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."
Thread beginning with comment 151643
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:

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 Parent Score: 1

n4cer Member since:

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 Parent Score: 3