Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft To Acquire Xamarin (phoronix.com)
New submitter androlinuz writes: Microsoft has signed an agreement to acquire Xamarin, a leading platform provider for mobile app development. In conjunction with Visual Studio, Xamarin provides a rich mobile development offering that enables developers to build mobile apps using C# and deliver fully native mobile app experiences to all major devices, including iOS, Android, and Windows. Xamarin's approach enables developers to take advantage of the productivity and power of .NET to build mobile apps, and to use C# to write to the full set of native APIs and mobile capabilities provided by each device platform.
ho hum... .Net was better off as 2 companies instead of 1
Seems like a good move to me
Looks like Miguel de Icaza has officially become part of Microsoft. Maybe he can pull a Elop and get Windows 11 to use Gnome as its desktop environment.
-- Political fascism requires a Fuhrer.
Now that Microsoft open sourced .NET (https://github.com/Microsoft/dotnet) this makes sense. Really happy for everyone at Xamarin, they are one of those companies that put in the work and deserve this.
He's been an apologist for MS in the OSS community for as long as I can remember, this seems like a natural move for him.
Microsoft has signed an agreement to acquire Slashdot.org :)
Advertisement for what, exactly? Do you consider this to not be news that people might want to know about? Or are you just a jerk?
You can always remove your account and not visit slashdot if you don't like it.
fully native mobile app experiences to all major devices, including iOS, Android, and Windows. Xamarin's approach enables developers to take advantage of the productivity and power of .NET to build mobile apps
Wow.
Someone ha d a second glass of the cool aid.
bickerdyke
Have you ever heard an actual hands-on IT person describe any IT component as having a "rich" quality to it? It seems like a writer's use of language to ascribe a tactile quality to something which has no tactile properties.
As far as I understood, it's simply a way to use C# to develop cross-platform mobile apps - nothing as grandiose as you're suggesting. That a space that, at least initially, Microsoft wasn't interested in filling. However, given Microsoft's recent focus on cross-platform development, this actually makes a lot of sense for both companies. For Microsoft, it means not having to duplicate work that's already been done, and for Xamarin, frankly, it means not having to compete with a space Microsoft wants to get in.
Historically speaking, I'd argue that Mono has been the alternative to Microsoft's proprietary implementation of C#, along with whatever other languages it supports. Also, now that Microsoft has open-sourced the .NET core, there might end up being a waning demand for an alternative implementation, although that's admittedly just a guess.
Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
The C# implementation of the whole .NET framework is fully open source.
https://github.com/dotnet/core...
Xamarin was chargin to use it and it was one of the few possibility to be able to write app that work on iOS.
My best guess it will be free with Microsoft so dev can write app that works everywhere.
Wow. What crawled up your ass and had the batteries die?
There's news, and then there's being given an advertisement under the guise of news. I just wondered if anyone else thought it seemed more ad than news article. There's a reason that 'slashvertisement' was coined.
Now have yourself a very pleasant enema :)
No, Mono is the alternative to MS's implementation of C#. Xamarin is built on MS's implementation of C#, except some of the OS/GUI hooks.
Your ad here. Ask me how!
Backdoors and telemetry on all platforms!
What? No. Xamarin allows you to develop .Net apps for iOS and Android using Mono (Android) or a rickety cross-compilation toolchain (iOS). These days you use something very similar to the Windows Mobile API (including XAML) to target iOS, Android and WinMo/Metro. It's pretty nifty; I work on a Xamarin-based app and about 95% of the code is shared while the app looks and feels 100% native on all platforms.
I can see Xamarin as something Microsoft would want - now they supply one of the most popular APIs for cross-platform app development.
USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
As someone who uses Xamarin in a commercial product I find this to be very interesting news. Even if it was written in marketingese.
USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
Normally, I would say that this is a bad thing, but Xamarian's pricing is brutal anyone who just wants to play around, explore, and possibly try to sell an app or two if they're halfway decent. When I was looking at cross-platform development tools, I was really interested in using Xamarian, but I wasn't about to fork over $1000/year just to play with developing cross platform software (ie: mobile AND desktop). And their starter edition only runs with Visual Studio, which is Windows only.
QT is even worse. Their documentation actually states "Please consult a lawyer before using QT for commercial development". Their pricing is so brutal they don't even advertise it on their website. I had to google for leaked price lists just to get a ballpark figure, and the prices almost made me fall out of my chair. So heaven forbid you write an app and think, "Hey, this ain't bad. I'll put this on the app stores and see if anyone likes it." QT will be suddenly expecting several thousand dollars right up front before you legally able to sell.
I really like the "It's ok, you can pay us once you're making money" system that Unreal and Unity have switched to. THAT's how you encourage indie adoption. Unfortunately they're geared primarily for making games, not regular applications, so if you wanted to create some kind of database-type system or whatever, then those toolkits are not a good fit.
The summary is not really summary written by the submitter, the second and third sentences are taken verbatim from the Microsoft press release about the acquisition. Seems a bit advertisement-ish to me as well.
.NET to build mobile apps, and to use C# to write to the full set of native APIs and mobile capabilities provided by each device platform. This enables developers to easily share common app code across their iOS, Android and Windows apps while still delivering fully native experiences for each of the platforms. Xamarin’s unique solution has fueled amazing growth for more than four years."
http://blogs.microsoft.com/blo...
Below is the third paragraph from the press release link above:
"In conjunction with Visual Studio, Xamarin provides a rich mobile development offering that enables developers to build mobile apps using C# and deliver fully native mobile app experiences to all major devices – including iOS, Android, and Windows. Xamarin’s approach enables developers to take advantage of the productivity and power of
The C# implementation of the whole .NET framework is fully open source
No, it's not. Otherwise, please send me a link to download this fully open source WPF classes. Thanks in advance.
In the past .NET was a way to lure dev to Windows and to anchor them there.
What is their incentive today for .net
1) open sourcing
2) supporting and now purchase of Xamarin?
If xam/mono gets MSed than it seems even less safe to use .net as they may pull the plug on Mono anytime.
Is it a ploy to sell more VisualStudios? And then WinOS for devs? Can't see a big money in this for MS...
4wdloop
.NET has productivity and power?? Who knew??
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
Like most stuff at MS these days, it's Azure. A mobile app is just another front end to a web applications, and this makes the case of having using .Net from end to end and hosting in Azure and using things like Azure Mobile Services, Service Fabric and so on.
Miguel de Icaza, you earned it.
If you were me, you'd be good lookin'. - six string samurai
Lol
Reading these is like someone going on a rant about IBM. Strange today, as MS lost the monopoly they had.
The incentive is simple. Why do they still sell Office to Mac users? To make money. Visual Studio is another money maker. If they can't beat em on the mobile platforms at least join them and make money for app makers. VS code already runs on Linux natively and VS 2015 community edition even has full Android SDKs and emulators and java 7 jdk. No I am not making this up.
MS incentive also is the new CEO wants cloud and services and less concerned about platforms and tie in like Gates was. Azure has FreeBSD and Linux vm's ready to boot as they make money either way whether you use Windows or not.
Xamarin makes sense in that you are not tied to one platform. MS is turning into IBM after they lost they became more open. The UI and integration might not be as much but a Xamarin app for IOS will likely run on Windows Moible for easily with porting.
In essence the incentive for Sun with Java and why they didn't really capitalize on it. The idea is if they give java away these applets run on Solaris so what do you know?
http://saveie6.com/
Xamarin simply sponsored Mono, but that doesn't necessarily grant the ability to kill it. How would they "pull the plug" on an open-source and free project? Besides, it would just scare people away from .NET in general, so I just don't see that happening.
Microsoft is simply embracing other platforms, especially mobile, as they well understand they don't really have a serious dog in that fight with Windows mobile. They'd like to keep developers on Windows, and offering high-quality tools for multi-platform development is a way to do that, because yes, both Visual Studio and Windows (for PC) are important products still, despite overall waning importance of the PC platform. At the very least, keeping mobile developers in the VS environment certainly won't *hurt* their own product line, as they may get some ports they otherwise wouldn't have.
Even so, when your company is focusing on services like Azure to a much greater extent, the client's platform doesn't really matter quite as much. I really don't think it's anything more complicated than that. People keep looking for deep, nefarious reasons for what MS does, when most of it can be explained by reasonably straightforward business strategies or strategic goals.
Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
As the monkey once said, Developers Developers Developers! It's Microsoft trying to get people used to using Microsoft tools. If you use Visual Studio, you can use its built-in Xamarin integration to develop your Android and iOS apps. Once you're doing that, you really might as well also publish for the Windows app store - it's minimal additional effort and nets you at least a few percent more of the market - and that's what Microsoft really needs people doing.
The whole "Windows Phone / Windows 10 Mobile is a pretty good OS, runs on some nice hardware, etc... but it has no apps so I went with Android / iOS" thing has been discussed nigh unto death, both on Slashdot and across the broader web. Microsoft has, for years, been searching for a way to get developers to publish for the Windows [Phone] store. If they can get people using the tools and frameworks, and make it *really* easy to then target Windows as well, they can perhaps finally solve the chicken-and-egg problem: Windows phones don't have many apps, so they have low market share, so there aren't many users to buy apps, so most developers don't publish apps for them, so there aren't many apps...
If Microsoft can break that loop, they have a chance in the mobile market again. This is one (of several) approaches that they are taking to try and achieve this.
Disclaimer: Not a MS employee, and the above is based on personal observations and guesswork, not on published statements or insider information.
There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...
It was overdue. Oddly, I think it was Xamarin that delayed this acquisition. I think MS would have been happy to pick them up two years ago. For all the flack Miguel de Icaza gets, he is a big open source supporter, and I bet he was concerned with how that would work being at MS and all. But, when .Net core happened, the writing was on the wall, and now they can just get .Net core to be what it needs to be.
Make no mistake, this is a play to displace some existing players and to encourage adoption of hosting on Azure and using Azure services. It's a good story for a lot of companies. You can use one set of skills (C#/.Net) to address development from end to end and you get pretty streamlined hosting (via Azure). Compared to having to assemble all the pieces from front to back, plenty of companies will take the ecosystem lock in.
Xamarin acquires RoboVM. Microsoft acquires Zamarin. Interesting timing. And goodbye cross-platform mobile java...
Xamarin sounds like a prescription drug, not some sort of web tech.
I just renewed my license back in December.
As others have noted, the license structure was brutal - I'm a consultant and just needed Tamarin for a few times a year I have to help out a particular client with a Tamarin built application.
They wanted *$1K* for a license, even though I'd hardly be using that. Luckily I was able to talk them down a fair amount after explaining the situation, but given how many consultants are active these days in helping smaller companies build applications, they really should have had some kind of intermediate tier.
I'm really curious to see what Microsoft does with Xamarin, you have to wonder if they will decide to shut down the tooling and have people use Visual Studio...
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Woo hoo! XAML.
This is Appertime!
This is Appertime!
Unit Tests die once they're in sight
This is Appertime!
Everybody hit the floor
Take a seat 'til the flatulence makes you die!
It's not safe! We are sure
You're not safe in Appertime
(Apologies to Harry101)
Xamarin provides a rich mobile development offering that enables developers to build mobile apps using C#
Oh. Here I thought that Xamarin was specifically intended as an alternative to Microsoft's proprietary implementation of C#. Oh, well, shows what I know. I guess we've always been at war with Eastasia.
You thought wrong. Xamarin (and MonDevelop) are IDE's + libs for the .NET platform, on windows or mono. Additionally Xamarin enable creation of cross platform mobile apps using C# I presume underneath its Mono on Android and iPhone.
Whatever. I was forced to use Xamarin in a previous job and it is the clunkiest piece of SW I have ever used. There is a mantra that every dev should chant - cross platform toolkits do not work at least if you are interested in writing UI once and deploying across multiple platforms . They are fine for an enterprise level piece of SW but ultimately they resort the LCD and you end up fighting the tool and wishing to god you could just write native code.
WPF is a library that is on top of the .NET framework. It isn't part of the .NET framework. Just like glibc isn't part of the Linux kernel.
.NET platform as well as the compiler is open source and pretty good stuff too.
The entire
Honestly, I'm kinda with matty on this. I don't really see this as an advertisement. I see this as something that genuinely will be a boon to me since I do all my development using Visual Studio and C# and just yesterday was heading to Xamarin's website to purchase a license and now I think I'll hold off a little since I think it will be part of my MSDN subscription soon.
If it is an advertisement, it kinda worked backwards, I'm going to spend like $2000 less (2 platforms) per year now because of this information. So, Microsoft kinda just lost the $2000 I was about to give them company they're buying.
Not quite. Xamarin, formerly known as Ximian, actually built Mono, open source as it is. Only last year, when MS open sourced C# did Xamarin begin to look at moving to that rather than rely on Mono. That part of the Xamarin product has always been free, but their studio, and specifically the non-open source bindings from Mono to iOS are what you get for their license.
I'd like to see MS make Xamarin free as part of their MSDN license.
Community edition as well. :-)
Microsoft's proprietary implementation of C#.
You really need to get your butt out of the 1990s, the world has changed dramatically since then.
This is all over Twitter, why the fuck would they need to pay to advertise it?
There's news, and then there's being given an advertisement
If you don't understand the difference between a press release and advertisement you really shouldn't participate in any kind of discussion on Slashdot. Or any discussion about anything anywhere. Perhaps you should even try to put duct tape on your mouth for about five to six years, just to be sure. Almost any news you ever read anywhere is the result of a press release or similar of some sort. Slashdot is News for Nerds, quoting press releases is in fact on of the things it should do. If they are relevant for nerds.
The 1990s called and asked you return your paranoia.
I still question Microsoft's long-term commitment at high levels, given their actions in other parts of the company. There's evidence aplenty that the old guard that wants lock-in is still alive and kicking.
So there's still the strong possibility that all of this ends up in a "it's a trap" moment.
I don't know about you, but with me MS has burned a lot of trust. I mean a ginormous amount. I don't trust MS and I don't trust the judgement of anyone who isn't wary of MS. MS isn't looking as evil as a few years ago, and their surface hardware looks quite neat actually. But there is quite a bit more that has to happen before I trust MS again with running anything mission-critical for me.
I don't know if this is going to help or destroy Xamarin - I'm sorta caught in the middle. Or so I wish. ... But glancing over to Nokia, I'm not placing any bets on Xamarin. Companies bought by MS too often die specatularly just a little bit later.
I wish it were different, but the statistics clearly point against Xamarin surviving an akquisition by MS. That's the plain, simple and painful truth.
It's a shame for Xamarin actually - it is a neat x-plattform toolkit and I've used MonoDevelop for some projects. Very cool and quick to set up.
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
C# is a language within the .NET framework so wouldn't it be more appropriate to say that WPF is a library not included with Xamarin just like glibc isn't included in the GCC compiler suite? oh.. wait.
If it makes you feel any better, I suspect Microsoft didn't buy Xamarin to take totalitarian control of the .Net development environment. Xamarin was probably going bankrupt, and Microsoft thew some couch cushion change at it, so they could preserve the miniscule ecosystem of developers. The future is not Microsoft selling proprietary OSs, but migrating customers to Microsoft's cloud. Microsoft will need cloud app developers for that. (Developers! Developers! Developers!)
I actually consider unified XAML for every platform to be a major feature. You write the UI once and it works everywhere. A few things (mostly margins) might be off on one platform or the other but Xamarin provides a way for you to declare platform-specific values right in the XAML file. Very handy.
Also, I prefer hand-written XAML over Apple's Interface Builder as I never got along well with IB for Cocoa Touch. That's just my personal preference, though.
USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
If Windows Mobile was in a dominant position like iOS and Android, sure, they might not bother with cross-platform compatibility. That's just not the reality of the market, so I don't see their commitment to cross-platform development going away anytime soon either. Make no mistake, you should never trust a company to continue policies that work against their own financial self-interest - but keep in mind that doesn't necessarily have to work *against* their customers' interests either.
Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
No. It would be more appropriate to say "like glibc isn't part of the gcc C compiler". First of all glibc is not included in GCC. It's an independent project with it's own page and everything. That's makes sense and many of it's users doesn't use GCC.
WPF isn't part of C# but it's definitely part of the dotnet distribution. The question if course is if it will continue to be. There are plenty of libraries that used to be important to dotnet that are now obsolete. Xamarin wrote a wrapper around WPF that unlike WPF is easy to implement and portable. Applications that use those can tun on WPF as well as several other graphics API:s. If Microsoft intends to continue the Xamarin effort of bringing C# to a place where it can compete with Java WPF and other API: that are very tied to Windows has no future.
So how do you adapt such a UI to data? Applications I write are data-driven and the UI:s are generated out of interpreting data from a database. Does Xamarin support that?
So how do you adapt such a UI to data? Applications I write are data-driven and the UI:s are generated out of interpreting data from a database. Does Xamarin support that?
You can do UI in C# so a custom control written in C# is what you'll probably go for in this case. Once written, that control behaves like any other so it can be used in XAML pages/controls. The app I'm currently working on actually has some (tame) data-driven pages and it works well.
By the way, since my last comment was downmodded as "Overrated": I'm not really trying to advertise Xamarin here. It's not the best thing since sliced bread. It's pretty good at what it does, though, and if your company is already using C#/WPF it allows you to apply most of your experience with that to app development. Since my company is a C# shop that's a big plus. (While I'm at it: MVVMCross is another framework you might want to consider if writing apps in C#. It goes well with Xamarin.)
Before Xamarin we used Cordova for app development and the main reason why that didn't work out was that the guy who did the app back then barely spoke JS and had no clue about how the DOM works. The quality of the final product is why we decided to go with a more familiar language and framework this time around. Still, it's a good alternative and it avoids Xamarin's long compile times when targeting iOS.
(In case you're wondering: Apple won't allow Mono on iDevices so Xamarin has to talk to a Mac to cross-compile everything to native code. This cross-compilation is done to the entire binary, of course, so even if one single byte is changed you still have to recompile everything. That's the "rickety cross-compilation toolchain" I mentioned earlier. Compiling for Android takes seconds. Compiling for iOS takes minutes.)
USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)