I am SO glad the article actualy points these things out
the technology in .NET came from the Visual Basic team
Why am I *NOT* Surprised!!!
It was before its time. Computer hardware just wasn't ready for most of the ideas in Longhorn
See, THIS is the *kind* of "thinking" that gets us BLOATY CRAPWARE in which the computer system performs WORSE than its predecessor did, even when the predecessor ran on INFERIOR HARDWARE!!
so we did built the Start menu on .NET, on modern Windows
Oh, the "Start Thing" was ALSO based on dot-CRAP then ? NO surprise either!!
(and that word "modern" does not mean what they think it means...)
according to StackOverflow surveys, .NET is top in one of the "most loved" categories
Obviously not a representative survey. Most loved by "Copy Pasta" "developers" MAYBE...
It's also notable that .NET applications are increasingly deployed on Linux.
went from ONE to TWO then??? (obvious snark here, yeah)
its appeal to new programmers is limited.
One of my biggest GRIPES about Micros~1 hyping whatever "new shiny" they come up with is that it makes the assumption that senior developers MUST RE-LEARN this "new shiny" instead of being PRODUCTIVE with what they are ALREADY GOOD AT. Hesitancy is what results from this kind of "new shiny" "thinking".
C# and the .NET platform have been a remarkable success
I do not think "remarkable success" means what you think it means...
Biting the hand that feeds IT
