Microsoft Releases .NET Core 3.0

Posted on September 23, 2019 by Paul Thurrott in Cloud, Dev, Mobile, Windows, Windows 10 with 22 Comments

As promised, Microsoft today released .NET Core 3.0 with new versions of ASP.NET, EFC Core 3.0, C# 8.0, F# 4.7, and Visual Studio.

“We’re excited to announce the release of .NET Core 3.0,” Microsoft’s Richard Lander announced. “It includes many improvements, including adding [support for] Windows Forms and Windows Presentation Foundation (WPF), adding new JSON APIs, support for ARM64 and improving performance across the board. C# 8.0 is also part of this release, which includes nullable, async streams, and more patterns. F# 4.7 is included, and focused on relaxing syntax and targeting .NET Standard 2.0. You can start updating existing projects to target .NET Core 3.0 today. The release is compatible with previous versions, making updating easy.”

Oof. That’s a lot of stuff. And ASP.NET Core 3.0 and EF Core 3.0 are also being released today, along with Visual Studio 2019 16.3 and Visual Studio for Mac 8.3.

To me, the big news here is support for Windows desktop applications via WinForms and WPF: These once-deprecated frameworks have been given new life thanks to the failure of UWP and are once again first-class citizens. But .NET Core 3.0 is big news whether you target the web, mobile, or web services too.

And if you want to learn more, be sure to check out Microsoft’s new video series.

Tagged with ,

Join the discussion!

BECOME A THURROTT MEMBER:

Don't have a login but want to join the conversation? Become a Thurrott Premium or Basic User to participate

Register
Comments (22)

22 responses to “Microsoft Releases .NET Core 3.0”

  1. Thom77

    Funny this article just came out. I spent the last 2 days trying to figure out why some games weren't installing on a new laptop because it couldnt pass the DirectX installation part. I needed Directx 9 for these older games, and it was acting like i didnt have it installed, when i was pretty sure i did considering i had Directx 12. I also had installed these games on my other laptop and Surface Go.


    Sparing the agonizing details of rabbit holing on the intrawebs, i finally figured out after sifting through many, many "do this" on comment sections of articles, that my .NET needed repairing and it had nothing to do with Direct X.

      • nazmuslabs

        In reply to ragingthunder:

        I think his point was that since Win10 comes With DirectX 12, why is it not a superset? That is, DX12 should contain APIs for previous versions to ensure smoothest back compat. Instead, DX12 fully supports down to I think 10. To add support for the rest, you have to download DirectX 9 June 2010 update, which should add all the DX9 and earlier APIs. So I ask, why not simply include these APIs in-box?! Win10 OS updates and .NET updates are cumulative. So why not have DirectX be cumulative?

    • nazmuslabs

      In reply to Thom77:

      I understand your confusion. The reason people in forums suggest installing DX9, is that it is Microsoft’s recommend advice. In your case it was .NET, but many times the game errors are fixed by installing DirectX 9. That’s why when you first run a game on steam, steam is “Installing DitectX...” along with “Visual C++ Redistributable”. It’s a flaw in the OS architecture that you keep having to install DX9.


      If you ever need to install it, search Microsoft website for DirectX June 2010 Cumulative Update

  2. dontbeevil

    latest 4 days updates from the store:

    MR portal: UWP

    MS whiteboard: UWP

    Xbox game bar: UWP

    Sticky Notes: UWP

    Lenovo Vantage: UWP

    Snipe & Sketch: UWP

    Nightingale: UWP

    Your Phone: UWP

    Angry birds 2: UWP

    Awesome Tube: UWP

    Xbox game bar plugin: UWP

    SKype: UWP

    Store: UWP

  3. dontbeevil

    And of course my comment is gone

  4. maethorechannen

    These once-deprecated frameworks have been given new life thanks to the failure of UWP and are once again first-class citizens


    At the cost of muddying the waters when it comes to it being a cross platform implementation of .Net.


    One thing they never, ever seem to mention is why you would use .Net technologies in a green field project, where "the C# you know and love" isn't a thing. What's the selling point for someone who isn't using .Net to switch over to it?

    • christian.hvid

      In reply to maethorechannen:

      Aside from familiarity (the best language/framework/whatever is always the one you know), a lot of developers choose ASP.NET Core for performance reasons. Node.js has a lot going for it, at least if you come from client-side web development, but JavaScript is inherently slower than compiled languages like C#.


      Also, many enterprise developers find that the more rigid type system in C# is a better fit for back-end services, where the entity model and business logic typically lives.

    • wp7mango

      In reply to maethorechannen:

      Why would you NOT switch over to using. NET? It doesn't have to be C#.

      • maethorechannen

        In reply to WP7Mango:

        Because everyone else on the planet is currently using node?


        What are the alternative to C#? VB? No thanks. Much as I love F#, they seem to mostly be positioning themselves as a niche language for "analytical processing" (if the blog post about the latest version of F# is anything to go by). What else is there that is being actively developed?

        • wp7mango

          In reply to maethorechannen:

          There are lots of. NET languages available, including Python, Ruby, Ada, J#


          At the end of the day, maybe just stick with what you know.


          BTW, what's wrong with VB.NET?

          • maethorechannen

            In reply to WP7Mango:

            None of those languages are being actively developed anymore. At least not the .net versions. The only first class, actively developed language for .Net is C#.


            As for VB - if I was going to develop something with .net, why would I use a more verbose yet less featureful alternative to C#? Basic (visual or otherwise) is a language that the world has moved on from, which is probably for the best.

            • wp7mango

              In reply to maethorechannen:

              So, now you're getting down to the main issue, since you ask "if I was to develop something with .NET"


              The question is not really about the language, but rather a question about the platform, in this case .NET, or perhaps more specifically, .NET Core.


              But to counter your point about VB being slightly more verbose, yes it is, but it's also more readable for the same reason.


  5. christian.hvid

    I watched the .NET Conf keynote, and it seems like Microsoft is pretty pumped about Blazor (and so am I). The keynote even ended with a preview of WebAssembly Blazor wrapped inside Electron, which really boils down to a new way of doing .NET desktop development, only with HTML as the markup language instead of XAML. That's really something to keep your eyes on.


    As an aside, I loved it when Scott Hunter was gushing about the new (and rather clunky) hot reload feature in Xamarin, claiming he had NEVER seen anything like it on ANY platform... Well, say hello to Flutter and React Native. :)


  6. martinusv2

    But without Winform / WPF designer?

  7. rmac

    The big news is Blazor client side will be released May '20.

Leave a Reply