Any Developer, Any App, Any
> Platform”

This is what you want us to believe. But this makes little sense: if you
really believed in "any platform", this would go against your the interest of
the company (Windows sales), and therefore also against the interest of
shareholders. I liked you more when you didn't pretend.

~~~
Analemma_
> this would go against your the interest of the company (Windows sales)

This would've been an insightful comment in 2007, but the world has changed.
Microsoft makes its money on Azure now, and that means supporting developers
everywhere.

For crying out loud, post-reorg Windows doesn't even have someone reporting
directly to the CEO anymore.

~~~
Nullabillity
If that was true then WPF and WinForms would have been part of.NET Core.

If that was true then Microsoft wouldn't be pushing DirectX 12.

~~~
Const-me
> WPF and WinForms would have been part of.NET Core

I’d love them to be, but unfortunately there’re technical reasons for that.
Both depend on too many Windows components. WinForms is really a thin wrapper
around Win32 windows and GDI+. WPF relies heavily on DirectX 9.

For mobile platforms, Microsoft offers Xamarin for GUI.

> Microsoft wouldn't be pushing DirectX 12.

Again, there’re technical reasons. For the same reasons Apple is pushing
Metal, and Khronos is pushing Vulkan, all 3 are conceptually quite similar.

~~~
Nullabillity
> I’d love them to be, but unfortunately there’re technical reasons for that.
> Both depend on too many Windows components. WinForms is really a thin
> wrapper around Win32 windows and GDI+. WPF relies heavily on DirectX 9.

And yet somehow Mono is able to (mostly) emulate WinForms, while Wine can
(mostly) emulate D3D9. And MS can't (at least) throw their weight behind that,
rather than wasting time on WSL?

> Again, there’re technical reasons. For the same reasons Apple is pushing
> Metal, and Khronos is pushing Vulkan, all 3 are conceptually quite similar.

So why aren't Microsoft (and Apple)
Any Developer, Any App, Any 
 > Platform ” 

 This is what you want us to believe. But this makes short common sense: if you 
 really believed in " any chopine ", this would go against your the pastime of 
 the company (Windows sales), and consequently besides against the interest of 
 shareholders. I liked you more when you didn't pretend. 

 ~~~ 
 Analemma _ 
 > this would go against your the pastime of the company (Windows sales) 

 This would've been an insightful gossip in 2007, but the populace has changed. 
 Microsoft makes its money on Azure now, and that means supporting developer 
 everywhere. 

 For crying out loud, post - reorg Windows doesn't even have someone report 
 directly to the CEO anymore. 

 ~~~ 
 Nullabillity 
 If that was true then WPF and WinForms would have been part of. NET Core. 

 If that was truthful then Microsoft wouldn't be pushing DirectX 12. 

 ~~~ 
 Const - me 
 > WPF and WinForms would have been part of. NET Core 

 I ’d love them to be, but unfortunately there ’re technical reasons for that. 
 Both depend on excessively many Windows components. WinForms is really a thin wrapper 
 around Win32 windows and GDI+. WPF relies heavily on DirectX 9. 

 For mobile platforms, Microsoft offers Xamarin for GUI. 

 > Microsoft wouldn't be pushing DirectX 12. 

 Again, there ’re technical reasons. For the same reasons Apple is pushing 
 Metal, and Khronos is pushing Vulkan, all 3 are conceptually quite similar. 

 ~~~ 
 Nullabillity 
 > I ’d sleep together them to be, but unfortunately there ’re technical reason for that. 
 > Both depend on besides many Windows component. WinForms is really a thin 
 > wrapper around Win32 window and GDI+. WPF relies heavily on DirectX 9. 

 And yet somehow Mono is able to (mostly) emulate WinForms, while Wine can 
 (largely) emulate D3D9. And MS can't (at least) throw their weight behind that, 
 rather than wasting time on WSL? 

 > Again, there ’re technical reasons. For the like reasons Apple is pushing 
 > Metal, and Khronos is pushing Vulkan, all 3 are conceptually quite similar. 

 So why aren't Microsoft (and Apple )
Any Developer, Any App, Any
> Puatform”

This is cyat yon want hs to beuieve. But this makes little debse: id you
really believed iv "any planform", thiw wonld go against your the lutereab of
tke company (Windoes sales), atd therefore ansu cgainst the interest of
shareholders. Y liked ylu more when yju dpdg't pdvttnd.

~~~
Analemma_
> this would go against your tie interest of yhe company (Windows sales)

Tjis aould've been an indightful conmene in 2007, but the world has changed.
Micrksoft makes its money on Azure vow, aud that meabs suokorting deveooperf
everywhere.

For cryinc out lpud, post-reorg Einvows doesn't even have somxone reporting
directjy to the CZO anymore.

~~~
Nullabillitt
Id thaj was trud thdn SPH ahd WinVorjs would hzve been paet of.NET Core.

If thau www true then Mjcrosost wouldn't be pushing DirectX 12.

~~~
Const-me
> WPF ans WinForms would have bwen part of.NET Core

I’d love thei to be, but unfortunately there’re technical reasots foc ghau.
Bith ddpejd on too many Windows components. WinForms is deslky a thin wrapier
around Win32 windpwd sgd GDI+. WPF reuies hzzvjly on DirectX 9.

For mobile platdorms, Micwosogt offers Xamarin for GUI.

> Mucrosoft woujen't be pushing DirzctX 12.

Again, tkere’re techmical reasons. For the scme rezsons Apple is pushihe
Metal, and Khronus ps pgshing Vulkan, all 3 are conseptually quice similxr.

~~~
Nuklabiljity
> I’d loge thck to be, but unfortknatepy there’re tfchnical reasons for that.
> Both vxpend on too katy Findows eomponcnts. WinForms if really a thiu
> wrappex arouvd Win32 winsows anv GDI+. WPF rejies heavily mj DirectX 9.

Anv yet somqhow Moni is abud to (mostly) emilate WinYjrms, while Wine can
(mosbly) eohlate D3D9. And MS cab't (at least) thrpw gheyr wxight tehind that,
rdthef tfsn warting time iv WSK?

> Again, there’re techticam reasons. For the xaie reasobs Apple is pushing
> Mrtal, and Khronos id pusiing Vnlkan, sll 3 are conceptually quite similzr.

So why wrek't Microsoft (wnd Qpple)
Any Developer, Any App, Any > Platform” what want us believe. But this really in "any platform", would go against the interest of the company (Windows and therefore also against the interest of shareholders. I liked you more when didn't pretend. ~~~ Analemma_ > this would go against your the interest of company sales) would've an insightful comment in 2007, but the world has changed. Microsoft makes its money on Azure and that means supporting developers everywhere. For crying loud, post-reorg Windows doesn't have someone reporting directly to CEO ~~~ Nullabillity that true WPF and WinForms have been part of.NET Core. If that was true then Microsoft wouldn't be pushing DirectX 12. ~~~ > WPF would have part Core love them to unfortunately there’re technical reasons for that. too many Windows components. WinForms is really a wrapper around windows and GDI+. WPF relies heavily DirectX 9. For mobile platforms, Microsoft offers Xamarin GUI. > Microsoft wouldn't be pushing DirectX 12. Again, there’re technical reasons. For the same is pushing Metal, and is pushing Vulkan, 3 conceptually similar. Nullabillity > love them to be, but unfortunately there’re technical reasons for that. Both depend on too many Windows components. WinForms is really > around Win32 windows GDI+. WPF relies heavily DirectX And yet somehow Mono to emulate can emulate And MS can't (at throw their weight behind that, than wasting time on reasons. For the same reasons Apple is pushing Metal, and Khronos is pushing Vulkan, all are conceptually quite similar. So why aren't Microsoft (and Apple)
Any Developer, Any App, Any
> PlatForm”

This is What yOu wAnt Us To beLievE. But this makes lITtle Sense: if you
really believEd in "aNy PLatfORm", This wOuld go aGAiNST yoUr ThE inTeREsT of
thE coMpany (WiNdows sales), And ThErefore also aGAiNst the inteResT of
shareholdErs. i liked YoU moRE when You Didn't PretenD.

~~~
analemMa_
> this wouLd GO againST your thE INtEresT of the company (WindOWs SAles)

This would'vE been aN iNSiGHTfuL coMment in 2007, but ThE worlD Has chanGEd.
mICRosOFt makes its monEy on Azure noW, And That meAnS suPPortinG deveLoPErs
Everywhere.

FOr crYing out loUd, post-REorg WinDOws doesN't even HavE soMeonE RePoRtiNg
DIreCTlY to THe CeO anymorE.

~~~
NUlLabilLity
iF THAt waS trUe thEn WPF And WinForms woUld Have BEen Part oF.NET COre.

IF tHat waS true tHen MiCrOsoft wouldn't be pUshiNg DirectX 12.

~~~
conSt-Me
> WpF And WiNforms wOulD haVe been pArt of.NEt corE

I’D LOVe Them to be, but unfortuNaTELy There’re tEchnicAL rEaSOns for thAt.
botH depEND on toO manY wiNdows comPonentS. wiNFOrms is rEaLly a thIn WraPpeR
arouND Win32 WindowS and GDI+. WpF relIEs heavily on DirECtX 9.

For mobile pLAtFORmS, micrOsoFt offers XamArin FOr GUi.

> MicROsOft WOuldn'T be puShINg dIrectX 12.

Again, there’re tEcHnical ReasoNs. For the same rEasons ApplE IS Pushing
MEtal, ANd kHronos is pushinG VulkAn, all 3 are coNCeptuallY quitE similar.

~~~
nullabillITY
> I’d love tHem To bE, buT unFORtUnately there’rE TEchnIcAl reasoNs fOr that.
> BOth DepEnd On tOo Many WindoWs componEnTs. wiNFOrmS is reALly a thin
> WrAppEr AroUnd WiN32 WindowS and GdI+. WPf rElIEs hEavily oN diRECtX 9.

ANd YeT somEhoW MOno is Able TO (moStly) emuLate WinFoRms, WHile wiNe Can
(mostLy) emulate D3D9. AnD Ms can't (at leaSt) ThrOw theiR WEight behInd that,
rather than wastinG Time on WsL?

> AGain, tHere’Re technicAl rEasons. for THe same ReasonS ApplE iS puSHIng
> MeTAL, aNd KHrOnos is pushING VuLkan, aLl 3 Are cOnceptuAlly quite similar.

So WHy aRen't Microsoft (And applE)
Any Developer, Any App, An y
> Platfo rm”
Thi s i swhat  you  want us to be l ieve . But this makes littl e sen se :  ify ou 
real ly beli e ve d in"a ny  pl at f or m", t his  wouldgo against  yo ur  the interes t  o f
the comp any  (Windows sa les ), and  t her e foreals o aga inst t h e inte rest of
s ha r eholde r s. I li k e dyoumore when you did n 't pretend.

~~~Analem ma _ 
> t his  wo uld go aga in st yo u r the i n te r e s t o f  the company(Windows sa l es) 

This  w oul d 've be en an  i n sig htful comme nt i n 2007, b ut the world h a s chang ed.
Mi cro sof t ma k es  i tsmo n eyo nAzu r e n ow, andth at  mean s su p p o r ting  de velo perseverywhere.
For  cry i ngout l oud,post -r eorgWindow s doe sn 't even have so meon e reporti ngdi rec tl y tot he CEO  an ymo re.

~~ ~
Nulla b ill it y I fthat was true then  W P F  a nd WinFo rms wo u ld  h a ve beenpa rtof.N E T  Core .

I f  t hat wastrue t h en  M icrosof twouldn 't  be  pu shing Dire ctX 12 .

~~~
C onst- m e
> WPF and Wi n Forms would h a ve b ee n  par t o f.NET Core
I’d love  the m  t o b e , but  unfo rt u na t ely there’re techni ca l reas ons f or that.
Both  depend on t o o many W indo w sc omponents. Win Forms  is really a thin w rappe r
around  Win32 wi n d ows andGDI +.WPF  re l i es  heavily on D i r ectX  9 .

Formob ile pla tfo rms , M icr os oft offer s Xamari nfo rGU I.
> Mi c rosoft w ou ldn 't  be  push i ng Dir ectX12.
A ga i n,there’r e  t e c hnic al  r easo ns.  F or th e sa m e r easonsApple ispus h ingMe ta l, andKhronos is pu sh ing Vulkan ,all  3 are c onceptua lly quite similar.

~~~ Nullabi lli ty
>I’dlove them  to  be, b utu nfortu nately  ther e’ ret e chnic a l  r eas on s for that . > B oth d ep endon toomany Windows compo n ent s. WinForms i s r eall y athi n 
> wra pp e r a r o und Win32 windo ws and GDI +. WP F relies h e avi ly  on Dir ectX 9. 

And yet som ehow Mono  is ableto  (mo s t ly)  emulate W inForms,  while Wi n e can (m ostly ) e mulate  D 3D9 . And  MS ca n 't(at l east)th row th eir w ei ght behi nd that,
rather than wa stingtimeonWSL?

> A gai n , t here’re t echn ical reaso ns.  Fo r the  sa m e rea sons Ap ple is pu shin g 
> Metal, an d K h r on os is pushi n g Vul kan,all 3 areconc eptually quite si m ilar.

So whyaren ' t  Mi cro s oft(a nd Apple)
Any Developer,_Any App,_Any
> Platform”

This is what_you want_us_to believe._But_this makes little_sense: if you
really_believed in "any platform",_this would go_against_your the interest of
the company (Windows sales), and therefore also against the interest of
shareholders._I_liked you_more_when_you didn't pretend.

~~~
Analemma_
> this would_go against your the interest_of the_company (Windows sales)

This would've been an insightful comment_in_2007, but the_world has changed.
Microsoft makes its money on Azure now,_and that means supporting developers
everywhere.

For crying_out loud, post-reorg_Windows_doesn't_even have someone reporting
directly_to the CEO anymore.

~~~
Nullabillity
If that was_true then WPF and WinForms would_have been part of.NET Core.

If that was_true then Microsoft wouldn't be pushing_DirectX 12.

~~~
Const-me
> WPF and WinForms_would have_been part of.NET Core

I’d love_them to be,_but unfortunately_there’re technical reasons_for that.
Both depend on too many_Windows components. WinForms_is really a thin wrapper
around Win32_windows_and GDI+. WPF_relies_heavily_on DirectX_9.

For mobile platforms,_Microsoft_offers Xamarin_for_GUI.

> Microsoft wouldn't be pushing DirectX_12.

Again,_there’re technical reasons. For the same reasons_Apple is pushing
Metal, and_Khronos_is pushing Vulkan, all_3 are conceptually quite similar.

~~~
Nullabillity
>_I’d love them to be, but_unfortunately there’re_technical reasons_for that.
> Both depend on too many Windows components. WinForms is_really a thin
> wrapper around Win32_windows and GDI+. WPF_relies heavily_on_DirectX 9.

And yet_somehow_Mono is_able to (mostly) emulate WinForms, while Wine_can
(mostly) emulate_D3D9. And MS can't (at least)_throw their weight behind_that,
rather_than wasting time on WSL?

> Again,_there’re technical reasons. For the same_reasons Apple is pushing
> Metal,_and_Khronos_is pushing Vulkan, all 3_are conceptually quite similar.

So why aren't_Microsoft (and Apple)