Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 23rd Mar 2006 23:28 UTC, submitted by anonymous
.NET (dotGNU too) On his blog, Mike Harsh of Microsoft writes that the support of WPF/E on the Macintosh platform will not be limited to a JavaScript engine: "WPF/E supports programmability through JavaScript for tight browser integration. The WPF/E package also contains a small, cross platform subset of the CLR and .NET Framework that can run C# or VB.NET code. Yes, we are bringing C# programming to the Mac."
Thread beginning with comment 107419
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
by dikatlon on Fri 24th Mar 2006 00:19 UTC
Member since:

Why do they come up with this now?!
We got mono on the mac, and imagine it's oss - you can tune it what you want it too.

Reply Score: -2

by sigzero on Fri 24th Mar 2006 00:23 in reply to "LAMERS"
sigzero Member since:

The problem with Mono is MS. I will never touch Mono because MS could, if they wanted, stop the project cold. I have said this before, while Mono may be a cool language/framework most people see the specter of MS overshadowing it. So they say "Mono is cool, but..." and that is where they will stand because the legal issues are not at all clear.

Reply Parent Score: -1

by ma_d on Fri 24th Mar 2006 00:46 in reply to "RE: LAMERS"
ma_d Member since:

Doubtful. I'd still rather work in Python.

Reply Parent Score: 2

by cendrizzi on Fri 24th Mar 2006 03:47 in reply to "RE: LAMERS"
cendrizzi Member since:

And yet Redhat, with their history of extreme caution, has decided that mono will ship on Fedora.

As referenced on another article on osnews, this is why:

I doubt very much this will change your mind of course.

Reply Parent Score: 4

by dikatlon on Fri 24th Mar 2006 08:52 in reply to "LAMERS"
dikatlon Member since:

I wonder why i am getting voted down for my comment.
I don't understand why they don't support mono instead - it's a good base to use. It contains their .NET technology - why start from scratch ( is'nt that lame ?).

Edited 2006-03-24 08:53

Reply Parent Score: 1

by BryanFeeney on Fri 24th Mar 2006 10:42 in reply to "RE[2]: LAMERS"
BryanFeeney Member since:

Well, for one, the subject "Lamers", seems like flamebait.

Second, Microsoft has their own C# codebase that's ready to go, it would be a whole lot easier for them to make it cross platform than support two completely separate implementations, of which one was incomplete. Not to mention the fact that they don't want to be seen supporting an external project, nor do they want to cause any fuss by appearing to interfere in an external project. Thus your comment didn't make a whole lot of sense.

Then there's the fact that it seems unnecessary to criticise someone for trying something even if, at first glance, it appears redundant (though in this case, their approach is clearly better).

Reply Parent Score: 3