How? Recent version of Windows come with recent versions of .Net out of the box. How would you 'win' here?
The core clr is supposed to be bundled as far as I understand, so it'll be just another dependency of your application: You don't even NEED to install .Net (on the system/system-wide) anymore.
Recent versions of windows come with whatever version of .net was stable at the time, in order to upgrade you have to download from msdn. This vs. `sudo apt-get install upgrade` etc.
The announcement of the windows package management features should help this though.
New versions often come via windows update (which you _could_ consider easier than manually installing it -> apt).
Plus, this is a thread about the core clr and as I said: That won't be required/necessary in a system wide installation anymore. So you now install RandomApp and .Net is just part of it - just like you can apt-get install random-app.
We're comparing now the package management, not the ease of installation of .Net. There is no installation of .Net anymore (or - see above: It sooner or later lands via windows update).
I'm a Linux guy, but that's [1] just a weird case to make here, both in general and specifically in this context.
1: Easier .Net installation on Linux than on Windows
How? Recent version of Windows come with recent versions of .Net out of the box. How would you 'win' here?
The core clr is supposed to be bundled as far as I understand, so it'll be just another dependency of your application: You don't even NEED to install .Net (on the system/system-wide) anymore.
Recent versions of windows come with whatever version of .net was stable at the time, in order to upgrade you have to download from msdn. This vs. `sudo apt-get install upgrade` etc.
The announcement of the windows package management features should help this though.
New versions often come via windows update (which you _could_ consider easier than manually installing it -> apt).
Plus, this is a thread about the core clr and as I said: That won't be required/necessary in a system wide installation anymore. So you now install RandomApp and .Net is just part of it - just like you can apt-get install random-app.
We're comparing now the package management, not the ease of installation of .Net. There is no installation of .Net anymore (or - see above: It sooner or later lands via windows update).
I'm a Linux guy, but that's [1] just a weird case to make here, both in general and specifically in this context.
1: Easier .Net installation on Linux than on Windows
Ever tried to install an update to .net and powershell automatically without a restart remotely?
You need the wrappers of defined state or sccm just to survive. Winrm can't even touch it. (except through ugly as sin scheduled commands)
To be honest: No experience with that.
But that's yet another example of something that has no relationship to the core clr (-> bundle, local installation, 'just a dependency').
So yes, Windows needs restarts to update some files. And yeah, for most stuff / everything but the kernel (?) you don't need that on Linux.
No relation to the ease of deployment of .Net, especially not the open source/cross platform thing that started this thread.
It is literally as easy to deploy as any application on your platform and doesn't need to be deployed explicitly.