Slashdot Mirror
Mono Ships ASP.NET server
Miguel de Icaza writes "We have just released the new version of Mono the new version includes a working version of ASP.NET. The release includes a sample web server that "hosts" the ASP.NET runtime (it can be hosted anywhere, for instance in Apache, with mod_haydn). The web features of ASP.NET would not be very useful without the support of a backing database. The new version of Mono includes database providers for Oracle, MS SQL, Sybase, ODBC, OleDB, Gnome Data Access, SqLite, MySQL and of course, Postgres. The C# compiler is now 37% faster due to some nice optimizations on the JIT engine and in our class libraries. You can use it to develop GUI applications using Gtk#. Screenshots for mPhoto and the GUI debugger (which can debug both JITed apps and native applications). "
Ask for your money back.
J2EE is a mess. Whether .NET matches up with it or not doesn't matter.
Making a port of a system based entirely on mental masturbation. Java and .NET were based on mental masturbation, but they served a purpose -- Java to make applications inefficient (so Sun can sell large servers) but easy to develop for inferior developers (so all kinds of crashy crap will be written for it), .NET -- to create a large and convoluted infrastructure that is even more inefficient (so Intel can sell new hardware incompatible with Linux drivers) and is tied to the design of Windows-specific software (so future developers will learn Windows-specific programming techniques and will be incapable of writing Unix software).
But why do we need to spread the monstrosity is beyond me.
Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
It seems obvious that the Mono crowd is tremendously naive to believe that Microsoft has laid .Net technology into their hands without any strings attached. At the very least the open source movement is going to spend a tremendous amount of energy "chasing" standards and implementation that are defined by Microsoft(ala Samba but a lot more complicated). .Net on Linux/Unix et al will always be a second class to .Net on Windows. At worst, M$ will flex their legal and marketing muscle to ensure that .Net on Linux/Unix is partially functional but crippled. The only reason that Microsoft has opened .Net at all, is to deal a blow to Sun and Java. I am not convinced that there is anything of significance that can be done with .Net that can't be done with Java. It seems obvious that from a business perspective Microsoft sees Mono as an ally in its battle against Java. However, don't be confused into thinking that they want to support open source/linux, etc. In a classic "Art of War" like move they are just using one enemy(the open source movement) to fight another enemy(Java), leaving each too weak to fight with M$.
.Net space. They realize that competing with M$ on .Net in the space that M$ created and controls is a losing proposition. Say what you will about Sun, but they have clearly supported/financed open source as much as any company with the possible exception of IBM. The acceptance of the Apache group in the JCP process, the recent decsion to certifying JBOSS has also proven that they are susceptible to being nudged by the open source community. Can the same be said for Microsoft?
If I were the CEO/CIO of a company why would I base my technology on Mono who basically copied the spec's given to them by M$ when I could get a fully supported version of the technology from M$. It seems interesting that none of the other big tech firms that have the wherewithal to "nudge" the direction of technology in a broad sense ie. IBM, Oracle, BEA , etc are doing anything in the
In my opinion the focus of mono is a misguided effort that distracts the open source community from creating a truly competitive OS platform to Microsoft. You may disagree, but even though the desktop platform Linux has improved dramatically in the last couple of years it is still a long way from competing with Windows for Joe User in terms of comfort and ease if for no other reason than intertia. No matter how vast the open source community is, we can't afford to spend all of our energy chasing each technological whim developed by M$ to combat other companies and the industry in general, with their $40 billion war chest.
- Rodney
What's the big deal of downloading 100mb of something?
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
I agree, strong typing always _seems_ like a less risky way to go (catch problems at compile time, not run time).
This is one of those topics that creates huge debates and flamewars.
There are tradeoffs to both approaches (static typing versus dynamic typing or type-free). Which tradeoffs weigh more heavily seem to be a personal preference. Scriptish languages produce less cluttered code IMO, closer to psuedo-code and with less formalities to slow your eyes down.
I myself started out with static/strong typing but have gravitated toward preferring scryptish languages over time, although a lint-like "warning system" would be nice for scriptish languages. Microsoft seems to have abandonded scriptish languages/features in order to fend off Java. MS's technologies at any given time reflects their perception of their top enemies. Appearently they don't consider PHP a threat. Probably because they are targeting larger companies who are more likely to waste big bucks on PHB-ware, and PHP does not fit the image of PHB-ware and bloated consultant budgets.
Table-ized A.I.