Yahoo Excludes BlackBerry From Employee Smartphone List 192
Nerval's Lobster writes "Freshly minted Yahoo CEO Marissa Mayer is promising the company's U.S. employees a new smartphone of their choice. There's just one catch: it can't be a BlackBerry. According to Business Insider, which posted significant portions of Mayer's memo, employees will have a choice of the Samsung Galaxy S3, HTC One X, HTC EVO 4G LTE, Nokia Lumia 920, or the upcoming iPhone 5. 'We'd like our employees to have devices similar to our users, so we can think and work as the majority of our users do,' she wrote, adding that Yahoo will shift away from BlackBerry as its corporate device of choice. Somewhere up in Waterloo, at least one Research In Motion executive could be screaming in frustration over this development. Not because Yahoo is a bellwether for corporate smartphone use; its U.S. employees shifting to an iOS, Windows Phone or Android device won't automatically drive other major companies will follow suit. But as a symbol of RIM's current issues, it's difficult to find a better one than a high-profile technology company dumping its collective BlackBerry stock in favor of pretty much any other platform."
One failing company dropping another's technology (Score:5, Funny)
What's next, RIM employees stop using Yahoo for search and tell their employees to use Google or Bing?
Re:One failing company dropping another's technolo (Score:5, Funny)
What's next, RIM employees stop using Yahoo for search and tell their employees to use Google or Bing?
I think the vast majority of them are already using monster.com and dice.com, etc. Oh wait, do you mean general internet searching, not looking for a new job after the downsizing?
Re: (Score:2)
At least RIM makes a decent product, even if noone wants it. I cant think of the last time I willingly went to yahoo... I guess people use it for fantasy football?
I don't get this - why bother with a policy? (Score:2)
If Yahoo employees are like everyone else in the world, they won't be asking for Blackberries anyway.
Oh Yahoo... (Score:3)
Oww, that has to hurt.
Yeah, we all knew that RIM was on the outs; but getting cut from the running for 'stodgy corporate issued device' by the somewhat-less-than-vibrant players over at yahoo? Ice burn, man, Ice Burn.
Re:Oh Yahoo... (Score:5, Interesting)
That's one way of interpreting it.
So here's an ex-google exec saying Yahoo employees can use a bunch of android phones or a currently-unavailable iphone. Didn't a certain Nokia exec do something similar recently.. hmm
So Yahoo thinks it should discard RIM... When was the last time Yahoo got much of anything right? How do we know this isn't yet another miss-step? Aren't there some BB users that use Yahoo? Wouldn't it be better if Yahoo employees used ALL of the common smartphones?
Re: (Score:2)
1% [bgr.com] is "common" now?
Admittedly I think they're higher than 1% here in the UK, but I've wanted them to die for about 8 years now. I'm happy to see them go. Steam is due out on Linux soon-ish, and MS look like they're going to pull a Vista with Windows 8. All in all, things in the world of technology seem to be heading in a good direction :)
Re: (Score:2)
% of mobile traffic != % of smartphone marketshare
Re: (Score:3)
iPhone accounts for the majority of mobile internet traffic. But it's marketshare is ~25%
Re: (Score:2)
Admittedly I think they're higher than 1% here in the UK, but I've wanted them to die for about 8 years now.
That pretty much tells me that you either dont get much work email, or that youre always at your desk. Name me a phone that does better for corp email / calendaring / phonecalls.
Re: (Score:2)
Buying an iphone 4S would be a waste of money because the 5 will be usable for at least one year longer than the 4S. I am sure that any employees that want an iphone will be glad to wait a week to get the better phone.
Re: (Score:2)
Right.. and I'm sure there are no Yahoo employees that already own a 4S.
Re: (Score:2)
Yahoo is little more than AOL at this point. I see them as struggling to find a place among other better and more useful brands like Bing and Google. You'd think they would want to BOND with a brand becoming such as RIM who is also becoming less and less relevant by the hour.
Re: (Score:3)
With(unfortunately for their shareholders) one crucial difference.
Somehow, I don't know how they did it, AOL took a formerly-high-flying and now rotten from the inside company and somehow conned Time Warner to a merger of almost equals, with AOL on top. Damn. Now, of course, their business consists largely of confused old people who can't figure out how to cancel; but that was their moment.
Yahoo, by contrast, turned to a rather generous buyout bid and has been slipping fairly steadily in value since....
Why a Microsoft phone? (Score:3, Insightful)
No one buys Microsoft phones.
They're in the same boat as RIM but they get a pass for some reason.
I can only assume Microsoft is paying them to stay somehow? Maybe free phones?
Re:Why a Microsoft phone? (Score:5, Insightful)
Not true. This is posted from a Windows 7 Phone. They work just fine. I'm happy with mine. You don't know what you're talking about.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Why a Microsoft phone? (Score:5, Funny)
Hey look! You found him!
Re: (Score:2)
No one buys Microsoft phones.
Not true. This is posted from a Windows 7 Phone. They work just fine. I'm happy with mine. You don't know what you're talking about.
The above post is useless with out pictures.
Re: (Score:2)
Wow, +5 for that? OBVIOUSLY he didn't truly mean "not one single person on Earth." As of December 2011, Windows Phone was at 1% of the market. [blogs.com] Double that--hell, quadruple it if you want--and it's still not that much.
Android - 190 M - 31%
Symbian - 190 M - 31%
iOS - 114 M - 17%
Blackberry - 93 M - 14%
Windows Mobile - 17 M - 3%
bada - 8 M - 1%
Windows Phone - 5 M - 1%
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
By Dec 2011, WP7 had been out for just over a year. 5M in one year isn't very good for a smartphone, true. Now, consider that Nokia has sold 7M Lumia devices this year alone - putting them on track for at least 10M and probably more (consider the holiday season). That's just the Nokia WP7 devices; there are a lot of other manufacturers.
15M by the end of this year, even if we discount everything except the Lumia sales for this year, is 3% market share (possibly a bit less, since the market is growing) and 20
Re: (Score:3)
None of the people ragging on Blackberry know what theyre talking about either. It seems like noone can consider that there is a market segment that loves what RIM has to offer, just as there is a segment for iPhone and android and WinPhone devices.
Re: (Score:3)
They /are/ using Bing for searches these days, so that's probably something to do with it.
Re: (Score:2)
No one buys Microsoft phones.
That's because MS doesn't make phones. Oh wait, you mean the WinPhones make by LG/HTC/Samsung/Nokia et al. They seem to be doing alright collectively.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No one buys Microsoft phones.
They're in the same boat as RIM but they get a pass for some reason.
I can only assume Microsoft is paying them to stay somehow? Maybe free phones?
Why support desktop Linux for anything? It has much less market share than Windows Phone. Does that make any sense? Perhaps Yahoo thinks it's good platform showing good promise in the future
Just Nokia sold 7 million Windows Phones in the last two quarters and the Lumia 920 is looking promising compared to others. While it may not seem like much compared to iPhone and Android it's not negligible.
Look at this comparison of phones and the poll underneath.
http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2012/09/iphone5-spec-show [wired.com]
Re: (Score:2)
They're in the same boat as RIM but they get a pass for some reason.
Oh no, Microsoft is in far better shape than RIM. One of the devices supports ActiveSync (like every other smartphone in the last 3-4 years) and one of them requires layers upon layers of provisioned services and dedicated servers.
Re: (Score:3)
I think maybe yahoo just doesn't want to run a BES anymore. :p
Re: (Score:2)
Is that because those happy customers got their phones for free, courtesy of being Microsoft/Nokia employees?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Please, consider it strongly. We implore you. [giantbomb.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Windows Phone - #1 in astroturfing!
It's funny because the carriers don't seem to like Windows Phone very much. You think they know something about actual user satisfaction that the astroturfer boy here doesn't?
Re: (Score:2)
While I think it's a troll rather a shill, here's some surveys:
http://www.pcworld.com/article/235986/Windows_Phone_7_Edges_Android_in_User_Satisfaction.html [pcworld.com]
http://www.neowin.net/news/windows-phone-tops-in-user-satisfaction# [neowin.net]
http://blog.amplifiedanalytics.com/2012/07/customer-satisfaction-with-windows-smart-phones-rise-by-18/ [amplifiedanalytics.com]
Re:Why a Microsoft phone? (Score:5, Funny)
Because RIM is on the decline and there is a fair amount of momentum behind MS.
I think you misspelled the word "money". The first two letters were right, but then you went right off the tracks.
Re:Why a Microsoft phone? (Score:4, Insightful)
The US military still insists on Blackberries over iPhone / Andoid. So just like with the US government's use of Iridium sat phones kept that company afloat, until the US military stops using Blackberries, the company will be "around".
Re: (Score:3)
They do? I could've sworn I heard about some field tests [geekwire.com] involving iPhone, Android, and Windows Phone 7, which later resulted in Android being selected [tuaw.com]. Granted, they cited a lack of secure encryption as a problem, but the nice thing about Android is that you can just put it in yourself. Plus, RIM's services all go through a central point of failure that has proven less-than-resilient in the last year or two.
Re: (Score:2)
but the nice thing about Android is that you can just put it in yourself.
Baloney, unless you mean that all the devices need to be rooted first.
And the thing about encryption is, its almost never more secure to roll your own.
Re:Why a Microsoft phone? (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm talking about making your own version of the OS, and then, yes, rooting the phones and installing it.
Otherwise, yep, you are correct in the general case, but this is the military we're talking about, so I'm guessing they may have some experience in rolling their own already. ;)
Re: (Score:3)
The US military still insists on Blackberries over iPhone / Andoid. So just like with the US government's use of Iridium sat phones kept that company afloat, until the US military stops using Blackberries, the company will be "around".
Yeah, I was admining a database running under BTOS on a unisys ruggedized "mini" in the early 90s in the US Army. That sure worked out well. Probably no one on /. has even heard of either the company or the OS. That's where Blackberries are inevitably headed. Grunt gets issued a "blackberry", asks WTF is this?
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, the DOD swooped in and bought the iridium network at the 11th hour right before the sats were to be given the command to thrust and burn up in the atmosphere. And they bought the entire network for pennies of what it cost to launch the birds in the first place (or what it would cost to launch their own similar network)
My understanding it was purchased primarily for non-secure military communications i.e. soldiers half a world away getting to call or video conference back home.
Re: (Score:2)
Interesting, that could be the difference. Thanks!
What does this mean for Yahoo? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Or maybe she just want to make sure employees have good mobile devices since they're, you know, the future.* Maybe she recognizes how horribly Flickr missed their opportunity on mobile [gizmodo.com] and doesn't want that to happen again.
* and the present.
Interesting rationale (Score:5, Interesting)
CEO Marissa Mayer: "so we can think and work as the majority of our users do".
That makes sense on the surface, but it doesn't exactly sound like the attitude of a company that wants to be an innovator or technology leader. It might not be the attitude of a market leader, either. [google.com] At the risk of sounding like a fanboy of another big tech firm, "Think Same" may not be the motto to live by. But then I'm CEO of nothing.
Re:Interesting rationale (Score:5, Funny)
My WTF was different than yours.
CEO Marissa Mayer: "so we can think and work as the majority of our users do".
VLM questions "Yahoo still has users?" Who?
But then I'm CEO of nothing.
Patience young grasshopper. Yahoo will achieve nothingness soon enough. Then you can be its CEO.
I've occasionally wondered how much it would cost to start collecting companies as a hobby. For example, mint condition dotcom 1.0 corporations. How much would it cost me to buy flooz or drkoop.com or whatever it was called? I would imagine there's some ongoing accounting/tax costs. I do know people who collected paper stock certificates, for example Disney's paper stock certs used to be really cool and artistic, and I've always thought a collection of dotcom stock certs would be funny... but why collect a paper printout of a millionth of the dotcom when I could own the whole thing? My budget for this amusement would be on the scale of three digits, four is really pushing it. Is this a realistic collecting hobby for me? I'm not going to be one of those old people collecting a houseful of ceramic frogs... no not me... I'm gonna collect mint condition dotcom 1.0 companies. That sounds like fun.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Sure, but Yahoo doesn't make hardware or consumable software. They provide services on platforms created by other people which are used by their customers. You have to know your customers' experience before you can improve it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
At least they intend to think as their CUSTOMERS do and figure out what they want and do daily instead of trying to think as their competitors do.
That at least, makes sense.
Re: (Score:3)
Otherwise, how else do you know what needs improvement?
Too much privacy? (Score:3, Funny)
Your ELD is off. [dilbert.com]
No real keyboards? (Score:5, Insightful)
choice of the Samsung Galaxy S3, HTC One X, HTC EVO 4G LTE, Nokia Lumia 920, or the upcoming iPhone 5
None of these phones have real keyboards. To those of us with large fingers, that's a deal-breaker when selecting a phone; on-screen keyboards are simply unusable with a screen that small. As much as it sucks in other ways, the BlackBerry at least did offer a hardware keyboard. Yahoo should offer at least one Android phone with an actual keyboard (maybe the Samsung Epic 4G?)
Re: (Score:2)
Apparently you don't need it. The article ridiculously claims that focusing on physical keyboards and long battery life was a "failure" on RIMs part. Somehow they manage to overlook several multi-day network outages as a factor...
Re: (Score:2)
Other than perhaps the Palm Pre, I have not seen any non-RIM phones with a decent keyboard. Motorola Admiral comes kinda close, but keys are wobbly and the software sucks at registering them.
Re: (Score:2)
That may be a reason for a tech company to give developers (particularly big-fingered ones) keyboardless smartphones.
"Here, have a difficult constraint. Figure out a way to make it work anyway."
Re: (Score:2)
I believe those are the top-end f
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Are you serious?
Yeah, believe it or not there are people who have preferences that are not only different from yours, but diametrically opposed to yours. Incredible, isn't it? (Not incredible that people have different preferences, but that you've reached an age where you're posting on /. and apparently are still shocked by this.)
I have a Blackberry precisely because I have strong personal preference for a physical keyboard, and because they're remarkably robust. I upgraded my phone recently (and ditched the most hideou
Re: (Score:2)
It wasn't a matter of him stating that he preferred a real keyboard for the tactile feel of it, but because he had large fingers. But I can tell you from experience that the keys on a blackberry are tiny indeed, especially for someone with large fingers. It doesn't make any sense that you would chose a tiny little keyboard when you fat finger 3+ keys every time you hit a button. Maybe he has a different definition for large fingers, I don't know.
I can respect someone preferring a real keyboard, certainly
Re:No real keyboards? (Score:4, Informative)
Perhaps you don't realize, but the physical keys are roughly the same size as the on-screen ones.
Being able to feel the keys (and press down on only the one you want) is a huge difference. Maybe when touch screens get haptic feedback, they'll catch up. But until then, on devices smaller than tablet size, a physical keyboard is the only good option for me.
History repeats itself (Score:5, Insightful)
Companies that both manufacture hardware and hand-roll their operating systems tend to collapse over time.
There are too many decisions which must be made centrally, and these involve too many conflicting "business objectives." In other words, the two branches (hardware and OS) can't figure out how to work together to nudge consumers toward spending more money, time and effort on the product.
Apple ducked this one by purchasing the core of its operating system from two sources, and allowing maintenance to be mostly driven by updates at least one of those OSes (BSD).
Blackberry has been frozen in motion (like Yahoo), unable to develop new software or hardware at the pace of the market. The result is that the world has moved on and, by parallax motion, RIM has moved backward.
Re: (Score:2)
By contrast IBM has done pretty well designing both hardware and the OS that runs on them. Their mainframe business has been around for 60 years. Their PC business, - which followed your preferred model, was abandoned years ago.
Server side software (Score:5, Interesting)
Wow... (Score:5, Funny)
It's like being dumped by the dorkiest fat kid in school.
Lumia 920? (Score:3)
As much as I hate to say it, I don't think that moving people from BlackBerry to Windows Phone will solve the problem she's describing.
Wait! Blackberry is still in business? (Score:2)
Or are they talking about the old ones still lying about?
Damn, technology moves just too quickly for me to keep up with it.
But not the Nexus (Score:2)
Fortunately there isn't the slightest possibility that I
ActiveSync (Score:2)
Blackberry's failure to adopt ActiveSync - which became nearly ubiquitous among smartphones several years ago - is a big part of their downfall.
Blackberry users have been paying more for less for far too long.
Uh, Yahoo as a major technical bellwether? (Score:3)
that's so 90s.
Nice! (Score:2, Informative)
I wish I worked at a tech company that would do something like that for it's employees, although granted it is a work phone though... *shrugs*
I think RIM seriously needs to rethink their strategy when it comes to users and business which to them have been one and the same. Except while their infrastructure might have been the "bees knees" 5-10 years ago, it's old and unreliable to most of what people use today. for instance my parents used blackberries (despite my constant objections) up until their last
RIM has been walking with 2 crutches (Score:2)
Sriramk posted this as an advice for Marissa (Score:2)
http://sriramk.com/unsolicitedyahoo.html [sriramk.com]
(Yea, I am on HN too)
Re:Nokia Lumia 920 (Score:5, Funny)
If you could astropost when they'll actually ship, the rest of the world might care.
Re:Nokia Lumia 920 (Score:5, Funny)
I'm glad to see they chose Nokia Lumia 920 as a phone. It is very powerful, sleek and well-done smartphone with enterprise features from Microsoft. It's really much better business phone than iPhone or Android-based smart phones. On top of that Yahoo can use Visual Studio to develop their own apps - all with the maturity and familiarity of C# and Windows programming. Great choice!
Hum. You guys aren't up to the standard of the normal turfers from waggeneredstrom.com. They usually throw in some links:
I'm glad to see they chose Nokia Lumia 920 as a phone. It is very powerful, sleek and well-done smartphone [wikipedia.org]with enterprise features from Microsoft. It's really much better business phone than iPhone [wikipedia.org] or Android-based smart phones. On top of that Yahoo can use Visual Studio to develop their own apps [wikipedia.org] - all with the maturity and familiarity of C# and Windows programming [wikipedia.org]. Great choice!
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Ditto. I have the HTC Arrive and still tell people that I love WP7 (of course, I'm mad at Sprint for their lack of support for WP7 --- I just hope it corrects with WP8) and I code in C# all day long. But that post was a tad "blech" to me as well.
But I was glad to see that WP8 made Yahoo's cut of "still relevant" phones.
Re: (Score:2)
I am calling troll trying to look like a shill.(a very successful one based on responses).
Re: (Score:3)
Poe's law may also apply here.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I work on VS, and I still cringe every time I see one of those. My rough estimate is that it takes probably about a dozen of polite. meaningful and truthful forum posts to counter the negative publicity effect of one such post.
Which is why I think it's likely someone trolling. Given how many angry replies they get every time this kind of post makes it a first post in a story, it's a pretty good way to troll, too.
Re: (Score:2)
It's remarkable how on every phone story there's a post made simultaneously with the article about how great the Lumia is.
Microsoft really needs to hire less obvious shills.
Re: (Score:3)
It's remarkable how on every phone story there's a post made simultaneously with the article about how great the Lumia is.
Microsoft really needs to hire less obvious shills.
Six first posts from six most recent phone stories. Based on stats, 0 were hidden. The first 'shilly' looking one (the last one on the list) does not mention Lumia and may be a troll or a fanboy. I think same applies here. If only for the reason that I don't see why someone would pay for posting crap that gets modded to oblivion. Much more efficient would be for example get a ton of articles about your phone published. Then again, I guess if Apple is what Slashdotters want to read about, Apple articles we
Re: (Score:2)
Only on Slashdot a positive email is flagged as a troll.
Re:Nokia Lumia 920 (Score:5, Interesting)
It's Java again.
Even the designer of C# has moved on, to Javascript of all places!
Re:Nokia Lumia 920 (Score:5, Interesting)
C# is completely different than Java. Know what you speak of.
C# developer here, and yes, C# shares a lot of similarities with Java, being as they are both C-family languages. However, I do agree that C# is sufficiently different to make it, on balance, a better and more flexible all-round language than Java.
*waits for anti-MS Java worshippers*
Re: (Score:2)
As a recent convert from C# to Java, it's hard to deny the very obvious influence Java had on C#. I see C# basically as a port of Java in most instances.
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed. I like both languages, and I think C# is better in some ways, but it's not like MS invented C# out of whole cloth. The whole concept of the .Net CLR was nicked from Java, and C# shares a great many language features and paradigms with Java.
Given the choice between the two, I'm not sure which I would pick. It would depend on what features I need, I suppose, and what platforms I need to support.
Re: (Score:2)
When C# was at 1.0, it was basically Java with a touch of Delphi (properties, events), and a couple keywords swapped ("sealed" vs "final").
However, C# has developed much faster than Java since then. For example, it had function literals (lambdas) in 2005 in C# 2.0, and the same with type inference for arguments in 2008. For comparison, Java will only have the same next year in v8.
Re: (Score:2)
No one worships Java. It's owned by Oracle, and the the only tech company to get more hate than M$ is Oracle.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
No one worships Java. It's owned by Oracle, and the the only tech company to get more hate than M$ is Oracle.
That's not true. Oracle is #3 on my list, just below Apple.
Re:Nokia Lumia 920 (Score:5, Informative)
Oh, let's see.
Proper anonymous functions, including lambdas.
Proper function pointers (called delegates) without needing to write entire classes for them.
Support for stack-allocated complex types (structs).
Support for bi-directional and output parameters, even of types normally passed by value.
Unsigned integer types.
Object parameters (technically functions, but cleaner than a bunch of Get*and Set* function definitions and usages).
Proper generics (try declaring an array of generic type in Java, for example).
Easy interop with native code (P/Invoke, good marshaling capabilities, support for ordered structs and unsigned types, etc.).
Support for direct memory access (if you want/need it; use the unsafe keyword and byte* or similar types).
LINQ.
Tuples.
No one-public-class-per-source-file restriction, or the associated restriction on file name.
No restriction on project directory structure.
Partial classes (allows separating parts of the same class, such as autogenerated code from developer code, into different files).
The using keyword (in both of its uses).
Conditional compilation (similar to C preprocessor) to do things like exclude debug code without any overhead at all.
These are the ones that came to mind in just a few minutes of thinking about it, based on personal experiences, I'm sure there's a ton more. C# is a vastly more advanced language than Java. I don't deny that MS learned heavily from Java, but half of that learning was "let's not repeat their mistakes" and the other half was "what is it really lame that this language lacks? Let's do better."
Re:Nokia Lumia 920 (Score:5, Interesting)
http://www.harding.edu/fmccown/java_csharp_comparison.html [harding.edu]
Weeee, look at how different it is.
It's so different.
It's clearly thinking different.
It's sooooooo different.
Re:Nokia Lumia 920 (Score:4, Insightful)
When you focus on just those items, sure. But that table didn't include all of the features of both languages. Where's LINQ? Lamda expressions? etc.?
Run that same table to compare against any other language derived from C/C++.......there will be similar overlap. The point of that table looked like it was to get someone started on making the move from one language to the other.
Re:Nokia Lumia 920 (Score:5, Informative)
With a comparison like that, I guess there would no differences between C, C++, JavaScript, Objective C.
A few differences copied from a Stackoverflow post:
Generics are completely different between the two; Java generics are just a compile-time "trick" (but a useful one at that). In C# and .NET generics are maintained at execution time too, and work for value types as well as reference types, keeping the appropriate efficiency (e.g. a List as a byte[] backing it, rather than an array of boxed bytes.) .NET in general) than Java's JNI .NET is a more transparent affair, with a reference type being created for boxing by the CLR for any value type.
C# doesn't have checked exceptions
Java doesn't allow the creation of user-defined value types
Java doesn't have operator and conversion overloading
Java doesn't have iterator blocks for simple implemetation of iterators
Java doesn't have anything like LINQ
Partly due to not having delegates, Java doesn't have anything quite like anonymous methods and lambda expressions. Anonymous inner classes usually fill these roles, but clunkily.
Java doesn't have expression trees
C# doesn't have anonymous inner classes
C# doesn't have Java's inner classes at all, in fact - all nested classes in C# are like Java's static nested classes
Java doesn't have static classes (which don't have any instance constructors, and can't be used for variables, parameters etc)
Java doesn't have any equivalent to the C# 3.0 anonymous types
Java doesn't have implicitly typed local variables
Java doesn't have extension methods
Java doesn't have object and collection initializer expressions
The access modifiers are somewhat different - in Java there's (currently) no direct equivalent of an assembly, so no idea of "internal" visibility; in C# there's no equivalent to the "default" visibility in Java which takes account of namespace (and inheritance)
The order of initialization in Java and C# is subtly different (C# executes variable initializers before the chained call to the base type's constructor)
Java doesn't have an equivalent of the using statement for simplified try/finally handling of resources
Java doesn't have properties as part of the language; they're a convention of get/set/is methods
Java doesn't have the equivalent of "unsafe" code
Interop is easier in C# (and
Java and C# have somewhat different ideas of enums. Java's are much more object-oriented.
Java has no preprocessor directives (#define, #if etc in C#).
Java has no equivalent of C#'s ref and out for passing parameters by reference
Java has no equivalent of partial types
C# interfaces cannot declare fields
Java has no unsigned integer types
Java has no language support for a decimal type. (java.math.BigDecimal provides something like System.Decimal - with differences - but there's no language support)
Java has no equivalent of nullable value types
Boxing in Java uses predefined (but "normal") reference types with particular operations on them. Boxing in C# and
This is not exhaustive, but it covers everything I can think of off-hand.
Re: (Score:2)
You're showing the table that shows the difference roughly as it was as of C# 1.0 and Java 1.4 - i.e. 2002, 10 years ago. Heck, it doesn't even have generics.
It's completely worthless when comparing the two languages today, because they have both evolved since then, but C# did so at a rate much faster than Java.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Nokia Lumia 920 (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
As a C# guy, I find VB syntax to be a major inefficiency when I'm using it. That's not because VB is necessarily any less efficient, it's just that I'm thinking in C# and translating on the fly. So there are some valid personal reasons to dislike VB. I'm sure the exact opposite is true for you.
Then there's unsafe. That's the last thing VB still lacks that C# can do. It allows for all of the COM interop (ugh) to work. Without unsafe, there's no interop, or interop has to be coded directly in MSIL. Count your
Re:That's gotta hurt (Score:4, Insightful)
Clueful IT departments will still favor blackberry as it still is far more manageable and secure than the other options. The only real issue is that your coworkers will probably hate you.