Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 11th Aug 2006 19:10 UTC, submitted by Dolphin
.NET (dotGNU too) "Four short years ago, Microsoft unveiled its new framework/engine for programming and running applications in a virtual environment, and the world was stunned. Microsoft had introduced a run-time environment that was for the first time a true 'write once, run everywhere' implementation, but that was far from being the end. With .NET 3.0 on the loom, NeoSmart Technologies takes a look at how far .NET has come and just how long it can keep going."
Order by: Score:
run everywhere
by Aaron1 on Fri 11th Aug 2006 19:54 UTC
Aaron1
Member since:
2006-01-19

Microsoft had introduced a run-time environment that was for the first time a true 'write once, run everywhere' implementation

I know mono can run some .net stuff now but before that was their anything other than Windows that could run .net? I'm having a hard time buying into the run everywhere concept.

Reply Score: 5

RE: run everywhere
by Clinton on Fri 11th Aug 2006 20:01 UTC in reply to "run everywhere"
Clinton Member since:
2005-07-05

In Microsoft land, "everywhere" means 95/98/Me/NT/2000/XP/2003/Vista.

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: run everywhere
by zetsurin on Fri 11th Aug 2006 21:08 UTC in reply to "RE: run everywhere"
zetsurin Member since:
2006-06-13

"In Microsoft land, "everywhere" means 95/98/Me/NT/2000/XP/2003/Vista."

Actually, haven't Microsoft declared that "everywhere" now means 2000/XP/2003/Vista?

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: run everywhere
by timosa on Sun 13th Aug 2006 06:19 UTC in reply to "RE: run everywhere"
timosa Member since:
2005-07-06

It also means that you can run your software in both 32-bit and 64-bit environments without porting.

Reply Score: 1

I don't think so
by Clinton on Fri 11th Aug 2006 20:00 UTC
Clinton
Member since:
2005-07-05

I have used .NET from its earliest betas until I left my last employer a while ago.

Microsoft's way of doing things may be to bind you to their technologies, or it may just be a habit formed long ago, but either way the result is the same. You can't get from point A to point B in a reasonable fashion, programatically speaking, using Microsoft's development tools/technologies.

Most of the development I did in .NET was web based; ASP.NET pages with C# code-behind. Now I'm using either Django or Ruby on Rails for all my web development. Both of these frameworks are a lot more sane that .NET and the development times are less as well.

.NET may be a cool technology, but it is basically Java with the benefit of hindsight and there are a lot better things out there today to develop with.

Reply Score: 5

RE: I don't think so
by ma_d on Sat 12th Aug 2006 02:04 UTC in reply to "I don't think so"
ma_d Member since:
2005-06-29

Ruby is implementable on .Net... The implementation is currently in progress.

It's probably also implementable on Java's system as well, as many other languages such as Groovy have been implemented there.

But I agree, .Net is certainly evolutionary from Java with the twist that it's not as picky about bringing new ideas in as Java (as a language) has been (I really mean C# here, but that's the flagship language for .Net).

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: I don't think so
by tmack on Sat 12th Aug 2006 02:16 UTC in reply to "RE: I don't think so"
tmack Member since:
2006-04-11

Just to clarify, Ruby has already been implemented for the Java platform (for a while even).

Java has support for many, many more languages than .NET does. It's just that Sun has not officially supported the practice until recently.

Up until the recent change of heart, Sun said you could program in any language you want... as long as it's Java. ;)

Edited 2006-08-12 02:17

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: I don't think so
by zerohalo on Sun 13th Aug 2006 02:25 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: I don't think so"
zerohalo Member since:
2005-07-26

Do you mean to say that it's possible to compile a Ruby program into a binary that can be executed by a Java VM without the need to have a Ruby intepreter present on the client system?

And is that what Ruby.NET implementations are supposed to do? So that you can write a program in Ruby, turn it into an EXE that can then run on a Windows system that has the .NET framework and it will run (so the user doesn't need to install Ruby). And that you access any .NET library from your Ruby code? I'm just trying to make sure I understand the relationship between Ruby and .NET in this case.

Reply Score: 1

With this kind of cheerleading...
by zambizzi on Fri 11th Aug 2006 20:01 UTC
zambizzi
Member since:
2006-04-23

...who needs actual numbers to back it up!

and the world was stunned

Say *what*? I don't remember such an event, maybe...just maybe he's being dramatic?

...was for the first time a true “Write once, run everywhere” implementation

Say *WHAT*!? Sure, it runs everywhere...on Windows. Oh sorry, Mono too, if you want to count a half-complete re-creation of the .NET framework.

That's great about dynamic languages...however Java already does this (i.e., Groovy) and will improve dramatically w/ Mustang (Java 6.0) due out this fall, in beta as we speak.

Sure, .NET is taking over the world...the Microsoft world. That's only logical being the step-up from the old-school VB (depending on who you ask), COM, ASP, etc. days.

Reply Score: 4

butters Member since:
2005-07-08

"and the world was stunned"

and the world was confused, is more like it. At least, that's how I interpreted it, and much of the mainstream IT media outlets agreed. For a while there, no one was quite sure if .NET was a subscription-based business model (Hailstorm), a "Trusted Computing" platform (Palladium), or a sinister attempt to wean developers off of VB.

People often confuse dynamic and interpreted languages. .NET didn't offer a dynamic language until IronPython came along (unless ASP.NET is dynamic, I don't know anything about that). The "write once, run everywhere" dream world is a function of interpreted languages.

I have this equally pie-in-the-sky theory that, with a good JIT compiler, Python/PyGTK/PyQt/wxPython can become a true write-once-run-anywhere development framework. I'd really like to see this happen, because Python really opens up application programming to a less-technical audience, and it makes rapid development a breeze.

I must say, C# turned out better than I thought it would. It's a little verbose and CamelCased for my taste, but you can't please everyone when it comes to syntax.

Reply Score: 4

Rubbish!
by Bit_Rapist on Fri 11th Aug 2006 20:02 UTC
Bit_Rapist
Member since:
2005-11-13

.NET is great and I currently am doing a project on the framework but to claim that its platform independant is a bit of a joke.

Sure if you use mono on both platforms you might have something that works with Linux and Windows (or at least close to works) but MS in no way offers 'write once run everywhere' unless your definition of multiple platforms is MS only operating systems.

I like .net over java but when it comes to multi-platform I'm sorry but java still wins hands down.

Reply Score: 5

Joke?
by MediaSex on Fri 11th Aug 2006 20:02 UTC
MediaSex
Member since:
2006-02-08

And everyone is using MSN!

And those Xbox 360s are flying off the shelves all over the world!

Reply Score: 2

RE: Joke?
by chiwaw on Sun 13th Aug 2006 05:19 UTC in reply to "Joke?"
chiwaw Member since:
2006-02-05

In case you're being sarcastic ....

"And everyone is using MSN!"

Of the hundreds of peoples I have interaction on a regular basis, 100% of them are using MSN. Nobody I know of is using any other messenger.

"And those Xbox 360s are flying off the shelves all over the world!"

As a matter of fact, yes, they do.
(Except in Japan, oh snap!)

Reply Score: 1

"Run everywhere" FUD
by Damien on Fri 11th Aug 2006 20:03 UTC
Damien
Member since:
2005-07-07

Microsoft had introduced a run-time environment that was for the first time a true 'write once, run everywhere' implementation

I call BS and FUD. Java had this years earlier. The only reason that .NET was any different to Java's similar claims is that MSFT limited the scope of the runtime, only releasing it for certain editions of its OS and only its OS, not OSX or other UNIXes. Java is the same way when you focus on the same limitations - any Java 1.2 app will run on any J2SE v1.2 VM. Just don't try running J2EE apps on your cellphone's J2ME VM as they are different platforms and are a world appart.

Then I could get into the whole "well of course .NET works like that, it is based on Java" but nobody else agrees with me on that one so I'll shut up :o)

Damien

Reply Score: 5

RE: "Run everywhere" FUD
by ma_d on Sat 12th Aug 2006 02:14 UTC in reply to ""Run everywhere" FUD"
ma_d Member since:
2005-06-29

See, the trouble is what they said is entirely correct. .Net was Microsoft's first write once run anywhere system. I'd say that since they opened up to allow things like Mono that at least counts as it theoretically running on other systems.

Yes, it wasn't the first system like this. Java was designed for the same purpose, long before (and I imagine also has at least one platform it can't run on). But Microsoft didn't create Java.

The denotative meaning of the sentence is correct, .Net is Microsoft's first write once and run anywhere system. Unfortunately, it's vague, it can also mean it's the first system of that sort.

I really think the author meant it was the first for Microsoft.

Reply Score: 1

Very funny post
by andyleung on Fri 11th Aug 2006 20:07 UTC
andyleung
Member since:
2006-03-24

[quote]and the world was stunned[/quote]
yes, I remember this though. When I was studying .NET 2003 first time in college two years ago, I was so shock that my teacher restarted 5 times in 1 hour lecture just for a hello world VB.NET program, and I was really impressed!

I totally disagreed with zambizzi about taking over the MS World because there are tons of software developers and engineers working in MS still using Unix and Linux to cross compile Windows code everyday! I doubt they use mono to do this in *nix environment. MS is really pushing hard on advertisement like this, I see no where .NET can enter the enterprise except the most outer web server that is even outside of firewall cuz it is not worth to protected, serving some little web program for customer information and inquiries.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Very funny post
by zambizzi on Fri 11th Aug 2006 20:11 UTC in reply to "Very funny post"
zambizzi Member since:
2006-04-23

Fair enough...you have a good point. I myself have done some small wxWidgets work on Linux, cross-compiling for Windows. However, to be fair, it would probably have been less painful (and would have produced faster code) on Windows w/ the MS C++ compiler.

I do agree with your second point and my personal experiences with .NET in the enterprise have not been good, though they've been successful in small projects in a Windows environment.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Very funny post
by andyleung on Fri 11th Aug 2006 20:20 UTC in reply to "RE: Very funny post"
andyleung Member since:
2006-03-24

True, compiling C++ using MS Visual .NET 2003 is pretty easy and fast, I have to admit this. I really wanna try how Eclipse C++ works and how good it compares to .NET 2003.

You are right and in PHP, Ruby or even JRuby are gaining momentum these days, for fast small to medium web development, .NET is nowhere closed to PHP. Look at this:

www.sugarcrm.com

Can you believe that this enterprise class software is done in PHP with tons of modules available at www.sugarforge.net? For medium to large projects, they use Eclipse + Tomcat/JBoss + Hibernate + Spring + "all other open source libraries including amazing ones from apache" would do all the jobs already.

For example, a backend program sitting in Tomcat with Axis can automate many different workflow and processes using Quartz and Hibernate for scheduling and persistence management. How about enterprise class email client Lotus Notes? Java does the job for everything. I know .NET can create web services pretty fast, but so does Tomcat + Axis too! I was able to use Tomcat + Axis to run web services client of Salesforce.com and also as web services server of blackberry client, with interoperability like this, who needs to run .NET server and what's that for??? I know there are many MS fans but I just cannot think of a reason myself.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Very funny post
by zambizzi on Fri 11th Aug 2006 20:27 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Very funny post"
zambizzi Member since:
2006-04-23

Of course, MS would be fools not to provide an incredible cpp compiler for their own platform...it puts gcc to shame...but if it did not then we'd *really* have to wonder what those MS devs are getting the big bucks for.

Mustang will support all of those dynamic languages you mentioned, and then some. Rhino should be cool, pure Javascript on the JVM - whoo hooo!! However, I myself *like* the Java language and am quite productive...so I'm not sure how it all fits in just yet...I'll wait and see.

SugarCRM is one example of what MS just doesn't get when it comes to the relationship a vendor should have with its developers in present times. Openness! Sugar's (or MySQL, JBoss, etc.) is the software business model of the future...and at least Sun *gets* that!

JAX-WS web services in Java EE 5 are even easier than they are in .NET - Sun didn't sit still because developers didn't sit still - and it's the developers who guide where Java goes via the JCP.

Reply Score: 3

RE[4]: Very funny post
by andyleung on Fri 11th Aug 2006 20:37 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Very funny post"
andyleung Member since:
2006-03-24

Exactly! I am a Java Developer and I really love it since 1991. I tried .NET web services, honestly, there is no way you can teach yourself for this. I, myself, really think Axis's documentation is way easier to follow. I am just waiting for Mustang and then I will see how their desktop apps rocks!!

Linux and Java is the best combo for business!

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Very funny post
by elsewhere on Fri 11th Aug 2006 21:17 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Very funny post"
elsewhere Member since:
2005-07-13

SugarCRM is one example of what MS just doesn't get when it comes to the relationship a vendor should have with its developers in present times. Openness! Sugar's (or MySQL, JBoss, etc.) is the software business model of the future...and at least Sun *gets* that!

http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-6038966.html

Oh, Microsoft gets it. Whether they agree with it is a whole different subject.

The whole embrace, extend, extinguish strategy is still alive, except that now they apparently refer to it as the "Shared Source Initiative".

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Very funny post
by zambizzi on Fri 11th Aug 2006 21:36 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Very funny post"
zambizzi Member since:
2006-04-23

Yes, and it's been such a hit w/ their "community".

I'm sure they *see* it but they don't really *get* it yet. The whole Shared Source concept was laughed into obscurity as soon as it hit the airwaves.

Reply Score: 2

This article should be countered with...
by zambizzi on Fri 11th Aug 2006 20:08 UTC
zambizzi
Member since:
2006-04-23

...this article from JDJ...after all this isn't Fox News, it should be fair and balanced!

http://java.sys-con.com/read/117741.htm

Reply Score: 2

ma_d Member since:
2005-06-29

I prefer Just and Accurate, but I don't think you'll ever get either from a human being and much less a group of human beings...

Besides, the big arguments always start over the worst articles.

Reply Score: 1

Ok. 95% of the market
by NotParker on Fri 11th Aug 2006 20:08 UTC
NotParker
Member since:
2006-06-01

Ok, everywhere means 95% of the market.

*nix has 1% of the users, Apple has 3%.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Ok. 95% of the market
by Bit_Rapist on Fri 11th Aug 2006 20:13 UTC in reply to "Ok. 95% of the market"
Bit_Rapist Member since:
2005-11-13

Ok, everywhere means 95% of the market.

*nix has 1% of the users, Apple has 3%.


What about the compact framework ?

Windows Mobile is not 95% of the handheld market and yet MS only supports the Windows variant.

The .net framework is marketed heavily server side with ASP.net and thats a market that *nix has the bigger share but MS has made no effort to go there.

Reply Score: 4

RE: Ok. 95% of the market
by zambizzi on Fri 11th Aug 2006 20:19 UTC in reply to "Ok. 95% of the market"
zambizzi Member since:
2006-04-23

I assume you mean desktop OS market share...and those numbers are a few years old, at least. They're also very hard to quantify and change rapidly. At one point in recent years, it was estimated that the Linux desktop had overtaken Apple by a small margin.

But I digress...

There is a great divide between Windows forms on Windows, Windows forms in Mono (incomplete), GTK#, QT#, etc. - so the write-once, run-anywhere slogan in the article, which is a rip-off of the same Java slogan, is BA-loney.

If we're talking about the server-side part of the market, .NET has clearly *not* taken over the world...that's just not with reality any way you bend or mold it.

Reply Score: 5

RE: Ok. 95% of the market
by collinm on Fri 11th Aug 2006 21:21 UTC in reply to "Ok. 95% of the market"
collinm Member since:
2005-07-15

linux server have about 30% of the market
linux desktop user is about 3%

linux marker share is about 5%

have you travell in Venezuela?
in Venezuela, majority pc selled have linux
computer have a technical support number if customer have problem

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Ok. 95% of the market
by robmv on Sat 12th Aug 2006 16:42 UTC in reply to "RE: Ok. 95% of the market"
robmv Member since:
2006-08-12

What you say is false, I live in Venezuela and no mather how much I like Linux (I am a happy Fedora Core 5 user), the majority of computers sold or assembled here are Windows based (legal and illegal copies), like any other part of the world. Just yesterday I saw for the first time in my life, a Suse Linux based PC being sold on a store (CompuMall)

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Ok. 95% of the market
by collinm on Sat 12th Aug 2006 17:04 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Ok. 95% of the market"
collinm Member since:
2005-07-15

my error is not venezuella but argentina

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Ok. 95% of the market
by Gryzor on Sat 12th Aug 2006 17:39 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Ok. 95% of the market"
Gryzor Member since:
2005-07-03

my error is not venezuella but argentina

And you are again making a mistake, since the vast majority of the PCs sold in Argentina come with a variant of MS-Windows; there are some Mac users hanging around the Graphic Design labs, but the vast majority uses Windows.

I haven't lived there for four years (tho I've been there in May) and I haven't seen a single computer vendor promoting Linux. (There might be, but Joe User won't get it). If you go to a computer store in Argentina you either get Windows or a Pirated Copy of it.

Not that I have been lurking Computer Shops in order to find a linux, but all the PCs I've seen during the month I spend there (a lot to be fair!) had Windows 98 and/or 2000/XP

Now Brazil *may* be another history, but I'll let the brazilians speak for themselves.

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Ok. 95% of the market
by collinm on Sat 12th Aug 2006 18:12 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Ok. 95% of the market"
collinm Member since:
2005-07-15

stop to lie, majority of computer sell use linux

check computer store like Musimundo, Garbarino

Reply Score: 1

RE[6]: Ok. 95% of the market
by Gryzor on Sun 13th Aug 2006 19:13 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Ok. 95% of the market"
Gryzor Member since:
2005-07-03

I did, Musimundo offers a ratio of 4 to 1 Windows XP Home Edition Vs. RX ART Linux, that is every 4 computers, only one is offered with Linux whereas the rest has Windows XP Home; not counting Laptops and Notebooks, where Windows XP is offered exclusively.
On the other Hand, "Garbarino" offers six different computers under "IT -> Computers"

3 of them have RX ART Linux, 2 have Windows XP Home edition and another have no clear indication of any OS whatsoever.
(http://local.garbarino.com/catalog/default.php?cPath=14207)

So you are right, they sell Linux much more than I thought, but to be honest, every PC I've seen in Argentina, had a copy of XP/2000, I haven't seen a single Linux box "at home" in the whole month I've spent there. Gosh I even have three cousins who were born there; one of them is " a power user " a he uses XP Professional.

Do not mistake the amount of piracy with the Vendors selling more linux.

Despite that, this has got nothing to do with .NET and is way off-topic.

Reply Score: 1

Stupidset post ever
by JeffS on Fri 11th Aug 2006 20:15 UTC
JeffS
Member since:
2005-07-12

This "NeoSmart" person, or organization, seems to be a pure MS FUD machine. It's all pro .Net, anti Java, anti Firefox. Nothing but ignorant, inflammatory, non-factual FUD. The site is completely worthless, unless your're drinking the pro MS kool-aid so vigorously that you're choking on it, just like Rush Limbaugh and his sheep, err, dittoheads (or Michael Moore and his sheep). BAAAaaaaaah BAAaaaaaah!

The claim that .Net is write once run anywhere is the first ludicrous tip off about this organization/individual's idiocy. The headline of ".Net taking over the world" is the other.

Really, is it possible for someone to be so stupid and partisan?

I'm wondering why Thom linked to it in the first place. Probably for hits, and lot's of posts. That's fine. Or maybe he just wanted the guy to be seriously ripped to shreads, as he well deserves.

Edited 2006-08-11 20:17

Reply Score: 5

"Is .Net Taking Over the World?"
by Beta on Fri 11th Aug 2006 20:16 UTC
Beta
Member since:
2005-07-06

Sadly we dont have the ability to add tags like on /., but for this I would add:

"No"

Reply Score: 5

kmarius Member since:
2005-06-30

You can use bold and italic tags here.

Reply Score: 1

Great article
by ronaldst on Fri 11th Aug 2006 20:25 UTC
ronaldst
Member since:
2005-06-29

.Net changed my opinion on Virtual Machines. Seeing Java's failure on the desktop, I had completely abandonned the idea of apps running on virtual machines for desktop usage.

Let's face it, Microsoft has the best devs tools. And .Net shows that they haven't lost their touch.

What's not amazing is that the OSS fundies have already spammed the comment section of the article with their usual unfounded Microsoft hatred. -_-

Reply Score: 2

RE: Great article
by andyleung on Fri 11th Aug 2006 20:34 UTC in reply to "Great article"
andyleung Member since:
2006-03-24

You just don't face the fact yourself. Try running a C#.NET program on desktop is only insignificantly faster than a Java app on desktop these days. If you don't want me to mention OSS, fine, how about Websphere? Oracle's JDeveloper and Middleware? How about BI platforms? Database like DB2? Oracle10g? obviously you are not living in enterprise's world.

I don't mind using Microsoft products if they are good. Like Microsoft Office 2007, none of any office suite can compare for its very initiative UI, OOo is far from it. MSN? well, you think everybody is using MSN but everybody in Asia and many in Europe are using Yahoo, Jabber and Gaim. Try looking around the world, you don't wanna live in front of your own Windows XP Home world only right?

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: Great article
by kaiwai on Sat 12th Aug 2006 10:54 UTC in reply to "RE: Great article"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

I don't mind using Microsoft products if they are good. Like Microsoft Office 2007, none of any office suite can compare for its very initiative UI, OOo is far from it. MSN? well, you think everybody is using MSN but everybody in Asia and many in Europe are using Yahoo, Jabber and Gaim. Try looking around the world, you don't wanna live in front of your own Windows XP Home world only right?

Excuse me, outside the US of A; AOL/AIM mean jack shit; Microsoft is top shit, grand poobah, big kahuna; ask anyone in New Zealand, Australia or the Asia/Pacific region what they have for their chat client, its going to be MSN; sure, there are some hold out few still hugging their Yahoo accounts more to do with compatibility than enjoying the service.

As for C# etc. Like I said, its a Windows platform technology; for all intensive purposes, if you want multiplatform, then go Java, if you want an improved development framework for Windows, then go for .NET.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Great article
by Soulbender on Sat 12th Aug 2006 12:53 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Great article"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

"the Asia/Pacific region what they have for their chat client, its going to be MSN"

Nice try but the AP region is much bigger than Aus & NZ. Yahoo, Gmail, ICQ and Jabber all have a fair share. Heck, Chikka is gigantic here (Philippines) and it's based on XMPP.
You are correct that AOL/AIM dont man jack outside the U.S.A though.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Great article
by kaiwai on Sat 12th Aug 2006 22:15 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Great article"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

Nice try but the AP region is much bigger than Aus & NZ. Yahoo, Gmail, ICQ and Jabber all have a fair share. Heck, Chikka is gigantic here (Philippines) and it's based on XMPP.
You are correct that AOL/AIM dont man jack outside the U.S.A though.


And the number who have computers in the Philippines who are of any substantial dollar value is SFA; look at established markets like Singapore and ask who is king.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Great article
by zambizzi on Fri 11th Aug 2006 21:45 UTC in reply to "Great article"
zambizzi Member since:
2006-04-23

Best dev tools?

Ever tried eclipse? Ever tried Netbeans? JBuilder? JDeveloper? Sounds like maybe you're not speaking from experience.

Having a *choice* of platforms and tools is perhaps just an advantage you're not accustomed to.

Unfounded MS hatred? I don't hate MS personally, they produce *some* good software. However, I don't think it's the best bang for your buck. It's not the best out there and it just doesn't justify the price tag. I'll take superior quality + zero license fees any day, thanks.

Reply Score: 4

RE: Great article
by Ford Prefect on Sat 12th Aug 2006 12:29 UTC in reply to "Great article"
Ford Prefect Member since:
2006-01-16

Sure, MS has good dev tools. It's still that .Net can't beat Java, as it doesn't offer any significant feature over Java, while Java is mature und _really_ "write once, run everywhere".

The article is bullshit, and the readers recognize this, and post about it. This is not about OSS fundies, this is just about senseless crap.


And btw, Java had much to learn, but did, regarding desktop usage. Future will tell if it's too late or not.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Great article
by Gryzor on Sat 12th Aug 2006 17:51 UTC in reply to "RE: Great article"
Gryzor Member since:
2005-07-03

It's still that .Net can't beat Java, as it doesn't offer any significant feature over Java,
You obviously have no idea what you're talking about.
Now compare the time it takes to write a single Windows application with Window Forms (for god's sake I hate WinForms) and then compare it with Swing/AWT or whatever "toolkit" you happen to have...

I've seen dozens of companies choose .NET over Java because Java has no decent presentation layer... Java apps look horrible, behave horribly and take "ages to load" (Azareus anyone?)
Now before you troll again: "ages to load" means the Java Runtime Environment scratching the HDD (I have 1GB RAM) *much more* than "other applications".

Plain simple. You can tell when Java has loaded or is loading... there are a "few" seconds of hdd thrashing.

So, Apart from that "little detail" (faster processors, more ram, precompiled java, and stuff like that will dimish this problem), then there's the need for an easy, well integrated (full of bugs, like WinForms ;) ) toolkit... Swing doesn't do...

You gotta admit it. I choose .NET over Java because we needed a Visually Stunning Application with TabletPC capabilities, and very very easy to use.

By Using GDI+ and C#.NET + WinForms, we did it and we get "ahhh" "oohhh"s when people see it. And behind the scenes? .Net is as good as Java...

So saying that ".NET doesn't have any significant feature over Java" is childish.

You don't seem to understand that:

a) Not every company needs to support a zillion plataforms.
b) Not every company is developing websites.
c) Not every company can spend *more* time developing... .NET is, like VB was back in 1998, faster to develop... you may like it or not, but it's the truth.

I had to integrate a VB/VC++ (6.0) project with a Java application a couple of years ago. We went for SOA and webservices; we had the webservices and everything up and running in one day. It took the java devs at least two to set up a myriad of open source projects, apache, tomcat, etc...
And the company was SUN Certified as a Java I don't know what and had more than 100 Java devs... they Knew what they were doing.

So no, not everyone can "afford" that...

.Net has a lot of problems, but in VS2003 (and now 2005) you can develop windows applications really fast... really. And the quality can be as good as a Java/C++ application from an "OOP" perspective. (Sometimes even better!). Now there's no excuse.

All in all, I wish I could go back to Objective-C and my Mac ;)

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Great article
by Ford Prefect on Sat 12th Aug 2006 18:05 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Great article"
Ford Prefect Member since:
2006-01-16

I got my tomcat up & running in 10 minutes... (it's "Apache Tomcat", a single product, btw)

So well, I guess everybody has his own experiences on that field. Don't be too blind to tell everybody it's a pain in the ass to set up a production environment with j2ee only because of single experiences.


You're right about the GUI framework, Swing is really infamous, I didn't have a further look into AWT and others, yet.


So ok, likely that we have this additional feature Windows.Forms, which wouldn't help me, as I develop cross-platform, but should be a feature over Java for Windows only developers.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Great article
by Gryzor on Sun 13th Aug 2006 19:25 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Great article"
Gryzor Member since:
2005-07-03

I got my tomcat up & running in 10 minutes... (it's "Apache Tomcat", a single product, btw)
Yeah, my fault, it's a single product. Sorry. I know that it's possible easy to get up and running, but it's still more complicated than IIS (IMO)

Don't be too blind to tell everybody it's a pain in the ass to set up a production environment with j2ee only because of single experiences.

Oh but I don't, I just think that it's more complicated than IIS; maybe the procedure has changed a little bit (last time I've seen that it was 2005).
OTOH, I remember FOSS projects involved for "everything" you wanted to do...

Anyways, I have nothing against Java, I only say that .NET in Windows is what makes possible a lot of developers to develop good things, faster and better looking than with Java and its tools.

And Visual Studio as bad as it may be (bugs) is very easy to set up... install -> next next next.. done.

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Great article
by Ford Prefect on Mon 14th Aug 2006 09:45 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Great article"
Ford Prefect Member since:
2006-01-16

Well, on my system, I had to do:

qpkg tomcat
/etc/rc.d/tomcat start

and it was up and running. To deploy sth, I had just to copy the .war file to
/opt/tomcat/webapps/

.. to get a little bit further than that, there are nice plugins for Eclipse, even a Tomcat Debugging one:
http://www.sysdeo.com/eclipse/tomcatplugin

I think it's rather easy and I wonder how it can be significantly more easy ;) .

I wouldn't love to use IIS just because of his long term history of demonstrating how _not_ to implement a webserver (security-, stability-, performance- and standardswise (was not RFC-compatible - is it yet?) ... well IIS in history was just a joke, and that for years ;) . But this seems to have changed, I'm just still a little bit suspicious about it.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Great article
by andyleung on Sun 13th Aug 2006 03:50 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Great article"
andyleung Member since:
2006-03-24

I guess you really have no idea of what you are talking about right? As far as I know, there are tons of good to go high performance Swing apps out there in many enterprise companies including big ones like IBM, Oracle and BusinessObject....o well...who cares if you don't look around.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Great article
by Gryzor on Sun 13th Aug 2006 19:19 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Great article"
Gryzor Member since:
2005-07-03

As far as I know, there are tons of good to go high performance Swing apps out there in many enterprise companies including big ones like IBM, Oracle and BusinessObject....o well...who cares if you don't look around.

Yeah sure, like Oracle Tools (me wonders why everybody prefers Toad), like IBM Internal Tools, like IBM Raid Configuration Tools (which really su**). On the other hand, maybe that's why Business Objects Analytical, IBM Tivoli, IBM Lena, etc... are all written in C++ and not Java; and then when a new version -ported to Java- comes, all the people complain that it really suc**.

So.... I don't look around; I worked with Oracle and its beautiful tools, worked For IBM in 1998 and then worked with a company who made extensive use of BusinessObjects for Direct Marketing customer segmentation and analytical purposes...

But I don't look around. Keep comparing Java Front end with .NET for Windows... sure.

Reply Score: 1

Strange
by tmack on Fri 11th Aug 2006 20:46 UTC
tmack
Member since:
2006-04-11

The summary described Java to a tee, yet called it ".NET."

And they called Sun "Microsoft."

In all seriousness, .NET is great for the kiddies. VB developers LOVE that stuff.

Java is where it's at for anything significant.

Edited 2006-08-11 20:48

Reply Score: 3

RE: Strange
by twitter on Sat 12th Aug 2006 02:50 UTC in reply to "Strange"
twitter Member since:
2005-07-25

Yes, I'm not making a three figure salary creating high-performance distributed applications in C# that run on WS2003 at a Fortune 50 company.

It must be my imagination, and I must be a "kiddie".

The only true language and platform is Java. Everybody knows that. How could I not see it? I must go back to being a $25/hr Websphere code monkey one of these days to see how it feels to be you.

Edited 2006-08-12 02:51

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Strange
by tmack on Sat 12th Aug 2006 04:11 UTC in reply to "RE: Strange"
tmack Member since:
2006-04-11

Your biting sarcasm wounds me deeply, like a blade tempered by the beard of Zeus.

And yes, you definately are a kiddie.

Just because you work with .Net-based distributed cash terminals at your job with MacDonalds, does not an enterprise systems engineer you make.

Reply Score: 2

Three IDE's better then Visual STudio...
by MikeekiM on Fri 11th Aug 2006 20:57 UTC
MikeekiM
Member since:
2005-11-16

JBuilder2006, JDeveloper and Netbeans,
in my exprience. the Eclipse team will, I'm sure, tell you they are far and away better the VS.

It's getting really pointless to take to MS fanatics.
You should have learned Java 6 years ago.
You're now in the dark ages.

Reply Score: 1

Luke McCarthy
Member since:
2005-07-06

...as long as it's Windows.

Reply Score: 2

Is .NOT taking over the world ?
by flywheel on Fri 11th Aug 2006 21:37 UTC
flywheel
Member since:
2005-12-28

Yes - unfortunately - .NET 3.0 is the main platform for Vista - while Win32 (And I guess Win32H also) has gone into legacy mode and is being supported through the Connectix Virtual Engine.

When something is taking over the Windows platform, it is taking over the world.

Reply Score: 1

zambizzi Member since:
2006-04-23

This is the MSDN crowd taking over the direction Windows goes at MS. I do *not* see this going over well. It's a strong-armed attempt at forcing those comfortable w/ Win32, MFC, etc. to use .NET instead.

.NET is just not mature enough for such a high place in Windows, IMO.

It's no wonder why the hardware requirements for Vista are so high-end.

Reply Score: 1

Nex6 Member since:
2005-07-06

every major version of windows has had higher sysreq then the one it replaces. even Gnome and KDE requirements change over time.



-Nex6

Reply Score: 1

zambizzi Member since:
2006-04-23

Incremental, sure...this drastic? Nah. How much greater were the hw reqs for moving from NT to 2000? How about 2000 to XP? Not much.

How about Gnome 2.8 to 2.14? KDE 3.0 to 3.5? The memory consumption for both of those DEs have actually been reduced considerably. That trend is set to continue as well.

Reply Score: 1

Nex6 Member since:
2005-07-06

thats, true Gnome and KDE bot at the toolkit level and DE level have tryed to lower mem/sysreq but vista, is a 5 year project look at sysreq form gnome and kde and compare that to there lastest.

and there is tons of low rights framework and other stuff in there and i am sure that crap takes a hit on preformence.

-nex6

Reply Score: 1

kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

.NET is just not mature enough for such a high place in Windows, IMO.

Care to back up that statement with some facts.

If you've got a case against Microsoft, lets stick to the realms of reality, shall we?!

Reply Score: 2

Here is the thing:
by Nex6 on Fri 11th Aug 2006 21:46 UTC
Nex6
Member since:
2005-07-06

as someone who admins and devs on windows and Linux,

dot NET is something MS has done right, its pretty good stuff. but, its for windows when used on the desktop. when used for services you CAN deploy dot NET web apps that work in Nix, but most people who deploy this stuff dont care.

and dot NET has support for strong security structures, mandatory rights and things. its all about using the right tool for the job, if you live in a windows shop dot net is by far the best way to go.

-Nex6

Reply Score: 3

RE: Here is the thing:
by ma_d on Sat 12th Aug 2006 02:10 UTC in reply to "Here is the thing:"
ma_d Member since:
2005-06-29

If you avoid System.Windows.Forms you should be ok. For example, you can use GtkSharp instead.

I'm sure there are other areas to avoid, but that's the BIGGY.

Reply Score: 1

misinformed people
by proforma on Fri 11th Aug 2006 22:43 UTC
proforma
Member since:
2005-08-27

"It's no wonder why the hardware requirements for Vista are so high-end."

Hardware requirements for Vista are not high-end at all. Cheers for misinformed people!

Reply Score: 1

java+jython taking over the world
by pierino on Fri 11th Aug 2006 22:55 UTC
pierino
Member since:
2005-07-31

.NET is not cross plattform (whats mono ? hahahahahha )
java +jython is perfect for most apps.

Reply Score: 1

n4cer Member since:
2005-07-06

.NET is not cross plattform (whats mono ? hahahahahha )
java +jython is perfect for most apps.


The misunderstanding comes in using the term .NET rather than CLI. Microsoft created a cross-platform standard for applications development called the CLI.

.NET is Microsoft's implementation of the CLI plus additional platform-specific libraries, just as Mono is Ximian/Novell's implementation of the CLI plus platform-specific libraries (plus their own implementation of MS' platform-specific APIs). These additional libraries atop the CLI are value adds, and are not part of the standard, nor meant to be cross-platform unless licensed as such.

Any code built for the CLI should run on any implementation of the CLI (disregarding profile differences).

Cross-platform compatibility issues only appear when you bring in code tied to a specific platform by license or dependence on platform services. This is easily avoided if cross-platform compatibility is your main goal.

Reply Score: 2

tmack Member since:
2006-04-11

Which makes any serious crossplatform .NET impossible. Microsoft designed and created the technology, and it's completely in their interest to keep it Windows-only.

Mono is a sad waste of time.

Reply Score: 1

n4cer Member since:
2005-07-06

Mono is a sad waste of time.

Mono is not a waste of time. I don't know why people think .NET-compatibility is the only reason Mono should exist. Should GCC not exist because you can't take MS' DirectX and legally run them on Linux? The situation is no different. There's a standard for interoperability, and there's value added functionality beyond the standard.

Mono offer's a platform for developers to write code using the language(s) with which they're most comfortable, and either target a number of platforms with the same source code or take advantage of features specific to each platform while letting the runtime take advantage of whatever optimizations are available among different architectures (32/64-bit, SSE, 3DNow, et al.).

Language designers benefit from a widely supported platform and class library, and interoperability. They can benefit from underlying changes for free or by implementing new functionality as the common platform evolves .

Reply Score: 3

In other news...
by SamuraiCrow on Sat 12th Aug 2006 00:33 UTC
SamuraiCrow
Member since:
2005-11-19

Apple is backing their own open-source solution called LLVM. It still accesses the APIs natively and has a very lightweight runtime. While .NET is like a device driver for an entire operating system, LLVM is like a device driver for the microprocessor only.

http://llvm.org/

As for Python and Ruby running on LLVM there's a solution in the works for it (albeit behind the times) called HLVM.

http://hlvm.org/

Reply Score: 2

what horrible treacle
by dogen on Sat 12th Aug 2006 01:20 UTC
dogen
Member since:
2005-11-13

I like .Net just fine. But this article was just giggly fanboy treacle. I needed a pint of bitter after reading it. OSNews should hold to a bit higher standard.

Reply Score: 1

RE: what horrible treacle
by twenex on Sat 12th Aug 2006 22:18 UTC in reply to "what horrible treacle"
twenex Member since:
2006-04-21

Come now, can't we have a giggle once in a while?

Reply Score: 1

Woh!
by ma_d on Sat 12th Aug 2006 02:09 UTC
ma_d
Member since:
2005-06-29

"So .NET can run on non-type-safe languages – but what does that mean?"

Python is type safe... Dynamic does not imply a lack of type safety!

Reply Score: 3

Is he?
by snowflake on Sat 12th Aug 2006 05:03 UTC
snowflake
Member since:
2005-07-20

>And yes, you definately are a kiddie.

And you don't know what he even does. Let me guess you work at Burgerking? You see, I don't know what you do.

Reply Score: 2

C# is more aking to...
by shotsman on Sat 12th Aug 2006 06:04 UTC
shotsman
Member since:
2005-07-22

Delphi rather than Java.

MS hired one of the main Delphi Architects from Borland to develop C#

IMHO, .Net is a pure pain in the ass.
I was working on a system where all the UI apps are written in .Net/C# and coded by Mumbai script monkeys.
We had lots of problems where is does not scale at all well.
Then we had some Java apps supplying the real time data to the SQL Server DB. These wiped the floor with the .Net apps in terms of performance and runtime footprint.
The customer is currently thinking long and hard about how they move forward to the next phase. There is a very real chance that .NET will be given the old heave-ho in favour of other solutions including dropping SQL Server and moving their server platform from W2K3 to Unix
So, how exactly is .NET taking over the world?

Reply Score: 2

RE: C# is more aking to...
by Gryzor on Sat 12th Aug 2006 18:00 UTC in reply to "C# is more aking to..."
Gryzor Member since:
2005-07-03

There is a very real chance that .NET will be given the old heave-ho in favour of other solutions including dropping SQL Server and moving their server platform from W2K3 to Unix

Wow, crazy. I have the same experience, only ^-1.

All "java" enterprises are looking for speed and ease of develop. Yes, being a software architect, developer, etc. doesn't mean you need to be a NASA engineer. Get real ppl, developing with .NET is faster and easier; if done correctly, the results can be really great. I'm sorry but the VB haters have no argument anymore.

Java could be faster, maybe, maybe not. .NET could use less memory, maybe, maybe not. But the truth is that both are OK, only VStudio is *the* IDE to develop for Windows. And yes, a lot of people like to develop FOR windows, since it controls "most" of the desktop marketshare... not every developer is working for Linux/Mac/etc...

Get real.

I love Objective-C and my Mac.

Reply Score: 1

RandomGuy
Member since:
2006-07-30

it doesn't mean it's good. Same goes for books:
before publishing it they say "we'll make this a best seller"

In addition I would not say a language is better but a language sucks less...
Hope you don't mind me bitching about languages.
I have mostly used C and C++ lately and I'm not an expert in any of these.
So I'm more or less new to programming (apps<1000LOC).

VB: nearly drove me away from programming

Delphi: nice on the first look but made me sick with its "I know better than you what you need to do"-attitude

C: It's a nice language but it could use polymorphism, operator overloading and OO
Is there any way except compiler tweaks to tell it how to arrange the data of a struct?

C++: Does 90% of what I need to do but the last 10% are often harder than in C (I know I can write C in C++ but with C I would have used an entirely different strategy)
I _desperately_ need operator overloading outside of classes.

PHP: Cannot understand why it is so successful. Find it actually harder than Perl...

Perl: Great for regexes, can become a mess though. Some sort of love hate relationship...

ruby: Just read a little bit about it and finding out that constants can be changed with only a warning made me want to puke ;) might consider it nevertheless.

python: Have not learnt it yet but find it very interesting. I think I might get a book about it.

LISP: I know, I'm a crazy noob to try myself on this but I just had to :-)
I think it can be quite powerful from what I saw but...
folks, there's a reason why most of us don't use prefix and it's called headache!

Java: Just looked at some code snippets and was scared how complicated simple things were. Not exactly a concise language?

C#: You say it's akin to Delphi and my head starts achin'. Lame joke, I know.
In which way is it similar to Delphi?
good IDE?
"I won't let you do something wrong"-attitude?
Syntax?
Never used it so I'm just plain curious.

Edited 2006-08-12 10:06

Reply Score: 2

And the Answer is......
by segedunum on Sat 12th Aug 2006 12:25 UTC
segedunum
Member since:
2005-07-06

No. After some initial hype, once the reality hit home I've seen several companies who were going to do lots of stuff in .Net and even replace their Java server stuff - and then didn't.

Cheerleading articles like this aren't going to change that reality.

Reply Score: 3

v .NET
by robot12 on Sat 12th Aug 2006 13:55 UTC
A Rebuttal & Clarification of Sorts
by Dolphin on Sat 12th Aug 2006 14:45 UTC
Dolphin
Member since:
2006-05-01

It seems one of the NeoSmart staff ("Computer Guru") has posted a rebuttal/follow-up pending some of the replies..

http://neosmart.net/blog/archives/235#comment-3737

It addressess a lot of the FUD in the comments here..

Reply Score: 2

Stop the hate!
by nasserd on Sat 12th Aug 2006 16:43 UTC
nasserd
Member since:
2006-08-12

Yes, this post sucks.

No, SugarCRM is not the only OSS game in town. Actually, there's a product called SplendidCRM which redeploys SugarCRM onto a Microsoft-based platform (ASP.NET/SQL Server).

Yes, the poster is incorrect about the "write once, run everywhere" concept (that is clearly Java).

No, Java actually does suck. Actually, the .NET Framework is by-design intended to be ported to any platform but with a strong base. That being said, .NET's base is the client OS market; Java's base is the *nix OSes (incl. servers).

In other words, there's a lot of FUD going around. In the end, everything that is developed in OSS technologies can be built as perfectly in .NET; however, both technologies are using similar business strategies to control the market.

Reply Score: 0

uh, real pro's
by Matzon on Sat 12th Aug 2006 17:18 UTC
Matzon
Member since:
2005-07-06

From the Authors:
"Our team did indeed measure the difference between Java and .NET garabage cleanup, ... look at the memory consumption, then minimize the application and check again. Big difference."

"NET 2.0 breaks backwards compatiblity, and that’s a good thing"

Wow - just wow! Obviously these guys - a team - know their shit. Best not contradict their claims...

Edited 2006-08-12 17:21

Reply Score: 0

These guys are simpletons
by PlatformAgnostic on Sun 13th Aug 2006 04:11 UTC
PlatformAgnostic
Member since:
2006-01-02

I don't think you can take this stuff to be representative of either the strengths of .NET or the weaknesses of Java, or anything that Microsoft are doing. These NeoSmart people are just non-programmers (or they are at least not users of the most powerful features of .NET or Java) who have got some misguided notion that they should promote .NET. I doubt there's any MSFT marketing behind this.

It should be noted that Longhorn was going to have a lot of managed code inside it, but didn't go that way for a reason. Managed code is good enough for most applications, but if you're writing some really serious and heavy app (like a big word processor or a database or a major OS subsystem), reconsider. On Windows, COM is the way to go to make these sorts of things.

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Great article
by Soulbender on Mon 14th Aug 2006 03:01 UTC
Soulbender
Member since:
2005-08-18

"And the number who have computers in the Philippines who are of any substantial dollar value is SFA"

Yes, and of course we don't have things like internet cafe's and computers at work. We're in the fricken stone age here.
Of course, Singapore has ~4 million and people and the Philippines ~85 million. I'm reasonable certain that there are more than 4 milllion people here who owns a computer, has internet access and uses IM.

Reply Score: 1