"Do you really think that.NET is such a dramatic improvement over Java/J2EE?"
It's a small, but considerable, improvement over Java/J2EE. It's really a difference of how they evolved. Java started out as a solution without a problem, and they tried to find a problem to fit with it, which resulted in the current kludge..Net evolved as a solution to a problem, so they were able to start from step 1 with a better design.
It's definately a major improvement of VB and DCOM.
"Don't be obtuse. "
Hmm, that sounds like an insult.
"Who said I was? Like the original poster, I think that.NET will win over many Windows developers. I haven't written any Windows software for a few years, but it is what I would use on that platform if I had to. What it won't do is cause people to flee Java and UNIX for some great Windows.NET holy land. This is simply the next generation Windows development environment - no more, no less. "
"If no one objects it or a similar bill will almost certainly pass."
If it does, or if there is a similar bill, then obviously the proponents have put forth better arguments than the opponents. But I don't think it will pass because of the attention it's drawn.
"Well good for you, but the point is that DRM will be mandated by law if Senator Hollings has his way. So you will buy it."
Again it won't matter to me because I won't buy the products if they won't work the way I expect them to. That's more money in my bank, and less in the product providers bank, which means I win.
"Yes, it is. But that's irrelevant. If we wait until it's here it will be too late."
So we should instead use poorly informed idle speculation to think about what it might mean?
"I don't think that they have.... So me a link where they deny this."
http://vitanuova.loyalty.org/2002-07-05.html
"Not a fantasy and very easily accomplished."
Actually no, that's not at all correct.
"Linux won't be able to remain free if it incorporates expensive technologies."
Ohwell. That just means it won't have the same functionality.
"Microsoft's OS will be the only OS that will be able to view streamed music and video. Great selling point."
No, it will be the only OS that will be able to view streamed music and video from content providers who demand DRM. But that's a decision on your part, if you want to view these companies content, then you play by their rules. If you don't want to play by their rules then you create your own content and stream it however you want.
It seems to me like you need to stop whining and start doing.
To defeat Microsoft, dominance of non-M$ technologies in the enterprise area is key.
This is true.
Conversely, if Linux/Unix/Java win the enterprise space, Microsoft will have no new source of revenue
This is true as well.
It's important to ensure that the.NET CLR is either a non-starter (as it's been thus far),
This is bizarre. It's not true, and it's too late..NET CLR is off to an incredibly good start.
Whatever they say, Microsoft wants to control the uptake of.NET in such a way that business software will really only run on their platforms. [...]There's no incentive to have real competition in server platforms for.NET applications. The point of.NET is to sell more copies of windows, SQLServer, and Visual Studio.
Well duh! That's also your goal as you stated in your first several paragraphs.
Come on, at least learn to be honest with yourself. Then maybe others will trust you.
That's interesting, I know people who work in the White House Office of Cybersecurity, and they tell me just the opposite of what you just said.
Now, of course it's possible I don't really know anybody who works there. Then again, it's even more possible that neither do you. That's the wonderful side-effect of Whitewater, it proved that hearsay evidence is incredibly powerful, even if it isn't true.
I think I'm seeing a pattern here. Any opinion(or fact even) which you disagree with you label as FUD.
That's not the definition of FUD.
I know plenty of people in the industry who are "consumers of computer software and services" who don't trust Microsoft.
Disproof by counter example isn't going to work here. That there are exceptions to a general trend doesn't mean the trend isn't still there.
That sounds like more BS to me.
As I said in my first point.
Toolset improvements might reduce the time to develop features for the individual developers somewhat, but that is hardly something I would take to my CEO.
Explain to me why you are using Java and not Assembler?
I consider these technologies evolutionary rather than revolutionary.
That's pretty much what they are. Just like Java, C++ and other languages before them.
Any developer worth their salt who understands Java (J2EE), C++ and web services could be productive in the.NET environment very quickly.
Then you really have nothing to fear. So why are you attacking it?
As far as my opinion being FUD, I think not. It is by far more based on fact then fear, uncertainty and doubt.
Well it's certainly not based on any facts, more like poorly informed idle speculation, which is why I label it FUD.
There are certain concerns with Holling's bill, and I don't think it will pass.
But as far as the DRM stuff, that's a non-issue. If the entertainment people think they can sell their product that way, I say let them. I don't care because I won't buy something I don't want. (Yeah, I know, silly me... I should instead pretend to be all outraged like yourself, when really I'm just concerned I won't be able to pirate music and movies.)
As far as Palladium... we don't know what that is because it's years out yet. But your claims have already been denied by Microsoft and quite frankly I can't think of any logistical way in which they could accomplish your fantasy.
Apple announcements only enthrall Apple loyalists.
You're not going to see iMac in use in most business or homes.
It is amazing the amount of free publicity Apple get's though, and it should be disappointing to their shareholders how little of it materializes as revenue.
This is interesting. Most people confuse.NET Servers and.NET Services with the.NET framework. You've apparently taken a reverse course and choose to attack the Framework when Gates was talking about the servers and services side.
I won't address issues involving getting companies to deploy the.NET environment to their PCs... Microsoft is most likely going to have to force people-- which may not be popular.
It's being deployed in August here... No force involved. We also have a JVM installed? Is that bad? Are we confusing your first point?
a1. If you already have a substantial investment in software written in anything but a.NET language, chances are you aren't very motivated to switch paradigms.
We have software written in C++, C, Java, VB, Delphi, Uniface, COBOL, a few others I can't think of and now.NET. That's pretty standard in any large company, unfortunately. So this point of yours is really pretty invalid.
a1. Regardless of how you view.NET the fact is java has been here for quite a while and has a good following. I have yet to meet a serious java developer who has any interest in.NET
Now you've made this a religious argument. I've yet to meet a serious java developer who is not interested in.NET.
But the same could be said for the multitudes of Visual BASIC developers out there. Should they switch? What they have works fine. Oh, wait....NET works better. Hmm, might want to think about it then.
a1. Regardless of all the claims Microsoft makes about C#/.NET maturity, nobody in their right mind is going to bet the company on a new MS platform just because the pay-for-plundits say it's sexy..NET has to earn the industry's trust-- not an easy hill to climb these days.
Ok, so now you're using FUD.
That depends on how you define the word industry. If your industry is Silicon Valley dot-bombs, then yes, Microsoft isn't trusted. If your industry is consumers of computer software and services, then Microsoft is more trusted than either Sun or Oracle.
a2. There is little imperative to adopt something for which there are no major none-Microsoft commercial offerings.
Windows, Office, Visual BASIC... I could go on and on with the variety of industry defacto standards sold by Microsoft.
a2. Either way, I suspect difficult part of the sell for.NET is in convincing CEOs that they aren't further limiting their licensing choices and options in order to adopt something they just don't need-- at least not yet.
It's easier to sell it if you simply point out their software development will be cheaper because of the increased productivity provided by the new toolsets. CEOs like cutting costs.
Personally, I find it hard to get excited about something from a company whose major call to fame these days is the latest way it is reaming its customers.
Yet you are excited about Java. That's curious because Sun has always been a follower rather than a leader on pricing and adding value to customers, whereas Microsoft is the leader in the industry in that regard.
From reading your post and the combination of religious dogma, FUD and flat out lies, it sounds to me like you are terrified your employment skills may become outdated.
It seems clear enough to me. Microsoft and the entertainment industry are in bed together. Both have something to gain from DRM.
Microsoft's position on this is quite understandable. They aren't in bed together, but Microsoft feels that if they do not incorporate DRM into their applications and utilities someone else will and that application will become supplant Windows as a desired choice.
It's called hedging your bets.
FUD. Yep, good ol' fear, uncertainty and doubt has always helped Microsoft in the past.
I hope you do realize that your entire post was nothing but FUD. If not, then you obviously do not know what the term means.
Someone recently accused me of looking for the trolls on/. and responding to them.
Guilty as charged!
BTW, people: RAID does NOT improve performance. It hurts it. Read some benchmarks if you don't believe.
RAID is faster on reads than writes. It depends on your application, but most servers tend to do more reads than writes anyway. But the prime motivating factor usually is improving reliability of the server as a whole.
I wouldn't recommend any RAID system which didn't have a hot-spare and the drives weren't hot swappable. Might as well keep your server up and running when you have a drive fail, right?
I've got 4 servers that were the top of the line, most reliable hardware that are 5 years old.
I've got a server like that under my desk. It's an older production system that they were throwing out because it was no longer under a maintenance agreement from Compaq. I now use it for testing different software configurations.
They cost $8k each back then.
Oh, I'm afraid my Proliant 5000 with quad PPro-200, 1 Gig of RAM and five 9.1 Gig 10k drives with a Smart array controller cost quite a bit more than $8k in it's day. My guess is more like $40k. It's worth maybe $1000 today, how's that for depreciation!:) I guess I'm questioning your concept of "top of the line".
Companies and people tend to be cheap when they start out, but as you grow, at some point you need to mature and get past that tendency. I used to have the same attitude as you, but numerous failures have taught me a lesson.
I'm trying to figure out if this is the same John Ellis, cousin of George W. Bush, who misreported election 2000 for FoxNews?
I can't find any confirmation as he appears to be trying to hide his history, but the tone of the article, and the subjects of his other comments seems to point to that conclusion.
Reading the column it seems to be a case of someone trying to manipulate people by playing off their hot buttons. It's pretty standard political boilerplate opinion column. Reading through his blog I see a variety of the same.
Anyway, I guess the point is, it's good to know whose opinion it is you are reading. This certainly appears to be the same John Ellis, and I personally would not trust him to have my interests in mind.
Or they were like me and had removed the.ida ISAPI filter from their web server config, as identified in Microsoft's IIS checklist which had come out nearly a year previous.
Didn't apply the patch when it came out, and still didn't have any issues when CodeRed hit.
For all Linux's technical superiority to Windows, we as a community must not be seen as childishly attacking Microsoft.
Maybe you could provide some more detail to this technical superiority claim?
Instead most advocacy seems to center around completely emotional reasons, thus the use of the $ sign as some sort of "Fight the man!" argument. When people don't have good sound logical arguments to support their claims, they typically resort to such childishness.
Buy a new machine. One that handles VS.NET well will set you back about $500.
Give me a good text editor and command line tools any day.
They are there, in all their glory. If you want to do everything by hand you can. Save yourself some money and just download the.Net SDK.
Microsoft is going to integrate and complicate.NET with Windows to the point that Mono will never work.
The point of Mono is not to be 100% cross-platform compatible. The purpose is to provide a similar development environment for Linux/Gnome. If you read Miguel's commentary what impresses him most about.Net is the problems they solved for developers.
Now at a very base level, there is some compatibility. You have the same language syntax with C#, and it sounds like they are using the same IL assembly calls. But you are going to be missing many of the custom Windows libraries. But is that important? Wouldn't you expect custom libraries evolve for Linux specific features?
MS will release new.NET crap every year and Mono will play catch up for a year so it finally works again just as MS is releasing a new incompatible version.
Why is this important to you?
In the past, Microsoft has either presented an "open" standard, or pushed someone else's open standard, only to hijack it in the end, to the detriment of non-Windows users and developers.
But then so have non-Windows developers. Netscape, Sun, there are many examples. Even GNU is guilty of this, as I can no longer compile many open source programs with the tools that come with commercial unix because of extensions added to GNU make and GNU cc.
I think the Open Source community would be better off backing a web technology like J2EE and not.NET.
Why? J2EE is technically inferior to.NET, and Sun has certainly been less supportive to developers with their Java than Microsoft is being with.NET.
I think Java has a good record for working everywhere consistantly.
One of our foreign development shops just looked into running their web app they wrote with BEA's Weblogic on a different J2EE implementation. They can't do it without extensive recoding because each Java implementation contains custom stuff to differentiate themselves. In this case it had something to do with database connection caching, or something, which wasn't added by Sun in the J2EE specs but offers signifigant performance gains.
I'm often amazed at the lack of maturity demonstrated by people who make this claim.
Be never had a viable product offering, their initial business plan tied their wagon to Apple's star and when they were cut loose they floundered.
Not surprising, I guess, but Microsoft had nothing to do with the failure.
It's the latter that the Apple commercial is doing.
They're trying to imply that the current version of Windows XP is just as bad as the prior version of Windows 95.
FUD comes into play on that word... imply. FUD has nothing to do with lies, it could be the truth, but the purpose is to make the problem seem much larger than it really is.
Still my favorite was the Switch parody commercial that was running around before Apple's lawyers had it pulled. lickmesweaty.com/truth I think it was at.
I find it curious that MS is taking the effort to spread some FUD on the eve of Apple's Macworld announcements.
FUD? Is that anything like the Apple switch commercials?
In years past, they wouldn't have even bothered to do so, because they essentially wrote off Apple as a competitor.
In years past Apple wasn't running commercials targetting Microsoft.
Could this be a sign that MS is getting a bit nervous about OS X and its potential to infiltrate their corporate and home markets?
If you want to think so... But the infiltration rate of OSX to dedicated Mac users hasn't been all that good according to Apple. They're saying they have only 1 million people using it.
Do you seriously thing that an automaker would advertise their engine as having only 140 hp if with a small software change they could get 160 hp? I mean come on.
No, they spec the engines out based on a number of factors relating to emissions, fuel economy and reliability. So by tweaking you adjust the compromise. Automakers do refine engines over time to gain more power, but they try do so in ways that don't effect it negatively. By that I mean, decreasing reliability or not allowing the car to meet US regulations regarding emissions and fuel economy.
Slashdot Mirror
"Do you really think that .NET is such a dramatic improvement over Java/J2EE?"
.Net evolved as a solution to a problem, so they were able to start from step 1 with a better design.
.NET will win over many Windows developers. I haven't written any Windows software for a few years, but it is what I would use on that platform if I had to. What it won't do is cause people to flee Java and UNIX for some great Windows.NET holy land. This is simply the next generation Windows development environment - no more, no less. "
It's a small, but considerable, improvement over Java/J2EE. It's really a difference of how they evolved. Java started out as a solution without a problem, and they tried to find a problem to fit with it, which resulted in the current kludge.
It's definately a major improvement of VB and DCOM.
"Don't be obtuse. "
Hmm, that sounds like an insult.
"Who said I was? Like the original poster, I think that
Seems to me like you are being obtuse.
"Insult not worth a serious response."
In other words it was an accurate statement.
"If no one objects it or a similar bill will almost certainly pass."
If it does, or if there is a similar bill, then obviously the proponents have put forth better arguments than the opponents. But I don't think it will pass because of the attention it's drawn.
"Well good for you, but the point is that DRM will be mandated by law if Senator Hollings has his way. So you will buy it."
Again it won't matter to me because I won't buy the products if they won't work the way I expect them to. That's more money in my bank, and less in the product providers bank, which means I win.
"Yes, it is. But that's irrelevant. If we wait until it's here it will be too late."
So we should instead use poorly informed idle speculation to think about what it might mean?
"I don't think that they have.... So me a link where they deny this."
http://vitanuova.loyalty.org/2002-07-05.html
"Not a fantasy and very easily accomplished."
Actually no, that's not at all correct.
"Linux won't be able to remain free if it incorporates expensive technologies."
Ohwell. That just means it won't have the same functionality.
"Microsoft's OS will be the only OS that will be able to view streamed music and video. Great selling point."
No, it will be the only OS that will be able to view streamed music and video from content providers who demand DRM. But that's a decision on your part, if you want to view these companies content, then you play by their rules. If you don't want to play by their rules then you create your own content and stream it however you want.
It seems to me like you need to stop whining and start doing.
The Gartner report was somewhat irresponsible, it basically recommended "Security through obscurity".
If you haven't implemented the real solution to your problem by implementing a security policy across the board, you really haven't changed anything.
To defeat Microsoft, dominance of non-M$ technologies in the enterprise area is key.
.NET CLR is either a non-starter (as it's been thus far),
.NET CLR is off to an incredibly good start.
.NET in such a way that business software will really only run on their platforms. [...]There's no incentive to have .NET applications. The point of .NET is to sell more
This is true.
Conversely, if Linux/Unix/Java win the enterprise space, Microsoft will have no new source of revenue
This is true as well.
It's important to ensure that the
This is bizarre. It's not true, and it's too late.
Whatever they say, Microsoft wants to control the uptake of
real competition in server platforms for
copies of windows, SQLServer, and Visual Studio.
Well duh! That's also your goal as you stated in your first several paragraphs.
Come on, at least learn to be honest with yourself. Then maybe others will trust you.
But then I guess it's human nature to throw insults when one lacks facts.
Yes, it seems you've definately proven that.
I find it curious that you refuse to respond to any of the points I raise.
That's interesting, I know people who work in the White House Office of Cybersecurity, and they tell me just the opposite of what you just said.
Now, of course it's possible I don't really know anybody who works there. Then again, it's even more possible that neither do you. That's the wonderful side-effect of Whitewater, it proved that hearsay evidence is incredibly powerful, even if it isn't true.
Says you - that is just more FUD.
.NET environment very quickly.
I think I'm seeing a pattern here. Any opinion(or fact even) which you disagree with you label as FUD.
That's not the definition of FUD.
I know plenty of people in the industry who are "consumers of computer software and services" who don't trust Microsoft.
Disproof by counter example isn't going to work here. That there are exceptions to a general trend doesn't mean the trend isn't still there.
That sounds like more BS to me.
As I said in my first point.
Toolset improvements might reduce the time to develop features for the individual developers somewhat, but that is hardly something I would take to my CEO.
Explain to me why you are using Java and not Assembler?
I consider these technologies evolutionary rather than revolutionary.
That's pretty much what they are. Just like Java, C++ and other languages before them.
Any developer worth their salt who understands Java (J2EE), C++ and web services could be productive in the
Then you really have nothing to fear. So why are you attacking it?
As far as my opinion being FUD, I think not. It is by far more based on fact then fear, uncertainty and doubt.
Well it's certainly not based on any facts, more like poorly informed idle speculation, which is why I label it FUD.
There are certain concerns with Holling's bill, and I don't think it will pass.
But as far as the DRM stuff, that's a non-issue. If the entertainment people think they can sell their product that way, I say let them. I don't care because I won't buy something I don't want. (Yeah, I know, silly me... I should instead pretend to be all outraged like yourself, when really I'm just concerned I won't be able to pirate music and movies.)
As far as Palladium... we don't know what that is because it's years out yet. But your claims have already been denied by Microsoft and quite frankly I can't think of any logistical way in which they could accomplish your fantasy.
Apple announcements only enthrall Apple loyalists.
You're not going to see iMac in use in most business or homes.
It is amazing the amount of free publicity Apple get's though, and it should be disappointing to their shareholders how little of it materializes as revenue.
There are two main potential .NET targets:
.NET Servers and .NET Services with the .NET framework. You've apparently taken a reverse course and choose to attack the Framework when Gates was talking about the servers and services side.
.NET environment to their PCs... Microsoft is most likely going to have to force people-- which may not be popular.
.NET language, chances are you aren't very motivated to switch paradigms.
.NET. That's pretty standard in any large company, unfortunately. So this point of yours is really pretty invalid.
.NET the fact is java has been here for quite a while and has a good following. I have yet to meet a serious java developer who has any interest in .NET
.NET.
.NET works better. Hmm, might want to think about it then.
.NET has to earn the industry's trust-- not an easy hill to climb these days.
.NET is in convincing CEOs that they aren't further limiting their licensing choices and options in order to adopt something they just don't need-- at least not yet.
This is interesting. Most people confuse
I won't address issues involving getting companies to deploy the
It's being deployed in August here... No force involved. We also have a JVM installed? Is that bad? Are we confusing your first point?
a1. If you already have a substantial investment in software written in anything but a
We have software written in C++, C, Java, VB, Delphi, Uniface, COBOL, a few others I can't think of and now
a1. Regardless of how you view
Now you've made this a religious argument. I've yet to meet a serious java developer who is not interested in
But the same could be said for the multitudes of Visual BASIC developers out there. Should they switch? What they have works fine. Oh, wait...
a1. Regardless of all the claims Microsoft makes about C#/.NET maturity, nobody in their right mind is going to bet the company on a new MS platform just because the pay-for-plundits say it's sexy.
Ok, so now you're using FUD.
That depends on how you define the word industry. If your industry is Silicon Valley dot-bombs, then yes, Microsoft isn't trusted. If your industry is consumers of computer software and services, then Microsoft is more trusted than either Sun or Oracle.
a2. There is little imperative to adopt something for which there are no major none-Microsoft commercial offerings.
Windows, Office, Visual BASIC... I could go on and on with the variety of industry defacto standards sold by Microsoft.
a2. Either way, I suspect difficult part of the sell for
It's easier to sell it if you simply point out their software development will be cheaper because of the increased productivity provided by the new toolsets. CEOs like cutting costs.
Personally, I find it hard to get excited about something from a company whose major call to fame these days is the latest way it is reaming its customers.
Yet you are excited about Java. That's curious because Sun has always been a follower rather than a leader on pricing and adding value to customers, whereas Microsoft is the leader in the industry in that regard.
From reading your post and the combination of religious dogma, FUD and flat out lies, it sounds to me like you are terrified your employment skills may become outdated.
It seems clear enough to me. Microsoft and the entertainment industry are in bed together. Both have something to gain from DRM.
Microsoft's position on this is quite understandable. They aren't in bed together, but Microsoft feels that if they do not incorporate DRM into their applications and utilities someone else will and that application will become supplant Windows as a desired choice.
It's called hedging your bets.
FUD. Yep, good ol' fear, uncertainty and doubt has always helped Microsoft in the past.
I hope you do realize that your entire post was nothing but FUD. If not, then you obviously do not know what the term means.
Someone recently accused me of looking for the trolls on /. and responding to them.
:) I guess I'm questioning your concept of "top of the line".
Guilty as charged!
BTW, people: RAID does NOT improve performance. It hurts it. Read some benchmarks if you don't believe.
RAID is faster on reads than writes. It depends on your application, but most servers tend to do more reads than writes anyway. But the prime motivating factor usually is improving reliability of the server as a whole.
I wouldn't recommend any RAID system which didn't have a hot-spare and the drives weren't hot swappable. Might as well keep your server up and running when you have a drive fail, right?
I've got 4 servers that were the top of the line, most reliable hardware that are 5 years old.
I've got a server like that under my desk. It's an older production system that they were throwing out because it was no longer under a maintenance agreement from Compaq. I now use it for testing different software configurations.
They cost $8k each back then.
Oh, I'm afraid my Proliant 5000 with quad PPro-200, 1 Gig of RAM and five 9.1 Gig 10k drives with a Smart array controller cost quite a bit more than $8k in it's day. My guess is more like $40k. It's worth maybe $1000 today, how's that for depreciation!
Companies and people tend to be cheap when they start out, but as you grow, at some point you need to mature and get past that tendency. I used to have the same attitude as you, but numerous failures have taught me a lesson.
I'm trying to figure out if this is the same John Ellis, cousin of George W. Bush, who misreported election 2000 for FoxNews?
I can't find any confirmation as he appears to be trying to hide his history, but the tone of the article, and the subjects of his other comments seems to point to that conclusion.
Reading the column it seems to be a case of someone trying to manipulate people by playing off their hot buttons. It's pretty standard political boilerplate opinion column. Reading through his blog I see a variety of the same.
Anyway, I guess the point is, it's good to know whose opinion it is you are reading. This certainly appears to be the same John Ellis, and I personally would not trust him to have my interests in mind.
That's bullshit and you know it.
Odd how that statement applies more to your post than the parents.
Or they were like me and had removed the .ida ISAPI filter from their web server config, as identified in Microsoft's IIS checklist which had come out nearly a year previous.
Didn't apply the patch when it came out, and still didn't have any issues when CodeRed hit.
Maybe they should try these new fangled rechargeable Lithium-Ion things instead of Everready AA's.
For all Linux's technical superiority to Windows, we as a community must not be seen as childishly attacking Microsoft.
Maybe you could provide some more detail to this technical superiority claim?
Instead most advocacy seems to center around completely emotional reasons, thus the use of the $ sign as some sort of "Fight the man!" argument. When people don't have good sound logical arguments to support their claims, they typically resort to such childishness.
What does .NET offer, really? "Portable" code and remote apps? Java has offered portable code for about 7 years now, and remote apps predate Unix.
.NET is about so much as increasing developer productivity.
Well actually so did Microsoft BASIC back 20 years ago.
I've still got my Creative Computing Games books if you want to type in the code.
Being "Portable" isn't what
Actually as far as like ASP.NET is concerned, I would use PHP as a more comparable example than Java.
All MS has done since they started developing NT is chase *nix.
And all Unix has done is chase the Mainframe. What is the Web anyone but 3270 terminals with color pictures?
The problem for *nix is that the general public isn't aware of that fact.
No, the public just doesn't care. That's the part that really bothers you.
VS.NET is slower than frozen mud
.Net SDK.
.NET with Windows to the point that Mono will never work.
.Net is the problems they solved for developers.
.NET crap every year and Mono will play catch up for a year so it finally works again just as MS is releasing a new incompatible version.
.NET.
.NET, and Sun has certainly been less supportive to developers with their Java than Microsoft is being with .NET.
Buy a new machine. One that handles VS.NET well will set you back about $500.
Give me a good text editor and command line tools any day.
They are there, in all their glory. If you want to do everything by hand you can. Save yourself some money and just download the
Microsoft is going to integrate and complicate
The point of Mono is not to be 100% cross-platform compatible. The purpose is to provide a similar development environment for Linux/Gnome. If you read Miguel's commentary what impresses him most about
Now at a very base level, there is some compatibility. You have the same language syntax with C#, and it sounds like they are using the same IL assembly calls. But you are going to be missing many of the custom Windows libraries. But is that important? Wouldn't you expect custom libraries evolve for Linux specific features?
MS will release new
Why is this important to you?
In the past, Microsoft has either presented an "open" standard, or pushed someone else's open standard, only to hijack it in the end, to the detriment of non-Windows users and developers.
But then so have non-Windows developers. Netscape, Sun, there are many examples. Even GNU is guilty of this, as I can no longer compile many open source programs with the tools that come with commercial unix because of extensions added to GNU make and GNU cc.
I think the Open Source community would be better off backing a web technology like J2EE and not
Why? J2EE is technically inferior to
I think Java has a good record for working everywhere consistantly.
One of our foreign development shops just looked into running their web app they wrote with BEA's Weblogic on a different J2EE implementation. They can't do it without extensive recoding because each Java implementation contains custom stuff to differentiate themselves. In this case it had something to do with database connection caching, or something, which wasn't added by Sun in the J2EE specs but offers signifigant performance gains.
It appears that the reason you didn't choose .NET was based entirely on emotional, rather than technical reasons.
Is this normally how you make decisions?
I'm often amazed at the lack of maturity demonstrated by people who make this claim.
Be never had a viable product offering, their initial business plan tied their wagon to Apple's star and when they were cut loose they floundered.
Not surprising, I guess, but Microsoft had nothing to do with the failure.
It's the latter that the Apple commercial is doing.
They're trying to imply that the current version of Windows XP is just as bad as the prior version of Windows 95.
FUD comes into play on that word... imply. FUD has nothing to do with lies, it could be the truth, but the purpose is to make the problem seem much larger than it really is.
Oh, that is good!
Still my favorite was the Switch parody commercial that was running around before Apple's lawyers had it pulled. lickmesweaty.com/truth I think it was at.
I find it curious that MS is taking the effort to spread some FUD on the eve of Apple's Macworld announcements.
FUD? Is that anything like the Apple switch commercials?
In years past, they wouldn't have even bothered to do so, because they essentially wrote off Apple as a competitor.
In years past Apple wasn't running commercials targetting Microsoft.
Could this be a sign that MS is getting a bit nervous about OS X and its potential to infiltrate their corporate and home markets?
If you want to think so... But the infiltration rate of OSX to dedicated Mac users hasn't been all that good according to Apple. They're saying they have only 1 million people using it.
Do you seriously thing that an automaker would advertise their engine as having only 140 hp if with a small software change they could get 160 hp? I mean come on.
No, they spec the engines out based on a number of factors relating to emissions, fuel economy and reliability. So by tweaking you adjust the compromise. Automakers do refine engines over time to gain more power, but they try do so in ways that don't effect it negatively. By that I mean, decreasing reliability or not allowing the car to meet US regulations regarding emissions and fuel economy.