Java and C#

I thought this was an interesting outlook on Java and C# - like I care about Ruby. Anyway, I'm surprised there wasn't more on C# at OSCON2005. I've heard that C# has a pretty good following of Linux users. Granted, this was just something I heard from a hardcore Linux person, so I have no idea how much support it has. Of course, this is all because of Mono.

Greg talks about how Java 5.0 (1.5) and 6.0 (1.6) features will help Java surpass C# current capabilities. Well, he's right. That kind of brings one thing I've always worried about to mind: will .NET be able to keep up? Microsoft is always good in the heat of battle, so I'm sure they'll do a good job; but speculation is exactly that. .NET 2.0 is coming soon, but when will 2.1 be around? If .NET releases are continually tied to other product releases, we may be hurting for features as Java spits out releases with smaller feature changes quicker. The 2.0 release will no doubt give us a great advantage over 1.1, but wouldn't it have been better to have gradual improvements to get us here? Maybe it's just me.

I obviously think some things should've waited until the 2.0 release, but I'm sure there could've been a number of features added to 1.2, 1.3, and 1.4 releases. Either way, 2 1/2 years later, we finally get an upgrade - more significant than any Java release since it's move to Java 2. Let's just hope they keep coming...and a little sooner.

posted on Wednesday, August 10, 2005 4:42 AM

Feedback

# re: Java and C# 8/10/2005 7:30 PM J. Daniel Smith

I'm with you on more frequent, smaller releases. Having to wait 2.5 years (and hearing about it for the past 1.5!) is far too long.

Part of the problem is that Microsoft decided to tie Visual Studio and SQL Server together.

# re: Java and C# 8/11/2005 5:06 AM Michael Flanakin

Yeah, I know about tying Visual Studio/.NET releases to other products, but once they see another product release is going to hold it back, as was supposedly the case with SQL Server 2005, they should say, "Hey, SQL Server 2005 is going to delay our 'soon-to-be-ready' VS 2005! Maybe we should go ahead and deploy VS and keep working on SQL Server."

Just my opinion :-)

# re: Java and C# 9/11/2005 8:21 AM Michael Brown

I read the same post which he has since taken down apparently, and commented on it in my blog.

In all honesty .Net upgrades have been released on a schedule that almost mirrors Java's first three upgrades. Java 1.0 came in 96 with 1.1 coming in 97 and 1.2 arrived in 99. Java has had 5 updates in 9 years.

In regards to Java's numbering system it's totally ridiculous. When Sun released 1.1, people were like "How modest of Sun, this really should have been called Java 2.0 because it's such a major upgrade." I guess Sun saw this as a good thing and continued the laughable system of numbering their upgrades as 1.x In all honesty 1.1 was an accurate number for that release because there was a lot broken in 1.0.

Honestly, I wouldn't want too frequent upgrades to .Net because that would involve buying a new Visual Studio more frequently. If you think about it VS6 was around for seven years before VS.Net. Since VS.Net we have had three releases in as many years.

# re: Java and C# 9/11/2005 2:48 PM Michael Flanakin

.NET releases shouldn't be tied to Visual Studio releases. It is nice, but not mandatory. Honestly, most new features can be supported without any additional changes to VS. Those changes will make life easier; but I stand strong by my belief that they should be considered independent of each other. Perhaps major releases could come with new versions of VS, but minor releases shouldn't. For instance, I'd like to see more modeling support for VS before .NET 2.1 comes out.

Post Feedback

Title:
Name:
Email: (never displayed)
Url:
Comments:
Please add 7 and 6 and type the answer here: Enter the code shown above: Remember Me?

Michael Flanakin's Web Log

News

Article Categories

Archives

Post Categories

Image Galleries

Miscellaneous

Feedback

Post Feedback