Slashdot Mirror
Mono - 'Breaking Down the .Net Barriers'
ceejayoz writes "MSNBC has an interesting article about the Mono project, saying that the 'volunteer effort
could oblige Microsoft to work with Linux'."
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
Why not do the same thing, but don't cater it to .NET specs?
Make the Linux equivalent (or better). Granted there are software packages that are "*nix only" but Soooooooo much time is spent making stuff to conform to MS specs , or "just like..."The more that things like that are done, the closer you become to turning linux in a windows re-write IMHO
Sehr geehrter Toilettenbenutzer!
Well it's both. Windows apps will still be written using System.Windows.Forms and they will need Wine to emulate them unfortunately. Mono/Linux apps will use the Gnome or KDE .net bindings, and they won't integrate as nicely into Windows.
Unfortunately Wine and the SWF effort are currently being screwed around by threading issues, and the new glibc also messes things up even more, so until the threading situation is sorted out I doubt we'll be seeing Windows .NET apps run on Linux.
what patents does SUN own on the Java language and arcitecture itself? we've seen IBM come out with a non-standard GUI library, and SUN only replies with: "it's not the standard java". as far as i know, anyone is freely able to use and extend the java arcitecture as it suites their needs.
.NET arcitecture and have not at all publicly stated that they won't use those patents to stop those who implement their technology on other platforms. when asked about mono, they say "that's an interesting project and it shows the power of .NET". they fail to add that "yeah, and we're going to basically own their source when it's all and done with it. tht GPL is going to get ripped to shreds."
microsoft does have patents on the
as others have mentioned FORTRAN isn't quite dead, but like BSD, it's dying. as late as 2 years ago i was coding business applications in FORTRAN on both VMS and Solaris platforms.
MS tried to adopt Java, but it just got them sued by Sun. That's one of the reasons why they developed .NET in the first place.
I don't see why you couldn't do that with C#... You can also use the TCPClient base class and implement call backs to handle multiple listeners on the same socket. For example:
r l= /library/en-us/dnadvnet/html/vbnet08142001.asp
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?u
seems they also thought about this
from http://go-mono.com/faq.html#licensing
Patents Question 122: Could patents be used to completely disable Mono (either submarine patents filed now, or changes made by Microsoft specifically to create patent problems)? No. First, its basic functional capabilities have pre-existed too long to be held up by patents. The basic components of Mono are technologically equivalent to Sun's Java technology, which has been around for years. Mono will also implement multi-language and multi-architecture support, but there are previous technologies such as UCSD p-code and ANDF that also support multiple languages using a common intermediate language. The libraries are similar to other language's libraries, so again, they're too similar to be patentable in large measure. However, if Microsoft does patent some technology, then our plan is to either (1) work around it, (2) chop out patented pieces, (3) find prior art that would render the patent useless. Not providing a patented capability would weaken the interoperability, but it would still provide the free software / open source software community with good development tools, which is the primary reason for developing Mono.
stop supporting microsoft with pirating their software!!!!!
You're missing out on the single fact that Microshaft have actually submitted a whole standard to the ECMA - the C# specs.
;8)
Sure there's nothing new, though. There's been nothing new since the 1960s with lisp, but that's a different rant.
~Tim
--
Rushing on down to the circle of the turn
SWF allows programs to hook into the Windows API message queue system, and many many apps use this to achieve special effects, and control things that .NET doesn't directly expose. They did try using GTK to start with, but that solution was quickly found to not work well, just like Wine originally used Tk and dropped it.
Just to carify...
The Mono C# compiler (mcs) is licensed under the GPL, the runtime is licensed under LGPL and the class library is licensed under X11.
Why does everyone think .Net will kill Java? They aren't the same thing.
.NET is a programming API for windows that is useable from multiple languages (C#, VC++, VB). It makes it a lot easier to program a lot of things a lot easier than they used to be. But primarily it ends "dll hell" by replacing COM.
.NET will kill java because of C#. C# is a very similar language to java, but it isn't platform independent. Because of the nature of .NET and C# I guarantee that you will have to re-compile stuff written in C# if you want to run it on another os, even if you have mono. .NET is not the same thing as java, so it can't replace it.
Java is a platform independent object oriented programming language. It makes software that runs on everything from cell phones to giant servers.
You might think that
Well, rather than slamming .NET without actually tinkering with it, I thought it might be neat to install it.
.NET framework, my little hello.exe worked perfectly. Granted, less than half the .NET spec is implemented yet in Mono, but performance was quite good. It took approximately 5-6 times longer for the equivalent program to load and execute using the Sun 1.4 JVM (no performance tuning with either).
On a Linux box with Mono and a W2K server with the
If they can continue to maintain this edge, Mono will be quite attractive once completed.
With that said, I'm concerned about Windows.Forms being dependent on WINE. While it's great they can leverage another oss project like this, it makes me wonder how solid the MS Windows.Forms assembly specification really is.
Eric Sarjeant
eric[@]sarjeant.com
Miguel de Icaza himself says that the reason Mono is thriving is that "There are very very very hard parts in .NET...extremely hard"
Here are a few terrifying things I see popping up in this debate:
.NET must be too, right?
.NET is under dubious patent protection and doesn't have a real compatibility/performance adherence test suite like Java. Microsoft already screwed Netscape this way with Javascript (submitted to ECMA as ECMAscript) and then simply changed it to screw up their browser efforts. The Mono guys are simply not paying attention to history here.
.NET is a way of playing Microsoft's game. Why dedicate all or your efforts to a strategy that your competitor and enemy controls? (Note to purists: you may not be into Linux to compete with Microsoft, but if you think that MS is not your competitor and enemy, think again. . . or just ask them)
.NET programmers, folks. . . Is the platform even out of beta on windows? Windows people are still learning .NET and there isn't much software even out for it. On, Linux, we've got an IRC client and a media player (that most of us wouldn't use over XMMS). .NET adoption is marketing, not reality. There is a huge difference (and a lot of trolls/astro-turfers trying to confuse the two).
.NET praying for some kind of compatibility that won't happen), they'll thank us by killing Linux by enforcing their patents and control of the Forms and Windows API as soon as sun is out of the way. I guarantee that this will happen.
1) I'm a little concerned about the dependence of Windows.Forms on WINE
Well, be a lot afraid. Microsoft is tricking you into writing native apps for GNU/Linux and making them dependent on the WINDOWS API (Windows.Forms are part of the new Windows API). . . and the mono guys have fallen for it hook line and sinker (and are helping).
2) C# has been submitted as an open standard, so
Wrong! A majority of
3) Mono is helping Linux compete.
Isn't anyone looking at the scoreboard? GNU/Linux is already competing and is kicking Microsoft's ass (and everyone elses for that matter)! Microsoft started with a huge lead on the desktop and server and GNU/Linux has had a faster adoption rate than any OS in history. Why? Because GNU/Linux changed the game into one where we build an OS that we want, unfettered by the dubious interference of monopolists and people with ulterior motives.
4) We will get Windows converts to GNU/Linux this way. . . and make great apps.
What great apps and what converts? There aren't many
5) "Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it."
There is a business history-lesson in the making here. If we help MS kill Java and our own platform efforts (by switching to
If we like their platform and research, we should be incorporating the best ideas into our own projects (like Parrot), Qt, Gnome. . . but not at the risk of binding our code to the Windows API (WINE and Windows.Forms anyone)?!*?
Miguel de Icaza is a good programmer with a lot of charisma, but he is doing a very dumb thing by leading a lot of people down the wrong path. Judgment in engineering and judgement in product/legal management aren't the same thing. Didn't we just get that harsh lesson over the dot.com fiasco the last few years?
I never thought I'd have to say this, but: why is Richard Stallman so silent on this issue?
No problems. A great new Aussie developer (old-skool, with code and great articles) mag has started coming out. Australian Developer, Issue 2, page 17 in an article about web services, where Mark Driver (Gartner) was discussing the fight for platform domination between Sun and Microsoft.
.NET flexibility for productivity"
The actual quote was:
"Java will sacrifice productivity for flexibility and
Cheers.
http://pcblues.com - Digits and Wood
Hi,
I'm running this contest at ohio state. Microsoft is giving us over $10,000 in prizes. I originally wanted to open it up any platform, but it would complicate several things. Foremost, judging would have to be done on several platforms, and this would make life difficult on me. Furthermore, in exchange for the prizes, Microsoft was insistant on using their CLR. If you read the rules document, you'll see that when the CLR is specified, the next sentence says "testing on multiple CLR's is encouraged"
This has nothing to do with stifling other CLR's, it has everything to do with legistics of running a large programming competition. I will change the contest documentation accomdate your concern.
thanx,
Rick
As yet another Ohio State person, I wonder why no one seems to have linked to the contest in question yet. I'm not too worried about OSU's bandwidth since I have some idea of their network topology (multiple backbones, etc.).
Personally, I've always wondered how NTsig (the group running the contest), can claim "not to be fully funded by Microsoft(tm)". Even when charging $5 per year per person, NTsig will be giving away over $10,000 in prizes for this contest, has regularly handed out thousands of dollars worth of MS software, and gave out a few Xboxes last quarter too. Furthermore, it is known that at least one NTsig officer is paid by Microsoft to run the club. Hence, I cannot say that the club is unbiased.
I attend a class at OSU where the professor teaching it has a large Microsoft grant. He has more MS servers than he knows what to do with (one hit by the latest SQL worm), a Tablet PC, a video projector, etc. -- all allegedly paid for by Microsoft. While he seems to be teaching the course fairly, he did add .NET alongside the Java portions this year. The same professor freely admits he still sees plenty more Java than .NET use, however.
Just to be fair, I'll link to the Ohio State Open Source Club too, although on a $300 per year budget, they can't be that significant, can they? :)