Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Mono Outpaces Java In Linux Desktop Development

Posted by timothy on from the statistical-manipulation-more-popular-than-ever dept.

dp619 writes "Mono, a framework based on Microsoft technology, has become more popular for Linux desktop applications than Java, but recent changes could strengthen Java's hand, SD Times is reporting. The story also touches on the failure of Linux distros to keep pace with Eclipse."

10 of 598 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Eclipse is stagnating by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    The difference between Eclipse 3.4 and 3.2 is night and day when you actually use it.

    Just because it looks the same (a shock to people who might want to change their hentai GTK theme every week) doesn't mean it is the same.

    It's like those idiots that uses Java 1.1 in 1998 and think that Java 6 is pretty much the same.

  2. Microsoft shill by El_Muerte_TDS · · Score: 5, Informative

    RedMonk analyst Stephen O'Grady, the guy being quoted in the article, is a Microsoft shill. And the whole article is filled with FUD.

  3. This is beyond garbage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    I quota from TFA: "Eclipse 3.1 lacks features that MonoDevelop has, including code completion, integrated debugging, refactoring, and unit testing capabilities"

    Excuse me !? That stuff was even in Eclipse 2.0. Claiming a Java IDE without code completion exists is just stupid.

    Another quota from TFA "Most Java developers on Linux use JetBrains IntelliJ, he claimed. IntelliJ is a commercial product that is not open source."

    Who says most developers use IntelliJ, I personally know NONE. Everybody I know is on Eclipse or Netbeans.

    I'm not even going to bother with the rest of the article. This article is written by one bunch of ill informed people.

    How much money do I need to pay to get an article on the frontpage ? Do I get a volume discount if I want five of them ?

    1. Re:This is beyond garbage by hattig · · Score: 5, Informative

      Why is he talking about Eclipse 3.1 anyway? 3.5 just came out, 3.4 came out a year ago, 3.3 a year before that, 3.2 a year before that...

      Does he talk about .NET 1.0? I doubt it.

      The only problem Eclipse 3.5 has is the minor hassle of getting SVN working, as it isn't integrated out of the box. I suspect this was because of subclipse and subversive bickering.

  4. Re:No mention of X-platform by DragonWriter · · Score: 5, Informative

    The Java VM was a good idea, but Sun never bothered to port other languages to it.

    Well, except that in reality there are lots of implementations of non-Java languages for the JVM, several of which (Jython and JRuby, among others) have Sun resources behind them, and some of which are even Sun created (Fortress, JavaFX Script.) There were non-Java languages for the JVM before .NET existed.

  5. Re:What is strengthening Java according to TFA? by rdean400 · · Score: 5, Informative

    It isn't helpful that TFA is wrong on at least one point. It said that Eclipse 3.1 lacks code completion, refactoring, and debugging features. Unless the build in Debian is horrifically broken, it has all of those, including thread-level debugging, which it's had since before Eclipse 3.x. My assumption has always been this is because the progenitor of Eclipse -- IBM -- was more interested debugging server-based Java applications than standalone ones).

  6. Re:Good by Freetardo+Jones · · Score: 5, Informative

    You obviously don't work with .NET on a daily basis. Same crap different syntax, different names on the box..

    I use it almost every day and in many ways I prefer it to Java (though I use Java often too for certain things it does better). I never get why people cares so much about what languages other people like to code in.

  7. No code completion or debugger? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    "Eclipse 3.1 lacks features that MonoDevelop has, including code completion, integrated debugging, refactoring, and unit testing capabilities, Hargett claimed. "I've found in my consulting that people who install Eclipse 3.1 through the [Debian] package manager say, 'This is terrible.' " He said that customers that have installed a version of Eclipse beyond 3.1 like it."

    Just out of curiosity, I just downloaded a copy of Eclipse 1.0. This build is from November 2001.

    http://archive.eclipse.org/eclipse/downloads/drops/R-1.0-200111070001/index.php

    For the record, it has code completion and integrated debugging. I do remember back in 2004 thinking IntelliJ IDEA's refactoring support was far better, so I suppose that was roughly the 3.0 timeframe. I guess I could track the JUnit plugin history and see which version of Eclipse started including this, but I think I've already made my point. I've got nothing against Mono, but geeze, what a load of BS...

  8. Re:Good by Cyberax · · Score: 5, Informative

    Nope.

    C# right now has the following features that are absent in Java:
    1) LINQ !!!!
    2) Delegates.
    3) Anonymous types and type inference.
    4) Reified generics.
    5) Support for dynamic methods.

    C# 1.0 was just a carbon copy of Java. C# 3, not so much.

  9. Re:Good by EvanED · · Score: 5, Informative

    C# is VB with C syntax. VB is Microsoft's bastardized version of Java.

    JDK 1.0: Jan 1996
    VB 1.0: May 1991

    VB was at 4.0 by the time Java was released.

    If by "VB" you mean VB.Net, I would say it's the reverse: C# is Microsoft's "bastardized version" of Java (though mostly better IMO), and VB.Net is C# with VB syntax.