuing in the embrace, extend and extinguish model.
Re: (Score:2)
Ideally it would be a huge wake-up call to Debian, and by extension Ubuntu.
No, it wouldn't. Everyone would say how "MS has changed!" "MS isn't as bad as they used to be!!" "Look how much code MS has contributed to Linux!!!" or "MS is much better than Apple" (which actually may be true in a way).
I don't think they'd want to deal with systemd, GNOME 3, and other software if it were primary developed by a MS-owned entity or a division of MS.
I disagree. Everyone's all too happy to jump on the Gnome3 bandw
Re: (Score:2)
That would be funny. They'd run it into the ground so I agree - they should do it.
Paging General Akbar (Score:3)
it's a trap!
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
it's pretty rare
With the advent of Azure, that's no longer the case
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I hope you don't run any other Linux distribution
https://techcrunch.com/2016/11... [techcrunch.com]
Even 6 years ago:
Cats and dogs; apples and oranges; Linux and Microsoft. Two of these three things do not go together. Would you believe that Microsoft—yes Microsoft—was the fifth largest contributor to the soon to be released Linux 3.0 kernel? Believe it.
http://www.zdnet.com/article/t... [zdnet.com]
Re: (Score:3)
I think the proper Internet etiquette is to tell them "Up your butt with a cashew nut" [youtube.com].
Will this cause .NET Core vs systemd deathmatch? (Score:3, Funny)
I'll pay to watch that.
Re: (Score:2)
But who would you root for, do you want Microsoft or Poettering in your Linux?
What a coindence... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Its a comprehensive, modular, application framework/library, released under the MIT License, that lets you develop applications/libraries/tools, in several ISO standardized languages, and has been publicly available for 15 years in one form or another. It has several advantages over other, similar, platforms. What those are depends entirely on what kind of applications you want to write, and would be meaningless otherwise.
I get it.. its not like you can just read things and find out. Internetting is hard.
Re: (Score:2)
I get it.. its not like you can just read things and find out. Internetting is hard.
Not at all. But I like asking a "stupid" questions and seeing what responses I get. You never know when someone else might want to ask the same "stupid" question but is afraid to ask because someone might respond, "Internetting is hard."
Re: (Score:2)
What does .NET brings to Linux that I couldn't do on my Windows PCS?
Really ? You get all the excitement of patching MS Software and lots of free and exciting utilities delivered right to your server without having ask or install yourself. Plus your server will be very happy to share these cool and fun utilities with others servers without manual intervention! What more can someone want ?
Re: (Score:1)
I got Red Hat Linux running at home. What does .NET brings to Linux that I couldn't do on my Windows PCS?
It's better to ask: What does .NET *Core* not bring to Linux that I could do on my Windows PCs? Since Microsoft hasn't ported .NET Framework to *nix, they've only created .NET Core.
Obviously: nothing to do with Registry access; nothing to do with GDI, WPF or Windows Forms.
Less obvious: nothing to do with .config files, especially Encrypted Sections, as .NET Core's ConfigurationManager only works with .json files now (this makes secure management of passwords more difficult amongst other things); ASP.NET met
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
....except for any .NET software that you'd want to run in the first place. This is just the barebones server stuff. There is no WinForms/WPF and what not, so no GUI apps. This is to make things like ASP.NET MVC sites and such.
MS wants you using their stuff, even on Linux, and renting their Azure server time (ideally with some SQL server stuff too). That (cloud stuff) is their entire business model now.
Re: (Score:1)
.net core is a Godsend for a lot of companies. Got a ton of C# developers, with huge licensing costs for hosting on MS OS? Simple, move to core, host on linux, many thousands of dollars saved....
Re: (Score:2)
Of course, for the vast bulk of the enterprise world, Java is king, so it's not likely to make many waves at all.
Re: (Score:2)
TIOBE has .NET languages at roughly half the usage of Java, although my experience in industry has been that Java's share is larger than that. Still, .NET has a big enough market share to be a major player, and with Java's market share seemingly dropping quite a bit over the past year, a move that makes .NET more cross-platform is certainly not going to hurt it.
Re: (Score:2)
But including Linux only covers part of the ground that Java can cover. Java is present on a lot of ecosystems, and the JVM itself was designed from the ground up to be fairly portable. That's why I suspect Java will be around long after Microsoft has moved on from .NET.
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps, but .NET core's platform support (x86/ARM and Linux/Unix/Windows/OSX) isn't too shabby, and covers the vast majority of desktops and servers, and most embedded platforms.
There are certainly platforms that it doesn't support (Unix support seems limited to BSD/Solaris/OSX at the moment), but it still covers a lot of ground, particularly the ARM Linux support, and platform support seems to be increasing since it's opensource and people outside of Microsoft are porting it to other platforms.
I don't thi
Re: (Score:1)
Paint.NET = Nope
Re: (Score:2)
Pinta. It's available for Linux and based off Paint.NET.
Re: (Score:1)
Pinta is dead abandonware
Re: (Score:2)
Uh, what the hell is wrong with Paint.NET???
Re: (Score:2)
Uh, what the hell is wrong with Paint.NET???
Maybe because it won't run on Linux, even using Microsoft .NET Core 2.0?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
How/why do you trust your existing compiler? Because you compiled it yourself? Yeah... about that: http://wiki.c2.com/?TheKenThompsonHack
Even in the world of https://reproducible-builds.org/ you have to draw a line somewhere and say "We sure think everything was clean at least of this version... so we'll build on top of that... without being able to prove the absence of such things.
Re: (Score:3)
You are more than welcome to read the source code to the .NET compilers right here https://github.com/dotnet/rosl... [github.com]
Both the C# and VB.NET compilers are there and fully open. (and this is where RedHat is going to get the compilers used alongside .NET core from)
Re: (Score:2)
Got any links that have more information? (e.g. about just what bits are missing)
Re: (Score:2)
There are no missing bits. Roslyn - the underlying library - is fully open source.
Re: (Score:2)
Then go to GitHub and download and compile it yourself? Go fork it if you want that is what the argument for Opensource is.
Re: (Score:1)
They're already a Linux kernel contributor and a platinum member of the Linux Foundation
I assume you're using MacOS or some kind of BSD then?
Re:compiler ILspy (Score:2)
It compiles to bytecode, which can be turned into compilable c# or vb.net by a third party tool, Ilspy, which is open source and by default opens itself to show you its own decompilation.
So now your comment makes no sense. You don't have to trust, you can verify every line.
Re:compiler (Score:5, Insightful)
How ridiculously paranoid to the point of stupid. Can you *imagine* the global impact of Microsoft's compilers having malware embedded in them that goes unseen or unnoticed.
Your a little late...
https://yro.slashdot.org/story... [slashdot.org]
Ignorant Neckbeards (Score:1, Insightful)
Microsoft finally embraces OSS and all you do is bitch.
Ignorant Non-Neckbeards (Score:5, Insightful)
Microsoft finally embraces OSS and all you do is bitch.
All that is left is extend and extinguish.
Re: (Score:1)
Have you considered that the "extinguish" part, in some sense could be Microsoft, on purpose, extinguishing Windows? They seem to be well under way with extending Windows with many/all capabilities from Linux. Eventually it doesn't matter if you deploy you workload on Linux or Windows as they, to a degree, has merged the two into one. This you should be fine with. The part you might find scary will be in order to do that, Microsoft will over the next years, move their employees into holding key positions in
Re: (Score:2)
All that is left is extend and extinguish.
This implies they have the leadership and intelligence to do so. That unfortunately left with its founder. The Microsoft we are left with today is the Microsoft that thinks it's a good idea to change the name of Windows Photos to "Stories Remix" [tenforums.com]
There is nothing left by incompetence. Certainly no visionaries or strategic thinkers capable of executing the last two Es in the EEE strategy.
It's a trap! (Score:5, Funny)
Call me when I give a ... (Score:5, Insightful)
... crap. When they actually port over the WPF (windows presentation foundation) so you can actually make beautiful drag-and-drop GUI applications in Linux and Windows using Visual Studio.
Until they add GUI, there's no point. And they 99% likely know that already. Without GUI, userland Windows programs won't target also Linux. The benefit to Microsoft is mostly in their direction, and not Linux.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
If it wasn't for Mono, I wouldn't be able to run Emby on Linux.
ps: Microsoft has owned Mono for exactly 18 months now
Re: (Score:2)
WPF has been depreciated. If you want you can use GTK# for c# for gui development [mono-project.com].I believe their was an editor or search index utility for GNome 2 written with Mono's implementation of C#.
Re: (Score:2)
Until they add GUI, there's no point. And they 99% likely know that already.
Actually, the purported reason they are doing this is to enable servers written in .net to run on Linux machines. As far as I can tell, they are trying to nudge .Net into the business/server world to displace Java.
As far as I'm concerned, Oracle and Microsoft can both choke on their own vomit.
Re: (Score:2)
I love WPF, but I'm not holding my breath. Core was built around websites -- originally, to simply make deploying them easier -- and continues to focus on that today.
I just don't see WPF being a priority. The API space is massive; probably the largest API within .NET. While it doesn't actually use Windows controls, there is still a deep integration with the OS that'll take a lot of effort to port.
Re: (Score:1)
The benefit to Microsoft is mostly in their direction, and not Linux.
Exactly, this is about their Azure cloud platform and not really anything else. There's a whole bunch of features you need to write .Net services to use, and being able to run them on Azure+Linux fits in with their current strategy.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
No one who uses OS X by choice can be allowed to say shit about MS, because then you're the largest hypocrite ever.
Re: (Score:3)
I haven't looked at QT or C++ for a long time now, but didn't they have this all covered? And is QT that horrible to use that nobody wants to make the effort to upskill on C++?
When I last looked at their offerings they were working on a GUI markup that seemed to be going good places, QML? did that go anywhere?
If I was trying to make a cross platform app with a good GUI then I would investigate QT and their current licensing. Sure I like C# but is it really the best cross platform tool?
Re: (Score:2)
Qt is good but two reasons have left it pretty much by the wayside. One is that Microsoft that used to use C++ a lot moved to C#, Apple uses ObjectiveC/Swift, Android uses Java and the web mostly Javascript. While there's quite a few people skilled in C++ I don't think there's many being added to the pool anymore and Qt isn't that great that you learn C++ to use it. The main reason though is that cross-platform today might mean more than Windows/Mac/Linux, also when Windows did a complete do-over with Metro
Re: (Score:2)
The thing is, QT is great for OSS development but if you want to do anything commercial, it's stupid expensive. When Xamarin was still charging absurd amounts of money for their software, QT make them look cheap by comparison.
So basically the only people who can use QT are open source developers, or developers in large corporations with large purse strings. Everyone in the middle can GTFO.
If that's not an excellent reason to scare away developers, I don't know what is.
After the eclipse, the end of the world, of course (Score:2)
Just click on the EULA I accept button, FFS
MS has never abandoned or repudiated the 3E's (Score:4, Insightful)
The 3 E's?
Embrace,
Extend,
Extinguish.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
From that page,
"Embrace, extend, and extinguish",[1] also known as "Embrace, extend, and exterminate",[2] is a phrase that the U.S. Department of Justice found[3] was used internally by Microsoft[4] to describe its strategy for entering product categories involving widely used standards, extending those standards with proprietary capabilities, and then using those differences to disadvantage its competitors.
Just because they have failed at it recently in other product lines does not mean they have no desire to protect their original core OS business.
Re: (Score:1)
So, how is open sourcing .NET 2.0 a case of "embrace and extend"? How does that lead to "extinguishing" Linux?
It's a trap! (Score:2)
It's a trap!
Re: Why NOT based on mono? (Score:4, Informative)
MS bought off Xamarin awhile ago. On Mac, the new Visual Studio is really the same previous Xamarin Studio with Visual Studio branding slapped on top. I wouldn't be surprised if they haven't done more or less the same with mono.
Re: (Score:3)
Visual Studio for Mac is definitely Xamarin Studio with a different name. .NET Core is most certainly *not* Mono, it's an entirely different codebase.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
At least on fedora it seemed like anytime something used mono, mono itself wanted to pull in a bazillion dependencies for install. It looked bloated to me. Of course this was years ago, haven't seen mono in a long time. I guess this makes that project mostly obsolete.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: Why NOT based on mono? (Score:2)
I'm not sure if I'm supposed to reply with a comment about the average Slashdot denizen or a comment about your mother. Hmm...
Re:Why NOT based on mono? (Score:4, Interesting)
I have been unimpressed by a number of apps written in mono recently (mainly 3D printer related stuff) as there seems to be no common versioning or even awareness of the different distros, what package management systems they may have or what the commonly installed and stable versions of any libraries may be.
You get these big ugly lists of instructions, usually telling you to uninstall all existing instances of mono and/or mono-based libraries and install the one specific version which their project will run with, then download 3 or 4 other dependencies from other projects (none of which give you a simple way to get the specific version of their project which is required) and then you have to fudge things around to bypass things provided by your resident package management system. Then the app prolly doesn't work anyway, or has the most primitive UI you have seen in years.
Ok, I know that a real Linux user has traditionally been prepared to edit configs and make files, build a few things from outside of their package management, and handle conflicting library dependencies without blinking, but I don't see why mono and .Net core projects had to take a huge backward step and make us mess around the way used to with Linux 15 years ago. I just expected if we were going to bring in all that bloat then it should at least have made things smoother to manage, or better looking, or something modern.
Re: (Score:2)
I have been unimpressed by a number of apps written in mono recently (mainly 3D printer related stuff) as there seems to be no common versioning or even awareness of the different distros, what package management systems they may have or what the commonly installed and stable versions of any libraries may be.
I've seen that, also. Several programs I've tried to use even crashed after failing to find a specific point release of mono installed.
Then the app prolly doesn't work anyway...
Ew. I just vomited a little bit.
Re:Why NOT based on mono? (Score:5, Insightful)
It's like MS haven't changed, instead of joining an existing project and improving it, they want to be in control. Old Microsoft, you haven't changed. Do not want
Uhm, because Microsoft always had the canonical source code to ASP.NET and Mono was a shitty attempt to re-implement it as open source? All they had to do was open it up, and they have. Hate on Microsoft all you want but this complaint is just silly.
Bigger point: (Score:1)
Mono is owned by Microsoft now anyways, so it is literally useless to use mono over dotnet as a second-source.
If only the FSF hadn't shuttered their dotgnut implementation because mono was more advanced, we wouldn't be in quite the dotnet quandry we are today.
Re: (Score:2)
ASP.NET has been out of the picture for a long time now - it was closed source, yes, it still remains closed, but it's legacy tech. Microsoft essentially left it on life support, and moved on to ASP.NET MVC - which, despite the name, is a complete rewrite with a very different design, and which was open source from the get go (indeed, it was one of the first large OSS projects at MS, and helped pave the way for more broad OSS acceptance within the company). So Mono didn't need to re-implement it. At this p
Re: (Score:2)
ASP.NET has been out of the picture for a long time now - it was closed source, yes, it still remains closed, but it's legacy tech. Microsoft essentially left it on life support, and moved on to ASP.NET MVC
To the point that, when someones says "ASP.NET," I automatically assume they mean ASP.NET MVC.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Your google skills *suck* man.
https://github.com/dotnet/core [github.com]
https://github.com/dotnet/cli [github.com]
Re: (Score:1)
Your google skills *suck* man.
https://github.com/dotnet/core [github.com]
https://github.com/dotnet/cli [github.com]
He used Bing.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Why NOT based on mono? (Score:3, Informative)
Re: Why NOT based on mono? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
I'm looking at Windows 10, and I'm not seeing professionalism. I'm seeing a braindead GUI that is a backwards step from Windows 7, all to capture a market (smart devices) that Microsoft has pretty much all but walked away from.
Re: (Score:2)
Linux in general lacks professionalism, especially in development practices, which results in low quality of the software. I think that Microsoft getting involved in Linux will finally take things to the next level.
Yeah, right, I don't see it. Microsoft's window manager is so awesome that most of the time Windows Explorer pops a dialog it opens behind the window you're currently using. You wouldn't even know it's there unless unless you notice the pulsing button on the task bar.
Re: (Score:2)
Anyone who wants a more modern language, for example.