Mono 0.20 has been released, major architectural
chunks that were missing, or were mis-implemented have been fixed in this release. Changelog here.
Mono 0.20 Released
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
Those MS affiliates guy pusing Mono make me laugh :o)
On one hand MS claim that dotNet, CLR, CLS … is not a Java clone, and on another they try to do exactly the same thing ! Isn’t it strange 😉
By the way, mono is only a useless lab kidding, because dotNet is grounded to use COM+ (a highly proprietary technology) that have no plan to be released (in any century) on a non MS platform !
At the same time, MS clerks explained it clealy, dotNet will be portable : allong MS platforms !!!
So mono, is void, mono is a waste of time. If MS want a platform to be compatible they will have to realy open dotNet specs and implementation and not only do insignifiant specification for devcon shows ! But doing this they would shoot themselves into the left leg : make MS applications compatible to non MS OS will certainly cause the end of Windows. Which is suicide for MS !
What it foresee here is that MS has trapped themselves, because by pusing a Java clone, they now realized that it is a dead end.
dotNet as a platform will still be a “dream”, but this to not mean that the dotNet idiom will died, because as it was multi-millioned advertise, MS will optimize this cost
Get Ready for UPNPdotNet ? :o)
As a conslusion, for those VB user in 97 that posted in the Java forums that Java concepts were “no future”, redmond firm has proven pusing C# that VB IS “no future” … sorry guys !
The only question is what will be next Java … AO languages ? advanced integration of contraints ?
What is sure is that neither mono nor dotNet is the future because all people claim to have is already here for alf a decade in Java (with exactly the same caveat by the way) !
People should learn with IT history …
-UT
At the same time, MS clerks explained it clealy, dotNet will be portable : allong MS platforms !!!
This is one of the reasons Microsoft created .NET. They realize that at the present time they are bound to IA32 while the two primary x86 vendors, Intel and AMD, are moving to IA64 and x86-64 respectively. .NET will allow for applications to take immediate advantage of the new instruction sets without breaking backwards compatibility on IA32.
But doing this they would shoot themselves into the left leg : make MS applications compatible to non MS OS will certainly cause the end of Windows.
Unfortunately you forget the host of other specialized non-MS third party applications only available for Windows. Furthermore, you forget that Windows works fairly well in corporate environments. Finally, you forget about Crossover Office, which already allows MS office to be used through emulation. What environment is poised to take Windows place?
There looks to be more work on Windows Forms, and it sounds as if it’s partially working under Linux. This is a major accomplishment. It sounds as if Mono may be a viable .NET implementation after all…
Alexandre Pigolkine continues to contribute more code to our Windows.Forms implementation. Currently it only runs on Windows (or in Linux without GC enabled, due to the pthread/Wine threading library mismatch. This is being actively addressed as part of the Wine work due to the movement to the new thread implementation available in RH 8.1).
Mono is .NET-like implementation. NOT 100 percent .NET, so, not cross platform compatible. Thus, completely useless. Can you for instance run that amateurish IDE implementation called sharp developer was it on Linux? –: ) No. Why? Isn’t .NET programs made for Windows are not supposed to run on Linux Mono? –: ))))
Fact are that Java IA64 platform are ready and up (both windows & linux!!), and dotNet CLR is only planned … ! Fact are that IA64 is at this time a flop (thanks to various 3rd party that let intel stalled).
Talking about Crossover Office, are you kidding ?
Crossover PDF, yes
But Crossover office ? You must be kidding here …
Mono is not a viable dotNet implemementation, because it is a rewriting ! And it will never be a viable implementation al long as MS do not realse a reference implementation or a test compatibility kit.
Who can bet bucks on a alleged compatibility ? People want facts. That’s exactly what Java people learn thru history … without 100% compatibility there is no use of it !
dotNet quite useless regard the IA32/IA64 problem !
Because, to build a IA64 CLI you need a IA64 compiler (or cross compiler) ! Which weaken the headache but do not solve it 100 % ! Remember of Win32s ? Why could there not be a Win64 any day … no need of dotNet for it.
About mono, an problem is that most of dotNet libraries use undocumented native DLL (called “unmanaged” in MS dotNet). This cause major trouble if you want to “emulate” because you do not have any control over precise scenarios and cycles as well as over version changes that may arrises …
As long as MS do not release a real port and promote reimplementation without spec, those platform are useless.
Plz, never forget, that the few standardized spec of dotNet are tip of an MS full controled iceberg. No plan to open code, nor open improvement or bug processes… at this time MS is alone on its own.
For all those reason : mono is useless and timewasting !
Middle term speaking, MS will got headaches : That’s what i call the “dotNet effect” … MS trapped, either to suicide Windows profits or suicide dotNet! Guess what they will chose
Techies, never think about strategy … stratego, never think about techs stuffs … all this led to historical flops !
PS : Better spend your time working on wine improvment then any mono
-UT
lee, you titled your post “Crossover Office” yet this is all you had to say on the matter:
Talking about Crossover Office, are you kidding ?
Crossover PDF, yes
But Crossover office ? You must be kidding here …
Did you actually have something to say about Crossover Office?
dotNet quite useless regard the IA32/IA64 problem !
Because, to build a IA64 CLI you need a IA64 compiler (or cross compiler) ! Which weaken the headache but do not solve it 100 % ! Remember of Win32s ? Why could there not be a Win64 any day … no need of dotNet for it.
It’s clear you’re a non-native English speaker and because of that I’m afraid I’m having trouble deciphering your post.
The problem regarding IA32/IA64 is that the ISAs are completely different. If a developer wants to truly support IA64, they must compile a separate IA64 build of their codebase, in addition to the IA32 release.
.NET allows for one release to be deployed across both platforms, with speed (after the MSIL has been compiled into the GAC) comparable to native code.
Win32s provided an implementation of the Win32 API. The underlying ISA was IA32, of course. There were no discontiguous ISAs to support, so the problem domain is entirely different.
.NET is a effective means for Microsoft to support three different ISAs (IA32, IA64, x86-64) simultaneously without the need to release three separate builds of their applications.
Nhl.
I don’t know if you have read this article yet, but I found it very informative.
Also have a look at what this author say that COM is.
http://arstechnica.com/paedia/n/net/net-1.html
If you create your apps for MONO they will also run on windows.
It really isn’t a big problem for cross-platform capabilities.
What do you mean _exactly_ with CrossOver office?
I can imagine something but I don’t want to thing loud now!
I thing that this term is not used right here by you (at least to meet the point that you meant)
But pleaze … explain!
First of all dear unmatched genius, please stop humiliating people because they are not good in your language. I know quite a lot of languages. Maybe more than you do. I would not humiliate you if I knew that you would not speak Turkish good for instance.
If you could not understand, here is what he says: THERE WILL NEVER BE AN MS OFFICE VERSION BASED ON .NET RELEASED BY MS THAT WILL RUN ON LINUX. I hope you are intelligent enough to get it now. –; )
By the way, native code compilation on the runtime, is not esoteric to .NET. It is perfectly possible to write such a bytecode runner in Java, actually, I know one such efford coming in near future. It is not very much useful though, especially if you think about future, since JITs are quite sophisticated nowadays, and HW is getting faster and faster. If you really need to have native version, you can compile it with a native Java compiler, such as GJC, or 20 or so Java to native compilers for Windows. Whats wrong with it? Open office, Opera, etc. have lots of different versions targetting to different platforms.
.NET is completely useless. Mono is completely useless. Because there is Java. Why should I risk with .NET? Java already works and supported on EVERY platform already, and it is not from the biggest unethical company every created on the face of this planet: MS.
I am really sick of this mono bashing. Instead of being happy that there is another cool way to develop applications under linux, people like CroanoN and nhl keep saying that everyone should use java instead.
I tell you something. Java was nice when it was released, but it really has some disadvantages. The lack of value types makes it totally inacceptable for numerical computing and 3D graphics. And the unacceptable memory usage and startup time makes it inacceptable for client applications.
Hell, even Mono, a version 0.19 open source project, slightly outperforms the mighty java 1.3 hotspot VM even in simple applications without object creation. The reason for this is that the java bytecode is just plain braindead!
Here is a simple benchmark:
//Java program to calculate all primes to 1000000
class Sieve
{
public static void main(String[] args)
{
long time0=System.currentTimeMillis();
boolean[] product=new boolean[1000000];
product[0]=product[1]=product[2]=false;
for(int i=2;i<product.length;i++)
if(!product[i])
for(int j=i*2;j<product.length;j+=i)
product[j]=true;
long deltat=System.currentTimeMillis()-time0;
System.out.println(“deltat=”+deltat/1000.0);
/* for(int i=0;i<product.length;i++)
if(!product[i])
System.out.println(i);*/
}
}
//performance on an athlon 700 system:
rudi@mad10:~/monobench> java Sieve
deltat=0.24
rudi@mad10:~/monobench> java -version
java version “1.3.1_02”
Java(TM) 2 Runtime Environment, Standard Edition (build 1.3.1_02-b02)
Java HotSpot(TM) Client VM (build 1.3.1_02-b02, mixed mode)
//cs program
using System;
class Sieve
{
public static void Main(string[] args)
{
DateTime time0=DateTime.Now;
bool[] product=new bool[1000000];
product[0]=product[1]=product[2]=false;
for(int i=2;i<product.Length;i++)
if(!product[i])
for(int j=i*2;j<product.Length;j+=i)
product[j]=true;
TimeSpan deltat=DateTime.Now-time0;
Console.WriteLine(“deltat=”+deltat);
/* for(int i=0;i<product.Length;i++)
if(!product[i])
Console.WriteLine(i);*/
}
}
//performance on the same system
rudi@mad10:~/monobench> mono Sieve.exe
deltat=00:00:00.2084630
rudi@mad10:~/monobench> mono
mono 0.19, the Mono ECMA CLI JIT Compiler, (C) 2001, 2002 Ximian, Inc.
For a more in-depth discussion of .NET versus Java performance, see this discussion on Usenet: http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=de&lr=&ie=UTF-8&threadm=1006f17d…
First of all, no. Both of them performs better for different algorithms. The reason: Because of the differences in their VM architectures. I’ve seen reports in which Mono performs better, and ones in which Java performs better.
But as I told many times, THE IMPORTANT THING IS NOT SPEED.
Because: HW is GETTING FASTER. Swing for instance, was mission impossible even three years ago, and it works now. Because, Java JITs are optimized and HW is fast now.
THE IMPORTANT THINGS:
1. Cross platform compatibility: .NET is not cross platform compatible. Even Mono is not .NET implementation. Can is run Sharp Developer? An IDE written in .NET for Windows? No. Why? Isn’t .NET supposed to offer WORA???? Java, currently, tested and running on: Windows, Mac OS, Mac OSX, Solaris, BSD, Linux, you name it.
2. Robustness/Reliability. .NET is not tested. I won’t trust Mono for at least 5 years, and won’t use it in any serious project, since I won’t trust it. Why should I risk my projects? They reached version 0.20 after 2 years nearly. Nice. But, Java is there for 8 years. Its working and tested and being used already.
3. MS: Unethical Gates: Evil. Miguel: Egoist. Goshlink: Fun! Look at the guy’s homepage for non-existing god’s sake. –: )
4. Tools: One word: Eclipse. I can also provide 50+ words more.
5. Support: .NET: MS, Ximian. Sun: All the others.
….
….
Please people, come to your senses.
http://java.sun.com/people/jag/“>James
Oh, also, I find the following report quite interesting: It is related with Mono 0.17 and different JDKs though. I am sure they tripled the speed in 0.20. –; ))))
http://www.javalobby.org/members/jpr/methodopt.jsp
Nuff said.
Java: because Speed is not important
> for non-existing god’s sake
I am atheist too, CroanoN, but it seems like you’re just trying to piss people off. I think it sounds stupid. if it’s non existing, who’s sake are you talking about? it’s saying FOR NOBODY’S SAKE which sounds stupid.
later
@tuttle: “Java: because Speed is not important” You did not get it did you? I said, SW level speed is not very much important, since HW level improvements dwarf SW level optimizations. Do you get it now? Please stop assuming.
@Wing: If you want to talk about philosophy or psychology, mail me here rather than turning IT related pages into religious discussions: [email protected]. I have masters from both. Do you know what is negative space for instance? In short, if I don’t feel disturbed when somebody says “for god’s sake”, they should not get disturbed when I say “for non-existing god’s sake”. Get it????
COM is a technology allowing objects written in different languages to interoperate. It is complex and clumsy.
DCOM is a technology that allows COM objects to communicate over a network via remote procedure calls.
COM+ is an object pooling and transaction management framework which uses DCOM as its transport mechanism.
Clear on that?
OK. Now that you understand that, let me stress something: The .NET CLR is a seperate technology. It is not built atop COM. It has no direct dependencies on COM.
Because COM is so common in Windows, the .NET framework has wrappers that allow .NET objects to be exposed as COM objects, and vice versa.
Let me stress again: .NET objects are NOT COM objects.
I thing CroanoN just want all people to know what he things he knows right 😉
Actually, it’s not a bad thing … but …
I would like to know what
“negative space for instance” is!
Pleaze explain!
(Maybe he has a good link to good search site..but psst)
My post was just to said : based on simple and clear facts, mono is useless !
If people want binary portability, they get Java ! If people want to optimize their code then go C/C++ !
About the sentence : “Java : because speed is not important”, you are right, the overall cost and ROI are far more important than abslute speed. If i was wrong, people would still code pure ASM !
Benching or comparing two plaform on a few loop is also ridiculous. What makes a win-win situation is not pure abstract power but the whole strategic context.
Mono is useless because mono is tied to comply to all decision made by MS in roder to virtualy claim to be “compatible”. But this is a race to infinity, as without specs and compatiblity kit from MS, they could never achieved to run a “real world” dotNet application on mono. Here again that’s fact proven by the GNU ClassPath project history.
dotNet is no-future, because ultimate goal is to build a Java clone platform. But Java success was made from a very strange situation : a weak hardware vendor ally to strong software vendor to push a web solution ! That’s the reason Sun did never perform very well on the Java software market …
Here this is not the situation for dotNet. As MS dominate the IT world.
At this time where are the MS ally to push dotNet ? Who will dare to fight side by side with MS ? Neither big-buddies, nor little businesses will want to compete on a moving sand ground, where MS can “at-will” change the rules, and deprecate your entire business model !
Only borland is still in the market with delphi8. XDE.net the famous IDE, is now somhow stalled because of IBM’s acquiring rational.
Here again, we are not talking of technological hype or whatever “hyped-feature”, but from business perspectives.
As an entrepreneur, Would you bet bucks on a business that could colapse at any time ?
As a IT leader, Would you bet your carrer on a platform that have no timeline and no clear future ?
I realy smile for the future, because most people do not realy noticed which impact MS’s decision to push dotNet and kill their existing technology will have over the window’s empire.
I may be wrong … but time is ticking !
And people hate to do risky businesses … so make your choice … and pray for the rest of us
I didn’t offer explaining what is negative space in my message which was not even targetted to you andreas.
But, if you want to know, I’ll give you some hints: it exists in math, physics, arts, literature, music, everything. Start from here: http://www.photosig.com easiest way of recognizing it is photography.
By the way, didn’t you, andreas, want all people to know what you think you know right while writing your message? Or you wanted all people to know what you think you know wrong? –; )
If you want to continue, write me a mail rather than polluting here.
Mono would make sense even if they could not implement a single .NET api that is not in the ECMA spec!
Mono applications will use their own APIs such as GTK#,Qt# An application written in c# using GTK# would be binary compatible to all platforms supported by mono. It would even run on windows because there is a GTK# port for windows.
So the platform independence of mono can be used without using microsofts proprietary windows-specific APIs such as Windows.Forms.
And almost all .NET developers agree that Windows.Forms is not that well-designed anyway, so losing Windows.Forms compatibility is not a big deal.
I think mono is great. I look forward to having Unix applications that do not have to be recompiled for each distribution and each glibc version!
regards,
tuttle
@CroanoN: If you want a bigger benchmark, what about the pet store benchmark 🙂
I think there are many cases when it’s useful to have a cross-platform codebase, and many more where its utility is overrated. In most cases, it’s much more important to have the ability for different platforms to interoperate via standard protocols such as SOAP. That way each platform can leverage its strengths while presenting a standard interface.
As for compatibility, let’s take a moment to separate the .NET (or Mono) runtime from the framework. A certain minimal part of the framework is necessary for the runtime to work. In fact, it can be considered a part of the runtime. That’s the part that is 100% portable and will be identical in Mono and .NET. The rest of it involves “extra” libraries that are very useful, but not, strictly speaking, required for .NET to work, such as System.Windows.Forms.
>>if you want to continue, write me a mail rather than >>polluting here.
Could you not have emailed him that?
Java 1.4.2, coming in couple of months, will have GTK+ and Windows XP bindings as standard part of the SWING. That means, the programs written 4 years ago will look exactly the way they should look now on Gnome and XP. –; )
What about Mono KDE bindings? Will there be any? Do you think Ximian will write, oh, sorry, support those? If not, what is the difference between Gnome and MS in terms of doing everything they can to suffocate their rivals?
What about Mono Cocoa bindings? Apple is already written them for Java. What about Mono Zeta bindings? There are for instance effords to implement KDE Java bindings.
Apart from that, you are right, WinForms is totally shit, since it has to support Win32 aka the most magnificient sever ever created.
I have read lately about the implementation of winforms for the Mono runtime, I wonder if now or in the future, it will be a “must” to have Wine installed along Mono in order to use the plataform. I hope things don’t get that far, I like the idea of mono a .Net, what I don’t like is the idea of having to run Wine for every C# application I make, I plan to use only GTK#. Not interested in the “crossplataform” thing
As long as you do not use Windows.Forms or other Windows-Only libraries, you should not have to use Wine.
Even SharpDevelop will run under GTK#, since the author Mike Krueger wants to make it GUI independent!
I think the Ximian people plan to use mono/gtk# for their own applications in the future. They would not want to install Wine to run evolution 🙂
“@CroanoN: If you want a bigger benchmark, what about the pet store benchmark :-)”
Why Not? Start from here:
http://www.ibatis.com/jpetstore/jpetstore-2.html
and here:
http://research.sun.com/projects/ace/petstore.html
Sorry dear, I forgot to give the most important link about Pet Store discussion, written by the guy responsible for the most important open source web application server in the world JBOSS:
http://www.dreambean.com/petstore.html
–: ))
Phuqker:”.NET objects are NOT COM objects.” People never said (as far as i did not missed a post!) that dotNet object are com+ !
What people and i claimed, is that dotNet is COM+ tied !
(COM+ which is more or less MTS + DCOM + advanced features !)
Presently, dotNet is COM+ tied. Here is fact. Even if MS claim to plan a new ala J2EE component model (managed component) that would replace COM+, there are no clues there are either planing it or having research around it ! As COM+ is windows tied, i can easilly came to a point where dotNet is windows tied for every day application.
It is not a matter of supposed feature or potential new features, but real facts that drive people choices. Would you build a whole architecture on COM+ component and think it is a longterm solution ?
Here again, if MS has plan to realy open dotNet, they would have first try to migrate slooly from the COM object model to the CORBA object model. But they didn’t !
I am not saying COM+ is not working, nor dotNet nor mono or whatever, i am just saying there is a trouble for those technologies as beeing part of the future architecture solutions.
Anyway, most of the people do not realy know what dotNet is, like most of people do not realy know what Java or J2EE are ….
The more you talk about it, the less you use it :o)
Yes, Java has been out there maturing for a long while. But just like Microsoft controls .NET, Sun Microsystems is the only body that can add to the functionality of Java. Microsoft did give part of the .Net specifications to a standards body. Sun Microsystems is not willing to give Java to the standards body. Who is anticompetitive?
C# specification
http://www.ecma.ch/ecma1/STAND/ecma-334.htm
CLI specification
http://www.ecma.ch/ecma1/STAND/ecma-335.htm
Mono is using those standards to create their software. Mono will provide competition to Microsoft as well as Sun Microsystems. Just like Linux is providing competition to other operating systems.
If you feel that Mono is not capable in handling your software development needs then use something else. What would you use if Java couldn’t handle your software development needs? Especially if Java was the only thing available.
Another cross platform is Rebol. It is probably not the best solution for your needs but it does fill someone’s need.
Rebol
http://www.rebol.com/
Having different tools to do similar tasks is a good thing. It gives you choice. If either Sun Microsystems, Microsoft, or Mono cease to exits hopefully there will still be a cross-platform tool to use.
Very attentive…
I could remark to this, but I won’t
-A
nhl = lee = Xavier ???
“Yes, Java has been out there maturing for a long while. But just like Microsoft controls .NET, Sun Microsystems is the only body that can add to the functionality of Java. Microsoft did give part of the .Net specifications to a standards body. Sun Microsystems is not willing to give Java to the standards body. Who is anticompetitive?”
First of all, submitting C# to the standards commity does not mean shit. Answer the following for instance: What happens if MS changes C# in its next release and makes it backwards incompetible and implements a Windows version of runtime that is capable of running both versions? Answer: C# programs written for Linux would keep on running on Windows, C# programs written for Windows would not run on Linux. –: )))) The question is would you trust MS? I would trust Jack the Ripper more.
You are lying or misinformed about Sun’s control of Java. Here is the link to the JCP. (Java Community Process). http://www.jcp.org It is the organization responsible for deciding the future of Java. Everything is voted in the commity by individual members and member firms. Please read the procedure. JCP, currently contains 600+ firms. No, MS is not one of them of course. Those bullying bastards never interoperated in their whole life cycle.
For instance, check out the all the JSRs (Java Specification Requests) here: http://www.jcp.org/en/jsr/all
As you can see, many of them are worked by Oracle, HP, IBM, Sony, Macromedia etc.
For instance, the expert group for MIDP V2.0 (Mobile Information Device Profile V2.0) specification contains the following:
AGEA Corporation Aplix Corporation AromaSoft Corporation Baltimore Technologies “Ciucci, Fabio” “Cordrey, Glen” “Distributed Systems Technology Centre (DSTC)” “Eaves, Jon”
Ericsson Inc. Esmertec AG Espial Group, Inc. France Telecom Fujitsu Limited “Fung, Wai Kit Tony” “German Aerospace Center (DLR)” “Institute for Communications and Navigation (KN-S)” HiddenMind Hitachi, Ltd. “Hook, David” “In-Fusio SA”
“J-Phone Tokyo” “Jain, Myank” “Katin, Neil” “Logica Mobile Networks” “Ma, Steve” “Mitsubishi Electric Corp.” “Mobilitec, Inc” Motorola NEC Corporation NTT DoCoMo, Inc. Nokia Corporation Omnitel “One 2 One Personal Communications Ltd” “Openwave Systems Inc.” “Orange PCS” “PalmSource, Inc.”
Philips “Reddy, Ravi Kumar” “Research In Motion, LTD (RIM)”
“Samsung Electronics Corporation” “Sharp Corporation” “Siemens AG” “Smart Fusion” “Sun Microsystems, Inc.” “Symbian Ltd” “Telefonica Moviles Espana” Vaultus, Inc. Veloxsoft, Inc. Vodafone Group PLC Vodafone UK Ltd. Zucotto Wireless elata PLC
All these people and firms and organizations AGREED how will be MIDP v2.0. They are preparing their devices according to MIDP2.0 now. So, please learn some before uttering.
–: )
to have this “working” eMail address, he hasn’t
…
_554_delivery_error:_dd_Sorry,[email protected]_canno t_be_delivered.__This_account_is_over_quota._-_mta212.mail.scd.yahoo.c om/
Blah Blah
-A
Thats why I supplied a different email address in my previous post. Did you read it really? –: ))))
With this much progress I can’t wait to see what 1.0 will be like. Mono certainly seems to be taking off regardless of all the whining produced by rabid Java programmers. The quality of comments on OSNews has greatly improved in the past few months, but wherever certain Java programmers go there seems to be a flamewar that interrupts the discussion and prevents useful comments from being posted. People who engage in Sun vs. Microsoft, C vs. C++, Java vs. .NET, Java vs. anything else, X kernel type vs. Y kernel type, cars vs. SUVs, Intel vs. AMD, ATI vs. nVidia, et cetera need to exercise a little more self-discipline. These discussions simply result in the repetition of facts, assumptions, and blanket statements until everyone is sick of reading them.
Of course that is why these flamewars were created, viz. to prevent people from having intelligent, positive, and useful discussion of the news post. The same people always seem to be creating the same flame wars every time there is a new release of Mono. I want to know why you do it. Don’t launch into your vitriolic statements like “Java is better than Mono because…” because such comments are not motive enough for finding every Mono news discussion and reiterating everything you dislike about the project. Why do you hate Mono? Why have you decided to fill every Mono news discussion with useless diatribe? Why do you think that OSNews readers appreciate reading the same comments over and over again? Why do you think you deserve to ruin every Mono news post?
I think that the people like Bascule who are trying to inject a little sanity and politeness into the useless tirades and hissy fits thrown over *every* Mono release ought to take a different approach to eliminating such flamewars. The flamers seem to do a pretty good job of publicly humiliating themselves; to anyone not currently caught up in the discussion they appear quite foolish. For example nhl wrote a brilliant synopsis of his first post. I do think that the best way to handle such people is to simply ignore them and begin discussing the positive things about the new release. Flamers seem to feed off the anger and hateful, repetitive comments that their posts engender so if no one gets angry at them, they will eventually get tired of shouting into the wind and go somewhere else.
I just cannot take you serious.
Yes I did, but will not in the future :-)))))))
First, I congradulate you for this enchanting literary piece, that can easily race with Romeo and Juliet if not with Animal Farm.
“With this much progress I can’t wait to see what 1.0 will be like.”
Me too, if it is linear, the whole efford will take 10 years, we already completed 2, so, 8 years more to see Mono 1.0 –: ))))
“These discussions simply result in the repetition of facts, assumptions, and blanket statements until everyone is sick of reading them.”
Just as your post. Actually if you read them, I am the one pointing out the assumptions. If you are sick of them, don’t read them dear.
“Of course that is why these flamewars were created, viz. to prevent people from having intelligent, positive, and useful discussion of the news post.”
Really? Can you show me non-intelligent, non-positive, non-useful anything in any of my posts apart from this one?
“Why do you hate Mono?”
I, for instance, as one of the person that you are addressing, since I am talking against mono, never said that I hate mono. In my case, stop ASSUMING. But I hate MS, since they lie, cheat, bribe and steal. Because, they are bullying bastards. Because, I believe, if they had not existed, IT would be 10 times forward now. Every efford in helping .NET is helping MS, including egoist Miguel’s efford. In short, to fix your assumption, I, for instance, never said I hate Mono. I just think that it is useless for the reasons that I said before.
“Why have you decided to fill every Mono news discussion with useless diatribe?”
I don’t. I fill every Mono news discussion with useful information. Cool down dear, I am trying to help people. –: ))
“Why do you think that OSNews readers appreciate reading the same comments over and over again?”
I never claimed that they would appriciate. Stop assuming. And why should I not write my ideas again and again? I am not a troll and I am not lying and this is a public forum.
There are more important questions like what is relation between OSNews and Mono? Why Eugenia put every Cringley and John Carroll article condamning Java and heroing .NET together with the ones related with how to save Sun from bankcrupcy while there are so many useful and important articles about Java and Sun around.
“Why do you think you deserve to ruin every Mono news post?”
Oh, again you assume. I don’t ruin anything. I am fixing the errors people are making. –: )))) Read my posts again.
“I think that the people like Bascule who are trying to inject a little sanity and politeness into the useless tirades and hissy fits thrown over *every* Mono release ought to take a different approach to eliminating such flamewars.”
Bascule is an ms puppy dear. And you are .NET puppy. And I am Java zealot and this is planet is called world. So, lets know our roles, and save the whales. Besides, Bascule is also injecting “sanity” from your point of view, or “lies” from my point of view in every Java and Mono discussion. Check out the archives.
“The flamers seem to do a pretty good job of publicly humiliating themselves; to anyone not currently caught up in the discussion they appear quite foolish. For example nhl wrote a brilliant synopsis of his first post. I do think that the best way to handle such people is to simply ignore them and begin discussing the positive things about the new release. Flamers seem to feed off the anger and hateful, repetitive comments that their posts engender so if no one gets angry at them, they will eventually get tired of shouting into the wind and go somewhere else.”
Well, as an open flamer, I am not feeding of anger and hateful comments, but having incredible fun!!!! Just another assumption –: )
And I am not going anywhere dear. Bwwwaaaaa hahahahaha!
Deniz Kaan Çopur.
[i]Java 1.4.2, coming in couple of months, will have GTK+ and Windows XP bindings as standard part of the SWING. That means, the programs written 4 years ago will look exactly the way they should look now on Gnome and XP. –; )[i]
One of the biggest gripes with the Java AWT was that it used native widgets which acted inconsistently across platforms. This approach was said to be a hack used to get Java out in time for a new release of Netscape. SWING was supposed to fix those problems.
And now they want to make SWING another AWT?
“One of the biggest gripes with the Java AWT was that it used native widgets which acted inconsistently across platforms. This approach was said to be a hack used to get Java out in time for a new release of Netscape. SWING was supposed to fix those problems.
And now they want to make SWING another AWT?”
No. Actually, Swing’s Look and feel approach is something different than using native widgets. Actually, I am really not very much agains native widget approach after seing IBM’s fantastic SWT (Software Windowing Toolkit) implementation done for Eclipse framework. Want details? Start from here: http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/library/os-ecgui1/?ca=dnt-43
If Mono ever manages full .NET compatibility, then we end up with a situation similar to Java now, where one company holds all the development cards, only in this case there is no Java Community Process to provide input, and the company that controls development direction is Microsoft rather than Sun. The Mono project will always be chasing Microsoft’s implementation, so it will always end up a second-class citizen for running .NET software.
If Mono doesn’t manage full .NET compatibility, as seems quite likely given Microsoft’s defensive patenting of some of the .NET class library, then it is just another VM, a pleasant one without a doubt but not the be-all-and-end-all, and one that is heavily influenced by Microsoft and likely to continue to be so. Not to mention that it gives Microsoft a veneer of Open Source goodness that it doesn’t deserve – you can already see this in Microsoft’s promotion of .NET as cross-platform and multi-vendor, when in reality it is only these things if Mono or Portable .NET succeeds.
Although I respect the efforts of the Mono developers and am impressed by the speed with which it is coming along, I am concerned that if it ever becomes a common development platform on Linux, it hands a big lever to Microsoft to meddle with Linux application development.
Consider this strategy that Microsoft might attempt:
1. Allow (encourage?) Mono to infringe on patented parts of .NET. Attempt to quietly downplay concerns over defensive patents. Mono is a large Open Source project, even if the main developers are careful to avoid infringing on patents it should be easy to slip some patent-infringing code into it subtly without people noticing – much easier than slipping a backdoor in. Pay whoever is willing to do this handsomely as compensation for being the fall guy, maybe promise them a job at Microsoft once it’s all blown over.
2. Encourage developers to develop for .NET as a cross-platform solution.
3. When a significant number of Linux applications are written using Mono/.NET, sue Mono developers for infringing on their patents.
4. Halt Mono development and development of Mono-based apps. Spread FUD to businesses about how you can’t trust Open Source software to play by the rules, all the while pointing out that said software runs fine under the WIndows .NET runtime, and without patent issues. A GTK# reimplementation for Windows might be necessary to move Mono GUI apps to Windows, but that’s not a lot of work for a company the size of Microsoft.
5. Watch with glee as businesses running Linux/Mono software jump ship to Windows in order to be able to continue running their software legally, taking a horde of developers with them, and smile even more when said businesses and developers vow never to return to Linux, having been burnt once.
6. Sit back and relax as there is no way to be sued for this behaviour as the Mono project is not a business in and of itself, even if anyone did find out.
Let’s not forget who Microsoft thinks is their No. 1 operating system competitor these days.
For what it’s worth, I’d much rather see the same kind of development resources poured into Parrot, the Perl 6 (and maybe Python 3?) VM, which seems much more worthy to me as an Open Source alternative to .NET.
I guess I’m just uneasy about Microsoft having such a large influence on Linux application development – it sends shivers up my spine.
First of all dear unmatched genius, please stop humiliating people because they are not good in your language. I know quite a lot of languages. Maybe more than you do. I would not humiliate you if I knew that you would not speak Turkish good for instance.
I said I was having trouble understanding his argument, the problem most likely stemming from the fact that he’s not a native English speaker.
If you could not understand, here is what he says: THERE WILL NEVER BE AN MS OFFICE VERSION BASED ON .NET RELEASED BY MS THAT WILL RUN ON LINUX. I hope you are intelligent enough to get it now. –; )
Do you even know what Crossover Office is? I was wondering if he was raising some specific complaints with it. Go to http://www.codeweavers.com/ and read, please.
By the way, native code compilation on the runtime, is not esoteric to .NET. It is perfectly possible to write such a bytecode runner in Java, actually, I know one such efford coming in near future. It is not very much useful though, especially if you think about future, since JITs are quite sophisticated nowadays, and HW is getting faster and faster.
I’d rather be free of the overhead of a large runtime.
If you really need to have native version, you can compile it with a native Java compiler, such as GJC, or 20 or so Java to native compilers for Windows.
The point of .NET is this occurs transparent to the user. The user may be on one of three ISAs yet the developer only needs to release one version of an application. Compiling to native code completely defeats the purpose of releasing one version of a program in MSIL instead of 3 different versions for IA32, IA64, and x86-64.
.NET is completely useless.
.NET provides a smooth transition to new ISAs, and the immediate accessability to the features of the new ISAs without the need to release multiple versions of applications. I’ve made this point three times now…
No, read my message again.
Does anyone know the status of the OS X port of SWT ?
I heard QT might get supported to, does anyone have more info on this ?
Thanks and sorry for the off-topic-ness.
http://dev.eclipse.org/viewcvs/index.cgi/~checkout~/platform-swt-ho…
No, read my message again.
No to what?
CroanoN, you’re yet to prove yourself capable of rational discourse…
But as I told many times, THE IMPORTANT THING IS NOT SPEED.
On the Java issue, uh? I disagree, Java required high power computer to get it runs faster. Do you have any idea how many people are complaining about how slow Java is and how Java required high power computer to make it runs smoother?
Java, currently, tested and running on: Windows, Mac OS, Mac OSX, Solaris, BSD, Linux, you name it.
On BSD? You need to wake up and open the eyes. Java on BSD is complete sucks compare from what’s on Windows, MacOS, Solaris and Linux. But, I think it might be better in FreeBSD 5.x. Sun doesn’t even write a native FreeBSD.
Tools: One word: Eclipse. I can also provide 50+ words more.
This is one of worst editor on the low machines. It’s bloody slow!
Please people, come to your senses.
Nonsense, it’s opposite, which you need to come to your own senses.
BTW: I don’t support .NET (include Mono), not look forward for .NET to get grow into the business and market.
On the Java issue, uh? I disagree, Java required high power computer to get it runs faster. Do you have any idea how many people are complaining about how slow Java is and how Java required high power computer to make it runs smoother?
That’s been precisely my experience. We’re using an older application here that was developed in house and written in Motif/C and Fortran 90. It’s somewhat lacking in features and buggy.
Due to complaints about the maintainability of the original application, it was decided that the original codebase should be scrapped. A group (which I was a part of) developed a much more powerful application written in Java with many of the bugs from the original fixed. They touted it could be run not only on the Solaris systems, but the Windows ones as well, thanks to Java.
Yet people persist in using the original application, despite the obvious drawbacks. Why? The performance of the Java application was unacceptable. Given, this application does some rather complex mathematical work on rather large datasets, and for that reason Java was a less than ideal solution (due to a lack of unsigned types and operator overloading)
On BSD? You need to wake up and open the eyes. Java on BSD is complete sucks compare from what’s on Windows, MacOS, Solaris and Linux. But, I think it might be better in FreeBSD 5.x. Sun doesn’t even write a native FreeBSD.
The only native builds of Java 1.4 are extremely alpha. You can find them in mailing lists posted by the people who are doing the port. Java 1.3 and previous releases are in the ports tree.
This (Eclipse) is one of worst editor on the low machines. It’s bloody slow!
So are all the IDEs written in Java (e.g. Netbeans)
I’m not really one to talk on the IDE issue though… I do most of my development in vim… never saw the need for anything more.
Nonsense, it’s opposite, which you need to come to your own senses.
CroanoN is a Java zealot so vehement even Java advocates tend to disagree with what he says…
The only native builds of Java 1.4 are extremely alpha. You can find them in mailing lists posted by the people who are doing the port. Java 1.3 and previous releases are in the ports tree.
Yes, but my point is that.. it doesn’t work perfect as what’s on other platforms. From what I heard that, it’s doing better on 5.0 so far.
So are all the IDEs written in Java (e.g. Netbeans)
I’m not really one to talk on the IDE issue though…
Indeed..
I do most of my development in vim… never saw the need for anything more.
Me too, but I use with gui mostly. (gvim)
Lets take .NET, Microsoft and the boogie man right out of the picture.
First, CroanoN, have you actually had a look at the mono extensions being added to .NET? have you actually had a look at the “mission statement” of mono?
I see you then crap on about KDE bindings. There are no bloody KDE bindings because most link to the qt library which there is already a project, qt#, taking care of that issue.
The only problem that mono CAN’T address are the native calls to outside API’s and applications. Maybe in the future once wine has stablised, the two, mono and wine, could work hand in hand. Until then, new applications written in pure C# and that avoid native calls like PInvoke will run without too many problems on mono.
As for sharp develop, you again are being an idiot. There is already a C# port of SWF meaning that Sharpdevelop is going to be ported to SWF. The reason for this is because GTKSWF is more mature than GTK#
Lets take .NET, Microsoft and the boogie man right out of the picture.
But this is the problem with Mono. You can’t take Microsoft out of the picture, and to do so is simply burying your head in the sand.
If it was simply a work-alike system, there wouldn’t be any concern. In fact it would be great. But it’s not a work-alike system, it’s trying as hard as it can be to be compatible, and therein lies the problem. Microsoft controls the specifications for which the Mono team are writing an implementation, and while this compatibility is a goal, Microsoft only has to shout ‘Jump!’ and the Mono team is forced to ask ‘How high?’
It hasn’t started happening yet, and it may never happen, but Microsoft’s patent applications on parts of .NET look ominous.
Let’s not forget the effect that being able to run Windows programs on Linux without difficulty might have on the native Linux software scene. Who will bother downloading free software and then improving it to meet their needs (or reporting bugs or writing documentation or any of the other things that people do to help out) when shinier, slicker commercial Windows software can be downloaded off a P2P network and runs straight away on Linux? It doesn’t happen much with WINE, but that’s a long way from being able to run most Windows software decently. With the CLR and class library there’s a lot less to implement to make this work, and I have no doubt that a lot of Windows software will be moving to .NET in the medium-term future. After all, isn’t most Open Source software the result of a developer ‘scratching an itch’? Access to a whole heap of future .NET Windows applications makes a lot of those itches disappear.
The best thing Mono could do for its independence – and maybe Linux’s native software base – is to lose the goal of being .NET-compatible, but unfortunately the (possibly short-sighted) desire to see Windows applications run on Linux (and possibly also Miguel’s desire to have a cross-platform SDK to kick TrollTech with) is just too strong. This means they’re going to have to play by Microsoft’s rules just like the WINE team have to, and last I heard, Microsoft wasn’t too keen on this Linux thing.
Microsoft only has to shout ‘Jump!’ and the Mono team is forced to ask ‘How high?’
Not if you read their mission statement. Compatibility is a goal, but not a requirement. If Microsoft decides to say ‘Jump!’, they can simply say, ‘No.’
It hasn’t started happening yet, and it may never happen, but Microsoft’s patent applications on parts of .NET look ominous.
These patent applications are just plain good horse sense. Microsoft is a business, as such they have to take action to protect their investment in time and R&D. They probably figure that if they don’t patent this stuff, someone else will. Don’t be too sure it means they’re going to use it to shoot down Mono.
Let’s not forget the effect that being able to run Windows programs on Linux without difficulty might have on the native Linux software scene. Who will bother downloading free software and then improving it to meet their needs (or reporting bugs or writing documentation or any of the other things that people do to help out) when shinier, slicker commercial Windows software can be downloaded off a P2P network and runs straight away on Linux?
Who cares about the native Linux software scene? What are you going to do, apply for endangered species status? And aren’t you essentially saying here that Windows software is somehow better (in some sense) than Linux software? At the very least, it’s “shinier and slicker.”
What are you trying to say here, marm? On the one hand, you think Mono is bad because Microsoft will pull the rug out from under them and they won’t achieve cross-platform compatibility. On the other, you think it’s bad because, if they do achieve cross-platform compatibility, it might destroy the native Linux software scene. Which is it?
I think you’re just saying it’s bad because it’s Microsoft, and your religion is Linux.
Posted From Mac OS X Safari.
CroanoN: First, I congradulate you for this enchanting literary piece, that can easily race with Romeo and Juliet if not with Animal Farm.
That is a perfect example of a useless comment. You have created a sentence that has no value except to attempt to humiliate someone.
CroanoN: Me too, if it is linear, the whole efford will take 10 years, we already completed 2, so, 8 years more to see Mono 1.0…
If it is not linear, I may call you on your desire to see Mono version 1.0.
CroanoN: Just as your post.
No, my posts do not contain blanket statements.
CroanoN: Actually if you read them, I am the one pointing out the assumptions.
In which case my statement is still correct because I said that these discussions are filled with facts, assumptions, and blanket statements. Why do you take personal offense to statements that are not specifically directed to you?
CroanoN: If you are sick of them, don’t read them…
I normally ignore your posts when you kick into anti-MS, Java is God! mode, but the fact that reading your posts is voluntary is not a good excuse for putting crap into them.
CroanoN: Really? Can you show me non-intelligent, non-positive, non-useful anything in any of my posts apart from this one?
Yes, and yes.
CroanoN: I, for instance, as one of the person that you are addressing, since I am talking against mono, never said that I hate mono.
Does this matter?
CroanoN: In my case, stop ASSUMING.
You consistently follow every Mono-related discussion and criticize the development team, call the project useless, imply that everyone working on the project is an idiot, and write sarcastic responses to anyone who questions your motives. If that is not hating a project, could you please tell me what it is?
CroanoN: But I hate MS, since they lie, cheat, bribe and steal. Because, they are bullying bastards. Because, I believe, if they had not existed, IT would be 10 times forward now. Every efford in helping .NET is helping MS, including egoist Miguel’s efford. In short, to fix your assumption, I, for instance, never said I hate Mono. I just think that it is useless for the reasons that I said before.
*sigh* Why do you have to call people names like “egotist” just because they do not share your opinions?
Also, we had this discussion before. Mono is not useless. It is currently less useful than Java for certain tasks, but it is not useless. If the tide of popular opinion were to turn against Java and for .NET (the platform), .NET would soon become more useful than Java. Where would that leave you? To be consistent, you would then have to champion .NET because it would be the more useful of the two.
Why can you not understand that people support what they like and quit telling them that they will fail just because Mono is not currently better than Java? If people had followed your “logic,” Linux would not exist because it did not begin life being better than Windows, IBM computer clones would not exist because they did not begin life being better than IBM computers, Mozilla would not exist because it did not begin life being better than Internet Explorer, etc. How would anyone develop any new project from scratch without starting out less useful than existing projects?
CroanoN: I don’t. I fill every Mono news discussion with useful information. Cool down…I am trying to help people.
I was never angry, so it does not make any sense to tell me to cool down. As for whether you add useful information to every Mono news discussion, that is fairly obvious but also quite irrelevant to my point. I was referring to people who attempt to instigate a flame war by purposely posting every rumor that makes Mono look bad. I have no problem with people correcting errors although I question whether it would be better to ignore people who are trying to start a fight regardless of how wrong their comments may be.
CroanoN: I never claimed that they would appriciate. Stop assuming. And why should I not write my ideas again and again? I am not a troll and I am not lying and this is a public forum.
I never claimed that you claimed that they would appreciate your comments; mature people, however, post comments that contribute to the betterment of the site community, and the community generally appreciates comments that contribute to their betterment. I will concede that not all corrections are popular, but that does not mean that all unpopular statements are correct.
CroanoN: Bascule is an ms puppy dear. And you are .NET puppy. And I am Java zealot and this is planet is called world. So, lets know our roles, and save the whales. Besides, Bascule is also injecting “sanity” from your point of view, or “lies” from my point of view in every Java and Mono discussion. Check out the archives.
CroanoN: Well, as an open flamer, I am not feeding of anger and hateful comments, but having incredible fun!!!! Just another assumption –: )
CroanoN: And I am not going anywhere dear. Bwwwaaaaa hahahahaha!
*scratches head* How are these comments useful if I cannot understand the point(s) that you are trying to make?