I don't know nor care much about whether or not going to support Avalon and XAML is a good idea if your goal is nuke Microsoft and Redmond.
However
My goal for Mono, being an active supporter and a small contributor, is not to try and kill Microsoft. My goal is not like most slashdot zealots to wipe and replace Microsoft. My goal is to provide Linux with a platform for developers that they can and will enjoy.
The point is not to compete with the Java world nor to compete with the Microsoft world. The point of Mono is to create both a self hosting platform and a platform that will be somehow compatible with Microsoft.
The point of Mono is not the be 100% compatible! It has never tried to be 100% compatible. The main point of Mono is to create a self hosting platform.
People often argue that it would be better to implement our own kickass framework. Well, Mono is just that. Agreed they are filling in the specifications which Microsoft made. But Mono is doing much more than that. And the specification is not that bad at all. Why throw a way a nice specification just because you hate the creator of it? That doesn't make any sense. And I don't hate Microsoft, nor do most Mono developers (oh by the way, Miguel is not the only developer).
Hating Microsoft is foolish and stupid. You don't have to love them (hell I don't) and you don't have to agree with their marketing point NOR technical point of view (mostly for the marketing part I for sure don't), but that doesn't mean that you also have to ignore them completely. I even dare to say that you are a fool and an idiot if you do so.
I would very much support introducing support for Avalon/XAML in Mono if Avalon/XAML is a nice technology. And yes, it looks nice to me. So if it's possible to implement that technology (using Mono or using whatever) then I think that we as an OpenSource community should do that. We should, indeed, (re)implement it, at some point in time.
Not because we can then compete with Microsoft, thats not the point, but because we want to provide developers (and in the end, users of our softwares) with the best technology, the best platform and most choices.
Our users will have the benefit of not having to get locked in that Microsoft monopoly because WE recreated a part of that Microsoft-world.
Lets not forget that we are doing this because of the love of the art of programming, not because we HATE Microsoft. Thats what those stupid newbie Linux usies think why we do it. We love the art of programming. We love to show our art and the best way to do this is by making it public. And we, OpenSource developers, think that the best way to make things public is by licensing it using for example GPL, MIT or whatever OpenSource license.
Just like a lot musicians release their compositions for free, so that students can learn using their materials. I often compare such (classical) music with software code. The author thinks that it's art, the listener mainly enjoys it. But for a lot people it's art, okay?
For software developers, our code is our art. Our users don't give a shit about that code. They want to use our code. We want to distribute our art and show our skills. THATS the main reason why OpenSource exists. NOT because we HATE Microsoft.
Regretfully most people think we are doing this because we hate Microsoft. We don't. (And I speak for a lot OpenSource developers, I am confident about that).
I don't fully understand why Linus may not call his kernel Linux but has to call it GNU/Linux. I do understand that RMS want's distrubutions to call the product GNU/Linux but why the kernel?
Asking Linus to call "Linux", "GNU/Linux" is like asking me to call every project that I am maintaining call Gnu/My projects name. For all my projects I used GNU software... but does that mean that I have to call these GNU-software?
I also don't understand why Linus is not free to use whatever software he needs for his job as kernel hacker. If he wants to use Bitkeeper and he has personal reasons for that.. then I don't think RMS should care about that decision. Maybe he should ask his programmers to create a better CVS and stop whining about it? But I am not asking RSM to do that. RMS, however, is forcing a person to "use" free software for a free project... thats wrong in my honest opinion.
I've been using my MacOS X for two days at work now, and I must say that I am totally in love with it. It allows me to be a Unix admin once I entered the shell. I can run a lot GNU/Unix/X applications on it (there are a lot ports). And it is a very "VERY" userfriendly system for non-computerexperts. I personally think Apple succeeded if they wanted to make a userfriendly Unix. I can only hope that MacOS X will be ported to Intel someday, I "WOULD" buy it for my homecomputers. Thats for sure.
And of course, the design of that new iMAC is.. well,.. whow:)
However, I agree that I have only seen OSX for two days so maybe I will change my mind about OSX. I am now going to checkout development on OSX..
In belgium we have a job-finding computer called the WIS-computers (Work Information System). As far as I know (and I life in Belgium) these systems work on Linux or at least a Unix. They have the typical "X" arrow of the X displaying system when they are "doing" something. It's a touchscreen of course, and the software is written in Gnome I think. But I am not sure if this is still the way it is.. I've found myself a job eh.
However, these system are ment for people who have no knowledge of computers "at all".
I know Linux, I know that they can make Linux 700*10! times harder to modify and crack then a Ms. Windows system. So if they are going to make a mass-computer for which they don't want to deliver support to much; and can update by broadcasting updates.. I'd go for a linux, thats for sure.
Kids should not start with languages like Visual Basic because then they will get a complete wrong idea of what programming is. If you are planning to learn a kid how to program I think the best language for him is pascal (use gpc or freepascal and rhide or mcedit). I personally learned programming with pascal, after that I started with visual basic, delphi, (linux), C , perl, php3, Java , etc. I was 14 years old when I started with pascal. However, in *nix I am sure you could teach him/them how to program using script languages. I don't think buying a book will help him/them a lot because books about programming are rather difficult to understand.
Slashdot Mirror
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIH_(computer_virus)
ps. It didn't destroy the US economy.
IMHO, we should indeed start such a project on, for example, sourceforge.
An opensource project that would show how easily writing worms and/or virusses can be done.
I don't know nor care much about whether or not going to support Avalon and XAML is a good idea if your goal is nuke Microsoft and Redmond.
However
My goal for Mono, being an active supporter and a small contributor, is not to try and kill Microsoft. My goal is not like most slashdot zealots to wipe and replace Microsoft. My goal is to provide Linux with a platform for developers that they can and will enjoy.
The point is not to compete with the Java world nor to compete with the Microsoft world. The point of Mono is to create both a self hosting platform and a platform that will be somehow compatible with Microsoft.
The point of Mono is not the be 100% compatible! It has never tried to be 100% compatible. The main point of Mono is to create a self hosting platform.
People often argue that it would be better to implement our own kickass framework. Well, Mono is just that. Agreed they are filling in the specifications which Microsoft made. But Mono is doing much more than that. And the specification is not that bad at all. Why throw a way a nice specification just because you hate the creator of it? That doesn't make any sense. And I don't hate Microsoft, nor do most Mono developers (oh by the way, Miguel is not the only developer).
Hating Microsoft is foolish and stupid. You don't have to love them (hell I don't) and you don't have to agree with their marketing point NOR technical point of view (mostly for the marketing part I for sure don't), but that doesn't mean that you also have to ignore them completely. I even dare to say that you are a fool and an idiot if you do so.
I would very much support introducing support for Avalon/XAML in Mono if Avalon/XAML is a nice technology. And yes, it looks nice to me. So if it's possible to implement that technology (using Mono or using whatever) then I think that we as an OpenSource community should do that. We should, indeed, (re)implement it, at some point in time.
Not because we can then compete with Microsoft, thats not the point, but because we want to provide developers (and in the end, users of our softwares) with the best technology, the best platform and most choices.
Our users will have the benefit of not having to get locked in that Microsoft monopoly because WE recreated a part of that Microsoft-world.
Lets not forget that we are doing this because of the love of the art of programming, not because we HATE Microsoft. Thats what those stupid newbie Linux usies think why we do it. We love the art of programming. We love to show our art and the best way to do this is by making it public. And we, OpenSource developers, think that the best way to make things public is by licensing it using for example GPL, MIT or whatever OpenSource license.
Just like a lot musicians release their compositions for free, so that students can learn using their materials. I often compare such (classical) music with software code. The author thinks that it's art, the listener mainly enjoys it. But for a lot people it's art, okay?
For software developers, our code is our art. Our users don't give a shit about that code. They want to use our code. We want to distribute our art and show our skills. THATS the main reason why OpenSource exists. NOT because we HATE Microsoft.
Regretfully most people think we are doing this because we hate Microsoft. We don't. (And I speak for a lot OpenSource developers, I am confident about that).
[freax@snuffel freax]$ ./wspace name.ws
Please enter your name: test
Hello test
[freax@snuffel freax]$
You are talking about Microsoft Visual Studio.NET.. this news is about nvidia...
http://www.freax.eu.org/img/linuxbox_tux_inside.pn g
I don't fully understand why Linus may not call his kernel Linux but has to call it GNU/Linux. I do understand that RMS want's distrubutions to call the product GNU/Linux but why the kernel?
.. then I don't think RMS should care about that decision. Maybe he should ask his programmers to create a better CVS and stop whining about it? But I am not asking RSM to do that. RMS, however, is forcing a person to "use" free software for a free project. .. thats wrong in my honest opinion.
Asking Linus to call "Linux", "GNU/Linux" is like asking me to call every project that I am maintaining call Gnu/My projects name. For all my projects I used GNU software... but does that mean that I have to call these GNU-software?
I also don't understand why Linus is not free to use whatever software he needs for his job as kernel hacker. If he wants to use Bitkeeper and he has personal reasons for that
I've been using my MacOS X for two days at work now, and I must say that I am totally in love with it. It allows me to be a Unix admin once I entered the shell. I can run a lot GNU/Unix/X applications on it (there are a lot ports). And it is a very "VERY" userfriendly system for non-computerexperts. I personally think Apple succeeded if they wanted to make a userfriendly Unix. I can only hope that MacOS X will be ported to Intel someday, I "WOULD" buy it for my homecomputers. Thats for sure.
And of course, the design of that new iMAC is
However, I agree that I have only seen OSX for two days so maybe I will change my mind about OSX. I am now going to checkout development on OSX
In belgium we have a job-finding computer called the WIS-computers (Work Information System). As far as I know (and I life in Belgium) these systems work on Linux or at least a Unix. They have the typical "X" arrow of the X displaying system when they are "doing" something. It's a touchscreen of course, and the software is written in Gnome I think. But I am not sure if this is still the way it is
However, these system are ment for people who have no knowledge of computers "at all".
I know Linux, I know that they can make Linux 700*10! times harder to modify and crack then a Ms. Windows system. So if they are going to make a mass-computer for which they don't want to deliver support to much; and can update by broadcasting updates.. I'd go for a linux, thats for sure.
yes
Thanks "a lot"
You are 100% right
Kids should not start with languages like Visual Basic because then they will get a complete wrong idea of what programming is. If you are planning to learn a kid how to program I think the best language for him is pascal (use gpc or freepascal and rhide or mcedit). I personally learned programming with pascal, after that I started with visual basic, delphi, (linux), C , perl, php3, Java , etc. I was 14 years old when I started with pascal. However, in *nix I am sure you could teach him/them how to program using script languages. I don't think buying a book will help him/them a lot because books about programming are rather difficult to understand.