Given that .net was a TLD long before the framework came out, it was a stupid thing to name it. Caused confusion and the inability to Google things right away.
dotnet developer
Submitted 9 months ago by JPDev@programming.dev to programmer_humor@programming.dev
https://programming.dev/pictrs/image/d219b059-f50d-4cfc-82a8-0cef5417270a.png
Comments
envelope@kbin.social 9 months ago
schnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de 9 months ago
Microsoft names many things stupidly.
xmunk@sh.itjust.works 9 months ago
Fuck you forever SQLServer. Transact was perfectly googleable.
Gork@lemm.ee 9 months ago
Microsoft Azure Blob
(Yes it’s a real product they market)
hemko@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 months ago
And renames a random product every month, following a restructuring it’s licensing
intensely_human@lemm.ee 9 months ago
“xbox”
jwt@programming.dev 9 months ago
It’s like naming your company x
intensely_human@lemm.ee 9 months ago
Or the rectangular gaming console that you sell “xbox”
NaibofTabr@infosec.pub 9 months ago
Like naming a new TLD .zip!
pelya@lemmy.world 9 months ago
It was pretty smart marketing move. Business people hear ‘dot net’ and nod wisely. Tech people hear ‘dot net’ and scrunch their faces. Either way people keep talking about Microsoft Java.
neutron@thelemmy.club 9 months ago
And this is why alcoholism is rampant. Please free me from this insanity.
jaybone@lemmy.world 9 months ago
That aligns with their fucked up naming conventions anyway.
Gork@lemm.ee 9 months ago
No, you’ll need to contact Kim Dotcom. I am merely Kim Dotnet.
aberrate_junior_beatnik@midwest.social 9 months ago
Ok, but we all should admit: .net is a terrible name.
neutron@thelemmy.club 9 months ago
And then there’s .net classic and .net core. Making up two entirely separate names shouldn’t be difficult for marketing executives.
dan@upvote.au 9 months ago
.NET Core doesn’t exist any more. It’s just .NET now.
The classic version is mostly legacy at this point too.
Honytawk@lemmy.zip 9 months ago
Still better than .dot
nexguy@lemmy.world 9 months ago
I totally agree.socialmedia
Sanctus@lemmy.world 9 months ago
I can, but due to the extra strains involved the price of this contract will increase.
MagicShel@programming.dev 9 months ago
How many strains of does it take to develop using .net? Are we talking high end or ditch weed?
NoLifeKing@ani.social 9 months ago
We talk about 2 bottles of Cuban Rum and 3 packs of sour gummy worms on top of the pay.
Daft_ish@lemmy.world 9 months ago
I can’t even remember what dumb shit Trump was showing this guy.
nelly_man@lemmy.world 9 months ago
It was an interview with Jonathan Swan about COVID-19 where Trump had a bunch of papers with graphs trying to show that the US was doing well with cases. The paper he handed over showed the rates of deaths per case, and Swan was asking him about the high rate of deaths in the US when looking at the total population of the country.
Daft_ish@lemmy.world 9 months ago
Man, if the media was with its salt it could absolutely bury Trump in negative campaign ad. It’s one thing to run a single valid negative campaign ad. With Trump you could collect them like fucking pokemon.
brbposting@sh.itjust.works 9 months ago
brbposting@sh.itjust.works 9 months ago
crystalmerchant@lemmy.world 9 months ago
Man it is HARD to believe this jabbering orangesicle was ever the president of the fucking United States
Mesa@programming.dev 9 months ago
“They are dying; it is what it is.”
Easily hits one of the 10 things you do not want to hear the president of your country say.
stewie410@programming.dev 9 months ago
I forgot how much this interview reminded me of my parents.
LazaroFilm@lemmy.world 9 months ago
I can but we’ll need to Reno I are my salary.
twopi@lemmy.ca 9 months ago
Well .NET is dead now so I guess .COM and .ORG are dead too?
quackers@lemmy.blahaj.zone 9 months ago
.NET is better than ever wdym
revlayle@lemm.ee 9 months ago
.net isn’t dead, that’s for sure. It’s not the top ecosystem, but it is pretty healthy.
satanmat@lemmy.world 9 months ago
But we’re an EDU!!!
ursakhiin@beehaw.org 9 months ago
It’s been my experience that the .NET developer will miss the actual statement and take it as an assault on .NET being the best solution for every use case.
JoShmoe@ani.social 9 months ago
Can you spot the error? Johnson went to the trump organization for a professional field.
intensely_human@lemm.ee 9 months ago
This is one of the funniest meme templates because it’s based on one of the funniest moments in media history.
sirico@feddit.uk 9 months ago
Yes but I’ll l need to charge more as they require disclosure specific equipment
CannotSleep420@lemmygrad.ml 9 months ago
I use .NET for my job. My team shifted to a lot of frontend work with react for about a year when the lastest .NET was .NET 5. Barely a year later after not touching it the latest version was .NET 7. Ridiculous.
NigelFrobisher@aussie.zone 9 months ago
I’m developing it for X-Box One X.
Antaeus@lemmy.world 9 months ago
That’s hilarious!
OneCardboardBox@lemmy.sdf.org 9 months ago
Sorry, what’s .Net again?
The runtime? You mean .Net, or .Net Core, or .Net Framework? Oh, you mean a web framework in .Net. Was that Asp.Net or AspNetcore?
Remind me why we let the “Can’t call it Windows 9” company design our enterprise language?
0x0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 months ago
But that actually made sense! They care about backwards compatibility.
For those not in the know: some legacy software checked if the OS name began with “Windows 9” to differentiate between 95 and future versions.
bequirtle@lemmy.world 9 months ago
let’s face it, the 10 was chosen for marketing, even if there’s a technical reason it can’t be “windows 9”
it could’ve just been windows nine. or any other word that isn’t a number
puttputt@beehaw.org 9 months ago
The reason they checked that it started with “Windows 9” was because it worked for “Windows 95” and “Windows 98”
activ8r@sh.itjust.works 9 months ago
It makes sense why they did it, but their messed up versioning was the cause to begin with. You should always assume Devs will cut corners in inappropriate ways.
dev_null@lemmy.ml 9 months ago
An often repeated urban legend that has no basis in reality. Sodtware checking the version of Windows gets “6.1” for Windows 7 and “6.2” for Windows 8. The marketing name doesn’t matter and is different.
dan@upvote.au 9 months ago
This is a myth. Windows doesn’t even have an API to give you the marketing name of the OS. Internally, Windows 95 is version 4.0 and Windows 98 is 4.1. The API to get the version returns the major and minor version separately, so to check for Windows 95 you’d check if majorVersion = 4 and minorVersion = 0.
jadelord@discuss.tchncs.de 9 months ago
Strange argument… how does that prevent checks versus Windows 7, 8 and 1* all of which would be less than 9.
mnemonicmonkeys@sh.itjust.works 9 months ago
Eh. I think Microsoft should have let that break so the spaghetti code finally gets fixed
ziixe@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 months ago
I was about to say that most apps should check the NT number but then I remembered that until XP it wasn’t common to run a NT system, but then I remembered NT 4 existed basically in the same timeframe as 95 did, and even if the argument went to “it’s a 9x application”, shouldn’t these OSes at least have some sort of build number or different identifier systems? Because as I said NT systems were around, so they would probably need a check for that
XTornado@lemmy.ml 9 months ago
.net core is not a thing anymore in case somebody it’s not aware, now is just .net. (unless you use really old version of course).
kautau@lemmy.world 9 months ago
But it’s still the core lol
github.com/dotnet/core
Pfnic@feddit.ch 9 months ago
I have the same issue with Java. Oracle JDK, Open JDK or some other weird distribution? Enteprise Servers or a Framework like Springboot? It’s always easier if you’re familiar with the technology.
stewie410@programming.dev 9 months ago
Hey now, why don’t you join my company and use
jboss-4.2.2.GA? (kill me)activ8r@sh.itjust.works 9 months ago
Because they have dozens of years of experience! They didn’t learn anything from it, but they have it!
kogasa@programming.dev 9 months ago
I really don’t think it’s that bad. The only weird thing is .NET Core becoming just .NET in version 5.
dan@upvote.au 9 months ago
Not too weird… It’s the “one true .NET version” now. The legacy .NET Framework had a good run but it’s not really receiving updates any more.
neutron@thelemmy.club 9 months ago
I scream silently everytime.
coloredgrayscale@programming.dev 9 months ago
May I introduce you to Usb 3.x renaming?
3.0, 3.1Gen1, 3.2Gen1, 3.2Gen1x1 are the 5Gbps version.
3.1Gen2, 3.2Gen2, 3.2Gen1x2, 3.2Gen2x1 are the 10Gbps version.
revlayle@lemm.ee 9 months ago
The reasoning it was to not confuse with .net framework 4.x series, and since they went beyond 4.x, it’s just .net now. I believe .net core moniker was to explicitly distinguish is from framework versions.
It didn’t help the confusion at all, tch. Being a .net guy since 1.0, you just figure it out eventually
NigelFrobisher@aussie.zone 9 months ago
I’m developing it for Xbox One X.
Vladkar@lemmy.world 9 months ago
Remember when Nintendo was panned for the name “Wii U”, and Microsoft saw that and said “hold my beer”
labsin@sh.itjust.works 9 months ago
They also couldn’t call it “.Net Core 4” so they called it “.Net 5”
Will they keep skipping numbers or start thinking about not naming everything the same.
pewgar_seemsimandroid@lemmy.blahaj.zone 9 months ago
example.net
turbodrooler@lemmy.world 9 months ago
Razor Blazor