The following lines were added (+) and removed (-):
Developing in .NET has advantages for the beginner. It is very easy to learn for the fresh mind not having to cope with altering an entire programming philosophy. With ease comes inefficiency. Applications running in a managed environment such as the Microsoft framework's CLR or Java's JVM tend to require more system resources than functionally similar applications that access machine resources more directly. Programs created in .NET are basically fat, and inefficient.Businesses lose millions of dollars each year over software they exclusively own and distribute being reverse engineered and illegally distributed. Microsoft .NET utilizes the Just in time (JIT) compilation. Software compiled using JIT can be more easily reverse-engineered than native code to algorithms used by an application, raising the concern of possible loss of trade secrets and the bypassing of license control mechanisms. It is easier to "crack" shareware developed in .NET.== Anti Innovation ==Microsoft is more interested in turning a profit rather than to create quality products. Microsoft naturally is opposed to the Open Source community. Furthermore, Microsoft is opposed to healthy competition in the technology marketplace. Microsoft applied for a multitude of extensive patents key parts of the .NET Framework. At one time Microsoft and a competing, yet no longer industry relevant company, Novell, had an agreement to allow both use of parts of open source components of .NET, yet lock out the rest of the world programming community. The agreement is in violation of the principles of giving equal rights to all users of a particular program.Microsoft .NET Framework was supposed to be inherently cross platform, as promoted by Microsoft at the end of the 1990's in an effort to gain developer interest. However, more than a decade later we see the full implementation of .NET is only supported on Microsoft Windows. Although the platform offers limited .NET subsets for other platforms, the substituted implementations of CLR, base class libraries, and compilers are all that is present. With some degree of standardization, all implementations remain with a variety of levels of completeness when compared to the full .NET version which Microsoft provides for Windows and are too often entirely incompatible.