• OneCardboardBox@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    5 months ago

    Sorry, what’s .Net again?

    The runtime? You mean .Net, or .Net Core, or .Net Framework? Oh, you mean a web framework in .Net. Was that Asp.Net or AspNetcore?

    Remind me why we let the “Can’t call it Windows 9” company design our enterprise language?

    • Can’t call it Windows 9

      But that actually made sense! They care about backwards compatibility.

      For those not in the know: some legacy software checked if the OS name began with “Windows 9” to differentiate between 95 and future versions.

      • dan@upvote.au
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        some legacy software checked if the OS name began with “Windows 9” to differentiate between 95 and future versions.

        This is a myth. Windows doesn’t even have an API to give you the marketing name of the OS. Internally, Windows 95 is version 4.0 and Windows 98 is 4.1. The API to get the version returns the major and minor version separately, so to check for Windows 95 you’d check if majorVersion = 4 and minorVersion = 0.

        Edit: This is the return type from the API: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/api/winnt/ns-winnt-osversioninfoexa

            • Octopus1348@lemy.lol
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              5 months ago

              I once heard some YouTuber say Windows uses \ in path names instead of / like everyone else because Microsoft thinks backwards.

              • dan@upvote.au
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                5 months ago

                As what often happens, using \ for paths is for backwards compatibility.

                Neither CP/M nor MS-DOS 1.0 had folders. When folders were added in MS-DOS 2.0, the syntax had to be backwards compatible. DOS already used forward slashes for command-line options (e.g. DIR /W) so using them for folders would have been ambiguous - does that DIR command have a /W option, or is it viewing the contents of the W directory at the root of the drive? Backslashes weren’t used for anything so they used them for folders.

                This is the same reason why you can’t create files with device names like con, lpt1, and so on. DOS 2.0 has to retain backwards compatibility with 1.0 where you could do something like TYPE foo.txt > LPT1 to send a document to a printer. The device names are reserved globally so they can work regardless of what folder you’re in.

            • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              5 months ago

              Well, better to be backwards with backwards compatibility than to just be backwards.

              looks at Apple

        • intensely_human@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          it could’ve just been windows nine. or any other word that isn’t a number

          But “nine” is a word that is a number

      • dev_null@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        An often repeated urban legend that has no basis in reality. Software checking the version of Windows gets “6.1” for Windows 7 and “6.2” for Windows 8. The marketing name doesn’t matter and is different.

      • activ8r@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        It makes sense why they did it, but their messed up versioning was the cause to begin with. You should always assume Devs will cut corners in inappropriate ways.

    • XTornado@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      .net core is not a thing anymore in case somebody it’s not aware, now is just .net. (unless you use really old version of course).

        • XTornado@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          Well the repo link yes… create a new repo and migrate everything… just so the url doesn’t say core no more it’s quite unnecessary.

          And to be honest actual code is currently under https://github.com/dotnet/dotnet The other links is just for news and docs currently.

          • kautau@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            5 months ago

            I agree, it was mostly a joke. But as the parent commenter explained, “.net is now dot net” is still confusing. They really should just cut ties with the .net name and start fresh. “.net is now MS Interop Framework” or some such. Adopt more sane server versioning moving forward, so searching for information isn’t so wild across all the possible variations and versions of .net, dot net core, dot net framework, asp.net, etc

    • Kogasa@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      I really don’t think it’s that bad. The only weird thing is .NET Core becoming just .NET in version 5.

      • dan@upvote.au
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        Not too weird… It’s the “one true .NET version” now. The legacy .NET Framework had a good run but it’s not really receiving updates any more.

        • Kogasa@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          I have no complaints about just calling it .NET. The distinction between .NET and .NET Framework isn’t much of a problem. It’s the fact that .NET and .NET Core aren’t actually different that’s odd. It underwent a name change without really being a different project, meanwhile the Framework -> Core change was actually a new project.

          • Lmaydev@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            Actually they are different.

            .Net core, mono and xamarin used to be completely separate and slightly incompatible runtimes.

            They have all been unified under .Net so c# (and other .net languages) will run exactly the same on each.

            So the coreclr runtime still exists but you no longer need to target it specifically.

    • Lmaydev@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      .Net is both the umbrella term for the entire ecosystem and the new runtime haha

      Microsoft is so bad at naming things!

      • coloredgrayscale@programming.dev
        cake
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        May I introduce you to Usb 3.x renaming?

        3.0, 3.1Gen1, 3.2Gen1, 3.2Gen1x1 are the 5Gbps version.

        3.1Gen2, 3.2Gen2, 3.2Gen1x2, 3.2Gen2x1 are the 10Gbps version.

    • neutron@thelemmy.club
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      And then there’s .net classic and .net core. Making up two entirely separate names shouldn’t be difficult for marketing executives.

      • dan@upvote.au
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        .NET Core doesn’t exist any more. It’s just .NET now. I think that changed around the release of .NET 5?

        The classic version is mostly legacy at this point too.

        • neutron@thelemmy.club
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          My workplace insists on using dot net classic to recreate a twenty years old VB app that should be able to drink, vote, and drive.

          Please send help. SQL queries are a spaghetti mess and all the original devs are probably gone or dead.

        • NegativeInf@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months ago

          Just because it’s no longer supported doesn’t mean there’s not some poor intern refactoring spaghetti backend in a basement somewhere using it.

          • Lmaydev@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            It is very much still supported and will be for a very long time.

            You just shouldn’t start any new products using it.

          • dan@upvote.au
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            Sure, but you can still find plenty of info on it by searching for .NET Framework or .NET 4.6. All the documentation is still available. Its just not in the spotlight any more.

  • envelope@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    5 months ago

    Given that .net was a TLD long before the framework came out, it was a stupid thing to name it. Caused confusion and the inability to Google things right away.

  • Gork@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    No, you’ll need to contact Kim Dotcom. I am merely Kim Dotnet.

    • nelly_man@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      It was an interview with Jonathan Swan about COVID-19 where Trump had a bunch of papers with graphs trying to show that the US was doing well with cases. The paper he handed over showed the rates of deaths per case (though Trump didn’t seem to understand the graph), and Swan was asking him about the high rate of deaths in the US when looking at the total population of the country.

      https://youtu.be/NmrEfQG6pIg

      • Daft_ish@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        Man, if the media was worth a damn it could absolutely bury Trump in negative campaign ads. It’s one thing to run a single valid negative campaign ad. With Trump you could collect them like fucking pokemon.

        • nelly_man@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months ago

          Yeah, I found it on my laptop and was too lazy to send it over to my phone where I was on lemmy. So I typed it up, and then I actually sent the link to my phone when it was pointed out that it was broken.

          Well, maybe lazy isn’t the right word. But I was too something.

      • Mesa@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        “They are dying; it is what it is.”

        Easily hits one of the 10 things you do not want to hear the president of your country say.

  • intensely_human@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    This is one of the funniest meme templates because it’s based on one of the funniest moments in media history.