[CALUG] Convert. Web pages in .asp to html

[Bryan J Smith]

On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 8:47 PM, Michael Cramer <mike.cramer at outlook.com>wrote:

>  This is why I did not want to get into this conversation
>

Actually, I think it applies.  Going the other way, Android isn't really
Java SE or even Java ME for that matter.  So there are examples in all
sorts of platforms.


> , but yes, .NET is Windows only.
>

And most of it, is still Win32-only.  That's the bigger issue.  Even though
CE is being abandoned, the new non-x86 (short for "non-byte aligned and x86
ISA/opcode) platforms like RT and Microsoft continuing to avoid creating a
"clean" Win64 still continues to be a problem for them.

The reality is that coders _must_ recognize when code isn't portable.  I
have long "had it" with developers who sell management on .NET being
portable, and it's, not at all.  It never had been.  And even years ago,
trying to get them to target Mono so a subset was portable, was impossible.

The result is nearly 0% code reuse and complete re-write.


>  It may not be used in some of the higher time critical trading
> environments,
>

It's not going into a lot of backends these days, especially as Linux takes
increasing control of the DataCenter.  This isn't me talking as a "Linux
advocate."  This is me talking as a "common sense" IT professional from the
standpoint of risk mitigation.  Making Win32-only investments is not just a
good move today.


>  but that does not mean it is not used in a lot of organizations.
>

MS Win32-only .NET (most of it), is just like MS Office, is _heavily_ used
by a _lot_ of organizations.  That doesn't mean they don't re-create or
have to modify code and documents every 3-5 years because compatibility
slowly becomes a joke.  Some of it is purposeful "abandonware," and other
is loss of mindshare on existing code (e.g., outsourcing, loss of
architects, etc...), that results in such.

In many cases, things aren't even a "proprietary" standard, because it has
to have long-term value in sustainment.  .NET tends to be more documented,
to a point, at least in the vertical.  But OfficeOpen XML is turning into
one of those "we told you so" moments where 12, 14 and even 15 now still
can't hit the ISO spec, and have incompatibility issues with each other
(even before we visit the MacOS implementation, and the native Win64
issues).

But you even make my point for me later ...  ;)


>  The past 3 companies I work for have used it heavily, and it has scaled
> quite well for their needs,
>

Of course.  You're doing SMB stuff, making desktop-centric investments,
etc...  In the financial industry, Bloomberg and Reuters are the leaders
for their non-real-time, delayed information and other things.  That tends
to be Windows-centric because of the volume.  At the same time, the
original feeds don't come from .NET.

It's kinda like the same thing with AD.  People see AD and assume it's the
back-end.  In many cases of larger organizations, let alone defense, it's
not.  It's just the workgroup/division-level feed.


>  including providing the back end to a massive e-learning environment
> across the world;
>

And there are many.  ;)


>  the front end of which is Objective C on the iPad; and they both
> communicate using JSON.
>

And here's the point you make for me.  ;)

You've decide to implement a cross-platform protocol, based on a
multi-platform target, from the get-go.  You didn't just take what Visual
Studio gave you for Win32-only.  See my point?  ;)


> I do mostly systems work with minor forays into programming when I get
> bored.
>
 I was merely providing a bit more informed information on the task at hand.
>
>
 Think of it whatever you will, just make sure what is being communicated
> is informed. 😊
>

Your comment of C# v. PHP was totally apples-and-oranges.  If anything, on
an open source list, you should have at least mentioned the GPL Java
implementation, alongside C# if you so desire.  I just thought it was a bit
misleading, let alone I have to question the avenue here.

Java has many solutions in the same respects at the .NET world.  Those who
are familiar with where .NET 1 and 2 came from (original and subsequent
re-license after the original lawsuit, respectively), understand they are
directly comparable, right down to core system, object models and methods,
inheritance limitations, etc...


--
Bryan J Smith - Professional, Technical Annoyance
b.j.smith at ieee.org - http://www.linkedin.com/in/bjsmith
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.unknownlamer.org/pipermail/calug/attachments/20130504/ac050420/attachment.htm