←back to thread

.NET 10

(devblogs.microsoft.com)
489 points runesoerensen | 9 comments | 11 Nov 25 15:44 UTC | HN request time: 1.244s | source | bottom
Show context
jitbit ◴[11 Nov 25 15:48 UTC] No.45888669[source]▶
For us, every .NET upgrade since .NET 5 has gone surprisingly smoothly and reduced CPU/RAM usage by 10–15%.

We were even able to downgrade our cloud servers to smaller instances, literally.

I wish .NET was more popular among startups, if only C# could get rid of the "enterpisey" stigma.

replies(26): >>45888799 #>>45888804 #>>45889332 #>>45891939 #>>45896032 #>>45898279 #>>45898305 #>>45898358 #>>45898503 #>>45898877 #>>45899062 #>>45899235 #>>45899246 #>>45899326 #>>45899445 #>>45899481 #>>45899858 #>>45900544 #>>45900791 #>>45900829 #>>45903218 #>>45904345 #>>45904435 #>>45905041 #>>45906073 #>>45907122 #
nicoburns ◴[12 Nov 25 14:22 UTC] No.45900544[source]▶
> I wish .NET was more popular among startups, if only C# could get rid of the "enterpisey" stigma.

I tried .NET and liked C# as a language. But even though the language and runtime are now open source, it seemed like a lot of the recommended libraries were still commercially licensed, which was an immediate nope from me. I've never encountered that in any other ecosystem.

replies(12): >>45900964 #>>45901284 #>>45901414 #>>45903677 #>>45904049 #>>45904177 #>>45904488 #>>45907685 #>>45907873 #>>45908268 #>>45908319 #>>45908388 #
wvenable ◴[12 Nov 25 18:40 UTC] No.45904049[source]▶
I will pile on that I don't use any commercial libraries in .NET at all. Ironically, I do purchase a commercial library for front-end JavaScript.

I agree that the commercial library offerings seem much more "in your face" with .NET but I don't find the actual breadth and depth of the free and open source library situation to be that troubling. It certainly continues to get better every year.

.NET is very "batteries included" as well so you don't need a huge base-line of competing open source packages just to do "hello world".

replies(1): >>45906999 #
1. osigurdson ◴[12 Nov 25 21:28 UTC] No.45906999[source]▶
Every company should give developers $100 per year to donate to the open source project of their choosing. Right now the conditions are such that maintainers are incentivized to rug pull.
replies(2): >>45907954 #>>45908364 #
2. dlahoda ◴[12 Nov 25 22:45 UTC] No.45907954[source]▶
every company must pay enough to allow developer to donate from his own pocket (and each state to allow vat free donations without paper work).
replies(2): >>45908073 #>>45908148 #
3. ablob ◴[12 Nov 25 22:56 UTC] No.45908073[source]▶
Surely you don't expect someonoe that uses a particular piece of software only during work to donate to that from their own salary.
replies(2): >>45908167 #>>45908457 #
4. geodel ◴[12 Nov 25 23:03 UTC] No.45908148[source]▶
One need to see how many developers are already getting paid enough and out of them how many actually donating to OSS projects.

AFAIK developers are full of excuses like "these trillion dollar companies need to pay fair share while my hundred thousand dollar salary in this big expensive city leaves me with nothing to donate.

5. geodel ◴[12 Nov 25 23:05 UTC] No.45908167{3}[source]▶
Obviously that'd be completely unheard of.
6. mikestorrent ◴[12 Nov 25 23:26 UTC] No.45908364[source]▶
I love this. I've also been bandying about the idea of an open source equivalent of a B Corp sort of accreditation where a company can essentially brag about auditably donating to the open source projects that it depends upon.
replies(1): >>45908671 #
7. rnewme ◴[12 Nov 25 23:35 UTC] No.45908457{3}[source]▶
It literally puts food on your table?
replies(1): >>45908641 #
8. Krastan ◴[12 Nov 25 23:56 UTC] No.45908641{4}[source]▶
Does it? If it didnt exist my company would need to develop it which still puts food on my table.
9. robmensching ◴[13 Nov 25 00:01 UTC] No.45908671[source]▶
Have you heard of the Open Source Pledge? Not exactly what you're suggesting but in the ballpark: https://opensourcepledge.com/