.NET platform independant?
-
Hi - a quick question. In one of my books it mentions that .NET programms can run on multiple platforms. Is this just referring to different versions of windows, or is it possible to run apps written for example in c# on linux/Mac OS/Unix etc. If it is possible - roughly how is it done and is anything required on the target OS if it is not windows to allow it to use the application. Cheers Peter
-
Hi - a quick question. In one of my books it mentions that .NET programms can run on multiple platforms. Is this just referring to different versions of windows, or is it possible to run apps written for example in c# on linux/Mac OS/Unix etc. If it is possible - roughly how is it done and is anything required on the target OS if it is not windows to allow it to use the application. Cheers Peter
Since Microsoft built the .NET Framework based on detailed specifications, and then published those specifications and the documentation for the .Net Framework Class Libraries, it allows other people to produce code on other platforms that re-produces the same behavior... therefore, if you take C# code and re-compile it on another platform with C# compiler written for that platform, it should work. Check out the Mono project, http://www.go-mono.com/[^]. What a piece of work is man, how noble in reason, how infinite in faculties, in form and moving how express and admirable . . . and yet to me, what is this quintessence of dust? -- Hamlet, Act II, Scene ii.
-
Since Microsoft built the .NET Framework based on detailed specifications, and then published those specifications and the documentation for the .Net Framework Class Libraries, it allows other people to produce code on other platforms that re-produces the same behavior... therefore, if you take C# code and re-compile it on another platform with C# compiler written for that platform, it should work. Check out the Mono project, http://www.go-mono.com/[^]. What a piece of work is man, how noble in reason, how infinite in faculties, in form and moving how express and admirable . . . and yet to me, what is this quintessence of dust? -- Hamlet, Act II, Scene ii.
Technically, you shouldn't have to recompile it. Michael Flanakin Web Log
-
Technically, you shouldn't have to recompile it. Michael Flanakin Web Log
Didn't know that. On the other hand, perhaps I should doubt the observation of anyone in the Air Force...? (* former Army guy *) What a piece of work is man, how noble in reason, how infinite in faculties, in form and moving how express and admirable . . . and yet to me, what is this quintessence of dust? -- Hamlet, Act II, Scene ii.
-
Didn't know that. On the other hand, perhaps I should doubt the observation of anyone in the Air Force...? (* former Army guy *) What a piece of work is man, how noble in reason, how infinite in faculties, in form and moving how express and admirable . . . and yet to me, what is this quintessence of dust? -- Hamlet, Act II, Scene ii.
It's ok, I work with a former Army guy, and I have to explain stuff to him all the time... "No, that lace goes over the other one." :) j/k As far as I know, the only thing you truly have to worry about is moving between versions, or using any part of the library that may not be supported on a specific OS's version of the .NET Framework. I don't have any examples, but I believe there are a few things Win98 and WinNT4 can't do. When you're looking at the classes within the MSDN library, scroll to the bottom of the screen and the platform requirements are listed. Just use this as a guide and you should be set. Michael Flanakin Web Log
-
It's ok, I work with a former Army guy, and I have to explain stuff to him all the time... "No, that lace goes over the other one." :) j/k As far as I know, the only thing you truly have to worry about is moving between versions, or using any part of the library that may not be supported on a specific OS's version of the .NET Framework. I don't have any examples, but I believe there are a few things Win98 and WinNT4 can't do. When you're looking at the classes within the MSDN library, scroll to the bottom of the screen and the platform requirements are listed. Just use this as a guide and you should be set. Michael Flanakin Web Log
Flanakin wrote: It's ok, I work with a former Army guy, and I have to explain stuff to him all the time... "No, that lace goes over the other one." -- that's probably why we stopped issuing lace-up boots in the late 80's and started issuing speed-lacers; you only have to lace them once... of course, I heard the Army got that idea from the Air Force... :-D OK, i kinda already knew that about NT/98 -- but running Mono on Linux? What a piece of work is man, how noble in reason, how infinite in faculties, in form and moving how express and admirable . . . and yet to me, what is this quintessence of dust? -- Hamlet, Act II, Scene ii.
-
Flanakin wrote: It's ok, I work with a former Army guy, and I have to explain stuff to him all the time... "No, that lace goes over the other one." -- that's probably why we stopped issuing lace-up boots in the late 80's and started issuing speed-lacers; you only have to lace them once... of course, I heard the Army got that idea from the Air Force... :-D OK, i kinda already knew that about NT/98 -- but running Mono on Linux? What a piece of work is man, how noble in reason, how infinite in faculties, in form and moving how express and admirable . . . and yet to me, what is this quintessence of dust? -- Hamlet, Act II, Scene ii.
Well, in theory, as long as Mono has everything implemented, it should work. But, these are also the same concepts that are used in the Java world, and you've probably seen how successful they've been. In my opinion, unless Microsoft gets involved in the cross-platform .NET initiative, it won't completely succeed. I'm sure it will exist and successful systems will be developed. But, nobody knows .NET like Microsoft. And, Microsoft will continue to knock out updates, making it hard to keep up - especially if they feel threatened by Mono or other projects. And, you can't escape the fact that most people who use Linux are doing so for the sole purpose of not using Microsoft technologies. Not all, mind you, but I would feel comfortable in saying "most." ...Of course, they'll never admit it and I'll probably get a bunch of static for saying this; but, we all know it's true. Michael Flanakin Web Log
-
Well, in theory, as long as Mono has everything implemented, it should work. But, these are also the same concepts that are used in the Java world, and you've probably seen how successful they've been. In my opinion, unless Microsoft gets involved in the cross-platform .NET initiative, it won't completely succeed. I'm sure it will exist and successful systems will be developed. But, nobody knows .NET like Microsoft. And, Microsoft will continue to knock out updates, making it hard to keep up - especially if they feel threatened by Mono or other projects. And, you can't escape the fact that most people who use Linux are doing so for the sole purpose of not using Microsoft technologies. Not all, mind you, but I would feel comfortable in saying "most." ...Of course, they'll never admit it and I'll probably get a bunch of static for saying this; but, we all know it's true. Michael Flanakin Web Log
Flanakin wrote: I'll probably get a bunch of static for saying this Not on this site you won't... most of the folks here seem to be pretty MS-oriented. ;) What a piece of work is man, how noble in reason, how infinite in faculties, in form and moving how express and admirable . . . and yet to me, what is this quintessence of dust? -- Hamlet, Act II, Scene ii.