managed vs unmanaged

[webdesigner25]

what is managed vs unmanaged in .NET, can someone explain this graph?

[boen_robot]

"Unmanaged" basically means any "normal" exe files. Ones in which the content is pure machine code."Managed" code is any code that isn't exactly machine code, but "machine code"-like code that needs to be passed on to a runtime (a "normal" exe file of sorts) that translates the managed code to actual machine code OR do something else if it determines the code may crash the computer or something.Unmanaged code runs faster, because it needs no translation and you don't need to load the framework. It's also more memory efficient, because you don't need to keep a runtime on in addition to your actual code. However, YOU are responsible for everything that may happen. Ever seen a blue screen of death? That's created by programs which make false assumptions about the computer that runs them, and therefore cause such crashes.Managed code is often easier to work with, because the runtime abstracts away common tasks, and is free to introduce its own syntax constructs for even easier access to stuff. It is also possible (at least in theory) to make managed code run on any OS, as long as there's a runtime for that OS. The speed decrease is neglectible enough that many developers prefer to use managed code for certain specialized purposes.There's no "managed vs unmanaged in .NET". Applications written in a ".NET" language are managed code. Well... they are compiled to managed code to be exact, but still. Do you know JAVA? It's the same deal, only instead of compiling sources to ".jar" files, you compile to them to special ".exe" files.