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'."

Comments

They say this as if it's negative for Microsoft...

[ergo98]

IMHO mono has been a great asset for .NET adoption: Previously, one of the primary "sales" problems in encouraging .NET adoption was the fear that it ties the customer to a single vendor solution (and this is often heavily played up when it goes against Java, for instance). Mono offers one the ability to offer a rapidly developing alternative in case of ridiculous FUD circumstances often imagined in efforts to detract from Microsoft products (i.e. "What if they withdraw all their products and you have to give your firstborn to use it! Then what!").

Best quote

[bjb]

The article just starts off with the best quote which really sums everything up: "I don't it's ever going to wipe out Microsoft, but it's going to be a fairer universe.".

Nobody could reasonably expect a project like this to have significant impact on a behemoth like Microsoft, but at least other platforms won't get shut out of a developing market. I'm glad Miguel at least has this realistic view.

Re:Java

[.sig]

And how is this a bad thing? Fortran was killed a long time ago (except for legacy apps and such), and I'm certainly not complaining.

(It may be obvious that I don't like Java, but even if I did I'd still look for something better on the horizon. No sense in living in the past, especially in such a fast evolving field.)

Move along...nothing to see here

[jayteedee]

This is a weak story. A point is made about MS being forced into compatibility, but no facts to back up the claim. Journalism at it's finest. I'll make my own conjecture: Microsoft will put out a compatible/standard product when they see SIGNIFICANT decrease in market share or lost revenue. They haven't got X-Box right, nor Windows CE, but a few billion dollars later, a few strong-arm deals later, a few revision later, they'll have a story and a product and the sheep will make it a standard.

Mono is a platform

[AirLace]

Mono is doing very well indeed as a platform independent of .NET or the tie-ins that Microsoft is traditionally associated. There are already several independent Gtk# applications popping up and the ASP.NET implementation is showing real promise. There's a new page of screenshots here. The Gtk# debugger and documentation browser are fairly complete and have been developed in a minimal time-frame thanks to C#. Other pages worth looking at are gsirc and Platano.

Basically, what these pages show is that Mono is less like Wine and more like a complete new development environment for Linux that also has cross-platform ties. There's lots of innovation going on in the Mono community and that's filtering down into projects like GNOME and KDE through Gtk# and Qt#, for example. I say it's all good.

Mono commoditizes .NET

[Lodragandraoidh]

Mono turns .NET into a commodity - so you won't have to bow to the altar of Microsoft in order to use it. That doesn't sound like a bad thing.

It looks like just another tool for the developer; don't think its going to make java go away anytime soon...

Now, Microsoft may look at this from two different perspectives: historically, it has been Microsoft that commoditized other people's standards and reaped the benefit - they might not take to having the roles reversed very well. On the other hand, this could help .NET get more early adopters - in which case it does seem to benefit Microsoft.

Seems Ironic

[xNullx]

I'm taking part in a Microsoft sponsored contest at my university currently, the rules dictate that we have to use one of the .NET technologies (ASP.Net, C#, VB.net etc). However the rules specifically state that we cannot use open source CLRs such as Mono and/or Rotor. I just find it odd that the article talks about how Mono may help gain MS support, but at the same time MS seems adamant at keeping us from using it.

Then again, I go to Ohio State. What do people out in Ohio know :)

.NOT

[Kadagan AU]

That [.Net works with Linux] could be a big breakthrough for Linux...

At least it would work somewhere then. I've been trying to develop with .NET for a few months here. As far as I've seen, it doesn't work on Windows. They took VS 6 and decided to get rid of anything that WORKED and replace it with non-functional things. I think that .NET is something we really don't want or need on linux. I'm far happier with Java and tcl/tk and c++.

the above was the opinion of a pissed off developer, these views are not necessarily the views of the slashdot.org editors.

Re:.NOT

[SL33Z3]

If you have been trying to develop .NET for a "few months" and haven't got anywhere, you might want to consider another business. In all seriousness, even the biggest Microsoft skeptics here at work have admitted just how easy the language is to learn. While they throw in their complaints about some of the features (or lack thereof) they all resoundingly admit "I picked it up in a few days".

Minus learning the libraries, the syntax is a no brainer for any C++ or Java developer.

Not very likely

[will_die]

The only people from microsoft who will be working on Mondo is the legal Staff.
Thier is noway that microsoft is going to allow mondo to duplicate enough of .net that it is worthwhile to even look at mondo.

Mono allows developers to switch

[manyoso]

Mono and Portable.NET really shine in allowing former Windows developers to get involved with Linux and still have a comfortable and semi-familiar place to start.

I don't see Mono or Portable.NET as cross-platform technologies (unless you mean cross-platform across Unices) because Mono and Portable.NET grew up on Unix and will be used here the most. Besides, Microsoft has simply created too many API's and hence the barrier to a *quality* cross-platform development environment is too great.

Rather, Mono and Portable.NET will be good for rapid prototyping and as a conversion tool for Windows Application developers. Is also important for providing an alternative when the great migration begins of Smart Clients begin from Windows to Linux.

As for the rest of the article: Yah, I'm sure the Microsoft developers who created .NET are enthusiastic about Mono, but the higher-ups (see: PHB's) have no love for Mono or Linux.

Re:I dunno.......!

[glenebob]

Make the Linux equivalent (or better)

You mean such as Java?

Mono is a good thing precisely because it makes programming for Windows and for Linux so similar. Like Java, but better supported at the Windows end. Like Wine but... well... not so yucky.

MS just has too much clout in the industry right now. It took a court order to get MS to ship a Java VM with Windows, and it took Sun to get that order. With that much resistance from MS to anything it doesn't control, the Linux community is forced to play copy-cat for awhile.

I think things may get very interesting in a quick hurry as Mono matures and the number of shipping .Net apps reaches some sort of critical mass.

Other OSs and embedded development

[Goth Biker Babe]

I have to say I don't know much about .NET or Mono. I have carried out significant amounts of Java developement and embedded C/C++ development.

Everyone here is talking about Windows vs Linux. What about other OSs, OS-X, the BSD variants, IRIX, Solaris, vxWorks to name a few. Is Mono *NIX software or Linux software as so much development now is? All to often lately software is advertised as *NIX but try compiling it on something other than Linux. It should be described as Linux software.

Also what's the over head of .NET and Mono? Ignore the Sun and MS JVMs, there are some extremely lightweight and efficient Java VMs out there in embedded land. Insignia's Joede is one example. Add to that emdedded processors which can run byte code natively. I don't think .NET will kill off Java that easily unless it can succeed in this arena too.

Will we see .NET in phones, set top boxes and the like, and if so, when.

Re:vendor lock in

[realnowhereman]

I see OpenOffice's support for MS Word documents merely a way of porting vendor lock in.

Ooop. Except that Microsoft don't make either openoffice or Mono. You don't think that it might be a method of removing vendor lock in?

While I do agree that Microsoft will jump on Mono if they perceive it as a threat they will find it difficult to do the more they use it as evidence of how nice they are now and continue to point at it as demonstrating their "love" of open standards.

talk on .net

[pamri]

Some people from Microsoft gave a talk on Shared Source Implementation of .NET in Linux Bangalore 2002, a conference abt linux related technologies held in bangalore. You need to appreciate their balls. The presentation is in star office format.

Re:vendor lock in

[realnowhereman]

All of which still exist. As Microsoft crumbles under the weight of penguins, their frankenstein versions of these standards will too. My point is that it doesn't matter that the OSS world is doing something that may or may not damage them, Microsoft will do what they want regardless of linux/icazza/standards. Basically - let's not worry about this. If you build it, they will come, etc.