iPhone Gets .Net App Development

snydeq writes "Novell has announced MonoTouch 1.0, a commercial SDK that allows developers to build iPhone apps using Microsoft's .Net Framework instead of the Apple-designated C or Objective-C languages. The SDK leverages Novell's Mono runtime for running Windows apps on non-Windows systems, allowing developers to utilize code and libraries written for .Net and programming languages like C#. With MonoTouch, the Mono runtime provides such developer services as garbage collection, thread management, type safety, and Web services, said Mono leader Miguel de Icaza."

Comments

Launch Times?

[glennrrr]

Well how long does it take to load the whole Mono framework runtime because every second counts on the iPhone?

Re:Launch Times?

[Gwala]

Probably not too bad - my guess would be it's using the AOT version of Mono, which compiles the framework into the final application, resulting in much better load times in performance-critical environments (see http://www.mono-project.com/AOT )

Re:Launch Times?

[Anonymous Coward]

If I am not mistaken and given that Apple bans other execution environments, the last step in building is compiling to native code. So there are no JIT times, I donÂt know about other loading times.

Re:Launch Times?

[digitalunity]

I would be more worried about WinForms compatibility. I developed a couple of .NET applications(never again!) and running them with the Mono runtime is markedly different than MS's runtime. Stability wasn't great with Mono and controls didn't always behave the same.

Although I won't developing any more .NET applications if I can avoid it, it would still be nice if Mono matured to the point where it could replace the MS runtime without noticeable difference.

Re:Launch Times?

[thetoadwarrior]

Like MS will ever allow that to happen. If .Net and Mono were completely compatible then it would be much easier to port apps to Linux and therefore remove the need for Windows.

Re:Launch Times?

[poetmatt]

It's no magic that Mono is always a version behind .net or more. It's just that lots of people are not realizing this yet, or the same with silverlight. It's stupid because if it was complete compatible then people would actually have more interest in windows, too.

Re:Launch Times?

[SanityInAnarchy]

Actually, there are two large things standing in the way of that:

1. The best .NET development tool, from what I can tell, is still going to be some form of Visual Studio.
2. Unlike Java, .NET makes native bindings dirt simple. If you were using a DLL in C++, you can use the same DLL in C# relatively easily.

#1 means that even if people want to target Mono, they might develop in VS.NET anyway, which is a bunch of VS.NET and Windows sales for Microsoft. #2 means that anyone who doesn't deliberately target Mono is probably going to call a bunch of native win32 code, just because it's so trivially easy to do so.

Note that both of these exist even with a "100% compatible" Mono, unless it was also combined with a 100% compatible Wine, and we all know exactly how likely the latter is.

Re:Launch Times?

[SanityInAnarchy]

How does this hurt Apple?

I don't know, how does Google Voice hurt Apple? How does Java hurt Apple?

I mean, you can sort of come up with a rationale, but it's really, really strained. Basically, it's not about whether it directly hurts apple, as whether it might hurt Apple, and/or whether it lets Apple give up even a tiny iota of control over their platform, and/or whether it hurts Apple's partners.

In this case, it's probably about control. Apple is going to be very wary of any language which supports eval(), since that means my app could just download new code from the Internet and eval it, thus eliminating the middleman (bottleneck!) that is the Apple approval process for all future updates.

Re:Launch Times?

[Cyberax]

Java has quite nice bindings to C++ now in form of JNA ( https://jna.dev.java.net/ ), it's actually about as powerful as .NET interop.

Of course, managed C++ is even better still.

Re:Launch Times?

[tyrione]

Because a secret agenda of theirs is to make you use XCode to develop apps. This was made quite clear to my former company on a project. That's why you won't see Java nor Flash any time soon, and the ToS explicitly forbids apps that execute external code. I theorize that by doing this they 1) want control and 2)hope that the iPhone development activity propagates into OS X development activity.

Yes. Use our Development Tools on our Platform. Truly it is a secretive agenda. Get real.

Re:Launch Times?

[EastCoastSurfer]

I don't know, how does Google Voice hurt Apple?

It hurts ATT and thus hurts Apple. The reason for the Google Voice rejection became clear when ATT announced their 'a-list' program to start on the 20th of this month. As long as you have a plan costing $59+ (most iphone plans) you can put 5 numbers on your a-list that will not count against your minutes. Add the Google Voice number to your a-list and boom, unlimited talk time.

Re:Why CLR (.NET mono) and not JVM (Java)?

[pavon]

MonoTouch compiles the code into a native executable, rather than shipping with a VM. Apple has no reason to disallow that.

Re:Why CLR (.NET mono) and not JVM (Java)?

[kalirion]

Since when has it needed a reason?

Unity

[tylersoze]

Unity, www.unity3d.com, which uses Mono, has been available on the iPhone for some now.

No it doesn't.

[Plug]

MonoTouch is not a runtime or an "app", it's a library with which you compile your own apps. It's ahead-of-time compiled, so you end up with a binary that runs on the iPhone.

It opens up iPhone development for millions of .NET developers, many of which may not have any interest in Objective C. And as far as I can tell, C#/Mono is garbage collected, and Objective C (on the iPhone) is not. That alone would make me interested in checking it out.

If you're not interested, that's great, move along.

Re:Must be app-store approved...

[Plug]

1. It's not a "shell" or a "runtime", it is ahead-of-time compiled down to native code.
2. This is a wrapper around native Apple UI objects, it's not using any Windows or .NET UI objects. You use the Apple Interface Builder just like you would if you were using Objective C.

Re:Mono

[jcr]

I think you may be prejudiced by your previous experience.

If his position is based on experience, then by definition it's not prejudice.

-jcr

Re:Why CLR (.NET mono) and not JVM (Java)?

[ClosedSource]

"MS fooled a generation of 20 and 30 somethings into buying its code books and learning how to code in their walled garden."

Well, it was a much bigger garden than Apple's and the gardeners were well paid.

"Once touched by MS you are not used to learning any new skills"

Whatever you think of Windows, it could hardly be argued that developing for it didn't require learning "any new skills" (C, Win32,C++, MFC, COM, ATL, COM+, SQL Server, ASP, .NET framework, C#, ASP.NET, ADO.NET, DirectX, WCF, WPF, WWF, LINQ ...)