Slashdot Mirror
.NET for Apache
PerlGuy was so kind as to forward us the news about the joint Apache/Microsoft combined press conference scheduled from Wednesday at the OSCON Quote: "We will announce news related to the Apache web server and Microsoft's
development technology, .NET. This should be one of the biggest
announcements of the conference..."
The email he recieved: Covalent Technologies will be holding a press conference at the O'Reilly
Conference on Wednesday at 3:15 in suite 415 (during the afternoon break).
We will announce news related to the Apache web server and Microsoft's
development technology, .NET. This should be one of the biggest
announcements of the conference and an interesting follow up to Microsoft's
appearance last year at the show as well as to their general comments on
open source. Executives will be on hand to answer questions or to conduct
one-on-one interviews after the announcement.
Before people get in a huff, we should mention that Apache has a history of integrating well with other technologies, those considered to be "evil" by some people, and others as well. I mean, look at Apache and Java. What about XML? Not to mention perl, PHP, TCL, and others.
.NET, just in a different way. Apache is wise to be as flexible and accomodating as possible - it's a good thing that it supports .NET, since it will most likely do it in a free way and expose more people to free software. On the other hand, it could always *not* support .NET, lose more market share to IIS, and generally piss people off who are using .NET technologies by wider corporate edict.
Java is not a warm and fuzzy free technology. I daresay it's every bit as proprietary as
-- Truth goes out the door when rumor comes innuendo. -- Groucho Marx
Microsoft actually validating apache as a competitor big enough to not crush them (right away) by closing their .NET framework only to IIS?
.NET deployment... ...or is (history repeating) a "good thing" only in the short run:
.NET stuff, let's learn .NET. God! it's so simple and easy, and object-oriented to the bones, I'll stay on that for all of my applications"
.NET2 to IIS-only, and since a lot of developpers moved or learned from scratch on .NET, they will migrate on IIS to continue or update their work.
.NET framework because they NEED people to USE it and gain acceptance... once they get that, they apply.monopoly(.NET);
Question is, is it good to see Apache embrassing a Microsoft framework so that it remains in the race of the
"Hey! Apache runs
1-2 years later Microsoft closes the
Usually, this scenario is typical of MS... so what would be different here? They have everything to gain right now to broaden their
--- Metamoderating abusive downgraders since my 300th post.
So anyone figured out what .NET does yet?
i guess this would be the "embrace" part of "embrace and extend."
Gyrate Dot Org - "Where high-tech meets low-life"
But though the editors were lazy or Slashcode was buggy, I'll put in a couple of cents anyway.
.NET initiatives that are Free.
First of all, this is bad. Microsoft are not adopting the "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em" ideal. Apache dominates web servers. No doubt about it. To defeat this, Microsoft are going to do what they do best: embrace, extend, erradicate.
Based on Microsoft's history, any components they write for Apache will be closed source. If it is not entirely closed, the crutial parts will be. Microsoft are not interested in opening up their IP. Consider this as one of the many possible scenarios:
Following initial proof of concept, first stage deployments and so forth, Microsoft will begin the trouble. It will strangely cease to work. Apache will be to blame and sites will like have to apply patches from Microsoft or just deal with them. At the same time, IIS will lack these problems. They will work to create inroads into the *nix space with Win.NET and IIS.
Keep Microsoft out of open source. They have no business being here. Instead, Apache people should look at either of the two
Why bother.
Alliances aren't always a good thing. When a stronger enemy is fighting many small opponents, if the strong guy can get a few of the small guys to take a break for a bit, that's really just a win for the bigger guy.
Microsoft using Apache instead of IIS. Now that's an interesting thought. Microsoft would have no issues with using Apache because it's license would allow them to lock up their changes without a problem. They write a module to let it use .net and *whamo* they look like open source advocates. As long as it's the right kind of open source.
This sig has been temporarily disconnected or is no longer in service
Comment removed based on user account deletion
When the same App was ported to .NET, it could perform better under a heavier load then any other database.
Well, I would say that porting applications to a different code base for benchmarking is an exercise in futility. The fact of the matter is that both architectures are amenable to considerable optimization that would not be done in this sort of study, and the 700 - 900 range in page load performance does not represent a difference that any experienced person would consider meaningful.
I know this was a joke, but in all fairness the CodeRed virus targetted IIS not .NET. As far as I know the only virus to target the .NET infrastructure is called "donut".
Jeremy
Why not? Because there won't be a standard way to show banner ads and popup ads to pay for the content, and no casual user is going to pay to read slashdot articles.
Moreover, I predict that there will be a versioning nightmare. The content providers and software writers are going to have a terrible time trying to stay in sync on the data formats and protocols between the sources and clients. Slashdot changes all the time, for instance. What if you had just bought a karma monitor that had a cool numerical widget to keep tabs on your karma in real time? Now its useless, because karma isn't a number any more.
Look at a current example that is similar to "web services". It's the billing infrastructure that interfaces doctors and hospitals to insurance companies. They've been working on this system for decades, and it is still a complete piece of crap. I'd estimate that my healtchare bills get significantly screwed up in the system at least 25% of the time. How hard can this be? Apparently pretty hard. Now everybody is working feverishly to make every aspect of our lives just as buggy. In the end, a lot of this hype is going to get discredited.
If it's just an add on, who really cares?
The core Apache foundation project is Apache, which works with well, most everything. mod_dtcl, mod_perl, mod_ruby and plenty of others. Contrary to what Java weenies would like people to think, the world is not, in fact, a choice between Unix+Java and Windows+.NET.
And given the way Sun keep jerking the free software world around (Oh, look, work on Tomcat and we'll make it the reference JSP engine! Oh, now we've changed our minds!), why would Apache care about keeping Sun happy more than they care about making Apache as compatible with as many platforms and technologies as possible?
Many of the good people have been working to make Apache a first-class citizen on Windows through the 1.3.x code, and achieved that in 2.0.x. I imagine those people would be very happy to see Microsoft recognise the quality of their work. And I doubt they give a shit about Sun or Java.
The story said nothing about Microsoft being involved. It said "Microsoft's Technology, .NET". I seriously (and I realize several posts here weren't) doubt M$ is anywhere near this thing.
Lump lingered last in line for brains, and the ones she got were sorta rotten and insane.
Besides, I think a lot of people has mixed the concept of Web Services(WS) with .NET. WS is a interoperability framework, while .NET aims to cover all aspect of computing, while remains to use a single protocol for communication.
.NET is attempting to 'dominate the world'. However, this is pretty much the only way of doing things if MS wanted to do what they planned.
.NET, you must have .NET on both end.
.NET's stability doesn't count), .NET wins. For the openness, WS win, as it doesn't need to be bounded on a single vendor solution(again, theorotically).
People jokingly said, in this regard,
It might be too complicated and confusing to explain without an example: suppose we'd like to implement Remote Procedure Call over the Web, with WS both ends must have SOAP-rpc defined and implemented so as to call each other, but they don't need to implement WS from the same vendor(theorotically). With
To be honest, in term of robustness of both models(if
(I know rpc is a bad example as CORBRA seems to beat them hand down and it's a proven technology...well, the other story)
A "good" business decision by Microsoft is often very bad for Microsoft's competitors. Don't get me wrong, either: I am not anti-Microsoft by any measure of the imagination (ironically I'm working on an IIS/SQL Server project in another window at this very moment, and I do almost entirely Microsoft platform consulting work), but rather I am realistic, and every single decision Microsoft makes has underlying motives. They might be aligned with other peoples, and sometimes they might be best for the computer industry as a whole, but sometimes they aren't: It's pretty naive to presume that it's "conspiracy theories" to assess why Microsoft does what they do.
.NET viable by supporting it on the world's most popular web browser" (presuming you mean web server), but then you berate those who think it's "some plot by Micro$oft to take over the world" : Wouldn't that be exactly why they're targeting the most popular web platform?
You sort of contradict yourself in any case: You claim that they are "making
That has to be the lamest set of supposedly "anti-java" rants I've ever seen. I could probably find some random luser off the street to do better than that.
.. else if .." etc?) .java file per class (not counting inner classes) is a lot??
Anyway:
1) irrelevant
2) false (perhaps he's thinking of the JDK? false for that, too)
3) misguided
4) misguided and irrelevant (can't do that in C or C++ either, and what's wrong with "if
5) One
-- Alastair
I hope you all who are in a management position realize that .NET is ONLY good choice when it's open source. We have NO reason to believe that M$ is doing this out of goodness of their heart.
Have you ever played Go, the ultimate strategy game? If you have you can probably see the similarities.
Does the devil turn good when it's threatened?
Wow.
.Net?
.Net is unproven, unused, and extremely expensive to develop for after you make every single one of my developers run a License for this Microsoft product, and that Microsoft product? All this while my competitiors build the same app with Java and Linux put me out of business because thier business logic can move from thier AS/400, BSD Box, Apple Macintosh or Linux DESKTOP throughout the entire enterprise with ZARRO the cost of additional licenses?
.Net with .Not Apache.
.No thanks.
Why would I want to run my infrastructure with a modified version of Apache with
Esepcially when I can build any web app with Linux, J2EE or Tomcat 4.x with zarro the nasty side effects of:
Tying my application to the PC platform and Microsoft's XP, both a combination made in hell to manage or even install.
Why would I do such a silly thing and restrict myself in any of these ways in this kind of business climate, which quite frankly sucks?
With a Mozilla client, a Linux, BSD, or Apple or AS/400, and a decent backend database and a Java VM I have all the tools I need to write my business logic for the 21st century.
Hack
Got Geometrodynamics? Awe, too hard to figure out? Too bad.
1) Bullshit, you're focusing on desktops, which are a relatively small portion of the total number of computers out there. .Net runtime is still a much larger install (about 22 megs compared to 12-13) .Net has it.
2) SFW - the
3) GC isn't controversial, but very useful - I assume that's why
4) So you want to turn switch into syntactic sugar for if.. else if..? Sure, just stick to C# then.
5) Why is a small number of huge files more manageable than a large number of smaller files? If I am looking for the class MyClass, I'd rather find it fast in MyClass.java than having to hunt through source01.txt, source02.txt...
Plus, there is no requirement that Java source needs to reside in files at all. A compilation unit can just as well be a database record.
Just a note: remember, Covalent is not the ASF and vice versa. Covalent happens to be a company that builds on top of Apache to ship their own software, just like any number of other companies. But they don't represent the ASF or any ASF projects, and the ASF can't control what Covalent does with Apache code (either the webserver or any of the other excellent software there) any more than we can control other companies. (Covalent happens to be big supporters of ASF projects internally, but that's different).
So it wasn't an 'Apache/Microsoft' release, it was a 'Covalent/Microsoft' release. While it may seem like a minor nit, it's a very important one.
- Anonymous ASF committer
Actually the only last possible reason to run IIS is ASP.NET. If they provide a way to run ASP.NET pages on Apache I think you would see a mass exodus from IIS. Remember that 50% of all webservers run Windows (but not necessarily IIS) so this may be Microsoft's way of keeping people on Windows while still losing some of the battle on IIS.
Can someone please point me to more info? .NET on Linux(not Mono, you Monons).
As where it says
Remember that Apache also runs on Windows?
Could this just be ".NET for Apache on Windows?"
One aspect of the vapor surrounding "web services" is that the tools and standards for them are infantile. Look at how young the XML standard is (1998), and, then, realize that all of the current web services buzzwords are younger than that. No wonder there really aren't any good tools and no one really knows what they are talking about. Most people are still trying to figure out what that HTTP thing is and why Java and JavaScript aren't the same thing.
How long did it take for the Internet to evolve before the rapid growth of the 90's made it central to so many people's work? Other technologies, slightly older than XML, still haven't reached any visionary's goals. Where are the VRML immersive environments and the Internet videophones, for example?
If web services really are what people claim, we will know it in a few years when we can't remember an Internet without them. Otherwise, they will just be another great idea that dissappears into obscurity.
Healthcare article at Kuro5hin