• OneCardboardBox@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    171
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 year 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?

    • Trailblazing Braille Taser@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      56
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      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.

      • puttputt@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        The reason they checked that it started with “Windows 9” was because it worked for “Windows 95” and “Windows 98”

      • activ8r@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year 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.

      • dev_null@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year 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.

        • Wrrzag@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Because it checks if the version starts with the string “Windows 9*”, not wether the number is less than 9.

      • Ziixe@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I was about to say that most apps should check the NT number but then I remembered that until XP it wasn’t common to run a NT system, but then I remembered NT 4 existed basically in the same timeframe as 95 did, and even if the argument went to “it’s a 9x application”, shouldn’t these OSes at least have some sort of build number or different identifier systems? Because as I said NT systems were around, so they would probably need a check for that

    • XTornado@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      1 year 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
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year 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
            3
            ·
            1 year 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

      • coloredgrayscale@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year 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.

      • Rev. Layle@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        The reasoning it was to not confuse with .net framework 4.x series, and since they went beyond 4.x, it’s just .net now. I believe .net core moniker was to explicitly distinguish is from framework versions.

        It didn’t help the confusion at all, tch. Being a .net guy since 1.0, you just figure it out eventually

    • Kogasa@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

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

    • labsin@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      They also couldn’t call it “.Net Core 4” so they called it “.Net 5”

      Will they keep skipping numbers or start thinking about not naming everything the same.

    • Vladkar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Remember when Nintendo was panned for the name “Wii U”, and Microsoft saw that and said “hold my beer”

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

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

      Microsoft is so bad at naming things!

  • envelope@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    128
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year 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
    105
    ·
    1 year ago

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

  • Sanctus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    60
    ·
    1 year ago

    I can, but due to the extra strains involved the price of this contract will increase.

    • nelly_man@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      55
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year 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

  • twopi@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    Well .NET is dead now so I guess .COM and .ORG are dead too?

    • Rev. Layle@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      .net isn’t dead, that’s for sure. It’s not the top ecosystem, but it is pretty healthy.

  • ursakhiin@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s been my experience that the .NET developer will miss the actual statement and take it as an assault on .NET being the best solution for every use case.

  • Destide@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Yes but I’ll l need to charge more as they require disclosure specific equipment

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

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