Slashdot Mirror
Miguel de Icaza on Mono, Ximian/Novell, XAML
moquist writes "Netcraft has an interview with Miguel de Icaza, of Gnome and Ximian fame. Icaza expounds his thoughts on Mono (the .Net framework for open source), the current direction of Microsoft's .Net, Novell's acquisition of Ximian, Novell's Linux desktop environment, Linux for grandmas and kids, and "the greatest danger to the continuing adoption and progress of open source" (Hint: it's pronounced "XAML".)."
Mono means monkey.
.. the interview summarizes neatly what Miguel has been saying for the past few weeks; it even links to the "two stacks" diagram. Hopefully distributions would start shipping with the unencumbered stack of Mono once Mono 1.0 is out.. between that and gcj/classpath Linux should see an influx of new developers.
Michel
Fedora Project Contribut
How the hell do you pronounce "XAML"?
interview_with_miguel_de_icaza_cofounder_of_gnome_ ximian_and_mono.html
I, for one, welcome our new naming convention overlords.
jdif
Let's overcome our weakness.
It should also be very obvious to anyone who knows this stuff just how giant a security risk all that sort of technology would present. I'm sure g-man thinks they've got it all sewn up now with these hardware controls, but cracks in the structure are inevitable and one can only imagine a world where just clicking to visit a website, rather than downloading a trojan installer that may or may not complete, instead downloads a robust trojan installer that will complete. And people are already getting pretty damn sick of tithing to both Microsoft and Symantec. Keep selling that crapware until they can't swallow any more!
Meanwhile, the linux desktop is coming together more and more and Microsoft's uber-desktop is pushed back again to.. when?
Computers are cheap. And I can tell you from experience it's not that hard to convince someone to try linux after you've helped the reload their computer for the second or third time. It's up to the product to keep them there once they've made that transition - if we can't beat the crap MS has been shoveling with another two full years of development time, it won't be because Bill and Steve are to blame.
-fren
"Where are we going, and why am I in this handbasket?"
Can't he talk about anything other than Mono and Microsoft Technologies? I swear he must be an employee.
He's the most visible member of the Linux community who does stuff related to MS technologies. We need people like him, people who are aware of and can help plan counters to upcoming technology that has the potential to bring great change (great as in a large amount of change). Silencing him would be like silencing a sentinel. It's good to be aware of current and future Microsoft stuff, even if you don't like Microsoft.
He acknowledges that the Microsoft replacement for HTML is a rich user experience to come, despite the fact it certainly is dangerous to a certain extent.
Do realize that, GNU/Linux zealots : you can say something is good from a certain point of view (usability), and bad from another (interoperability). Isn't that incredible ?
Really ; isn't that incredible ?
Regards,
jdif
Let's overcome our weakness.
This new technology is finally going to bring closer to the people with domain expertise the ability to create their own applications, without having to depend on technical specialists. HTML opened the door to many people with limited or no programming expertise. The .Net framework with Avalon and XAML will advance this even further. The Mozilla approach is something the Unix/Linux developers need to better understand and get on board with and contribute towards as the current stack used in the Unix/Linux community is already out-dated. Miguel is right-on-target!!!
.Net framework, Avalon and XAML in my opinion will have no peers unless the Linux community develops a competitive answer!
I've worked in Unix engineering environments since 1984 at HP and Sun (Operating Systems, Networking and Graphics). I've observed over the years that the Unix community took Microsoft very lightly and never very seriously. The unix industry has not traditionally worked with the same user community as Microsoft. But Microsoft has matured very quickly and now delivers some outstanding technology for developing applications! The
The stack that Microsoft is creating will not only empower more people to create more sophisticated applications, but will increase the productivity of application programmers by at least 30% over todays Unix/Linux development stacks!!!
Mozilla is a great start in the right direction, but cooperation between the Gnome, Kde, and Mozilla camps will need to occur in sort order to compete with the Microsoft stack when it comes to application interface development.
GigantanKramePithicus
XUL is more of a standard: there is a specification
which describes what things must do, and there are
a couple of implementations (Mozilla's being the
most popular one).
XAML on the other hand is a serialization format:
every tag in the XML is looked up in the class
libraries, and every attribute as an event or as
a property to be set. So the resulting markup
is just a way of creating instances of your classes.
The idea of XAML can be used with any class
library really, its not limited to Avalaon (for
instance, MyXAML is a XAML implementation for
Windows.Forms). Like I said on the interview,
what makes XAML/Avalon powerful is that it runs
on a sandbox, and it has a set of fairly recent
controls as opposed to those we have grown used
to on the Web.
Miguel.
I wish I could get excited about XAML, because I like the idea of a complete overhaul of HTML. This is the first I've heard of XAML. If you follow the links and look at the material on it, it looks pretty cool. What bothers me about it is that if and when it becomes dominant it will stop evolving, just like IE and every other dominant MS product. Its goal is not to change the world or fix the web, but to capture market share and make competition more difficult.
Having said that, why isn't there an far-reaching OSS project to replace HTML? For one thing I guess it's a lot easier to impose a standard on the world when you have the dominant platform. Will Microsoft convert the web into a network of C# apps? I hope not.
Interesting indeed.
Search on google for "cross platform toolkit" and note the second link - the XPToolkit from our friends at Mozilla. On that page what is the first text after the page title?
Vision: We make cross-platform user interfaces as easy to build and customize as web pages.
IMHO, Miguel isn't the only person who got scared - my bet is BillG and/or StevieB saw what Mozilla does and had a $3B coniption - XAML being it's end product. It's how Microsoft reacts every time something provides a hint of a credible threat to Windows dominance - destroy it before it destroys us.
I know that I would love a RAD tool (a la VisualBasic maybe, but with less suckage) to make XUL apps. I could then write-once-run-on-gecko with any of the quick and dirty development work I had to do, and the OS wouldn't matter one whit. (Hey, I can dream, can't I?)
Soko
"Depression is merely anger without enthusiasm." - Anonymous
Miguel (and others) tend to over emphesise "competition" and "threads" to open source. In my opinion, there is no such thing. In fact, I would go as far as saying that his focus on XAML and other "competing" technologies is the only thread to open source.
Open source is _not_ about competing with anybody else. It is _not_ the goal to create a competing technology to win market share or anything. Open source is an exercise in technology, invention and freedom.
Why should we fear XAML or widespread adaptation of it? And why should we therefore pursue clone technologies?
We dont have the pressure to compete in any market place! We can look at the software _we_ use and see what we can do better. Maybe an XAML like technology is good. Lets think about the ideas. But maybe it isnt good, then lets do something else. You decide, not some abstract competition.
Technologies like Linux, Mozilla (XUL+++), etc. came not from the desire to do something that could lure _others_ away from somebody elses technology, but to enable the developer to use hard and software they way he wanted to and the way he thinks others may want to use it. Yes, open source takes lots of ideas, but then they are made better and often different. The drive should come from within, from excitement about the technologies and new ideas.
Instead of worrying about what others might do and how others will perceive our software, we should get excited about it ourselfs first and make it good and work well. There is no fight, there is no competition. Dont waste your thoughts about others, think about how you can realize your own ideas and make them better.
Maybe then we can focus on and enjoy development again.
Let others sleep bad at nights worrying about "the competition".
Regards,
Andre Eisenbach
One thing I really give Miguel credit for; he is more than willing to put up with the political heat and flak for taking MS ideas seriously and seeing how they could apply to the Linux/Open Source/GUI world.
Given the popularity of Perl, Python, etc, it makes sense for a language independent VM and libraries for programming. Is the CLR the best for this? Well, no, but there's a good case that it is best thing right now, or at the least, good enough!
I think a killer Open Source project would be port Java over to the CLR. To be really evil and fun, make it a JVM->CLR rewriter. Of course, Sun will sue you like mad, but that not why it wouldn't happen (it helps MS too much), but it would break Sun's hold on Java a bit more. Especially with Mono in the mix.
And now to for the flamebait (This is a post with MS stuff it in, after all).
Microsoft does have true innovations in Longhorn. (See, I told you). And it is worth paying attention to and evaluating. Passing it off as vaporware or FUD isn't wise, considering the bits are getting into people's hands right now.
XAML is nicely balanced and really seems like the first truly usable markup-based GUI language (XUL was close, but not close enough. I think it'd be much more popular otherwise).
Avalon is nice, not totally groundbreaking, but it does kill bitmap-based windowing, and I haven't seen anything that suggest that Linux world is pulling that trigger yet. (X being a obstacle in the way) Apple did, and the results speak for themselves I think.
WinFX has some very interesting ideas in how you structure components, and has the chance to become the next big thing in components (after COM. Another Microsoft innovation! Flames rising).
Finally, WinFS is very, very cool stuff, even as vaporware. I'm not surprised they had to scale it back, because what there are doing is nothing short of rethinking the file system from the ground up. This is a bold thought to take seriously. The notion of extensible metadata alone is powerful. (Before, file metadata was fixed.) Add in searching, extensible relationships, etc and you have something worth paying attention too.
This is innovation, in my book. Invention is coming up with those rare new ideas. I see innovation is taking those ideas and making them applicable, or practical, affordable, widely available, better, used by many and so on.
I think Ford was an innovator for creating a practical way to mass-produce cars. He didn't invent the car, he made it a reality for many.
Microsoft has done that, for better or for worse. Not all innovation is a priori good for all.
Of course, one should never obsess with what MS is doing to the determent of all else. Pay attention, but focus on doing what you can do best, and let the chips fall were they may.
That's funny I thought it was pronounced XUL.
evil is as evil does
Avalon/XAML *is* scary - but Mozilla/XUL can/should trump the living heck out of
it. If the OSS community lets Microsoft
define the rules, we all lose. We need to
push the heck out of Mozilla/XUL. XUL needs
to become a de-facto standard. It should make
Avalon/XAML look like just yet another proprietary dead end.
It is time to shift focus
past the 3GL GUI toolkits (GTK/QT) and move
on to some much bigger, 4GL, app building
blocks. This is the only fight the matters.
The future 4GL "application platform" is being decided. Will Microsoft own the platform or will
it be open source.
P.S. Lets put Python into Mozilla/XUL (Javascript *is* a big drag)
there is no data .... only XUL.
Helloooooo, anyone home ?, once you get into creating 'elaborate' stuff in 'markup' then you are smack back into programming and code. Its that kind of thinking that gives us unmaintainable Excel or Word macros, JavaScript, ASP, Perl, Expect/Tk,...list goes on.
It IS programming and it IS in CODE because it has a syntax , a grammer and a vocabulary. Unless it is a natural language parser then its still a computer language.
I'm not knocking the language - I just think its being oversold by saying its not code.
I dont get it, MS has failed numerous times before with "exciting" new technologies and i dont really understand why they are bound to success now.
And Microsoft has succeeded numerous times with technologies too, such as DirectX and I suppose COM considering its widespread usage throughout the Windows OS. They've failed in the past, they've succeeded in the past. XAML can do either.
XAML might as well just be a failiure. Is it really a threat to linux? Not today and not tomomorrow since its just wapourware on paper as of today.
There are a couple articles on MSDN that discuss XAML and provide sample code, such as this XAML RSS reader. Longhornblogs regularly has XAML-related entries, most of which link to code, a sample executable, and screenshots. XAML is definitely not vapourware. It exists and people are using it.
All logical spellings of everything have been trademarked by drug companies.
Zamil, for instance, helps firm up stool for people on low-carb diets.
Common side effects may include:
Abdominal pain, abnormal dreams, abnormal vision, agitation, amnesia, anxiety, arthritis, back pain, bronchitis, burning sensation, chest pain, confusion, constipation, coughing, daytime sleeping, decreased mental alertness, depression, diarrhea, difficulty breathing, difficulty concentrating, difficulty swallowing, diminished sensitivity to touch, dizziness on standing, double vision, dry mouth, emotional instability, exaggerated feeling of well-being, eye irritation, falling, fatigue, fever, flu-like symptoms, gas, general discomfort, hallucination, hiccup, high blood pressure, high blood sugar, increased sweating, infection, insomnia, itching, joint pain, lack of bladder control, lack of coordination, lethargy, light-headedness, loss of appetite, menstrual disorder, migraine, muscle pain, nasal inflammation, nervousness, numbness, paleness, prickling or tingling sensation, rapid heartbeat, rash, ringing in the ears, sinus inflammation, sleep disorder, speech difficulties, swelling due to fluid retention, taste abnormalities, throat inflammation, throbbing heartbeat, tremor, unconsciousness, upper respiratory infection, urinary tract infection, vertigo, vomiting, weakness, abnormal tears or tearing, abscess, acne, aggravation of allergies, aggravation of high blood pressure, aggression, allergic reaction, altered production of saliva, anemia, belching, blisters, blood clot in lung, boils, breast pain, breast problems, breast tumors, bruising, chill with high temperature followed by heat and perspiration, decreased sex drive, delusion, difficulty urinating, excessive urine production, e ye pain, facial swelling due to fluid retention, fainting, false perceptions, feeling intoxicated, feeling strange, flushing, frequent urination, glaucoma, gout, heart attack, hemorrhoids, herpes infection, high cholesterol, hives, hot flashes, impotence, inability to urinate, increased appetite, increased tolerance to the drug, intestinal blockage, irregular heartbeat, joint degeneration, kidney failure, kidney pain, laryngitis, leg cramps, loss of reality, low blood pressure, mental deterioration, muscle spasms in arms and legs, muscle weakness, nosebleed, pain, painful urination, panic attacks, paralysis, pneumonia, poor circulation, rectal bleeding, rigidity, sciatica (lower back pain), sensation of seeing flashes of lights or sparks, sensitivity to light, sleepwalking, speech difficulties, swelling of the eye, thinking abnormalities, thirst, tooth decay, uncontrolled leg movements, urge to go to the bathroom, varicose veins, weight loss, yawning
I am still a realtively new coder, with only around 4 years under my belt all in Microsoft shops, and even newer to the linux world about 3 months.
/. I was excited at the possibility of using the development tools and environment that I am familiar with and be able to deploy my code to Linux. The most exciting thing to me was the possibility of running ASP.NET on Apache. In the last 2 weeks I have really began to experiment with this particular aspect and was able to copy my compiled C# ASP.NET web app from my windows box to my Fedora Core box and everything ran with no problems.
When I first heard of the Mono project here on
I welcome further the possibility to continue to use the development environment I know while being able to deploy my code across windows and linux platforms. (I am not a fan of Java and say what you wish about C#, but I find it to be a very nice language.)
I wish the mono team the best of luck.
I am so creative, look at my cry for attention in my sig.
> Why the need to counter what Microsoft do?
Because Microsoft has something on the order of 95% of the desktop market. If Linux ever hopes to achieve a greater penetration into that market (which would be a *good* thing), they need to counter things Microsoft does or they become even more marginalized.
> Why not just drive in an own direction?
Yes, it has worked so well for Apple. Their marketshare went from what, 10% to 2-3% over the past decade or two? You need to provide some sort of migration path. I develop applications on FreeBSD, but I do my development on a Windows machine because there are a few Windows programs that I have trouble doing without. I've finally moved over to Firefox/Thunderbird and Open Office, and almost done doing the same for my wife (as a web developer she still needs IE for testing) but games aside, there are a few applications that I use that I don't want to do without.
> Looking at MS at all times is just going to make Open Source spending time following MS instead of going our own way.
Open Source has a potential to do both at the same time... provide a migration path AND compelling reasons to switch over. But without the migration path, it's a scary change. Linux and other open source operating systems don't have enough marketshare to drive serious change in the desktop. I want to see open source innovation, but without that marketshare, it will be ignored and marginalized.
> Now that MS is starting to focus on getting patents and such on everything they do its a disaster waiting to happen if we do like them in everything.
And if everyone believes that Microsoft is doomed any day, then open source will never get the momentum it needs to be a 'real player' on the desktop. Microsoft is a competitor for the desktop market... and you can't afford to ignore competitors.
> We dont need to follow MS every move any longer as long as we stick to open standards.
I'm sorry, but that's just naive. When they have 97% of the marketshare, they CREATE the standards. Open standards don't mean a damn thing if there isn't a serious choice in applying those standards.
> If we follow MS in implementing closed or patented standards on the net we are doing MS nothig but favours and helping the acceptance of closed systems.
And if the open source 'market' ignores those closed or patented standards, they will become further marginalized and the rest of the market will be forced to accede to reality: that those closed standards are where the action is at.
Maybe it's time for the open source movement to do a little "Embrace and Extend"ing of their own.
GreyGore
Now how are they going to force people to give up millions of dollors in investment. Both software and training, let alone the new hardware that may be required (WinTel). For the so far unproven benifits of LongHorn?
Shiny things. IT management loves shiny things. As long as there are lots of nice shiny features that they can market to death it will sell. The reason the uptake of XP and Server 2003 has been so slow is because they don't really do a hell of a lot more thna Win2k. Yes, there are some nice new bits and pieces, but I don't know of any major shiny new features that actually break any ground.
On the other hand, Longhorn is their chance to fianlly add some of these "new groundbreaking" features - it's an all out overhaul rather than the incremental stuff that XP and 2003 have been. Of course Longhorn is, for now anyway, the vaporware repository too: "Objected Filesystem? Sure, in Longhorn.", "Graphics card accelerated desktop with scalable graphics? Sure, in Longhorn", "Uncrackable security model, Dancing bears and World peace? Sure, in Longhorn."
Some of the talked about features will undoubtedly make it in. Avalon, I gather, is making reasonable headway. Some of them might not - every time I hear about WinFS it has been scaled back even further, and will do even less. The point is that there are potentially enough shiny things to impress managment.
The thing to remember is that management cares about shiny things. Vendor lock in and ensuing extortion, security issues, and pretty much anything that requires contemplating more than a quarter in advance are irrelevant. Look! Shiny things... oooooh.
Jedidiah.
Craft Beer Programming T-shirts
Say hello to IKVM!. It works with Mono and MS's .Net implementation, and has already been demonstrated running full-fledged Java applications like Eclipse, along with translating between aspects of the Java and .NET world. It's a very cool project, and I look forward to seeing it completed.
using namespace slashdot;
troll::post();
Longhorn has kind of a scary technology called Avalon, which when compounded with another technology called XAML, it's fairly dangerous. And the reason is that they've made it so it's basically an HTML replacement. The advantage is it's probably as easy as writing HTML, so that means that anybody can produce this content with a text editor.
.NET language like C# or VB.NET if I'm not mistaken. Yes, XAML apps are similar to HTML pages, but they, like HTML, also need a scripting part to actually do something and not just be static. And that's what e.g. C# is for.
The main application code is supposed to be written in a
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
You are overlooking the fact that Mono has two stacks. One Microsoft clone and a home grown solution. The home grown solution is cross platform and not the same direction as Microsoft.
I any case. This isn't a case of choosing between our own direction and Microsoft's direction. It is choosing between a whole mess of open source projects moving in their own way or a coordinated push to integrate disparate open source projects and technologies that currently do not integrate well.
The patent issue has been covered so many times before. When it comes to patents, it doesn't matter if you are cloning Microsoft technologies or building something entirely original - your risk is the same because no matter what you are implementing, you are probably infringing a patent anyway. The only effective defence you have is prior art.
Here's how I'd guess at the state of things:
1) Miguel recognizes the fact that Microsoft is big, doesn't play nicely, and doesn't like having other people in its sandbox.
2) Miguel presumably believes that Linux is a superior system -- that given the opportunity, users will prefer Linux.
3) Miguel presumably believes that a primary reason Microsoft retains its position is because of barriers to interoperability established by Microsoft. By promoting their own, closed file formats and protocols, Microsoft makes it difficult for customers to move to other systems.
4) Miguel improves interoperability between Windows and Linux, reducing the barriers that Microsoft has worked so hard to establish, that prevent people from using Linux as a full or partial subsitute for their own products.
Then, once barriers to transition have been eliminated, as long as OSS developers and distro providers are providing a superior alternative, users can and will switch.
May we never see th
Shiny things. IT management loves shiny things.
I'm not sure if that is true these days. I think IT management are looking much closer at what kind of bang per buck they are getting.
The reason the uptake of XP and Server 2003 has been so slow is because they don't really do a hell of a lot more thna Win2k.
And this can work to our advantage.
As far as I can see, the only real benefit of LongHorn to businesses is XAML and its "zero-install over the network" delivery. Businesses are swimming in custom written in-house applications such as billing systems, stock control system, client record systems, etc. I work as a programmer at a web developement business. We specialise in Content Management Systems and basically web based applications. Our clients absolutely love having these applications running centrally on a server while being immediately available (zero install!) on every machine in the office (and out of the office if needed). This is done via a web browser and HTML+Javascript of course. Now, XAML takes this idea and implements it properly and fixes a lot of problems that come with trying to create applications inside a web browser.
What Mozilla needs to do is get their browser out there and on desktops, but more importantly they need to document(!) and further develop XUL. Try to use it for making business applications like I've mentioned above (not chat clients, get serious). Find out where the weak spots and gaps are and fix and fill them in. At the same time they need to get things working happening on the server side. OSS is strong on the server, but we need proper libraries and support for XUL apps on the server written in Java, PHP, etc hell even C# if really want to use a window webserver. For the love of god Mozilla, get in touch with Apache.org, Tomcat and friends. Create a full and complete platform (server + client) for creating and delivery business/database applications. We already have the big pieces.
In 2 years time we want IT management to have to decide between:
--
Simon
People who upgrade to Longhorn and
It is a complete waste of time to copy Microsoft and expect to survive, innovative products survive. Apple only outlasted OS2 because of its innovation. It only lasted this long because of innovation.
People don't exist to serve systems, systems exist to serve people.
Right after saying:
"We cannot choose one desktop over the other - Gnome or KDE - because there's users for both code bases."
He then states:
"We're making the decision it's going to be OpenOffice, the browser it's going to be Mozilla, the email client it's going to be Evolution, the IM client it's going to be Gaim. So we basically have to pick successful open source projects and put them together."
The problem is that, as far as I know, these tend to be the default applications used on top of the gnome DE. Granted I would install OpenOffice when setting up a computer with KDE, but it would make more sense to use konqueror, kmail(/Kontact) and kopete instead of the other programs. In fact given time and if koffice manage to convert over to the openoffice file format (which I believe they are doing) it might make more sense to install this for basic users, as like the other programs, it is tied in well to the KDE DE. This leads me to the assumption that Novell will eventually, at least in the short run, ship Gnome as the default as KDE will have to load 2 lots of services (it's own + those for OOo/gaim/evolution/mozilla integration) and will thus require many more resources.
In the long term I hope that this kind of activity will help to unify the two desktops background services, allowing software to be written that works with an equal level of tie-in with both DE, however I guess this will take a long time and lots of carefull negotitation before it happens.
I don't understand this guy. He rails in his previous blogs about how bad microsoft is, yet he goes out of his way to emulate microsoft technology. It's mind blowing.
How is that strange or incomprehensible? I see absolutely nothing inconsistent about hating Microsoft's business practices and security record, but liking their programming tools and UI.
I thing you need to stop thinking in black and white and recognise that it's possible for a bad company to come up with a good product.
Oh, you didn't know that about de Icaza? Miguel doesn't just like some of Microsoft's ideas - Miguel wishes he were working for them.
You've just described what DCOP does in KDE. Contact info is offered by the address book component, which can be queried by the email suite, the IM tool, etc. The entire desktop is built upon this approach, in fact.
The Freedesktop group has begun working on a generalization of DCOP called D-BUS, primarily geared toward exchanging message between backend (hardware detection...) and frontend (desktop environment), if I got it right, but I think that GNOME will also eventually be able to use it to tap into KDE components as well. This would be really nice.
-- B.
This sig does in fact not have the property it claims not to have.
Moz developers out there? Excuse my ignorance, but this XAML beast sounds an awful lot like XUL. So in a sense, the OS world has had a XAML alternative for a few years now - just a damn shame the Moz platform isn't ubiquitous enough to promote proper takeup of XUL. And if XAML is such a threat (and I see why), is it being developed along some standards? Is M$ going to submit this to ECMA as well? Why can't Moz/XUL start publishing "HTML New Generation" specifications, get corp buy-in from the likes of IBM, Sun, Novell, etc. to try and get XUL and XAML to converge?
-- Manik Surtani
Let me give you a clue - while it may remain fun for you to "keep it real" by coding on open source, .Net and the Avalon/XAML platform threatens to displace a lot of the progress Linux has made, at least on the desktop. And we know that when MS owns the desktop they have great leverage to push on the server area. Every time MS comes up with something, the first reaction is to downplay it and shout that it has already been done before. IE was a joke too. Windows was a joke to. You can keep laughing, but unless there is a viable open source alternative to what MS is providing, we stand to get our lunch eaten. That is what is scary. That is what is scary for a lot of open source companies which are essentially loss-leading by pouring tons of money into free software and HOPING that by doing so they can open the market and reap rewards later. .Net and Avalon/XAML threaten to crush that. It's not enough to say that it's nothing new or not a big deal. When all of Microsoft developers, and a large segment of the industry that MS influences, starts adopting it in droves, it WILL be a big deal. When MS develops something that will give their customers some value (whether or not you think it gives /you/ value), it is not enough to shout "bogeyman!"... you actually have to compete.
.Net.
I am a Java developer, and I for one don't want my career derailed because there was never an open source alternative to compete with
It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
If you have to install a 7 meg browser (mozilla) to make your application work why not just ship an application that updates itself over the network?
That would be an option if Java were free, so that the appropriate initiatives could be undertaken to have a decent way to run web applications.
Starting back in 1995, various companies asked for a number of features in Java necessary for launching web applications efficiently over the web -- licensees of Java paying Sun the big bucks. I was in one of these companies. Sun has never gotten what it would take to make Java a serious advantage for applications that trickle down to the desktop over the web.
There are many examples of things that would be needed and were repeatedly requested, that I have never seen materialize -- for example (one of many) a really-intelligent class loader that understands how to make applications work instantaneously and reliably over the web. The design doesn't seem that hard, but it is very different from anything that Sun has undertaken. I and other people made presentations to Sun, and they ignored it all, being a server company. Without free software, that leaves no options. This was 9 years ago, and Sun still has not figured most of it out. Companies cannot wait for Sun to get it.
As it is, I couldn't care less whether Sun or Microsoft wins, because it is 6 of one or half a dozen of the other, they will be limited by their own lack of vision. Licensees of Java were ripped off, believing they would be helped by Sun for all the money they paid.
It isn't that companies are not willing to pay. It is that Sun isn't willing to deliver even to those who pay who see how to bring Java out of the box where it is now (and have seen since the beginning).
Moving to Linux is not "free". Nothing is "free". There are distinct opportunity costs in switching to Linux. There is the time spent learning about Linux. The time spent getting any data that needs to be preserved into a portable form. The time to actually reinstall software on existing hardware. The inevitable troubleshooting required. If you are a company there is probably a lot of time spent to train employees. There is lost productivity due to system unavailability during the transition and due to "ramp up" time as people get used to working with the new software.
:)
Depending on the size of your company, this could cost hundreds or thousands of dollars. In fact, it might be easier to buy Apple computers for many reasons. Each company or individual must make its own decisions about any changes to existing IT infrastructure based on a lot of these factors, but simplistic statements like "Linux is free" are misleading. It sets up extremely unrealistic expectations.
However, there is one way in which Linux beats all the alternatives: It is Free (as in speech).
I do not have a signature
For those that don't speak Spanish but English with latin stems, mono* is a prefix meaning single or singular, e.g. monotheism - the belief in one god.
For those that speak slightly geeky American English, mono is short for mononucleosis, which is another term for glandular fever.
For those that speak common English, mono means a single sound source, i.e. monophonic as opposed to sterophonic.
But for the Spanish speakers of the world... it's Monkey.
* I know not it's true etymology.