Coming Home

[Duke_Nukem]

@godefroi

it’s definitely great that MS is at least talking about NETMF again, but let’s be honest, it’s still pretty much just talk.

And given the history of .NetMF that is fair, but for the first time ever .NetMF has a product team and a real and proper budget so I think we will soon see that there is much more then just talk behind .NetMF.

[Craig]

@Pete Brown

There’s a real good story when you have devices that can scale the entire range.

There’s also a realization by those in power, that if you do not have low-cost maker-friendly boards/devices/OS/etc. you lose the education market. Without education, you lose future makers and entrepreneurs. Your stuff isn’t the basis of crowd-funded products. You are simply not relevant.

This is huge in my opinion. I spent the first part of my career as a MS Trainer (was in the first 10 folks certified to teach Windows Advanced Server to age me). The last decade I have been in Higher Education teaching IS and IT classes. It is difficult to get the current crop of students interested in MS. All the “fun” stuff is being done in Linux and Android.

If MS was smart they would port WoD to the beaglebone and Pi as fast as they can, and get .net running on it as well. Or at least get Intel to make an x86 offering that is compelling. The galileo is neat but it needs graphics to compete with BBB or Pi. All my students love Visual Studio. We also need $20 netmf device, it is just to hard to compete with arduino’s pricing. The Free VS Community to bind it all together then you have a compelling offering.

Craig

[Duke_Nukem]

@ Craig - have you tried Gadgeteer in the classroom as the ability to design, build, code and test in a single class time gives kids that instance gratification they have grown accustom to and then teardown and your ready for the next class.

[ianlee74]

Do you think there’s any chance we’ll see a roadmap published before release or is this just going to be the typical old school process of us finding out post-release what we’re getting?

@Duke Nukem

@godefroi

it’s definitely great that MS is at least talking about NETMF again, but let’s be honest, it’s still pretty much just talk.

And given the history of .NetMF that is fair, but for the first time ever .NetMF has a product team and a real and proper budget so I think we will soon see that there is much more then just talk behind .NetMF.

[Pete_Brown]

@ianlee74

Do you think there’s any chance we’ll see a roadmap published before release or is this just going to be the typical old school process of us finding out post-release what we’re getting?

@Duke Nukem

@godefroi

it’s definitely great that MS is at least talking about NETMF again, but let’s be honest, it’s still pretty much just talk.

And given the history of .NetMF that is fair, but for the first time ever .NetMF has a product team and a real and proper budget so I think we will soon see that there is much more then just talk behind .NetMF.

Windows: We’ll have milestones where we talk about what we’re doing. There’s a LOT going on right now, and all of it is exciting.

NETMF should be more open, except where it might overlap other strategies. When you impact more than a couple product teams, disclosure becomes more difficult (more cooks). Please ask questions on the codeplex site. If you don’t get anywhere there, talk to me and I’ll ping Colin and the team.

Pete

[Pete_Brown]

BTW, Colin gave a NETMF presentation at the MVP summit.

As to Windows on Devices, I’d recommend paying attention to the bottom two levels from this diagram. Galileo was a starting point.

Pete

(image source? Why Mary Jo Foley, of course. Photo from TechEd EU)

[Duke_Nukem]

@ Pete Brown - oh if only this stuff wasn’t under NDA, but it will all come out in due time and as shown in that image, the full stack has pretty good coverage as Microsoft wants a good size chunk of the IoT space and it’s lining up it’s soldiers to do battle.

[Reinhard_Ostermeier]

@Pete Brown

BTW, Colin gave a NETMF presentation at the MVP summit.

As to Windows on Devices, I’d recommend paying attention to the bottom two levels from this diagram. Galileo was a starting point.

Pete

(image source? Why Mary Jo Foley, of course. Photo from TechEd EU)

By seeing this Image I’m awaiting thet 25% of the MS resources, targeted at the industry sector are invested into NETMF :whistle:

[njbuch]

@Pete Brown

BTW, Colin gave a NETMF presentation at the MVP summit.

As to Windows on Devices, I’d recommend paying attention to the bottom two levels from this diagram. Galileo was a starting point.

Acutally that image really disturbs my brain. I know that windows 10 is two generations in front of us, which is probably 2-6 years. But still.

I have still not understood exactly why MS abandoned NETMF in the first place, and have a lurking idea that it was because it was not good enough to use it for a watch. Now they have launched a watch/fitness tracker and I have still to be told that it was using NETMF.

But do MS still have plans to create a technology used to build really small devices that are professional grade - and call it NETMF?

[hagster]

@ njbuch - the band definitely does not use NETMF.

Why. Because when you are planning on building that many of something it is worth spending massively more time and money writing code that will run faster in cheaper hardware and get better battery life.

Remember that most MS Applications are not built using .NET either. That doesn’t mean they don’t support it.

However as many people have said it would be good for MS to do some serious dogfooding with a relatively complex netmf project

[njbuch]

@ hagster - Thanks

So, what we should not be saying is that .NET is mature when Microsoft Office is built on it.

As we should not say, that NETMF is mature when you can build a production ready watch on it.

I would love to say that though!

[hagster]

@ njbuch - just that the real benifit of .NET is as a productivity multiplier.

Performancewise it’s actually pretty close on the desktop to c++, but it uses lots more storage and RAM.

You can now say that the compiler for .NET is written in .NET though. That’s pretty cool.