> desktop applications are still 99% C/C++
In the Windows world especially that's not even slightly true.
In the Windows world especially that's not even slightly true.
Run "Process Explorer", Options -> Color Selection -> check ".Net Processes" (Yellow).
In all consumer Windows up to Windows 7 no dotNet processes run (by default) at all. [Longhorn was meant to bring a dotNet shell (explorer, etc) but failed big time.] I have lots of common applications and all are coded in C/C++ with the exception of IDEs (VS/Eclipse/IDEA) which eat memory like no tomorrow. I couldn't care less about the brave Win8/10 world.
Still supports C++ ;)
So XP and Vista then.
Most of the software that comes pre-installed on Windows machines (by the OEM) is .NET. That fact by itself means the amount of software written in .NET is far far far above 1%.
> In Windows world you are very wrong.
So you're saying after the shedloads of money, effort and development Microsoft has pumped into .NET it hasn't even amounted to 1% of applications running it? That's preposterous.
DotNet and Java are very big in enterprise software and server software. Java is also big in open source thanks to Apache foundation (if you need a full text search engine, Lucene is still the only feature complete in town; and all the projects based around Lucene like Hadoop, Solr, etc) There was an C++ port of Lucene (CLucene) that was a lot faster and used little memory and compatible with Lucene file format. Though no native fork of Lucene keep up with the development speed of Apache Java Lucene.
All non-technical people, so 90% of users. I get where you're coming from (and you have valid points about speed/memory usage) but to say <1% of software on Windows is .NET is frankly wrong. Sure it's not 100% and might not even be 50%, but it's way way way above 1%.