Will Mono Become the Preferred Platform for Linux Development?
-
As much as I love .NET:
- Will it kill Perl? No.
- Will it kill PHP? No (Oh, how I wish I'm wrong).
- Will it kill Python? No.
- Will it kill C++? No.
- Will it kill C? No.
- Will it kill Ruby? No. BTW, why one code in Ruby?
- Will it kill Java? No, but Java will bleed a lot. :cool:
Perl combines all the worst aspects of C and Lisp: a billion different sublanguages in one monolithic executable. It combines the power of C with the readability of PostScript. -- Jamie Zawinski
-
Let's hope not. The article is misleading too. They make it sound like this is a rogue outfit that dares to convert MS technollogy to Linux, and further implies that the work is being done without MS's blessing, but anyone that was around when Mono was puked out of Redmond knows damn well that's not the case. MS was looking for someone to do this for Linux (and indeed, they are partially funded by MS) to further their domination of the market by defining their own proprietary standards so they can charge license fees for it's use later on down the road (go head and laugh, but MS is NOT in this to be charitable, and they're CERTAINLY not in it for the benefit of the end user). I don't mind that MS charges for their software, or that it's closed source (indeed, open source as a business model is about as brainless as it gets), but being forced to use proprietary "standards" based on one company's all-to-narrow view of the world just pisses me off. ------- sig starts "...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001 "You won't like me when I'm angry..." - Dr. Bruce Banner Please review the Legal Disclaimer in my bio. ------- sig ends
Hi John. I see your point of view. Honestly, though, for the time I've invested working with .NET (time well spent too) I'm happy at the possibility of leveraging those skills more in the Linux world.
-
Let's hope not. The article is misleading too. They make it sound like this is a rogue outfit that dares to convert MS technollogy to Linux, and further implies that the work is being done without MS's blessing, but anyone that was around when Mono was puked out of Redmond knows damn well that's not the case. MS was looking for someone to do this for Linux (and indeed, they are partially funded by MS) to further their domination of the market by defining their own proprietary standards so they can charge license fees for it's use later on down the road (go head and laugh, but MS is NOT in this to be charitable, and they're CERTAINLY not in it for the benefit of the end user). I don't mind that MS charges for their software, or that it's closed source (indeed, open source as a business model is about as brainless as it gets), but being forced to use proprietary "standards" based on one company's all-to-narrow view of the world just pisses me off. ------- sig starts "...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001 "You won't like me when I'm angry..." - Dr. Bruce Banner Please review the Legal Disclaimer in my bio. ------- sig ends
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote: (go head and laugh, but MS is NOT in this to be charitable, and they're CERTAINLY not in it for the benefit of the end user). MS owns a ton of patents on software-related stuff (OpenGL patents come to mind). When was the last time they enforced one? (I'm not being sarcastic - I can't remember an instance of them enforcing a software patent). They seem to be like IBM - gobbling up patents to make sure they don't get sued for breaching them. That being said, they cannot patent the CLR or C#. Not at all, ever. The APIs that haven't been submitted could be kept as proprietary, much like what Sun has done with much of the Java Framework APIs. But there was a part in the article that very clearly stated that there were MS-specific APIs and NON MS-specific APIs implemented by the Mono runtime. Even if MS applied the smackdown, the non-MS APIs couldn't be touched, nor could the implementation of the CLR or C#. All of this aside, developers are a finicky bunch. Adoption of mono will rest on: - It's utility as a development platform - Whether or not it 'toes the line' with what non-Windows developers want to write software for - How well it actually can accomplish the cross-platform stuff that's actually useful - Whether or not it's a big enough deal to bother with in the first place - Which - if any - non ECMA APIs MS starts to put restrictive licenses on - Whether or not it becomes "kewel" to hack crap in C# I think the GUI cross-platform stuff will end up being entirely initiated by Mono. WindowsForms ain't gonna cut it, and Avalon (new stuff in Longhorn) doesn't even have the beginnings of an emulation layer in Linux. As for now, even with the impressive accomplishments of the mono guys, there's more sound-and-fury here than anything else. -- Russell Morris "So, broccoli, mother says you're good for me... but I'm afraid I'm no good for you!" - Stewy
-
Let's hope not. The article is misleading too. They make it sound like this is a rogue outfit that dares to convert MS technollogy to Linux, and further implies that the work is being done without MS's blessing, but anyone that was around when Mono was puked out of Redmond knows damn well that's not the case. MS was looking for someone to do this for Linux (and indeed, they are partially funded by MS) to further their domination of the market by defining their own proprietary standards so they can charge license fees for it's use later on down the road (go head and laugh, but MS is NOT in this to be charitable, and they're CERTAINLY not in it for the benefit of the end user). I don't mind that MS charges for their software, or that it's closed source (indeed, open source as a business model is about as brainless as it gets), but being forced to use proprietary "standards" based on one company's all-to-narrow view of the world just pisses me off. ------- sig starts "...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001 "You won't like me when I'm angry..." - Dr. Bruce Banner Please review the Legal Disclaimer in my bio. ------- sig ends
-
As much as I love .NET:
- Will it kill Perl? No.
- Will it kill PHP? No (Oh, how I wish I'm wrong).
- Will it kill Python? No.
- Will it kill C++? No.
- Will it kill C? No.
- Will it kill Ruby? No. BTW, why one code in Ruby?
- Will it kill Java? No, but Java will bleed a lot. :cool:
Perl combines all the worst aspects of C and Lisp: a billion different sublanguages in one monolithic executable. It combines the power of C with the readability of PostScript. -- Jamie Zawinski
-
I like Mono because it keeps an open door for me as a Windows developer. If Linux eventually becomes the dominant desktop (think 10 years down the road at least, if it ever happens), then my C# and .NET-related skills still apply. I think that is a big reason why some people react violently to Mono - it's friendly to Linux (one big reason for its implementation is moving Windows devs to Linux and make Windows software easily portable to Linux) and yet it's friendly to Windows devs like me. In other words, they aren't taking sides, and I think that pisses off a lot of Windows & Linux zealots alike. For the people that aren't so caught up in the Linux vs. Windows endless bickering, Mono is a great technology that builds a bridge between the borders of the good and the evil, whomever you percieve good and evil to be. :) --------------------------- He who knows that enough is enough will always have enough. -Lao Tsu
-
I just don't have much to say (more accurately, I don't feel much like saying it). I think I've become satisfied with the notion that I'm right and the rest of the world got it all wrong. I have recently developed an overwhelming urge to buy a one-room cabin in the mountains, a high-powered rifle, and sit on the porch all day drinking moonshine and shoot any stupid fucker that so much as shows his pointy little head. The short answer - I'm doing okay. :) Are you still here in the US, or are you back home where the water buffalo roam? You never did come down here and get me drunk and take advantage of me like you promised. :) ------- sig starts "...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001 "You won't like me when I'm angry..." - Dr. Bruce Banner Please review the Legal Disclaimer in my bio. ------- sig ends
-
The day it runs on Windows and fully implements the .NET spec, it'll be my preferred platform for Windows development. I doubt that it will ever become possible to copy a working .NET application from Windows to Linux and have it work seamlessly, partly because Microsoft will most likely avoid the possibility. In the meantime, I think that it's actually great that the two platforms are so similar in many respects. It makes it easy to write software in Java and port to C# and .NET, for software not using EJBs and other things not mappable to .NET. I probably wouldn't spend time at the moment Mono-certifying any of my applications, though. Regards, Jeff Varszegi
-
It is too early to say either way at the moment. Long term however I don't see Mono being a gateway for Windows apps running on Linux but the other way around. For instance, Evolution is excellent and I would welcome a fully functional version on Windows.
-
First, thanks for pointing out the article, was a good read! (oh and congrats on your CP position ;) ).. I have been watching the Mono project with interest for some time now. There are others that are trying for almost the same results, but I think Mono is farther along. For me, it is not having code that is 100% compatible, just something that I can port over with relative ease is fine with me. I would never even think of taking a Windows C++/MFC application and porting it to Linux as it may take more time that writing it from scratch. With C#/.NET however, this is a reality. Easy porting of applications to Linux. Write once, port often ;) The point is that it does give Windows programmers (even VB'ers) a door to Linux. That is a good thing for Linux and more than just Novell should get behind the port. While at the beginning it means that you may not be required to have a MS 2003 web server farm to host your ASP.NET applications, it also means that there are many WinForm projects that may be ported to Linux along with just capturing some Windows developers to build Linux dedicated versions of their software. As for the future of it though, I really wonder how Linux will even compete with Longhorn on an end user desktop standpoint. They have worked for years to get some market share for desktop. It they are still playing catchup with MS being dormat on their changes for most of a decade, how do they ever plan to make Linux compete with the scope of Longhorn GUI and integration? It is also going to be interesting when MS starts to battle Novell over patents ;) Well, it is a nice sign and want I have scheduled in pencil to play with for a week or two in the future. I figure I will develop a few WinForm type applications on Linux in the future along with possibly hosting my sites on a Linux box with mono, if I can get the security knowledge to protect it ;) Rocky <>< www.HintsAndTips.com www.GotTheAnswerToSpam.com
-
First, thanks for pointing out the article, was a good read! (oh and congrats on your CP position ;) ).. I have been watching the Mono project with interest for some time now. There are others that are trying for almost the same results, but I think Mono is farther along. For me, it is not having code that is 100% compatible, just something that I can port over with relative ease is fine with me. I would never even think of taking a Windows C++/MFC application and porting it to Linux as it may take more time that writing it from scratch. With C#/.NET however, this is a reality. Easy porting of applications to Linux. Write once, port often ;) The point is that it does give Windows programmers (even VB'ers) a door to Linux. That is a good thing for Linux and more than just Novell should get behind the port. While at the beginning it means that you may not be required to have a MS 2003 web server farm to host your ASP.NET applications, it also means that there are many WinForm projects that may be ported to Linux along with just capturing some Windows developers to build Linux dedicated versions of their software. As for the future of it though, I really wonder how Linux will even compete with Longhorn on an end user desktop standpoint. They have worked for years to get some market share for desktop. It they are still playing catchup with MS being dormat on their changes for most of a decade, how do they ever plan to make Linux compete with the scope of Longhorn GUI and integration? It is also going to be interesting when MS starts to battle Novell over patents ;) Well, it is a nice sign and want I have scheduled in pencil to play with for a week or two in the future. I figure I will develop a few WinForm type applications on Linux in the future along with possibly hosting my sites on a Linux box with mono, if I can get the security knowledge to protect it ;) Rocky <>< www.HintsAndTips.com www.GotTheAnswerToSpam.com
Thanks Rocky! Marcie http://www.codeproject.com
-
l a u r e n wrote: kill php??? *cracks up laughing* now u are visiting cloud cuckoo land :rolleyes: Damn you beat me to it. ;P Personally I like PHP because it is based on languages like C and Perl and out of the box has a shitload more functionally than ASP. Oh well, to each their own. Jeremy Falcon
-
As much as I love .NET:
- Will it kill Perl? No.
- Will it kill PHP? No (Oh, how I wish I'm wrong).
- Will it kill Python? No.
- Will it kill C++? No.
- Will it kill C? No.
- Will it kill Ruby? No. BTW, why one code in Ruby?
- Will it kill Java? No, but Java will bleed a lot. :cool:
Perl combines all the worst aspects of C and Lisp: a billion different sublanguages in one monolithic executable. It combines the power of C with the readability of PostScript. -- Jamie Zawinski
Daniel Turini wrote: Will it kill PHP? No (Oh, how I wish I'm wrong). Is this an educated option? Jeremy Falcon
-
No, because most linux users (i.e., linux zealots) are so brainlessly anti-Microsoft that anything that even smells of them is shamed and critisized. Ever read http://slashdot.org[^]? There's your proof. It'll be just another notch on the rung of linux development languages' bed post. It's nice to have so many options when programming. Of course, the .NET framework provides a similar experience with the CLI, but you don't see too many people jumping on board with any decent implementations (despite the number of languages that have been "ported").
Microsoft MVP, Visual C# My Articles
-
I just don't have much to say (more accurately, I don't feel much like saying it). I think I've become satisfied with the notion that I'm right and the rest of the world got it all wrong. I have recently developed an overwhelming urge to buy a one-room cabin in the mountains, a high-powered rifle, and sit on the porch all day drinking moonshine and shoot any stupid fucker that so much as shows his pointy little head. The short answer - I'm doing okay. :) Are you still here in the US, or are you back home where the water buffalo roam? You never did come down here and get me drunk and take advantage of me like you promised. :) ------- sig starts "...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001 "You won't like me when I'm angry..." - Dr. Bruce Banner Please review the Legal Disclaimer in my bio. ------- sig ends
-
As much as I love .NET:
- Will it kill Perl? No.
- Will it kill PHP? No (Oh, how I wish I'm wrong).
- Will it kill Python? No.
- Will it kill C++? No.
- Will it kill C? No.
- Will it kill Ruby? No. BTW, why one code in Ruby?
- Will it kill Java? No, but Java will bleed a lot. :cool:
Perl combines all the worst aspects of C and Lisp: a billion different sublanguages in one monolithic executable. It combines the power of C with the readability of PostScript. -- Jamie Zawinski
Depends what you mean by kill. I mean COBOL is not truely killed in some places! I personally think ASP.NET is a much better option for my future web apps, and I'm a former PHP user. So that's one user no longer PHPing. It goes the same for all the others. Of course they still do have a role, but IMO they have been significantly trimmed by .NET technology! So I expect that these technologies will fade into the shaddows as .NET gets more and more addopted... it's just a matter of time... wa ha ha haaaaaa Joel Holdsworth
-
Personally, I think that would be cool. And a port to the MAC too. Isn't that what Microsoft wants? Then, we could actually write apps that run on all these different platforms. I mean, what's the point of the IL anyways? It's not just to support optimizing Intel chips. Marc Microsoft MVP, Visual C#
-
Personally, I think that would be cool. And a port to the MAC too. Isn't that what Microsoft wants? Then, we could actually write apps that run on all these different platforms. I mean, what's the point of the IL anyways? It's not just to support optimizing Intel chips. Marc Microsoft MVP, Visual C#
Isn't that what Microsoft wants? Is it? What financial interest, i.e. how do shareholders benefit, since that is apparently the only real thing that matters anymore, from having apps written for .Net, work seamlessly on other platforms besides Windows/Microsoft OS's? What possible interest does MS have in encouraging cross platform (i.e. non MS platforms) development? If Mono ever gets enough steam up to make it pretty seamless to run code from MS .NET to Linux or an OSX version of Mono, what compelling reason do people have to stay with Windows? Why buy Windows if any app that I'd be interested in can pretty much seamlessly run (or be re-compiled to run) on another platform that may be more attractive to me? If it costs, say $50 for a good Linux distro, and it costs $200 for Windows XP (or whatever) why get Windows, since one of the *main* arguments is the plethora of applications, many of which are not found on other platforms, is now gone? Futhermore, lets again say Mono gets the developer mindshare, what incentive does MS have to *not* pursue aggressive licensing for patents etc? I am aware that they have said they won't, but do you truly believe that, given their past history? I guess I have a hard time believing that if Mono does succeed or even looks like it might, that MS won't do everything in their power to ensure that developers are locked into Windows/MS platforms, and instead just shrug their shoulders and say "Good luck guys!". All of their history indicates an extremely aggressive pursuit of *any* market, with pretty much of a no-holds-barred approach. I fail to see why this would be any different. ¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned
-
Isn't that what Microsoft wants? Is it? What financial interest, i.e. how do shareholders benefit, since that is apparently the only real thing that matters anymore, from having apps written for .Net, work seamlessly on other platforms besides Windows/Microsoft OS's? What possible interest does MS have in encouraging cross platform (i.e. non MS platforms) development? If Mono ever gets enough steam up to make it pretty seamless to run code from MS .NET to Linux or an OSX version of Mono, what compelling reason do people have to stay with Windows? Why buy Windows if any app that I'd be interested in can pretty much seamlessly run (or be re-compiled to run) on another platform that may be more attractive to me? If it costs, say $50 for a good Linux distro, and it costs $200 for Windows XP (or whatever) why get Windows, since one of the *main* arguments is the plethora of applications, many of which are not found on other platforms, is now gone? Futhermore, lets again say Mono gets the developer mindshare, what incentive does MS have to *not* pursue aggressive licensing for patents etc? I am aware that they have said they won't, but do you truly believe that, given their past history? I guess I have a hard time believing that if Mono does succeed or even looks like it might, that MS won't do everything in their power to ensure that developers are locked into Windows/MS platforms, and instead just shrug their shoulders and say "Good luck guys!". All of their history indicates an extremely aggressive pursuit of *any* market, with pretty much of a no-holds-barred approach. I fail to see why this would be any different. ¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned
You make a compelling argument, Jim, and I can't specifically refute it. But one thing comes to mind, borrowing from STNG: assimilation. Regardless of the cost of a platform or the relative merits, I think that for most of the world's software to be running on a Microsoft-based framework is something good for Microsoft. Here's a scenario: 1. Mono is successful. Maybe somebody else does a .NET port to the MAC. 2. Microsoft writes the "next killer app" in .NET. 3. Now, all of a sudden, Microsoft's user base is, well, everyone. So, very sneakily, they are assimilating the "others", ultimately for their own profit. And the irony is, this assimilation will occur under the guise of other people's open source projects which they created to try and stifle Microsoft, while all the time actually playing into MS's hand. I bet Bill will be laughing all the way to the bank. Marc Microsoft MVP, Visual C#
-
Depends what you mean by kill. I mean COBOL is not truely killed in some places! I personally think ASP.NET is a much better option for my future web apps, and I'm a former PHP user. So that's one user no longer PHPing. It goes the same for all the others. Of course they still do have a role, but IMO they have been significantly trimmed by .NET technology! So I expect that these technologies will fade into the shaddows as .NET gets more and more addopted... it's just a matter of time... wa ha ha haaaaaa Joel Holdsworth
Joel Holdsworth wrote: So that's one user no longer PHPing. Any particular reason besides the fact Microsoft didn't make it? Jeremy Falcon
