Slashdot Mirror
A .Net CPU
An anonymous reader writes "Windows for devices has an article about the .Net CPU. The chip is programmed with a subset of the CLR and runs the same software as the SPOT smart watches. Among other things, "[t]he computer module is implemented in the format of a 32-pin "DIP" (dual inline package) chip, allowing the module to conveniently plug into a standard 32-pin DIP socket. In addition, the ".netcpu CPU Module" integrates 4MB of nonvolatile Flash memory (interfaced via an SPI interface on the SoC). It also provides 24 general purpose digital I/O lines, which are multiplexed with other functions including 8 VTU ports, a USB port, two serial ports, and SPI and I2C interfaces." More information about the product can be found at the .netcpu company website."
*cough* java chips *cough* *cough*
so first you create a managed runtime... .net?
to run on every cpu....
and then you write a cpu for
doesn't really make sense.
How long before every PC has one of these .Net Chips?
Seems scary
...If it would suffer the same fate as those "Java Chips" I see on the market...
Maybe with this technology they can make a clunky cheap looking watch that imports my calendar and contact book by reading a flashing screen.
I for one welcome our new embedded cpu overlords!
Moderate this comment
Negative: Offtopic Flamebait Troll Redundant
Positive: Insightful Interesting Informative Funny
Nothing to see here
Seems for a while, those were really hot too. I never realized just how much (and how far behind) MSFT was following Sun.
It's an embedded chip which has a CLR on top of it. Nice idea, sorry that Sun thought of it earlier ( The Green Project) - Sun seems to be consistently missing the BUS here. They came up with "Network is the computer" and now MS is selling ".NET " :)
I've seen a couple of stack based engines but by its polymorphic natureQuidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur
They must be very small, but I think I can see them if I look really closely and squint a bit.
ooooooh! What does this button do? - DeeDee, Dexters Lab.
No, it is a CPU for .NET CLR as much as a Gumstix is a CPU for Linux kernel. It's just a VM embedded on firmware, NOT a REAL CPU.
Btw, the JVM FPGA is a real example of a VM less execution (or more correctly , a native JVM + support libs).Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur
There have been an Erlang CPU around for a long time:
http://www.erlang.se/euc/00/
Look for ecomp on the page.
--
Mickaël Rémond
http://www.erlang-projects.org/
I'm waiting for a Parrot chip.
Now that would be exciting.
Plenty of people develop for .NET. We've got ten plus here doing it today, and the rest of the company works in .NET from time to time. Our enterprise web app runs on .NET. We've got plenty of customers.
Sorry, wcitechnologies-- just because you want something to be true doesn't mean that it is.
I bet, every low cost Samsung printer (they like ARM7 microcontrollers) has this ".netcpu" embedded inside - though without dependence on stupid microsoft dev tools.
Anyway, it'll take few hours at most to get ucLinux running on this module.
While supplies last, you'll also get a free acronym dictionary, so that laymen can understand what the hell this thing does.
Imagine a beowu... oh, wait.
Nothing to see here, move along!
Parrot is not a very good design to put on a chip, for one single reason.
Too Many opcodes (1500 at my current count and growing).Morover parrot has opcodes which do very complicated things like "print_nc" which prints a FLOATVAL constant. Compared to that IL opcodes are simpler and JVM is still more simpler (CVM is even simpler - which is what I'm working on now).
Parrot is too complex, period.Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur
I'd say that I see more
Whence? Hence. Whither? Thither.
this thing seems like an overpriced piece of junk just trying to hawk its .NET and VS support. Most of the microcontrollers out there i have seen can in some way or another be programmed in C and its various forms. 200 dollars just for the cpu seems to be asking a lot when the only advantage i see is that is 4mb of flash, and other MC's can always be expanded to that anyway. Besides the fact that other MC's out there that are cheaper also contain a whole lot more peripherals and features than this one. But maybe thats just me
".net has nothingto do with Java"
... or dumb ;-)
:)
This guy is realy brilliant
In your oppinion, which one is the worst nightmare for Gates, Linux or Java ?
IMHO, it is Java on Linux
Vive GNU's Classpath project !
I know. I wish I had mod points today so I could smack wcitechnologies (you?) down. His frankly-quite-immature tone really grates, doesn't it?
The chip... runs the same software as the SPOT smart watches.
I wonder if it's going to be as popular as the SPOT smart watches?
Linux/Open Source/Anti Microsoft News
Sorry, Microsoft-- just because you want something to be true doesn't mean that it is.
.NET.
.NET developers. I'm not talking about which is more 31337, I am talking about which one will find more steady income and have less trouble when they need to change jobs.
Perhaps if you put your troll's club down long enough to take a look at sourceforge, you would notice most of the newer open source applications for Windows are being developed in
It won't take over the Internet, but it has been well accepted and is easy to use.
I wonder though, with all this FUD, if anyone can produce real numbers showing which is in more demand in the workplace: Linux developers vs
Microfirm jigglyware Dude, stop. You're pushing all the right buttons!
What happens if someone discover a flaw in the CLR ?
Do we have to buy another processor ? or flash another CLR ?
Placing anything on a processor is a *pretty* stupid idea.
Gee I though Gumsticks were already mainstream... oh.. but of course http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/wlg/4552
these thingys aren't from Redmond...
dang it.. too late...
-if at first you don't succeed, stay the heck away from paragliding.
Like the x86?
It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
How can this be over-rated??
As you mentioned, newer Windows applications are being written in .NET, and you go on to ponder what the demand is. I don't know of any numbers, but I'd imagine .NET developers would be in all sorts of demand with respect to developing on any Windows platform, after all, .NET is the new API which replaces Win32.
.NET, and it's pretty sad that it is. I'm not a Microsoft fanboy, but anyone who cannot recognise the Official API of future Windows development is in serious trouble (if they intend on developing future Windows applications, that is). As you said, .NET isn't going to take over the Internet (who said it would in the first place?), but it will take over ALL Windows development.
.NET, however I highly suspect I dreamt it.
I agree that there is all sorts of FUD flying around about
All that said, I seem to remember reading about how Microsoft was dropping
Clippy turns you off.
A drm hardware dream.
I assume FBGA is a typo for FPGA. This thing sounds suspiciously similar to one of those standard FPGAs with a built-in ARM7 core.
It actually sounds like quite a nice little embedded system, a kind of grown-up Basic STAMP. I expect that the .net VM is in ROM; on start-up the FPGA is probably bootstrapped from it. I wonder if it would be possible to replace it with a real operating system?
Where is the hardware-implemented JVM we've been promised for years and years? Not like this gloified BASIC stamp, running an implementation on the .NET runtime in software, but a real hardware implementation that runs bytecode natively.
Isn't this exactly like the Java CPU that Sun was selling a few years back? And it was simply a close relative of the Lisp processors from the 80s.
C#, Java. .Net, J2EE. CLR, JVM. .NET CPU, Java CPU. So should we expect Microsoft to simply repeat everything that Sun did with Java? If so, wake me up when they declare they're going to release CLR under an open source license.
http://www.clifford.at/bfcpu/bfcpu.html This piece of hardware is tres cool, as it implements the _complete_ set of Brainf*ck instructions as native instruction set.
A monkey is doing the real work for me.
Personally as someone who's long developed Windows Win32/MFC code (in C++) and is now moving to C# .NET stuff, I'm finding .NET an absolute doddle.
.NET, whenever I've wanted to do something, I've looked at the classes, thought "How would it be sensible to do this", and 9 times out of 10 it works perfectly
let's face it - MFC and Win32 are old and have been cobbled together, seemingly at random over the lifespan of the whole Windows family, meaning nothing feels like it's ever really been designed
One function returns a colour, another function needs a colour. Oh dear, one uses some kind of int, the other a struct (oh and another some kind of class) - lets bog down our code with lots of conversion functions - Most of the time the sensible obvious approach to a task is the wrong one.
So far in
Help me! I'm turning into a grapefruit!
Which industry is that?
.NET looks good for serious windows GUI apps due to the shortfalls of Swing/SWT but anything distributed has gone to Java, especially at the enterprise level.
Both media and banking (my last 2 contracts) have been dominated by Java/J2EE, although this may well be due to the fact that I am primarily a server developer, with my only client programming being the web presentation layer.
I know it's horses for courses but I'd like to know personal feedback for different industries.
You have a strange view of the Industry if you think Java has reached "will be with us forever" stage just 10 years after the initial release (and that didn't resemble Java as we know it today in any form). Java has too many problems and not enough advantages to stay as long as C has. Don't get me wrong, the idea of the virtual machine will probably stay for a long time but not Java as a language or as a Runtime Environment.
Linux is not Windows
Is it OK for them to use the '.NET' in the CPU name instead of ILCPU or ECMAwhatCPU?
In addition, their 4-color windows symbol resembles the Windows symbol just too much.
Ahnetkpu? Is this an Elder God?
No. This is not a typo.
FBGA = fine BALL grid array
FPGA = fine PIN grid array
FBGA is very common for small processors and chipset. FPGA is not so much used but for old CPU as now Intel uses LGA and AMD uses uOPGA
Use Google to get more informations about FBGA.
Any pointers to interesting projects?
I can't imagine .NET is going to take over the Internet, but ASP.NET is a very nice platform for writing web apps. OK they will probably run on IIS, unless you use Mono, but it is a big step up from the scripting languages approach of basically just printing out the web page.
It gives some nice abstraction to writing web pages, you don't have to worry about hand crafting every bit of HTML that is going out to the browser (although you can if you want or need to), and can deal with the concepts, objects and events.
.NET does little that is new, Java was doing much of it first, but for writing web apps it is pretty simple and powerful and has good development software. We are moving to it at work because it makes us more productive.
Although I agree with you that it isn't the case to troll everything that has "microsoft" into it, I think that an high income isn't the first requirement for someone that foreseek freedom of choice and information (why develop Free Software, else?).
The fact that 85% of the computer world use MS systems doesn't mean that it's the best thing to do. Still, things are (really) slowly changing. Maybe I'll live the day when the market share between MS and *nixes 'll be 50%-50%... and that would mean real competition, not just "smithe the infidel with teh big hammer" as almost everyone on both sides tries to do (often don't understanding really what's right to "fight" for).
42.
Looks like this idea's been around for god knows how long ... So much for innovation, we seem to be going backwards here ?.
This is a plug , but I've been working on aQuidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur
Not really a fair comparison; Linux is an OS, .net is an API.
.net platform for just about everything,
:/
To be honest though, I'm not looking forward to the future. It looks like Microsoft is going to be using brute force to get developers to use their
I have a feeling that this may be the last generation of computers for a while that feels truly speedy.
It's been a long time.
If so, I'm gonna buy one. Why the big people are always thinking their damnned 'JVM' or 'C#' etc. Who can pay a little attention to our common persons who just want to boost their CGIs.
Yes,
InterestingProject *mInterestingProjects = stackalloc InterestingProject[10];
Check out the company website, and Google them. I just did and it turns up that this company was founded on Oct10.2k4ce by Mark Phillips. A Google turned up... the company website, the original submission, and a couple other press releases. this is their only product, and they made it in two months.
Microsoft's only connection with them is that Mark Phillips guy, who, when googled investigatively, appears to have founded A Dot Corporation in Apr.2k3ce and they were involved in... SPOT Watch technology and claim microsoft to be a business partner (spotcorporation.com).
So is Mark Phillips using his work with microsoft's SPOT developer team to create something to market under a different name? Both companies list only Mark Phillips as founder and, in fact, confirmed employee, although one site listed A Dot as having 24 employees.
Yeah, so that's funny...
The OP probably meant FPGA as Field Programmable Gate Array.
It boggles my mind, every time someone comes out with a bytecoded language in order to attempt to achieve hardware independence, someone comes along and creates hardware to execute it! Thus defeating the original purpose.
Of course people see the need for hardware acceleration because interpreted or even JIT compiled bytecode languages are always going to be slower than precompiled native binaries.
Thank you MICROSOF~1 .NET assembly and spread them anywhere.
Now I will really be able to write my viree once in
Glorious news indeed. Right now I've installed 'silent virouses' on about 17k windows boxens around the net. These viree silently wait wihtout doing anything besides spread themselves in binaries. Every now and then, they check a specific URL on a free WWW site, which may contain commands for them to exe. Until now the only cmd I've told them to run is report infected machines. Apart from that, I'm waiting for the right time to command them to do something big.
btw, if you're interested in paying me to put these viree do something for you, search goodle for "red bearded pirate".
> But does it run Linux?
The real question is "does it run Mono?"
Hack your mind out of its sandbox.
Dude, they can't even port it properly to PPC (exception handling is b0rked).
:)
But that doesn't stop Novell from pushing out Cocoa# screenshots with the intepreter and benchmarks from the broken JIT together as if it's all done. (after all show me a benchmark which triggers an exception).
They're out to sell stuff - they'll "bend" the truth the way it suits them. Can't blame them either, 90% of all companies do it
.NET is the new API which replaces Win32
Say it when you have winword.exe - the dotnet executable. (Or quake4.exe for that matter).
This is a bizarre piece of technology
.NET to gain a profile in the market - or they are using some kind of grant from Microsoft and this is one of the key milestones they had to meet.
- It's too expensive for volume marketing
- It's too slow for anything useful.
When you thing of what you can do in C on an AVR micro with GCC-AVR for a fraction of the cost (ie 10%) this thing is insane.
It looks like someone is trying to use
All that said, I seem to remember reading about how Microsoft was dropping .NET
You're probably thinking of when Microsoft dropped the .NET branding from all of their server software. Originally, there was going to be a Windows Server.NET, and a SQL Server.NET, etc. Combined with the .NET branding on the languages, no one really knew what it meant to be ".NET".
Because of this, Microsoft cancelled all of their plans for .NET servers. This left Visual Studio.NET, which is used for developing the .NET languages. Programs written in .NET languages run on top of the .NET framework. (The Common Language Runtime.)
Antoher factor in the dropping of the .NET branding for the servers, I'm sure, is that it would have meant more stringent requirements for release dates, and it would have been more difficult to move to the next version (forced upgrades) without some branding confusion. (Think "Windows Server.NET Two!" Wait, is there a new version of .NET? Will my applications run on it? etc.)
The fact that 85% of the computer world use MS systems doesn't mean that it's the best thing to do.
It depends what computer world you are looking at. In my line of work, dedicated embedded devices, the numbers are reversed and microsoft has a small marketshare.
Say what you want about .NET (I disagree with u completely BTW), but the IDE KICKS Hardcore BUTT! I have yet to see something better the VS .NET 2003 for development. Quite a few people have bought into .NET and if I have a choice between C++ and C#, I pick C# thanks....but then I was born and raised on C and Java anyway....
My Favourite Meme
I've seen .Net moving in quite heavily in the manufacturing world. This is one sector that MS has a strong hold on simply because there are so few people that want to sit down and write the hundreds of communications drivers, etc needed to create manufacturing data systems. Or maybe because once you buy a manufacturing system you don't want to switch brands until you get back out of the hole with it :P .Net SDK's, and a lot of internal application programming seems to be moving that way also. .Net was the available choice (unless you consider VB6 as a valid choice...*shudder*) and despite the fact that the only other competing product was written in C++ (we think) we also managed to turn out a more efficient server (not that I don't think i could have made it even faster in C++, I just expected the other company's to suck that badly :P).
.Net, as the valid choices are generally VB6 vs VC++ vs some flavor of .Net vs Excel VBA (you think I'm kidding). The few other languages the make it onto the plate are generally as bad as VB6, so I prefer to leave them unmentioned. About the only time I have seen it go beyond this is the few times I introduced the power of bash scripting something on my laptop's preferred partition (ie, not windows) ;).
:)
A lot of the products I have seen (both data collection and warehouse-type) are moving to
The last major project I did was:
1 part config client and 1 part server
"please maximize uptime"
"please maximize scanning capabilities"
"please correct our last 9 months of errors and get it on the shelf in 2 months or less"
A lot of internal app's get written in
Ok, enough rambling
-T
Whee signature.
Jobserve seems to disagree with you:
search for ".net", any job type - 1629
search for "c", any job type - 1499
search for "java", any job type - 3009
search for "c++", any job type - 2300
Your comment has too few characters per line (currently 15.6). Guess I'd better explain then that jobserve.com is a major UK-based jobs web site, catering to a large number of industries. While the jobs advertised are mainly in the UK, they also cover parts of Europe, and have a site dedicated to jobs in Australia. How's that slashcode, better?
It's official. Most of you are morons.
As you said, .NET isn't going to take over the Internet (who said it would in the first place?)
Well not take over, but give everything else a run for its money, because at least it's semi-standards compliant with SOAP and XML and stuff. I LOVE the fact that all DB objects are stored in an XML format by default. Now that is truly revolutionary thinking (which probably get me marked flamebait...)
My Favourite Meme
.Net (WTF - extremely "ungooglable" name, BTW) is young and peppy... Wait 5-10 years for it to mature though.
http://www.arm.com/products/solutions/Jazelle.html
s or s/ns9775.jsp
/ 61 0041
.net follow java everywhere without any own original ideas?
http://www.netsilicon.com/products/netarmproces
http://www.developer.com/java/other/article.php
http://www.ptsc.com/products/images/mpu.pdf
http://www.jopdesign.com/ (GPL'ed FPGA java cpu)
http://www.kiffer.be/k/products.html (?)
So will
What do you do when you have a monolopy on a Market and you shareholders want ever increasing earnings? You either charge people more for your monolopy products or you take other peoples business.
.NET style chip. Same old story - Call it the Windows CPU, spurt on about how much better it is than Legacy x86/AMD64. Throw in some BS about security being better and then make sure you need a .NET chip to have the 'best' Windows Experience.
I fully expect Microsoft to enter the CPU Market in the next 10 years with a
They'll clean up.
The CPU is a 16.78 MHz ARM7tdmi RISC processor. It is a 32-bit processor but can be switched to....
c Frame.htm
http://www.cs.rit.edu/~tjh8300/CowBite/CowBiteSpe
You forget one thing, Java is being used in Banks, that pretty much guarantees that it is gonna be around for a loooong long time.
What you say is true.
I think whoever typed the original article confused the issue... I thought it was 32 pin DIL (Dual InLine sockets)
32-pin pinout, including 24 GPIO ports multiplexed with other functions (8 VTU ports, dual serial ports, SPI, and USB port)
Only the insane and the anti-hobbist would BGA up a 32 pin device.
Read this paper about how many hoops you have to go through to get a decent interpreter for .NET. And it blatantly ignores the _Main() x86 native code that's in the .exe files.
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur
If it supports CLR, it supports python via the IronPython project. If that works there's no reason you couldn't do the same for perl.
I am trolling
It's a ***Ing subset !!
...
...
IronPython needs remoting and Reflection.Emit magic to work
This ships with the engine minus the Basic Class Libraries
Sorry to reply twice, but according to wikipedia there is a Perl .net compiler, so you can run your perl directly on this cpu. Can't find a link though.
I am trolling
I assume FBGA is a typo for FPGA. This thing sounds suspiciously similar to one of those standard FPGAs with a built-in ARM7 core.
Fine-Pitch Ball Grid Array (FBGA).
-- Be careful what you say. Someone might remind you about it another day.
Gah, replying for the third time, but: YES, .NET INCLUDES PERL! If you have the activestate perl installed when you install .net, it will set things up so you can use perl with .net. Then you can compile the perl to CLR and use it on this CPU. So go and buy it.
I am trolling
it would have been more difficult to move to the next version (forced upgrades)
Forced upgrades? Releasing a new version of a language/API is a "forced" upgrade now? Who's forcing you to upgrade when a new Linux kernel or gcc comes out?
It's official. Most of you are morons.
check out the posting history
another immature slashdot poster
I can't do you Quake4, but how about Quake 2?
(Eactly how much Win32 do you think Quake 4 is going to use anyway?)
It's official. Most of you are morons.
I thought java is always a valid choice. It does run on windows, doesn't it?
--Coder
we've got 500 people programming in C.
.net could ever think of.
and I can spend less on the hardware and get a better product than your beloved
so what was your point again??
the delay in product launches are NEVER software but hardware.
My experience with .NET:
:P
- Build pages using Web Forms
- Watch the result in IE: just fine.
- In Mozilla: Horrible! Several CSS properties missing. (yes, missing, they were present in IE).
So, my so-called cross-platform web application became an IE-only application. It was not a web site, it was an interface to a power plant monitoring system (built with no Java/ActiveX/.NET, only HTML, Javascript, CSS... It even had zoomable charts. Yes, the chart was a static image
They'll patch it before it gets out. "Shipped with new errors from Microsoft!"
"To be is to do." -Socrates
"To do is to be." -Jean-Paul Sartre
"Do-be-do-be-do." -Frank Sinatra
Will THIS be fast enough to run XP at a useable speed?
This 2.6 GHz P4 can't even run it fast enough to keep up with my typing speed. It seems that 3 times as fast would be minimum to make XP bearable.
Sorry to pick nits in your comment, but .NET (or ADO.NET) does NOT natively store db objects in XML. Native database objects, such as DataSets, DataTables, etc. are stored in binary format, just like all .NET objects.
It only seems so because almost all the data objects in ADO.NET allow the user to readily serialize and deserialize the objects into and from XML. So yes, XML is the native serialization format for datasets, but not the format in which datasets are stored themselves (because of performance and size penalties).
You could sell a brick to many CTOs these days if you told them that it was ".NET enabled"... to update a cliche for our times, no one ever got fired for buying Microsoft, although many should.
My sig is too lon
Surely if microsoft or sun team up with intel or amd they could provide similar and add extensions at the cpu level? e.g. MMX or something similar but for .net or java.
How dare you show up Sun's chip and demonstrate favoritism towards anything Microsoft on Slashdot! We don't deal with "facts" here!
Why must M$ continue to push .NET like its some poster child of programming. The .NET attempt to take over the internet has failed.. Few to no companies use .NET for what M$ envisioned.
I'm sorry.. the minute you put VISUAL in front of any language, you just breed the next generation of lazy programmers.
Keep it real..
Where's my Java chip? They promised us cheap, safe little Java chips, with embedded DSPs and ethernet. I want one in my phone!
--
make install -not war
Maybe you are confusing the fact that Microsoft dropped the Hailstorm project (officially My.Net or something like that). It was supposed to regroup Passeport.Net, Calendar.Net, Hotmail and .Net itself.
Fortunelly Microsoft realised that people weren't going to developp applications where most of the information would be stored on Microsoft's servers.
A silly idea that gave a bad image of .Net. Good thing it's now well forgotten. It could have killed .Net.
"You superiour intellect is no match for our puny weapons" - The Simpsons
I'd rather use Seaside for web applications or Ruby on Rails for a web-based interface to a database than use ASP.NET. Seaside is probably the most advanced thing I've seen to date, you should check out the liveWeb project that is built with it, it's gonna blow you away.
You are obviously not a Smalltalk person are you? The numbers of useful, productive features that a Smalltalk IDE has that VS.NET doesn't is not even funny. Check out the non-commercial version of VisualWorks Smalltalk (by Cincom) and you'll see that VS.NET is suddenly not so hot.
Take out the MS CLR chip from the design and program your app in C/C++, have your code executed DIRECTLY by the microprocessor.
Speed increase guaranteed!
You also get more room for hardware that's actually needed, like RAM.
droolfool:
.NET 1.1 that they were never included. Either that or perhaps they're being matched as an earlier version of Netscape. Give it a look-see:
V er sion%\config\machine.config
The machine.config configuration file on the server contains a section where the capabilities of each browser is defined by parsing the user agent via regex. As such these behaviors are entirely customizable. I would bet that since Mozilla and FireFox are newer than
%SystemRoot%\Microsoft.NET\Framework\%Framework
You are comparing characteristics in the logic domain (software) to hardware specs. How do you compare?!
What you pasted for JVM was the engine specs and for this thing was the CPU/Embedded specs.
The guys haven't really given out WHAT the "embedded.net" runs - looks like it's about the same as what the embedded JVM runs (not the Java "chip"). It's not a ".NET" chip first off and secondly it's almost the same as those "jvm" embedded (ie 400k sdram for what I have) in features. Multi-threading is not really multi-threading either, it is a kind of co-operative environment.
It's really not the big badass ".NET" at all , despite the name and the endorsment.
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur
Er.... nope....
.Net code from perl. (and maybe possibly to call perl code from .Net)... But the perl code is not being compiled to CLR.
It's still the plain Perl 5 written in C. The Active state Perl.Net just allows you to call
The plan for .NET is not to take over the internet (despite the name). The real goal is to simplify the development process. There's a lot of draws to it:
.NET is a pleasure compared to the old scheme. It's not going to take over Java, but will likely work side-by-side with it (.NET on Windows boxes, Java on everything else), which is fine by me.
* Robust memory-protection and cleanup: Visual C developers can no longer screw up and create buffer overruns when using managed extensions.
* The ability to write in any language and mix them: Unlike other VMs, this isn't tacked on. It's a fundamental design of the platform. This is done exceptionally well.
* A better, simpler windowing scheme: Although Avalon looks to complicate this.
I'm not as fond of ASP.NET (it complicates things by bringing a lot of old ASP constructs over) but developing in
Shouldn't that be enought for anyone?
I only see doc at the site.
You're right, fortunately the developer convention (for very nice googlability) is "dotnet"
So just because there are a lot of open-source projects for a certain platform or language being thrown out by their authors doesn't mean there's a demand for those projects.
Who was it, when asked why 90% of sci-fi was crap, replied, "Because 90% of everything is crap!"
You're a moron. Notice that the sister to this post schools you. Get the facts before you spout off!
One of the major *advantages* of .NET over Java is that a .NET is supposedly compiled to NATIVE CODE on the first run, not interpreted bytecode like java. That being the case, what good is the .NET runtime in hardware? Faster compilation? .NET's compilation doesn't take forever anyway -- it's not Gentoo for crying out loud...
This would be more accurate then calling it a .Net cpu...
Dont expect to see these in a general use pc anytime soon ( if at all )..
There are several 'dedicated language' chips out there, like for java and forth.. but none really catch on outside their little niche markets..
They may be neat, but not too practical.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
They weren't single chip (single board), but they did take bytecodes (and sometimes source code) over a bus and execute them. Sometimes it was BASIC, and sometimes it was PICK assembler, etc.
If this puppy ran bytecodes for a simple BASIC (Which I am sure could be arranged...) then it would be very close to the old MAI Basic-4 minis, which did this on a single(8x12) circuit card.
Makes me feel sort of, uhm, nostalgic...
*whup* "Get along, little electrons. Heeyah!"
Fuck you. .NET. Yes, I tried to edit the .config file, but it didn't work very well. I had serious problems with GC , like pieces of memory never freed, and guess what, not my variables, but .NET specific stuff I couldn't control. I had web sessions misteriously disappearing. .NET is bad. But guess what? It's not perfect, it's not the right tool for every single job. Sometimes you're better off with J2EE (hint: clustering).
I got the facts, because I actually CODED IN
Such things actually HAPPENED to me. Stop whining, calling me a moron. I never said
you guessed it... a Beowolf Cluster of these?
Bill
It's my Sig and you can't have it. Mine! All Mine!
At the risk of being trolled, I must ask, how much does the salaries of 500 programmers cost? Would you need this many programmers with a more modern language? There is more to project cost than hardware and software. The biggest expense is usually labor. Also, every project delay I've ever encountered has been because of software problems or combined hardware/software problems.
Cool...a write-only cpu.
I can't wait to update my JavaStation to a .NETstation ...
yeah.
It is more productive to voice thoughtful opinions (reply) than to judge (moderate) others.
I don't think so. The specification say "FBGA chip form" and it's easy to 3 of them on the photos (The CPU and 2 flash memory). I see no relation to programmable chip.
I'm pretty sure what you were reading about is their attempt to drop the name .NET, not the technology. Microsoft is not backing off .NET as platform - if anything they're more excited about it now than they ever were.
From a marketing perspective, everything that came out in 2001 was labeled X.NET. Office.NET. MS Money.NET. They dilluted the phrase .NET so much that people didn't ever figure out what it is, and from the looks of most people on slashdot's comments, people still don't know what it is. .NET is not an attempt to take over the internet (in fact, if you look at the technologies love of web services and XML, you might even think .NET is trying to play nice on the internet). MSN Passport.NET which shares the name was an attempt to take over the internet that failed miserably, but its unrelated to .NET.
VS2003 works really damn well with C#, but I still prefer VC6 for C++ devel. The IDE has really become much harder to navigate, and the only thing that mitigates that cost is that when intellisense works, it is truly a thing of beauty.
And intellisense always works with C# (or as nearly always as I can tell).
But I'm dissappointed with C++.NET (though it looks like this will be mitigated with VS2005), and I'm dissappointed at how keyboard navigation became harder. OH, and I'm REALLY dissapointed about the drop of support for Win9x. Remote debugging is a pain.
Pax -- Ob
Fantastic! Another market where Microsoft is slapping the ".NET" branding on everything, even though it has nothing to do with the top-level domain of the same name, nor even with networks in general!
This is the worst marketing idea MS has had since they renamed their eHome concept to the generic sounding "Windows Media Center", without changing the names of any of the binaries.
Now THAT is geek humor. Bravo!
I am a leaf on the wind. Watch how I soar.
You have a strange view of the Industry if you think Java has reached "will be with us forever" stage just 10 years after the initial release (and that didn't resemble Java as we know it today in any form).
I won't comment on the "will be with us forever" part, but I will say this: Java is showing every sign of being a long-term player. I'm not sure how you try to estimate the staying power of languages and platforms, but by every reasonable measure, Java will be with us a long time.
Java has too many problems and not enough advantages to stay as long as C has.
This is just a meaningless troll unless you explain what show-stopper problems you think Java has that'll limit its future potential. Java has some problems, yes, but none of them are show-stoppers, and the language continues to evolve nicely (see Java 5).
In addition, the areas where Java and C compete with each other are pretty small already. You typically won't write low level systems code in Java, and writing general purpose applications in C is making less and less sense every day.
Don't get me wrong, the idea of the virtual machine will probably stay for a long time but not Java as a language or as a Runtime Environment.
And you base this conclusion on...what? With all due respect, your post is all words and no substance. As I said before, by every reasonable measure, Java will be with us a long time.
450,000 CLR instructions, I'd guess. Each of these would chew through many ARM assembly instructions.
Slashdot's name? When my compiler sees
Well, of course doing a port of an C++ application to non windows is feasible ;-)
.net is not technical but strategical for MS. They have build a clone, and they don't know how far this clone will endanger their core business supremacy ...
.net or any other technology that can endanger theyr busines.
.net has join OS/2 at MS museum).
...
The problem is availability of the application on that platform !
Here the VM is an application for me.
The main issue with
Let's see how will MS handle both ".net" supposed "compatibility" and Windows & Office official Lock-down at teh same time.
IMHO, MS will never support any non MS platform for
As a longterm consequence, either windows is dead (.net has won) or windows is still the #1 (and
Let's see
.net is still inferior to Java. JIT is really pointless IMHO if you aren't bothering to make it cross-platform. And Mono doesn't count because you have to alter your code in a lot of cases to get it to compile in Mono.
And I'm sure you filed a bug report about that, right?
If by "will be with us forever," you mean that in a decade .NET will leave millions of lines of bug-ridden, festering and unsupportable C# and Visual Basic .Net code, then yes, I agree with you. COBOL has touched every one of us in ways we shouldn't have been touched in, and everyone still remembers PL/1. Visual Basics 5 and less are pretty much in the graveyard already (and I know of some geniuses who decided to use it because they thought it would be the way of the future - so much so for trusting Microsoft to build a lasting product). Java may seem popular and widely used, but this is largely Sun spin; if it happened to just disappear spontaneously, I wouldn't notice a thing, and chances are neither would you. I think you can pretty much put it in the "living dead" category right now. Now C, there's a widely used language with a thriving and active programmer community. C++ even more so. You can't predict what will happen to a programming language in 10 years (much less "forever" - remember that computers as we know them today are barely 60 years old!), although it's tempting to try.
In the great CONS chain of life, you can either be the CAR or be in the CDR.
Their bid to hijack java is now complete. I, for one, welcome our new Virtual Machine and process stealing overlords.
.Not article I see.
Micro$hit makes me want to puke with every
l8,
AC
Hey, I want a Python CPU!!!
-- There is no final purpose.
You have to modify you code alot in Java to get it to work in both Windows and Linux. Ever heard of code once test everywhere? That came from Java. The only problem that Mono has is the lack of IO support for Windows, but luckily if they didn't use the Windows GTK# there isn't going to be a problem, and these companies are activily developing technology to take advantage of the System.Windows interface to map to QT# and GTK#. Give it another year and you will see code once, test once. Something Java still is not able to claim.
You do? That's news to me and a lot of other Java developers. Quit the FUD, Java really does do what it says on the packet about write once run anywhere. I regularly write on Windows and run on Linux for server code. Or write on Windows and run on Mac for GUI code. Hell I've even had little apps run without translation on a Palm and on a desktop.
--
USA: home of the world's largest terrorist training camp.
Well, given that it says right in the article summary that the supposed .Net CPU runs the same software as SPOT smart watches, making a link between the CPU and SPOT watches didn't take too much research, did it?
... the SPOT watches were designed by Microsoft and require you to subscribe to an MSN service to use them. There, see?! Clear proof of a conspiracy linking the .Net CPU to Microsoft.
And get this
Breakfast served all day!
>> But does it run Linux?
> The real question is "does it run Mono?"
Yes, of course, you are right. "Does it run Linux?" was a completely fake question.
will its contractors be ... 'ADot'Heads ?
Developers, Developers, Developers!!!!!: .Net CPU
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Long ago Western Digital made a Microengine that executed UCSD Pascal P-code. And Intel's iAPX-32 was supposed to execute Ada directly.
As hardware implementations, neither could economically evolve and survive.
Ok, first off, how the hell can you take a screenshot of a bluescreen unless you have a digital camera??? lol
Anyways, I know for a fact that bluescreen for XP exists, because I routinely trip one in an hp pavilion laptop of mine. 2.5 yrs old, off the shelf for 1.5 years, it has started to die in 1 out of 5 hardboots. It gets near to letting me enter a password, and sometimes after, sometimes before, I get a bluescreen coredump of bad_pool_header or page_fault_in_a_non-paged_area now (among others), truth be told, this laptop was badly dropped once, but its a beast, and all that was visible that happened was the breaking of the protective flap on a corner floppy drive bay (fixed) these blue screens and problems surrounding them did not start appearing till 6months later... do to the bluescreens and the fact that I have access to much nicer computers, I use it mainly for the purpose of a remote terminal to the computers I use primarily for work, along with backup HD space, music storage/playback, and wifi connectivity...
The upshot of using it like this means that I rarely stress the cpu, and so it runs much colder than it did when i used to have it as my main platform
Gravity Sucks
There are too many negative comments about this, and this only proves the inexperience of the posters.
.NET and C# experience) that I would actually hire these guys into an embedded position.
I'm an extremely experienced and competent embedded developer (C, C++, RTOS and not), and I believe this is truely meaninful advancement in technology.
Sure, it isn't a hardware CLR. What it is is a CLR that fits on a SoC. If any of you are familiar with the state of the highly embedded markets, you'll realize that this is not only a major hardware advancement, but a giant leap forward in embedded development productivity. Afterall, embedded developers are traditionally far harder to come by than VB or C# programmers. Now you can hire a C# programmer to do embedded work.
Is this a wise thing to do? Not traditionally, but the CLR and C# are so well thought out (I also have extensive
Get with it, people. This is truely an innovation in embedded development.
I don't get it :| stackalloc is a classname ?
Thinking of FORTH CPUs of yore.
And some old IBM CPUs, too, come to think of it -- writeable microcode, was it?
So there.
For God's sake - put more opcodes in Parrot! Python can't run without anything less than 60,000 opcodes. Perl6 needs at least 5.3 billion opcodes at last count. And can't we have a way to change Parrot's calling convention 60 times per second?
Fair enough, but you're certainly in a minority. Just out of curiosity, what development tools rise above the level of the "crap" you're complaining about?
-- Bitchslap aka Echo the Wonder Tube
a subset of CLR? Does that mean it clears part of the screen?
Seeing is believing... .NET framework.a ge
Can you provide a video similar to what this guy did using
http://www.rubyonrails.org/show/HomeP
.net is still inferior to Java. JIT is really pointless IMHO if you aren't bothering to make it cross-platform. And Mono doesn't count because you have to alter your code in a lot of cases to get it to compile in Mono.
.NET gives me access to the language I want to code on- one that is completely open and free, rather than restricting me to one piece of rubbish. And no, pointing me to that Java languages page does not suffice- no languages on that list have the same capabilities as .NET languages do, especially as far as two-way communication.
What does that statement mean? The first sentence makes sense, though I'd disagree with it. At least
What do you think a JIT is? A JIT has nothing to do with being cross-platform. Having a JIT'd language doesn't make the language non cross-platform. Sure, the VM isn't cross-platform, but guess what? VMs generally aren't. That's why most intelligent languages (e.g. Smalltalk, Lisp, etc) make the VM tiny- 500 KB of binary or so- and do the rest in the target language. I can't help it that Sun can't tell the diference between a class library and a VM.
Working toward a usable PDA environment in the spirit of Newton OS: Dynapad