Alternative to VB.net ?

[dilettante]

Edit: Even though everything I said above is a direct response to dilettante I hope you understand that this is in no way an attack on him personally.

Sad what we've come to!

I sure didn't take it that way. Those are good points, well stated, that provide balance to my own comments.


My remarks about the "Win World" dying are a real concern I have. Things have changed a lot and the market doesn't seem to be embracing most of those changes. The big shifts have also come at a time when users are beginning to have real alternatives again, and may just walk out on Microsoft. The cozy Win/Mac duopoly shows some real weakness right now.

I can also say I have never been a fan of Java myself. But there are only just so many viable paths open today and you can't justify the time required to craft everything in C++. We have to keep our options open.

[Niya]

The cozy Win/Mac duopoly shows some real weakness right now.

The only real threat to this is the mobile market. Mobile devices may be ubiquitous right now but they're far from being able to replace the desktop. Word, Excel, Photoshop and high end games will keep the desktop viable for a while. Hard to imagine being productive with a word processor on an iPhone. Tablets are a bit of a wild card though.

The only thing that I believe truly rock the foundations of the desktop market is something like this:-


And I think we're at least 50 years away from that.

[dilettante]

The only real threat to this is the mobile market. Mobile devices may be ubiquitous right now but they're far from being able to replace the desktop. Word, Excel, Photoshop and high end games will keep the desktop viable for a while. Hard to imagine being productive with a word processor on an iPhone. Tablets are a bit of a wild card though.

The only thing that I believe truly rock the foundations of the desktop market is something like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Cf7IL_eZ38

And I think we're at least 50 years away from that.

So, those games you're worried about... You want to play them while standing up touching your bathroom mirror?

[dilettante]

The only real threat to this is the mobile market. Mobile devices may be ubiquitous right now but they're far from being able to replace the desktop.

I think you've been sleeping if you think this is true.

Market rejection of Windows 8 has been very high, exactly at the same time when users are learning to use alternative OSs on those mobile devices.

This does two things: (1.) it makes users less dependent on Windows and hesitant to consider alternatives, and (2.) it opens a new desktop OS opportunity for some competitor, something Linux never managed because it had no traction in getting mass market mindshare.

It may be far less about desktop workloads moving to mobile OSs than it is about mobile OSs moving to the desktop.

There are some pretty good alternatives to MS Office on iOS and Android right now. Either of those might make the jump to a desktop OS any time and I doubt these alternative suites will hesitate to support them when they do.

The Android-x86 project is at a state now where it works very well as a desktop OS on a system with no touchscreen. All that really needs to happen is broader hardware support (GPUs, some CPU features, etc.) and a blessing from Google. Then Google or a licensed 3rd party could start shipping a retail Android Desktop you can install in any x86 or x64 machine. Or they might release it for free.

This could easily become an attractive alternative to Windows on client systems for both home and business use.

[Niya]

(2.) it opens a new desktop OS opportunity for some competitor, something Linux never managed because it had no traction in getting mass market mindshare.......
The Android-x86 project is at a state now where it works very well as a desktop OS on a system with no touchscreen.

I think you're greatly underestimating Windows. Its a very big shoe for a competitor to fill. Windows 8 may have failed but you're forgetting that there is still Windows 7 and XP which I would consider two of the best desktop OSes around.

Part of the allure of Windows is how easy it is to configure and how user friendly it is. Linux for example has been said a few times to be developer centric. You have to get low and dirty to diagnose problems and configure it. Its not point and click/plug and play like Windows. Even me as a person with some background in the low and dirty wants nothing to do with any OS that requires this, not when there is something like Windows that automates all these things.

All I have to do to install a driver on Windows 7 these is to turn on the PC. As far as I understand, in Linux, you have to use all kinds of bizarre console commands and God forbid one of them gives you some kind of cryptic error message for getting something wrong. Then there is getting drivers for Linux, another headache. Windows is just way ahead in ease of use.

I don't know anything of Android but it is based on Linux so I'd expect the same wires and pliers ethic. What you're saying has merit no doubt, but I'm not holding my breath.

[dilettante]

I don't know anything of Android but it is based on Linux so I'd expect the same wires and pliers ethic. What you're saying has merit no doubt, but I'm not holding my breath.

It actually uses little except the Linux kernel and a few low level core libraries (libc), and isn't really much like a conventional "Linux distribution" at all. While it is extremely unlikely, Android could be released running on top of a BSD kernel or something else tomorrow. There is enough of Linux's core there to run some of the command line utilities if you add them and a few more low-level libraries but the average user would see the shell (command prompt) far less often than a casual Windows user - if ever.

Chrome OS is somewhat similar in construction at the low level, with even less likelihood of shell access.

Windows does have a legacy of experience in running on all sorts of hardware to benefit from. Driver support is indeed a strong point, and since Windows has had huge market share vendors are quick to make drivers available if the install media don't already have usable ones.


But the times they are a-changin' and I think you are overestimating Windows stranglehold on the desktop down the road. I don't expect it to disappear at all, just to lose more and more ground over time to alternatives.

[esposito]

But the times they are a-changin' and I think you are overestimating Windows stranglehold on the desktop down the road. I don't expect it to disappear at all, just to lose more and more ground over time to alternatives.

You should not forget that Windows was created for the desktop and is still the best tool you can use at work. Tablets are not an alternative when it comes to using a computer in your office. It is true that iPads and Android devices are becoming more and more widespread, but it is also true that they are not used to deal with office stuffs (e.g. to write complex documents, work with graphics or multimedia, manage huge amounts of data etc.).

The Mac is the only serious threat to the Windows monopoly of desktop computers. Thank God, for the moment it is too expensive to replace Windows. People know you can do the same things buying a Windows PC for half price.

Personally, I think that MS made a mistake when they tried to impose the Metro interface on the desktop version of Windows. Multi-tasking is one of the most useful tools that (classic) Windows makes available, and using apps in full-screen mode would mean to go back to the DOS era.

I am firmly convinced that the best strategy for MS should consist in optimizing the classic Windows OS also for the use on tablets. They should invest in developing more powerful hardware for the tablet market and, more importantly, they should reduce prices as much as they could. The dual-purpose cover/keyboard that Windows tablets are equipped with makes a tablet as useful as a desktop PC (because it allows you to get rid of the cumbersome virtual keyboard which "invades" a large part of the screen) provided that it runs the classic Windows OS.

If there were no differences between a desktop PC and a tablet, even in terms of prices, it would make a lot of sense to take Windows into serious consideration when deciding which tablet to buy. What a shame MS are too blind to see!

[esposito]

I forgot to add that the Microsoft Store (the only place where you can download your WinRT apps from) represents a serious disincentive when considering whether to buy a Windows RT device or not. People are used to buying software directly from private developers and this prevents them from considering Windows RT as an adequate tool to use at work.

[dilettante]

You should not forget that Windows was created for the desktop and is still the best tool you can use at work. Tablets are not an alternative when it comes to using a computer in your office. It is true that iPads and Android devices are becoming more and more widespread, but it is also true that they are not used to deal with office stuffs (e.g. to write complex documents, work with graphics or multimedia, manage huge amounts of data etc.).

True today, perhaps not so much very soon. Android is still associated with mobile devices in the minds of most people but it is already on the edge of becoming the first viable Linux-based desktop OS ever.

Whether you visit the Java camp or the .Net camp you'll find that enterprise developers have a disdain for desktop development that is only growing as they start working more and more "in the cloud." If it were practical they'd make everyone just use a browser at the client, since that basically eliminates all client deployment issues as well as buying them a large amount client OS portability.

When a web browser isn't "rich enough" to do real work sustainably (perhaps the client machines must support specialized printers, scanners, or other less browser-friendly local hardware) they know they need an alternative, but it still won't be a "fat client" application if they can avoid it. They don't care whether the client OS is Windows or something else entirely though.

I suspect this is where Microsoft saw WinRT/Metro fitting in at the corporate level.

Conventional Windows Desktop programming will remain important to the home and small-office user for a while yet but they don't "drive the train." I.e. nobody considers their opinions or needs important. The leadership comes from the needs of the corporate market on the one hand and the mass consumer on the other. The little guy is merely along for the ride.