What about the Linux communicty in general? We couldn't agree in a common component standard yet. Do you think we are able to port/develop a framework (yao) if we haven't got an unique standard as Windows COM/ADO/OLE, which are the basic infraestructure of.net together with their over hyped XML compliance.
Guys, go to the roots, get a common user interface first, or at least a common "desktop framework".
Otherwise we will go thorugh the path of implementing a port of:
Win32API->MFC->COM->MSVM->ATL->ADO->COM+->ADO+->VB Script and finally.NET.
If so, I would prefer to buy Windows2000 before installing a bad clone on top of Linux.
Yes, but it's the kernel hangs, it goes half of the speed next time and then it will die again due the the previous morphed bug.
Nevertheless, it's nice to see this comparisons, altough I can't believe a program runs twice faster next time. It supposed the cache it's activated and used from the first instruction of the program.
And the hyped "morphing" does not implies faster second rounds, caching parsed code does.
Slashdot Mirror
What about the Linux communicty in general? We couldn't agree in a common component standard yet. Do you think we are able to port/develop a framework (yao) if we haven't got an unique standard as Windows COM/ADO/OLE, which are the basic infraestructure of .net together with their over hyped XML compliance.
Guys, go to the roots, get a common user interface first, or at least a common "desktop framework".
Otherwise we will go thorugh the path of implementing a port of:B Script and finally .NET.
Win32API->MFC->COM->MSVM->ATL->ADO->COM+->ADO+->V
If so, I would prefer to buy Windows2000 before installing a bad clone on top of Linux.
--ricardo
Corba, XCOM, QT, GTK, KDE, TCL, perl, ODBC, PHP, etc. etc. Yet another one framework ?
Please, leave .NET out, don't port it, we don't need more bloated virtual machines.
Future requirements for Linux+Gnome+.NET+Mozilla XCOM: Pentium IV quad with 4 GB of RAM. Add a couple of GB for apache and mod_perl.
Yes, but it's the kernel hangs, it goes half of the speed next time and then it will die again due the the previous morphed bug. Nevertheless, it's nice to see this comparisons, altough I can't believe a program runs twice faster next time. It supposed the cache it's activated and used from the first instruction of the program. And the hyped "morphing" does not implies faster second rounds, caching parsed code does.