|
The 3.2 release is loaded with features and performance improvements. Most of the release focused on upcoming .NET 5 and all benefits Uno Platform gets from building on top of it. However, we are also releasing improvements to the controls and tooling we introduced in previous releases. All your buzzwords, in one handy install!
Just in time for the .NET 5 release
|
|
|
|
|
Is Uno a Microsoft project? If it's not now, presumably it will be soon. It seems to fill a niche that Microsoft is slow to fill.
|
|
|
|
|
Independent at the moment, but yeah. They need to be bought (or subsidized)
TTFN - Kent
|
|
|
|
|
Overworked employees have a higher chance of sending a sensitive email to the wrong address. The database is open on port 5432? What?! NO!!!! I didn't mean to tell *you* that.
|
|
|
|
|
That's a deceptive way of saying "Bad Management"
|
|
|
|
|
PHB to Dilbert: "I could give you a raise or sack you, make everyone else work harder, and get a bonus".
From the manager's perspective that might seem like good management. 
|
|
|
|
|
Admit it, you’ve got them: legacy .NET applications in production supporting the business. How many times have you been asked the hard question of how you’re going to run those apps in the cloud? So you don't have to stash that old machine under someone's desk
|
|
|
|
|
Microsoft says that multiple Windows 10 apps including Outlook are affected by an issue causing them to forget users' passwords after the device is upgraded to certain Windows 10, version 2004 builds. How about a solution for users forgetting their passwords next?
But the icons are OK?
|
|
|
|
|
I suppose they will soon come with "Office 365" doesn't forget and an offer to upgrade
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
In the middle of the Nevada desert north of Las Vegas, the first-ever passengers just rode a Hyperloop. "I don't want to cause no fuss, but can I buy your Magic Bus?"
|
|
|
|
|
In the beginning there was .NET Framework, and it was all very simple. But then, over time, it grew and grew, and became a lot more complicated. Write once, run in some places
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: .NET Framework, the OG
Damn, you can't get away from @OriginalGriff anywhere these days! 
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: However, .NET Framework did not have side-by-side installation capabilities, so only one version could be installed at any time.
I see this "alternative fact" is spreading. 
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
Richard Deeming wrote: However, .NET Framework did not have side-by-side installation capabilities, so only one version could be installed at any time.
I see this "alternative fact" is spreading.
You're ignoring an important qualifier to what you quoted:
Quote: At least not initially…
And even after that, it was "complicated".
.net 1.1, was an in place replacement for 1.0, after that you could only have one of 2.0/3.0/3.5 installed, and then 4.x was the third set of only 1 version installed at a times.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, weighing all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: But the framework could be updated separately, meaning that the release cadence was not completely tied to the Windows release cadence. At least not initially… However, .NET Framework did not have side-by-side installation capabilities ...
I think you're parsing that paragraph incorrectly. 
"At least not initially..." relates to "the release cadence was not completely tied to the Windows release cadence", not ".NET Framework did not have side-by-side installation capabilities".
It's
- the release cadence was not completely tied to the Windows release cadence. At least not initially…
- .NET Framework did not have side-by-side installation capabilities
Not:
- the release cadence was not completely tied to the Windows release cadence.
- At least not initially… However, .NET Framework did not have side-by-side installation capabilities
I've spoken to the author on Twitter, and he's confirmed that he'd forgotten that 1.x, 2.x, and 4.x could be installed side-by-side.
And IIRC, 1.1 was a side-by-side install with 1.0. The first in-place upgrade was 3.0 and 3.5, which were more like service packs for 2.0.
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
Richard Deeming wrote: And IIRC, 1.1 was a side-by-side install with 1.0. The first in-place upgrade was 3.0 and 3.5, which were more like service packs for 2.0.
The last column of the table here says 1.1 was a replacement for 1.0; it's been a long time since I've had to think about that version too, but my memory was of it being a smaller service pack than the 3.x releases were.
.NET Framework version history - Wikipedia
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, weighing all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
|
The footnote points to this page[^], which then leads to:
In many ways, the side-by-side model introduced in the .NET Framework version 1.1 is the same model that Microsoft Visual Basic® has used for years.
...
At a high level, then, side-by-side execution enables multiple versions of the .NET Framework to be present on a system and execute concurrently without interfering with each other.
That page also describes what will happen on "a system with both 1.1 and 1.0 of the Framework".
My recollection concurs that 1.1 was a smaller "service pack" than any of the 3.x releases; but at the time, it didn't actually replace 1.0.
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
If you want to wrestle control of your personal data from companies, governments, hospitals and other organizations, a startup called Inrupt could be an ally. What has been pulled asunder, let one man fix
Or something like that. Needs more coffee.
|
|
|
|
|
I recently had the idea that our data should be traceable, like food.
If some cretin calls me for gas and electricity I need to know where they got my data.
They never know.
I have an idea, since it all started when I signed up at the Chamber of Commerce, which is mandatory for companies, but who are known to sell my data (now forbidden) 
Unfortunately, I'll never know.
I always ask to be forgotten, but as long as I can't be forgotten at the source it keeps on coming.
And an even better idea, the laws around gas and electricity here should be thoroughly reformed.
Some ![Elephant | [mastadon]](https://codeproject.global.ssl.fastly.net/script/Forums/Images/elephant.gif) ing call center that I've never heard of and who's probably out to rip me off (actually happened once) knows all about my usage and can sign me up for another provider just like that
I sometimes get multiple calls A DAY! 
|
|
|
|
|
Surely the fatal flaw in this plan is that users of people's personal data and manipulators/storers/aggregators of said data must sign up to use it.
Or they could just carry on doing what they're doing, without paying Inrupt a penny. Hmm... difficult choice.
As far as I can see, Inrupt has no buildable, sustainable business model at all unless businesses can be forced to use the technology. Who or what can do that? I detest statism and yet more laws, but it strikes me that only governments can force companies to use Inrupt or similar technologies.
BUT... if laws force businesses to use Inrupt or similar, then the current data baddies will just begin to compete with Inrupt so as to be able to carry on with their business model in a new, state-approved, 'secure', 'private' manner.
I (sadly and unhappily) predict that Inrupt will be about as successful in their endeavours as Mozilla has been in getting businesses to use open IoT technologies. 
|
|
|
|
|
Winning hacker team pockets $744,500 at the Tianfu Cup, China's top hacking contest. "Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!"
First prize is cash and a government job. 
|
|
|
|
|
After being announced nearly a month ago, AMD’s highly anticipated and Ryzen 5000 desktop processors are finally available to buy. Ryzen to the challenge
|
|
|
|
|
Ah, but Intel has a pathetically slow GPU! Take that AMD!
|
|
|
|
|
Google has been gradually rolling out new icons across the whole of Google Workspace this year, but it was only with the update to Gmail's logo last month that many sat up and took notice. But... NEW ICONS!
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
