.NET made raw COM and DCOM programming redundant?

Question

Has the .NET Framework introduced the conversion of raw to COM and DCOM?

(except for using some COM + services, for example, to manage transactions through the System.EnterpriseServices namespace)

Answer 1

Not yet, as the OS is still unmanageable.

If MS finally does what their labs have been talking about for years and creates a fully managed OS, then it will.

This OS will not be backward compatible. First they will have to create managed versions of Office, IE, etc. They will need to create a virtual machine to run unmanaged applications.

The pain will be something like a switch from Mac OS9 to OSX.

Answer 2

COM was the last major technology that MS actually caught up with. MS continues to create new APIs that depend on COM; for example, the Vista New Media Foundation (a kind of successor to DirectShow, which was also based on COM) is a COM API. So Direct3D10 (and I would suggest D3D11). I do not think that it will disappear soon, and for many Windows programming tasks this is not at all redundant.

Answer 3

Not yet, but I would say that in the long run he seeks. Obviously, there will always be room for lower levels, but from what I understand in Microsoft’s strategy, the move is to replace managed code as soon as possible.

Answer 4

I suppose it depends on what you mean by raw. I still consider it necessary sometimes to expose the COM-API from the .Net class libraries. Makes the process of switching from some platforms to .Net much easier, since I can replace small chunks through COM.

Answer 5

.NET was specifically designed to replace COM (and therefore the DLL Hell), so although .NET applications can still access COM components, all new developments are encouraged to switch to .NET, unless you have good reason to stick to com.