Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Windows Cloud Microsoft Network Linux

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.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Microsoft .NET Core 2.0 For Linux Released; Redhat Will Bundle Microsoft's .NET

Comments Filter:
  • That's it. (Score:5, Funny)

    by Major_Disorder ( 5019363 ) on Wednesday August 23, 2017 @05:04PM (#55072185)
    This has got to be the seventh sign.
    I think I will repent, while I still have a chance.
    • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 23, 2017 @05:33PM (#55072315)

      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.

      • Everything has become more Windows like than the other way around. Binary is just another word for compressed and Windows has moved past that to tokenized interpreted which is even more compressed still, but you go ahead and use as much spacetime as you want.
      • by joaommp ( 685612 )

        You clearly haven't used Gnome 3.

      • I would have thought that .NET, being effectively a substitute for Java for almost the same class of applications, doesn't substantially change the direction in which Linux distributions are heading since Java had already been present in them for quite some time.
        • A substitute for Java? It's like saying Spanish is a substitute for English because it uses the same alphabet.
          • Nice analogy. Java and .NET are indeed very close to each other in most traits, just like Spanish and English. Unlike, say, Haskell and Forth, or APL and Prolog (or Chinese and Amharic...).
            • 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

              • You failed to grasp the point I was trying to make as in both languages (computer) are much different than one thinks. I'm a native speaker of both Spanish and English so I know very well the differences even if they share the same alphabet. It's the reason I didn't choose French over Spanish.
        • by Rob Y. ( 110975 )

          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

      • 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

        • by unrtst ( 777550 )

          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):
          * ACL's
          * selinux
          * systemd init
          * dbus
          * gconf (and gsettings / dconf)
          * pulse audio
          * graphical boot
          * .NET from Microsoft (not just mono, which I equate to wine, but provided by Microsoft and shipped with RHEL!?!?!)
          * merged desktop displays (instead of 0.0 and 0.1; aka xinerama, etc)
          * binary logs (systemd)
          * etc

          Sadly, I

        • Just because you have one shitty application your statement on limitation of .NET sounds really funny. Clearly the limitation is your knowledge about .NET. I have seen as many shitty and slow application written in Java as in .NET. These are just tools and what really matters are the skills of developer.
      • by short ( 66530 )
        While I agree in general still how is MacOS more UNIXy than Linux?
      • As a long time UNIX user, I find the idea that BSD, macOS, CDE, or NeWS represent "the UNIX way" ridiculous.

    • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 23, 2017 @05:41PM (#55072363)

      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.

      • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 24, 2017 @06:48AM (#55074413)

        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.

      • 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

      • That would be funny. They'd run it into the ground so I agree - they should do it.

    • it's a trap!

  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 23, 2017 @05:08PM (#55072203)

    I'll pay to watch that.

  • I got Red Hat Linux running at home. What does .NET brings to Linux that I couldn't do on my Windows PCS?
    • by Anonymous Coward

      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.

      • 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."

    • by jmccue ( 834797 )

      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 ?

    • by Anonymous Coward

      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

  • You have to be able to trust your compiler...

    I barely trust Microsoft to not release malware that infects other companies products. Why the hell would invite them into my OS if I don't have to.

    • by Anonymous Coward

      You have to be able to trust your compiler...

      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.

    • by jonwil ( 467024 )

      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)

    • Then go to GitHub and download and compile it yourself? Go fork it if you want that is what the argument for Opensource is.

    • 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?

    • 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.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    Microsoft finally embraces OSS and all you do is bitch.

    • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 23, 2017 @05:29PM (#55072303)

      Microsoft finally embraces OSS and all you do is bitch.

      All that is left is extend and extinguish.

      • by Anonymous Coward

        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

      • 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.

  • by rocket97 ( 565016 ) on Wednesday August 23, 2017 @05:35PM (#55072327)
    Microsoft will secretly use this as another way to force Windows 10 on those who don't want it. Leave the office at night with RHEL running. Arrive at the office in the morning...Windows 10 is there to greet you.
  • by Chris Katko ( 2923353 ) on Wednesday August 23, 2017 @05:40PM (#55072361)

    ... 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.

    • Just a guess but I bet 90% of .net code is service or web related.
    • 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

    • 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#.

    • 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.

    • 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.

    • by r0kk3rz ( 825106 )

      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.

  • Just click on the EULA I accept button, FFS

  • by geekprime ( 969454 ) on Wednesday August 23, 2017 @06:43PM (#55072649)

    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.

    • 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!

If money can't buy happiness, I guess you'll just have to rent it.

Working...