back to article Microsoft bods tell El Reg: We've re-pivoted open-source .NET Core

Microsoft's open-source fork of .NET, called .NET Core, will hit RC2 – that's Release Candidate 2 – in mid-May, according to Scott Hunter, director of program management. The tooling will be dubbed "Preview 1", with further changes planned before it stabilizes. If a software preview is called a Release Candidate, it is …

  1. kryptylomese

    Or keep using Mono which has always been open source?

    1. d3vy Silver badge

      Mono and .net core are aimed at different things.

      Mono is a reimplementation of Full Fat .net.

      Core is a very cut down and streamlined version of .net

      There is also a new version of the full framework coming out (v5)

      1. JDX Gold badge

        Wasn't there some talk of converging?

  2. Mikel

    The real news

    They're talking to the Vultures again.

    1. Steve Foster

      Re: The real news

      Nah, it's the fruity firm that won't talk to ElReg.

  3. energystar

    Lots of 'screaming' wheels and smoke...

    At Microsoft Headquarters. Wishing the best. Still waiting for a REAL license on core technologies, to effectively cross-build upon. [Well, not for me anymore].

  4. Doctor Syntax Silver badge


    That's enough on its own to deserve a boycott.

    1. Chemical Bob

      Re: Re-pivoted

      Oh, don't be silly, its just been spin-doctored again. Nothing to see here...

    2. Sebastian A

      Re: Re-pivoted

      Re-pivoted? I didn't even know they'd pivoted it in the first place!

    3. Mikel

      Re: Re-pivoted

      Swivelled might be a better word, implying it's in their nature and certainly going to happen again.

      1. MotionCompensation

        Re: Re-pivoted

        English is not my native language. So I looked it up. To pivot means, among other things, to spin. When I looked up "to spin", it all started to make sense.

        "To provide an interpretation of (a statement or event, for example), especially in a way meant to sway public opinion"


        "To dive in a spiral descent"

        I learned a lot today!

    4. Daniel von Asmuth

      Re: Re-pivoted

      Who wants object-oriented software when you can have re-pivoted code?

  5. Zane

    And when the year is over I’ll reappear And have a solution

    Maybe it's time for MS to find a software architect? Developers developers developers seems not to be enough to make sensible software.

    1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

      Re: And when the year is over I’ll reappear And have a solution

      I always hear "developers, developers, developers" as a pitiful cry, rather like Peter Sellers doing "a horse, a horse" as Richard III

  6. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Microsoft desperate not to be obsolete

    And failing at that too

  7. bombastic bob Silver badge

    Lipstick on a boar

    well, ".Not core" is lipstick on a boar as far as I'm concerned.

    a photo of their project manager wearing a T shirt with a FLUGLY 2D 'modern' windows logo didn't help. ew.

    If they wanted to put a 'face' on the open sourceness, they should've just hired the guy that invented the, wait...

    ".Not" is bass-ackwards, and pretends to be 'object oriented' at the expense of resources and performance. You do NOT need to get multi-verse, universe, galaxy, solar system, planet, continent, yotta yotta, atom... just to get 'atom'. It's REDONKULOUSNESS at its best, and no WONDER Windows performance took a dive beginning with Server 2003 [where the UI became VERY "dot Notty" compared to Server 2k and XP].

    Windows developers are better coding for the Win32 API (on windows 7, where ~2/3 of windows computer users still are), at least until Microsoft actively tries to stop us.

    1. Tchou

      Re: Lipstick on a boar

      Win32 -now called Windows API for the sake of 32/64 bitness- will always be around because Windows Core can't on something else than C and C++. Computers are working the way they used to be since decades and academics language paradigms are not changing that, at the very best only making programmers worse at doing their job.

      Making native Windows API unavailable for programmers is definitely a risk MS is willing to take tough, keeping for itself the "pro" way and letting the rest of the world play in the sandbox dreaming they know what they do.

      The aim of MS is clearly to vampirize further the Open world, stealing features that will be added to .Net Core by the community to .Net while bragging about openness and honesty and transparency, why keeping 2 versions otherwise and grow them "separately"?

      "We have Fortune 500 customers that have deployed RC1 in production on both Windows and Linux. The performance that they’re seeing on those workloads is higher than they’ve ever seen before," he said." => I laugh in your general direction Microsoft, the reason people comes toward big vendors is not because of performence or usability or features but merely because they need a big name to hide behind as an excuse for management : "nobody got ever fired for buying Microsoft (or Oracle)"

      1. thisisthelist

        Re: Lipstick on a boar

        Spoken like someone who wants the world to stop where things were in the 90's, when C++ was all that and a ++ bag o' chips. C++ is not appropriate for a huge sector of programming tasks. .NET sits on top of low-level API's and exists to make that huge sector of programming tremendously more efficient to write. Software engineers are in the solutions business, not in the business to bill twice or three times the hours for simple line of business solutions so they can recreate their own memory management subsystem in the service of enabling a department to get insights into data they're already gathering. If you like living down at the molecular level, great. That doesn't mean that any other discipline or approach in a gigantic domain is immediately BS, because you aren't living there.

    2. LDS Silver badge

      Re: Lipstick on a boar

      Windows 2003 was still fine. It was from 2008 onward that the problem begins. Now I am afraid every time I have to open the event log. In 2003 it was fine and fast enough. From 2008 it is just slow slow with no real improvements. All the .NET management tools are too slow and cumbersome, and looks coded by an amateur programmer.

      And when they are built over powershell commands even more so. Invoking a shell to pass it a command line and then parsing the text output for GUI display is just stupid - call a damned API directly, you also get a chance of better error handling.

      All the remoting technologies over HTTP are no better either. Lots of data converted into text and back passed around. Not surprisingly, HTTP 2.0 became a fully binary protocol.

  8. Warm Braw Silver badge

    Is it just me?

    Or are the Program Managers getting younger?

    1. Charlie Clark Silver badge

      Re: Is it just me?

      Says a lot about the musical chairs at Microsoft over the last few years.

    2. John Sanders

      Re: Is it just me?

      Marketing dept:

      - Quick, get us a smiley tech guy!

  9. Charlie Clark Silver badge


    I don't currently work with .NET but there are some libraries I'd be interested at being able to compile and work with. But I completely failed to learn anything from this article except that beta2 is completely different to beta1. Anyone able to fill me in?

  10. Anonymous Coward

    Don't trust them

    You will spend a year learning this and a further year persuading people to use it. Microsoft will then 'repurpose' (i.e. deprecate) the platform. You will have wasted yet more of your professional life on Microsoft for their gain and your loss. In the meantime, your compatriots will have been polishing up on skills the market actually wants.

    See: Silverlight.

    1. John Sanders

      Re: Don't trust them

      You will spend a year learning this, some stuff will be implemented somewhere, MS will not maintain the product and will keep it around like a Zombie to kill it 2-3 years later.

      In the mean time just to ease the pain they will recommend that you deploy your code in Windows where it will magically work just fine.

    2. energystar

      Trust them, We need all of Us.

      Just don't mind invert on any tech not applicable at the rest of the platforms. Particularities to a platform should be qualified as incidental and minimal, or ignored. That goes for FOSS, also.

  11. John Smith 19 Gold badge

    The task of a commercial software tools company is *not* to help you do useful work.

    It's to so tie you to their systems you keep buying them.

    If you do useful work as a result that's a bonus.

    1. energystar

      The task of a commercial software tools company...

      Is to go well beyond what the Relevant Community is able to provide you. That's why the License type is vital.

      Use the Software Houses to empower your productivity [Not to get lost on detail]. But try not to develop dependency.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020