> He unironically believed .NET isn't the most advanced

>>58717531
It's probably heavily dependent on the win32 API underneath.
Would be cool if they rewrote it so it used OpenGL/Vulkan + whatever crossplatform window handling.
But of course Microsoft don't really care about OpenGL or Vulkan.

>>58717743

I think it's clear that they got scared of the multiplatform reality. It's not that they're scared of linux pe se, linux is small on the GUI world. But, it's linux derivatives like Android, it's all the phones, etc. even Mac so they're like let's explore it.. let's do an exploratory mission into open source.

But it's released on the MIT license! That's pretty cool. The spergs about it won't complain much, even linux distros include MIT licensed programs routinely.

File: 1469877726825.png (28KB, 470x241px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 470x241px

>>58717531
http://insights.dice.com/2013/01/17/java-vs-c-which-performs-better-in-the-real-world-2/
https://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/u64q/csharp.html
Now repeat after me
C# is a Java ripoff

>>58718012

Partially. And Java is a C ripoff. Will you invent the wheel too retard?

>>58717743
>OpenGL/Vulkan

That's a lot of work and WPF is a beast.

>>58717743
Everything in Windows is dependent on WinAPI.

You literally cannot remove it without rewriting the OS from scratch.

>>58718608

> he doesn't know the core of .NET is MIT licensed and run on linux for since last year now.

Nigga, they even offer Linux binaries for download.

>>58718646
I explicitly said everything in windows. Are you fucking blind?

File: IMG_20170129_181355.jpg (33KB, 404x378px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 404x378px

No one ITT knows how .NET works. Everyone thinks that because C# looks like Java it is Java. Never mind the CIL that is clearly built to be OS agnostic. So many people on this board just repeat shit to sound smart without actually taking any time to learn about how something works under the hood. C# is closer to C++ than Java in terms of functionality. Yes, both C# and Java use a C like syntax, and both are managed high level languages, but that's about where the similarities end.

Why are the Windows shills not even subtle? .NET is fucking garbage.

File: 1455309942530.jpg (993KB, 1182x1581px) Image search: [Google]

993KB, 1182x1581px

>>58718846
I would not be surprised if they slip telemetry botnet into .NET

They have done it with their compiler before

>>58718846

I use Linux as my daily OS but that doesn't mean I can't appreciate .NET. Microsoft actually created a powerful and robust platform. I can create libraries in C# that can be used by IronPython, and I can create applications in C/C++ that interface with COM applications to deliver data to an IronRuby application using the DLR. While .NET has its issues it certainly isn't "garbage." You can even modify the assemblies under the hood if you want. You can get as low level as needed and still use a multitude of managed languages.

>>58717531
>You're wrong. It can't compete with Qt, not even remotely.