Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 7th Mar 2007 22:27 UTC
Java "Although the .NET vs. Java war is basically over for control of the Windows desktop, where .NET is sure to become the managed language of choice for new Windows desktop applications, there is a new battle brewing. That battle is for the Linux desktop. Now that Java has been open sourced under the GPL, even the most strict of the 'free software only' distributions can start bundling it and integrating it into their Linux distributions out of the box."
Thread beginning with comment 219495
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Not a comendable analysis
by ma_d on Thu 8th Mar 2007 01:34 UTC in reply to "Not a comendable analysis"
ma_d
Member since:
2005-06-29

He didn't say that. He said that it was solved and that licensing was the last barrier to entry, they're independent of each other.

Mono is going to lag behind MS .Net. I'll be surprised if they ever get to the point where they've implemented 99% of what MS has and the 1% they're missing isn't something crucial to a huge number of people.
Assuming Microsoft stays with .Net at the pace they have for the last 6 years.

Reply Parent Score: 2

lazywally Member since:
2005-07-06

He didn't say that. He said that it was solved and that licensing was the last barrier to entry, they're independent of each other.

Thanks for clearing that.

Though I wonder if the performance issues are really invalid. Imagine a window manager, session manager, and all other components of the desktop written in Java. :-)

Mono is going to lag behind MS .Net. I'll be surprised if they ever get to the point where they've implemented 99% of what MS has and the 1% they're missing isn't something crucial to a huge number of people.
Assuming Microsoft stays with .Net at the pace they have for the last 6 years.


Mono is always going to lag behind .NET but thats not going to be a problem. Lets look at the situation now. Write code for .NET 1.1 and theres no need to care that MS .NET is at 3.0 and Mono is at 2.0.

Reply Parent Score: 2

pantheraleo Member since:
2007-03-07

> Though I wonder if the performance issues are
> really invalid. Imagine a window manager,

There actually are a few window managers written in Java. And really, there are no performance issues with them at all. Again, keep in mind Java does intelligent runtime analysis and looks for areas of code that are too slow, and then compiles those down to native code.

Remember that a typical computer program spends 95% of its time running 5% of its code. So the deal is optimize that 5%, and don't worry much about the rest of it.

Reply Parent Score: 2

ma_d Member since:
2005-06-29

Like project looking glass?

Reply Parent Score: 2

miguel Member since:
2005-07-27

Hello,

As it turns out, you do not need to implement 100% of Microsoft.NET to port a lot of applications. We found out with Moma (google our web site) we will be able in the next three months to bring 700 applications to Linux that have been reported to us through Moma (this is without making any changes to the apps).

From the remaining half of the applications (based on the sample of 1,700 or so results that have been submitted), its roughly 1/3rd split over less than 10 changes, between 10 and 40 changes, and more than 20 changes (by changes I mean, P/Invokes that will have to be redone).

So one sixth of the .NET applications today wont ever be ported, another sixth will require a strong commitment to port, another sixth trivial changes and the other half would port with trivial changes to Mono.

The numbers are estimates from memory from the results that I collected for my FOSDEM presentation.

Miguel.

Reply Parent Score: 4

pantheraleo Member since:
2007-03-07

> So one sixth of the .NET applications today wont
> ever be ported, another sixth will require a
> strong commitment to port, another sixth
> trivial changes and the other half would port
> with trivial changes to Mono.

The only problem with this, is a lot of those applications that will require "trivial" changes, will be closed source. Expect a lot of the software written for .NET to be closed source. So you won't be able to port it even it would only require trivial changes. Don't count on MS Office.NET running on mono any time soon.

Reply Parent Score: 2

ma_d Member since:
2005-06-29

Yea that's great and I'm not arguing against it. I'm just pointing out that Microsoft has a head start on features anytime they want to have one and they've got a lot more resources than Novell.
And right now Mono is finishing up 2.0 compatibility while Microsoft is rolling out 3.0, correct?

It does seem that Mono will forever be a step behind. Which is fine.

Reply Parent Score: 3