Linked by Eugenia Loli-Queru on Wed 11th Jan 2006 18:06 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 85030
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.





Member since:
2005-07-06
Ok, we can also call Java immature too, and LISP, and C++, and anything else to suit our agenda.
Well your own agenda maybe ;-). You only need to look at the way an application like Beagle drops your machine through the floor, or the relative overall maturity and performance of other Mono apps, to tell you that Mono is just not mature.
Yeah, if Mono didn't exist, but it does, so you're wrong there too.
.Net is not a cross-platform technology. Will there be Indigo support some time soon? I smell some deja vu there.
Oh, I'll just claim it's immature like you claimed .NET is immature
Java has been around an awful lot longer than .Net, and in application servers in a lot of companies (Java's biggest usage area) .Net just doesn't register. That's probably what he's referring to.
Completely false. Java wasn't designed for JIT off the bat like .NET
Not that that actually means anything because JIT support is just there.
Except for J2ME
Wow.
There is no complete open source implementation of J2SE5.
And? Open source J2SE5 is a work-in-progress, as Mono consistently is. It's like me saying that Mono doesn't support all the features of .Net 2.0 and won't have Indigo support.
Edited 2006-01-12 11:44