Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 2nd Jan 2013 19:05 UTC
Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu Expected, but still insanely cool: Canonical has just announced Ubuntu for phones. This is a new mobile phone operating system, with its own user interface and development platform. It's built around Qt5 and QML, and the interface reminds me of MeeGo on the N9. It's supposed to be on the shelves in early 2014, but the developer preview is out today.
Thread beginning with comment 547250
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[6]: I want one!
by ndrw on Fri 4th Jan 2013 13:36 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: I want one!"
ndrw
Member since:
2009-06-30

Lucas,

Saying that C# is "by far the best popular programming language" is slightly inaccurate given that it is an almost exact copy of Java. I wouldn't call Java the best language either - it it a great platform but language itself is worse than many OS offerings.

The problem with C# is the bully behind it. Even if MS don't attack you (although they would likely attack Google as they have already done with their other patents) it would simply be a stupid idea to commit to a closed platform. Say, you wrote a successful OS application. It runs on Mono and on Windows. Next thing you know is that someone implements a feature that depends on MS API and you end up with a fork - better version runs only on Windows and is actively developed, the OS version lags behind and is slowly becoming irrelevant.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[7]: I want one!
by Nelson on Fri 4th Jan 2013 14:31 in reply to "RE[6]: I want one!"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

Lucas,

Saying that C# is "by far the best popular programming language" is slightly inaccurate given that it is an almost exact copy of Java. I wouldn't call Java the best language either - it it a great platform but language itself is worse than many OS offerings.


Okay, so let's talk specifically then. What exactly makes C# worse than many OS offerings?


The problem with C# is the bully behind it. Even if MS don't attack you (although they would likely attack Google as they have already done with their other patents) it would simply be a stupid idea to commit to a closed platform.


See, no! This can't happen. Microsoft has made a LEGALLY BINDING promise not to sue over any patents included in C# or the .NET specifications.

This is the same promise that was good enough for the W3C to accept for Microsoft's CSS patents. Somehow they don't spread FUD about it, but others like you do about .NET, only because its .NET.

The complete callous disrespect with which the Mono team is treated in the Linux community is appalling.


Say, you wrote a successful OS application. It runs on Mono and on Windows. Next thing you know is that someone implements a feature that depends on MS API and you end up with a fork - better version runs only on Windows and is actively developed, the OS version lags behind and is slowly becoming irrelevant.


This happens all the time, and is in fact what Mono wants.

The point of .NET isn't write once run anywhere, its write once, port easily with minimal difficulty.

Mono specifically advocates for using OS specific UI toolkits with an OS agnostic backend for .NET.

To me, this screams of someone who's never done real cross platform .NET development before.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[8]: I want one!
by vidarh on Fri 4th Jan 2013 16:35 in reply to "RE[7]: I want one!"
vidarh Member since:
2011-10-14


Okay, so let's talk specifically then. What exactly makes C# worse than many OS offerings?


For starters it's designed to run in a VM, dragging all kinds of extra baggage with it. More importantly: It is little used by Linux developers. If Ubuntu wishes to draw on existing software developers familiar with Linux, and on existing software written for Linux, it is a bad choice because they'd be alienating most of the developers already familiar with their OS, and throwing out the vast majority of existing code.


See, no! This can't happen. Microsoft has made a LEGALLY BINDING promise not to sue over any patents included in C# or the .NET specifications.


You're naive. There's plenty of indication that Microsoft were pulling strings in the SCO case, for example, via an investment vehice. Even if they weren't, there's nothing stopping them from pulling a stunt like that going forward. Microsoft might have made a promise. But that promise is only on behalf of themselves, and would not prevent them from throwing some lucrative deals to the right patent trolls. There's also nothing stopping them from using *other* patents to threaten companies with a long, drawn out patent lawsuit to punish c# use they don't like without breaking their promise.

Putting your faith in the morality of someone who is convicted of repeatedly breaking anti-trust law is rather risky.


The complete callous disrespect with which the Mono team is treated in the Linux community is appalling.


We're under no obligation to like their product, nor are we under any obligation to take the substantial risk,whether legal or technological of having Microsoft try to throw us under the bus. More than enough of us are old enough to remember the blatant law breaking Microsoft engaged in to crush competition, and though they seem to have mellowed over the years, some place many of us draw the line, and depending on a language coming out of Redmond is well over the line for quite a few of us.

That it looks and feels like Java doesn't exactly make it better - the Java dependency is largely what's kept me from doing much Android development. If a phone version of Ubuntu were to tie itself to c# what would be the point? I might as well stick to Android in that case. If I'm going to consider Ubuntu for my phone, it would be to get something more Linux-ish, not something with the bad taste of Microsoft-isms attached.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[7]: I want one!
by lucas_maximus on Fri 4th Jan 2013 21:23 in reply to "RE[6]: I want one!"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

How is an ISO standard a closed platform.

C# while very similar to Java is much better Properties alone make it a better programming language.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[8]: I want one!
by ndrw on Fri 4th Jan 2013 23:58 in reply to "RE[7]: I want one!"
ndrw Member since:
2009-06-30

Only some components are standardized and covered by Microsoft Community Promise (C# language spec and CLI). The rest, which is the most of the framework, is closed, single-sourced, Windows-only, and owned by Microsoft. That's slightly camouflaged but nevertheless well known EE&E.

The promise itself is also questionable - it lists what you can do with the licensed software, which is incompatible with GPL and other copy-left licenses. It is too restrictive for big players like Google (if only because they would lose their right to sue/counter-sue Microsoft). And it is just a vague web page, written in English, not signed by anyone, "personal", addressed to a "you" (who exactly?) - good luck using it in a court.

As for the language, both Java and C# are relatively uninteresting and were deliberately designed to be simple, not powerful. Arguing "which is better" is pointless, when even Ruby can offer more (not to mention Haskell or Clojure). Power of C# and Java comes exclusively from their frameworks, and in case of .Net the framework is Windows.

Because of that C# doesn't even compare well against Java, where at least you have several major vendors (including the OS ones) implementing the whole framework, which designed to work with multiple platforms.

Reply Parent Score: 3