samsmithnz Posted January 7, 2004 Posted January 7, 2004 Those are the kind of projects we start in schooll... And we only start them because we are forced to do so by our teachers :p... In my way of thinking it's like reinventing the wheel... The OS's we have are far from perfect but I don't think anyone, starting from scrach could make something similar to Windows in never less than what?? 10 years?? :D Our friend Bill Gates had a LOT of luck in all his path untill now, specially in the beginning but one major thing that he had on hes side was allways the timing... if Linux appeared at that time, instead of MS Windows... We all would be working in Linux... believe me... Alex :D The reason Windows is around today, is because of three reasons. 1. Bill Gates has always had plenty of money, he was born into a rich family. That always helps when you're starting a business. 2. His deal with IBM to supply MS-DOS and his shall we say spying on apple was critical to his future success. 3. He was in the right place at the right time. It was a fledgling industry, and he choose the right deregulated computer to go with (what became the PC). MS has always had a good vision, and now has plenty of marketing now to back up the visions. I still don't believe that Linux would have been very successful if had showed up way back then. The main reason it's so successful now is because there are anti/disgruntled-windows people working on it. And the Internet, where would Linux be without the internet to distrubute it? Thanks Sam http://www.samsmith.co.nz
Administrators PlausiblyDamp Posted January 7, 2004 Administrators Posted January 7, 2004 Also the idea of an OS is a bit of an issue these days as it seems to cover everything from the hardware management through API functionality, the GUI and even things that could traditionally be treated as an application or addon (IIS, Messenger, IE etc) Low level stuff (parts of the kernel, parts of device drivers, HAL) will need some assembler to handle the underlying CPU etc. Other parts of the kernel and the API could be C or C++ although C++ may incur too much overhead in some places. C++ can make the application side of things easier than C though. However C++, C and assembler also require a very indepth knowledge of the language and it's quirks as well as involving quite a lot of manual coding to deal with memory management (leaks and Dr watsons are very easy to come by) C# (or VB.Net or any other .Net language) can provide a much quicker development environment and also make some of these issues less of a problem (not removed though) As to writting a C/C++ compiler these things tend to evolve - the earliest C compilers would have been written in assembler (probably) as these compilers and the language itself matured then later compilers would have been written in C. The first C++ compilers were really parsers that took C++ code and generated C code that did the same thing which was then fed through a C compiler, over time these became real C++ compilers. Again as the benefits became apparent then the C++ compilers would have been migrated over from C to C++. Posting Guidelines FAQ Post Formatting Intellectuals solve problems; geniuses prevent them. -- Albert Einstein
AlexCode Posted January 7, 2004 Posted January 7, 2004 And the Internet, where would Linux be without the internet to distrubute it? I can agree with almost anything you said except this sentence... Internet doesn't belong to MS! Wasn't even invented/created by MS. You can say that plenty Internet Servers work on MS Windows Servers but there are plenty that work on UNIX for example, with Apache and work just fine... If you have a WebPage, hosted somewhere around the internet, I think the probability of it's hosted on an Apache server it's 95% :D... Why did MS distribute Windows without Internet and Linux couldn't? Saying this, I may look a Linux admirer... I'm not... I just think that both had the same chances it they had started at the same time... If you look at Windows 3.11... is it better than Linux? :D Yeah ... I know ... both suck! :D Alex :D Software bugs are impossible to detect by anybody except the end user.
AlexCode Posted January 7, 2004 Posted January 7, 2004 As a developer I'm begining to try Mono as an aternative platform ... I have several institutions (clients) that belong to the Government, like Jails, that still have almost every computer with Win95... I'm considering installing Linux and deploy my .net apps on them... If it works with no probs it would be very very nice ... :D Alex :D Software bugs are impossible to detect by anybody except the end user.
Moderators Robby Posted January 7, 2004 Moderators Posted January 7, 2004 Earlier someone asked what language VS.NET was written in...they used C#. Visit...Bassic Software
samsmithnz Posted January 7, 2004 Posted January 7, 2004 I can agree with almost anything you said except this sentence... Internet doesn't belong to MS! Wasn't even invented/created by MS. You can say that plenty Internet Servers work on MS Windows Servers but there are plenty that work on UNIX for example, with Apache and work just fine... If you have a WebPage, hosted somewhere around the internet, I think the probability of it's hosted on an Apache server it's 95% :D... Why did MS distribute Windows without Internet and Linux couldn't? Saying this, I may look a Linux admirer... I'm not... I just think that both had the same chances it they had started at the same time... If you look at Windows 3.11... is it better than Linux? :D Yeah ... I know ... both suck! :D Alex :D When did I say that MS invented the Internet? I was just saying that I don't think that Linux would have replaced Windows if it was release 10 years ago. Thanks Sam http://www.samsmith.co.nz
dragon4spy Posted January 8, 2004 Author Posted January 8, 2004 (edited) Hello people! :D Now it's clear that c++.net is able to write an OS such as windows, but what's about vb.net? is it able to write an OS or .net framework independent app? If vb.net cannot, then i think c++.net is my next choice, cos it is limitless. I just want to make sure that i'm right. To people who support vb.net: Though i'd learn c++.net, i won't abandon vb.net. AlexCode and other people are right! :) Unless vb.net is not able to do then we'll need c++.net. Yeah! :p Edited January 8, 2004 by dragon4spy Don't judge a man by his look. Don't judge a book by its cover. :D
samsmithnz Posted January 8, 2004 Posted January 8, 2004 What sort of applications do you want to make? And no VB.NET or c# or even the C++.net managed code can be used to write an .net framework independent application. Thanks Sam http://www.samsmith.co.nz
dragon4spy Posted January 8, 2004 Author Posted January 8, 2004 even the C++.net managed code can be used to write an .net framework independent application. We have discussed that C++.net = C++ 7 only, and C++6 is able to write an framework independent app, so why's c++7 not? Don't judge a man by his look. Don't judge a book by its cover. :D
AlexCode Posted January 8, 2004 Posted January 8, 2004 Yeah... you're right... As long as I know C it's limitless as you say. Anything it may not do you can always make an assembly call to perform the task... As you may have aready read on this thread, C++.net advantages comparing to VB.net & C# are in such areas that we usually don't mess with... Specially if, as you said, you're a VB 6 develloper, a direct hardware call or a huge elaborated graphical app where never on you scope... so do yourself a favor and stick with VB.net... Meanwhile, if you really want to take a bite on C++.net you can allways read some good books about it but never make it your first, and spetially, never make it yout only programming language... Good look with your boss and your team mates if you discard my advise... You'll really need it... Alex :D Software bugs are impossible to detect by anybody except the end user.
AlexCode Posted January 8, 2004 Posted January 8, 2004 even the C++.net managed code can be used to write an .net framework independent application. This sentence doesn't make any sence... who said that?? When you say C++.net Manage Code you're refering to the C++.net code that its managed... managed means that this code its managed by the Framework. So, if the code itself depends on the framework... how can it generate something Framework independant??? By "Framework Independant" I understand that its a peace of code that can work without the Framework installed... So, no way that quote can make any sence at all... Alex :D Software bugs are impossible to detect by anybody except the end user.
dragon4spy Posted January 8, 2004 Author Posted January 8, 2004 no VB.NET or c# or even the C++.net managed code can be used to write an .net framework independent application. Heh heh :) This is a NO before everything. You mean that only C++.net unmanaged code will be able to run independent. Don't judge a man by his look. Don't judge a book by its cover. :D
AlexCode Posted January 8, 2004 Posted January 8, 2004 Sorry ... You didn't quote the complete sentence ... samsmithnz is right... Sorry... Alex :D Software bugs are impossible to detect by anybody except the end user.
dragon4spy Posted January 8, 2004 Author Posted January 8, 2004 Thanks everyone for all of your advice and priceless time. (Priceless=High Value) In conclusion, if i write an OS, i'll use c++. Don't judge a man by his look. Don't judge a book by its cover. :D
AlexCode Posted January 8, 2004 Posted January 8, 2004 Yeah... only unmanaged code can generate unmaged apps (framework independant)... Unless I'm missing something, if you build some managed code you'll allways need to install the framework to run it... The only .net language able to do so it's C++.net, no doubt... Alex :D Software bugs are impossible to detect by anybody except the end user.
AlexCode Posted January 8, 2004 Posted January 8, 2004 In conclusion, if i write an OS, i'll use c++. An OS will require a lot more than C++... You'll have to be a Guru working on Assemby either! Just to open your mind to something this simple: There are plenty of different CPU's aren't there? If you make an OS you'll have to use Assembly to use most of their internal functions... But if they're different you'll have to study all of them and make some sort of lib that "translate" all the diferent functions in one single way of doing the same thing. Just on this I believe you'll loose almost all your hear! :) Good luck. Alex :D Software bugs are impossible to detect by anybody except the end user.
AFterlife Posted January 8, 2004 Posted January 8, 2004 When did I say that MS invented the Internet? I was just saying that I don't think that Linux would have replaced Windows if it was release 10 years ago. Geesh , you are all wrong. Al Gore invented the internet.Remember?
dragon4spy Posted January 8, 2004 Author Posted January 8, 2004 Final Conclusion All dotNet Languages Are Equal? Ok, these are the final conclusion to my original question. + All .net languages are not equal even each languages's syntax are not the same either. + VB.net and C# are similar, they almost interchangable. Therefore, this is no need for vb.net programmers to learn c#. + C# is a hybrid of Java & C++. It was made fully for only .net and its framework. + On the other hand, C++.net is just a next version (7) of C++6 with a managed extension of .net framework. It is the only language that can make app running independently from .net framework and windows os. This language is LIMITLESS. Thanks to everyone for all of your effort to explain me. I think, we go too far from the original question. :D Consequently, i should have splitted this thread into seperated threads. ;) Don't judge a man by his look. Don't judge a book by its cover. :D
samsmithnz Posted January 8, 2004 Posted January 8, 2004 Re: Final Conclusion I just want to comment on a couple conclusions you've made: + VB.net and C# are similar, they almost interchangable. Therefore, this is no need for vb.net programmers to learn c#. I'm definetly not a C# programmer, but I've still found it useful to learn the c# syntax, espeically want I'm looking for a way of doing something in .NET, and I can only find a C# example. There are some great sites that help with converting between these two now. + On the other hand, C++.net is just a next version (7) of C++6 with a managed extension of .net framework. It is the only language that can make app running independently from .net framework and windows os. This language is LIMITLESS. Note that while c++ is more powerful, its also a lot harder and slower to program in. A good example is that it takes about 1 line in VB/ C# to say Hello World, but in C++, it can take 100. Thanks Sam http://www.samsmith.co.nz
AndreRyan Posted January 9, 2004 Posted January 9, 2004 (edited) Just to add to the discussion, the next version of Windows(Windows Longhorn) is written 90% in .Net, only 10% which would mainly only include DirectX and the CLR as well as any of the most low level components that are linked directly to the hardware. Microsoft has said that you can actually add Assembly calls to your .Net program so your Managed program can interact directly with the hardware. This means that Windows will probably use C++.Net so they can implement Assembly calls(I think they said they actually were altering the MSIL so the Assembly can be directly added in C# or any Managed app, I don't know if this is correct, it may or may not be) but anything that doesn't interact directly would probably be in C#. They may also use VB.Net in some places, they did use a small number of VB6 apps in Windows XP. This basically shows that .Net can write an operating system with a little help. Microsoft is viewing Win32 applications as obsolete, in Longhorn they stated that any additions to Windows will not have a Win32 dll and APIs created for them, only .Net applications will be able to use the future additions. They also stated that they will shortly begin hosting Win32 applications as emulations, like old Dos apps in Windows. Since the Windows subsystems are all in .Net, no Win32 application can cause damage because the .Net security will denie permission to alter the subsystems that it doesn't have permission to access. Edited January 9, 2004 by AndreRyan .Net allows software to be written for any version of Windows and not break like Unmanaged applications unless using Unmanaged procedures like APIs. If your program uses large amounts of memory but releases it when something else needs it, then what's the problem?
AlexCode Posted January 9, 2004 Posted January 9, 2004 Ths idea its all cute but if we remember that plenty client computer are still usng Win95. Worse its that their owners have no idea to upgrade them cause they do its Word and Excel work just perfect and an upgrade would necessarelly mean alse an hardware upgrade... Based on this i'm beginng to investigate on the mono project cause I'm still having trouble to deploy some of my apps because of this .net problem with Win95... But the main idea of this its that only about 10 years from the Longhorn release would be productive for us to develop an applcation specally/only designed for this OS... Alex :D Software bugs are impossible to detect by anybody except the end user.
samsmithnz Posted January 9, 2004 Posted January 9, 2004 I don't know about you, but if my target user has windows 95 and only uses word and email, they probably won't want my .net application anyway. I just assume that people have good computers, it sucks, but its a fact of life you have to shell out a couple grand and buy a new computer every 2 or 3 years, less if you like playing games. Thanks Sam http://www.samsmith.co.nz
AlexCode Posted January 9, 2004 Posted January 9, 2004 The problem is that when you work with State property institutions as I do, it's very difficult do make them upgrade whatever it is... Dispite I agree with you that we must upgrade our computer 3 years max, for some institutions it doesn't work that way. I'm talking about denny a software implementation that will earn me �10.000+ just because .net doesn't support Win16 and I just don't want to work with old OS's... Alex :D Software bugs are impossible to detect by anybody except the end user.
samsmithnz Posted January 9, 2004 Posted January 9, 2004 I feel very lucky in this respect, I work for a private financial company, where all computers have the same OS, are only allowed IE, and are all very powerful (there's a strict 2 year replacement rule) Thanks Sam http://www.samsmith.co.nz
samsmithnz Posted January 9, 2004 Posted January 9, 2004 Hey, just when you thought this thread was finally dead and buried. Slashdot.org has a link today about a benchmark test someone did, and a couple of .NET languages were included. follow the link: http://osnews.com/story.php?news_id=5602 If you're not that interested, C# and VB.NET performed very well compared to native C (which does not require the .NET framework to run). Thanks Sam http://www.samsmith.co.nz
Recommended Posts