dotnet developerprogramming.devimage JPDev ( @JPDev@programming.dev ) Programmer Humor@programming.dev • 5 months ago message-square57fedilinkarrow-up1893
arrow-up1893imagedotnet developerprogramming.dev JPDev ( @JPDev@programming.dev ) Programmer Humor@programming.dev • 5 months ago message-square57fedilink
minus-square aberrate_junior_beatnik ( @aberrate_junior_beatnik@midwest.social ) cakelinkfedilinkEnglish44•5 months agoOk, but we all should admit: .net is a terrible name.
minus-square neutron ( @neutron@thelemmy.club ) linkfedilink12•5 months agoAnd then there’s .net classic and .net core. Making up two entirely separate names shouldn’t be difficult for marketing executives.
minus-square dan ( @dan@upvote.au ) linkfedilink7•edit-25 months ago.NET Core doesn’t exist any more. It’s just .NET now. I think that changed around the release of .NET 5? The classic version is mostly legacy at this point too.
minus-square neutron ( @neutron@thelemmy.club ) linkfedilink2•5 months agoMy workplace insists on using dot net classic to recreate a twenty years old VB app that should be able to drink, vote, and drive. Please send help. SQL queries are a spaghetti mess and all the original devs are probably gone or dead.
Ok, but we all should admit: .net is a terrible name.
And then there’s .net classic and .net core. Making up two entirely separate names shouldn’t be difficult for marketing executives.
.NET Core doesn’t exist any more. It’s just .NET now. I think that changed around the release of .NET 5?
The classic version is mostly legacy at this point too.
My workplace insists on using dot net classic to recreate a twenty years old VB app that should be able to drink, vote, and drive.
Please send help. SQL queries are a spaghetti mess and all the original devs are probably gone or dead.
Still better than .dot