> > C# was never meant as a platform agnostic language that competed on its > merit and could be mixed and matched into any tool chain. So you shouldn't > expect people to judge it as such and dismiss Microsoft-phobia as > irrelevant brand preference. C# was made as the Microsoft language you use > when you want to work with predominantly Microsoft technologies. If people > are trying to stay out of that all-Microsoft, Microsoft-everywhere space, > it follows logically that they avoid C#. Also, there are plenty of options > for a more platform agnostic mix & match Java++ language. >
Yes, that's the world view some seems determined to paint. However, the truth is that nothing in the Ecma specs contain anything Microsoft/Windows specific. Ignoring for a moment who's behind the standard, C# is for all practical purposes, a super-set of Java catering to that same developer group. It then seems silly to have giant discussions about the demise of legacy Java (no closures, no extension methods, no decimal literal etc.) and a next gen Java like Scala (which seems to attract the top 20% while scaring the remaining 80%). > Oracle may or may not be "nice", I don't feel qualified to make that > judgement, but I feel that I can use Java and work within the JVM ecosystem > and still retain a high level of technology freedom and autonomy. The JVM > ecosystem has a very decentralized nature. It's the norm to use a dozen > different JVM technologies in a single tool stack that are each developed > by completely unrelated people who don't work for any common organization. > Yes, which is the cause of many interoperability problems across the stack and leads to the paradox of choice [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VO6XEQIsCoM]. Choice is good, but too much choice is bad as it shifts the focus from the problem to the tools. The Microsoft tool ecosystem is completely centralized and all-Microsoft > and that's precisely what the Microsoft dev community loves: it's simpler, > there is less to learn, there is less time wasted debating about > infrastructure, infrastructure integration is more polished, and technical > staff is more standardized and interchangeable. Lots of companies adopt > all-Microsoft approaches: you can use whatever technology, OS, IDE, > programming language, database, and web framework that you want as long as > it's Microsoft. And if that's what makes them happy, that's great for them. > But I understand those that find that all-Microsoft, Microsoft-everywhere > strategy oppressive and resent it. > But dude, I am not talking about all-Microsoft anything, *you* are - hell I run Linux all over, even on my Macbook Air, so whenever I need Windows I simply log on to the corporate Citrix solution. I simply started this thread purely because Dick kept extrapolating to the point of non-sense, which doesn't suit him. > Casper, why don't you just get an all-Microsoft job? I can understand the > bitter Scala or Haskell enthusiast because it's rare to find an employer > who will pay for that type of work, but Microsoft technologies dominate the > traditional paid job space. > Because I don't pretend to live in a black or white world. Sure, it would be easier (take your pick between "Java sucks" or ".NET sucks"), but call me crazy, I'd just like to see the full spectrum out there - and my manager expect no less, since few products/services lives in total isolation. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Java Posse" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/javaposse/-/913caAZOO7QJ. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
