Slashdot Mirror
DotGNU Ported to PocketPC
t3rmin4t0r writes "The Pocket PC# group has ported DotGNU Portable.net to PocketPC. This is a significant step because the .NET Compact Framework SDK is heavily licensed, unlike the .NET SDK available for free from MSDN. Thanks to PocketPC#, now you can build Window.Forms C# applications for PocketPC without submitting to Microsoft's exhorbitant SDK licensing fees. Portability to embedded/low-end hardware is one of Portable.net's stated goals.
DotGNU Portable.net also works on 9 major CPU architectures according to gentoo's portage. The Darwin-ports features a cool package with Windows.Forms for Mac OS X. Handhelds like iPAQ or Zaurus have also ports (the iPAQ one features Windows.Forms). Esoteric hardware like
the Sony Playstation 2 or the Microsoft XBox can also run Portable.net."
This is great for people looking to develop on handhelds and smartphones such as myself. Programming for these devices really brings me back to the good old days in the 80s where one person could create a killer app or game!
Urge to post... fading... fading... RISING!... fading... fading... gone.
isn't DOT NET full of patents though (not that its gonna effect 90% of the globe)
doesnt it strike anyone as odd that i have to pay MS to make their product successful
licensing means its never yours so why bother
These two companies have been beaten by Microsoft playing the game better then them.
So what are they doing 15 years later? Playing back with Linux.
Open Source is not about free for these guys, it is increasing becoming a corporate game (Novell and IBM) with big profits.
Mono / dotGNU is about trying to treat the application developers equal. This is a chance to start over with Java-like technology.
Like it or not, don't ignore C# / dotNet. It likely has more users than Sun got in 10 years, anyone have numbers to share on that?
I'd never heard of a runtime fee associated with .Net compact framework.
Is this a lack of research or is there truth to this?
Take a look at the screenshots page. Spin through those shots and just try to keep a smile off of your face. Seeing OSX, windows, and foss all on the same screen and system? C'mon, it wasn't that long ago that all of this was just little dreams in some heads. Seriously, the linux kernel and gnu software have started what i see as pretty serious revolution. Did it not strike anyone that MS is finally, and visibly showing concern about the gnu/linux advances? This is really exciting stuff, well, to me anyway.
i know i'm wandering, but think about it, longhorn is a long way off, linux is moving....and very fast, i might add, and besides the ridiculous prices, OSX/Apple will be the only real competitor in the next few years. This nonsense involving Sun's current flip-flopping is merely hope confused with death throes.
So, the window is open and with more tools like DotGNU wrapping systems together, damn, i'm looking forward to what will happen in the next few years. Good stuff, i think.
It's slashdot. Anything which may be considered a controversial opinion (i.e. one which doesn't bow down to open source) is immediately modded as flamebait as no one will actually defend open source with arguments.
Even if a valid question is raised the gpl fanboys try and hide it. Which is a pain for people like me who use proproatary and open source software all day. I like open source but for some things I need my proprietary apps, I'm a pragmatist more interested in creating products than living to some moral standard.
-- Be careful what you say. Someone might remind you about it another day.
What are you talking about? This is slashdot. There's no room for intelligent debate here.
Then create a login/sign in, post what you think. If you're not a depraved moron most people will like some of your comments, so you're likely to get up to at least a 1 (if I can do it anyone can) at which point some people will have to mod you down (but it means they'll read you). If enough people do this people might change.
On the other hand bitching about it as an AC gets achieves nothing.
...before the Nastygram(TM) from MS's lawyer corps arrives?
Honey, I shrunk the Cygwin
here, here, here and here.
I just don't trust anything that bleeds for five days and doesn't die.
DotGNU has about 5-6 developers working on everything :)... lend a hand ...
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur
Yeah, I remember how 1983 unix had loadable kernel modules, a /proc filesystem, Video4Linux APIs and hotplug device detection. Idiot.
And Lisp is superior to either of them. The world is not Democrat vs. Republican, Christian vs. Muslim, C# vs. Java.
BOTH C# and Java are mediocre 21st-century-COBOL languages. Open Source people would do far better writing in less pedestrian languages.
No. Copying is fine. But when MS or IBM copies, they subsequently claim to "own" the "innovation" and prevent other people copying further like the hypocritical antiscientific moneygrabbing assholes they are.
It's such tyrannical restriction of the spread of information that is evil. Intellectual "property" laws are the crime, not copying.
Open Source is not about free for these guys, it is increasing becoming a corporate game (Novell and IBM) with big profits.
It is about "free", as in "freedom": without the free and open source licenses that this software comes under, companies like Novell, IBM, etc. could never cooperate on these kinds of projects--by the time their lawyers have worked out their IP agreements, the market opportunities have evaporated. It is the freedom guaranteed by free software licenses that allows big companies to cooperate. The fact that they also don't have to pay licensing fees is related, but it isn't the deciding factor: everybody knows that free software still has non-zero cost of ownership (and companies like Microsoft are just stating the obvious when they point that out).
Like it or not, don't ignore C# / dotNet. It likely has more users than Sun got in 10 years,
I suspect it's not up to Java levels yet. But it will be: C# offers exactly what Sun/Java lacks: the freedom to do with it whatever you want, and the freedom for big companies to contribute to the same piece of software without getting lawyers involved and without having one contributor benefit disproportionately.
What legal basis would Microsoft's lawyers have to complain? C# and large parts of the libraries clearly are not Microsoft intellectual property.
people do not agree with the statement, and it is a touchy subject (for some) and is therefore flaimbait.
Let's call a spade a spade: people who are heavily personally invested in some platform and fear for its long-term viability get really zealous about it. On Slashdot, that shows up as a reflex to moderate down anything that state preferences, problems, or issues that may go against that platform. And these people firmly believe that they are right: it's a kind of group think.
There isn't much that can be done about it, it's just a fact of life. People do the same thing in the real world.
You may notice that, while debate between Linux, Windows, and X11 users may get heated, they generally don't mod each other down that much. While those users may dislike each others platforms and vehemently disagree, they are secure enough about the future of their platform that they don't have to resort to suppressing statements they don't like.
This is using open source to provide free marketing for Microsoft. First, take a microsoft technology (.Net), then spend a lot of time and effort duplicating a subset of .Net, which will never be a complete implementation as Microsoft haven't given out all the libraries. Microsoft then have cut-down versions of '.Net' distributed on a range of systems, with no effort required from them, and they can say 'for the real, full, professional .Net experience come to Windows'. I view the .Net clones as persisting the (wrong) impression that open source software is an amateurish attempt to copy professional software.
There are better ways. Why not use Java? Its free, and there are many Java clones that are full-featured and run on Pocket-PC and PalmOS.
If you don't like Java.. why not actually be innovative and develop a new portable bytecode and languages to run on it? If not a new bytecode, why not help the work on parrot? Why not show that in VM technology open source coders can do more than simply play catch-up with Microsoft?
DotGNU's java compiler can compile stuff like this (which was my Demo program for a LONG time).
It uses parts of classpath + C# glue and never got fully developed because nobody was interested. (and the javalib therefore never hit the CVS)
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur
I just bought a new Ipaq which is pocket pc based.I've been trying to find good apps for it but theres hardly anything thats free and good.Most Pocket PC apps come to you with a "relatively" hefty price tag.
So like many others wondering about this, would DotGNU Ported to PocketPC bring more free and good applications for the users?? I think thats the bottomline rather than the C# or C++ issues.
Lord of the Binges.
Anything which may be considered a controversial opinion (i.e. one which doesn't bow down to open source) is immediately modded as flamebait as no one will actually defend open source with arguments.
.NET) represents open source here and Java represents the proprietary solution.
That's completely backwards. C# (in the form of Mono and Portable
Likewise, postings critical of Apple's GUI and window system, both of which are proprietary, often get modded down. As far as I can tell, postings critical of X11 get modded down much less, even though X11 represents the open source solution. I suspect that X11 users are secure enough about the future of their platform that they are willing to debate, rather than suppress, criticism, while users of those other platforms are worried about their futures.
I'm a pragmatist more interested in creating products than living to some moral standard.
People who advocate open source solutions are pragmatists--they simply are pragmatists with longer time horizons (and probably much more experience) than you. You see, they have lived through a couple of generations of operating systems and languages, and they know the kind of havoc proprietary solutions can wreak on their business.
Or do you seriously think that companies like IBM, Novell, or McDonalds are adopting open source models because of some "moral standard"? They do it because it is good for business and because it works.
DotGNU Support in Parrot CVS | Parrot Support in DotGNU CVS
*g* -- I like parrot -- In fact I want Parrot to become the FreeSoftware VM :)
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur
Anything which may be considered a controversial opinion (i.e. one which doesn't bow down to open source) is immediately modded as flamebait as no one will actually defend open source with arguments.
Actually, no. The reason that the great-grandparent was modded troll was because it offered no argument. It was a piece of content-free flamebait. Of course, I wouldn't expect someone with your illustrious posting history to admit or understand this.
I may be wrong here, but last time I looked, the only 'heavily licensed' part of developing for the .NET Compact Framework I could find was that I had to buy Visual Studio.NET 2003 in order to use it. There are no licenses per se for developing/deploying with the .NET CF, so what exactly does Pocket C# exist for?
Now, as far as I know, no SDK exists for Compact Framework 1.0, but one is slated for 2.0, as mentioned in this post. It seems an SDK doesn't exist due to time constraints, rather than licensing requirements.
Pretty please, could we have something new, or at least something pleasant to use ? More Microsoft interface clones do not in my book make the world a better place.
Well, the number of Microsoft interface clones is completely irrelevant to your complaint. The only thing that matters is how many nonclones are available, and there are a number (starting with the UNIX console clone).
So, let's be constructive, shall we? What is it that you're looking for?
Have you tried the open source Plan 9/UNIX II? Is this closer to what you want or further away? In what ways?
Is the Apple interface more to your taste? Ratpoison? A jack into your skull? A magic wand?
I'm not going to just yell "Show me the code!" at you. I happen to believe that noncoders have a perfectly acceptable, even valuable, role to play in the development of software in the discourse phase of things.
But discourse requires discourse, not just complaints. Point in a direction rather than just bitch about where you're standing. Any damned fool can bitch, thus there is no particular shortage of bitching in the world, thus most of it simply gets ignored.
As it well should be.
KFG
C is an ANSI standard language and has been implemented by hundreds of groups and companies, including all the major OS vendors.
.NET and this implementation are attempts to define, control, and open (or close) these basic layers. So if you take .NET seriously (which I do not, but that's a personal opinion), an open source equivalent is obvious and necesssary. Proprietary platforms extract a huge tax on their developers and customers: the lesson of Bell Labs' inventions and how they ended-up changing the world shows that gcc, Linux, and the thousands of other "clones" represent heroic and vital investments in reducing the cost of IT so that its benefits can reach beyond the elite.
Unix was largely standardised as POSIX long before Linux existed.
Both these (and many other technologies, such as parser generators, editors, networking) form basic layers of what has become a huge and sophisticated pyramid of applications.
Layers like
If you are still using the same applications as in 1983, then you have some catching up to do. In 1983 I was using vi and assembler and some C, and seriously, things have changed a little bit since then...
Sig for sale or rent. One previous user. Inquire within.
Lisp?!? Haskell!
While running DotGNU, of course. Keeping your standard Palm OS... nope. It's just like running Windows (PocketPC) or Linux (DotGNU) today.
"Instant gratification takes too long." - Carrie Fisher
pnet.darwinports.com/
http://tinyurl.com/4ny52
"DotGNU will be a complete replacement for .NET (and not just a Free Software implementation). The goals are to provide a reasonably compatible system and then improve on what Microsoft is offering."
.Net market, they can start innovating. There's certainly room to improve .Net, and with backwards-compatible free software there isn't much of a barrier to switching away from MS's version.
In other words, they're trying to embrace and extend DotNET. Once they get enough of the
j2ME has a childish UI library that assumes 1D screen with no layout. If your device is so limited, why even bother with applications? In every other area, the built in class library is severly crippled and you keep having to write classes yourself. And lack of native code/regular filesystem access? Argh!
Compact framework actually shares many of the same "features" but at least has native code and it's possible to write usable UI with heavy hacking. Now that Sun and MS are pals, Javasoft should just bite the bullet and release official, well working Personal Java for CE. Why should Zaurus have all the fun?
I'm getting some guys together to port Microsoft Money to Linux. We think its going to be a really interesting project and Microsoft will really love having their stuff ported for free! We don't think they'll care when we give it away for free either so we aren't asking for any patent releases or anything!
Who's with me?
Hehe..:)
:)
.net CF applications FOR PocketPC (you already can do this for a long time) - it allows to write them ON PocketPC, I ported only C# compiler and tools.
Who writes these news?
"The Pocket PC# group".. Author of this port is me, Vitaliy Pronkin.. I'll think about changing my name to "Pocket PC# group"
More.. This port doesn't allow you to write
Regards,
Vitaliy Pronkin
pub-at-mifki.ru
Developing for PocketPC is an absolutely free experience, and has been for some years now. You could for a long time download the eMbedded toolkits (C++ and VB) and develop, even without a device since it comes with an emulator, and deploy for nothing. The only cost, and I don't think it's fair to count this, is the cost of the OS and software on the DESKTOP, since the free PPC tools don't run on anything other than Windows.
If a pion (n-) collides with a proton in the woods & noone is there to hear it, does lamdba decay into the source pa
so now we've got a some free software that is causign MS to lose lots and lots of money (because maybe people will go with this rather then MS's SDK)...
I give this about 3 days before MS finds a way to shut it down...
MS releases virtually all of their SDKs for free, including those for mobile device development. They wouldn't lose money if people went for this, at least not directly.
This is how they created a near monopoly in both the desktop operating system and office software markets. Do you want this to continue to development platforms, or do you want open standards based development that isn't controlled by a single company?
Open Standards Portal
So, yes, it works, but yes they are big limitation on it....
If that were the case, it would not run on mobile devices with only a few MB of memory. Of course, it does.
The compact framework has no licensing issues other then it's not open source. This is a pointless waste of time.
Gorkman
First to the guy who says I am a non-coder - why would I have been a Unix in 1983 as a non-coder ? Besides, as a total non-coder I would have found getting my Ph.D in computer science a bit challenging.
/proc and loadable kernel modules and Berkeley Unix did not - frankly, operating systems technology must have been stalled if that is all the progress we got in 20 years. Even Multics had multi-processor support, and it came before Unix!
To the guy who called me an idiot because Linux has
To the reasonable parent of the present reply - I bemoan the fact that all the open-source programmer time goes on cloning - even if the clones are important bricks. Sooner or later Microsoft and friends will buy enough congresscritters to make cloning illegal - what then ?
And yes, I am still using a text editor most of the time, and a C compiler occasionnaly. This is what computer "scientists" do. This is where basic algorithms come from - thought and a small amount of programming. Think of me as the guy who develops the raw material for those important bricks. And I stopped using emacs, it's too complicated for my needs.
This is not a signature.
Apps huh? You did enough searching? There's a lot of free apps out there. You just have to do a little googling:
vxUtil, a networking took and several caluclators
HP Mobile Printing 2.0 for printing from your ppc
Wisbar Advanced, a task switcher
PocketPCsoft.net has a TON of freeware
Next time before deriding it and saying it's all pay ware, try doing a google search.
Gorkman
...and USB and SCSI and gigabit Ethernet and commodity SMP and IPv6 and...
Parent^2 was probably a troll, or maybe just ignorant, but in case anybody agrees, consider this:
If you ever take a look at the various visualization projects that show the breakdown of the Linux kernel, like this one, what you'll find is that a huge amount of code is dedicated to things that didn't even exist in 1983, and probably not in 1993 either. Most of them are hardware drivers and filesystems and networking standards that get built as modules, so you wouldn't necessarily care that there's IRDA or HFS or MIPS support, but it's there.
Keep an eye on handhelds.org
This will open you up to 10,000 free software packages.
~.~
I'm a peripheral visionary.