Home > Mono > GTK# 0.14, wx.NET 0.3 Released GTK# 0.14, wx.NET 0.3 Released Eugenia Loli 2003-11-21 Mono 27 Comments The release 0.14 of Gtk# is a minor bugfix release to support an imminent Mono 0.29 release. wx.NET is a set of .NET bindings for the wxWindows cross-platform toolkit and the 0.3 version brings new features. About The Author Eugenia Loli Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker. Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli 27 Comments 2003-11-21 4:18 am Anonymous wx.NET is pretty nice even though there have been times when it’s been broken as the DotGNU and Mono runtimes have undergone changes. The editor control that wxWindows is pretty interesting. It uses part of the scintilla library for code completion. Another interesting thing is that it now works on OSX with dotGNU(although it says it’s a bit unstable). /me patiently waits for the “but we already have java” trolls to arrive. 2003-11-21 4:57 am Anonymous wxWindows kicks ass again. Thanks, guys! -Erwos 2003-11-21 7:02 am Anonymous I think the reason why so many people say negative things about Microsoft is because they want choice! If they make this technology available for the OS of my choice than I am all for it! We don’t need the same OS in order for everything to work. Take a look at all the cars on the Freeway or the Internet. Thank you for all of the hard work! By the way, I like JAVA for the same reasons. It is not about technological supremecy it is about being able to choose for myself. 2003-11-21 9:45 am Anonymous “I think the reason why so many people say negative things about Microsoft is because they want choice!” But this also means to have the choise for MS. When doing .NET development, I choose Microsoft, because it’s the best for .NET. Mircosoft’s .NET framework as their development tools for .NET are years ahead from the Open Source projects. Mono and friends are nice to play a lillte bit around but for realsize projects MS offers more. And seeing all the real cool developments MS is doing in this field (WinFX, Whidbey, Avalon, Xaml, etc.) I think the gap between MS and the Open Source .NET systems will be larger in 2006, not smaller. 2003-11-21 10:45 am Anonymous There is no “Mono and friends”. Ximian and therefore Novell is behind Mono and they are almost done with 1.0 within a year. for a while framework thats not that much time. comrad 2003-11-21 11:00 am Anonymous I disagree with the porting of .NET to linux, unless it is done by Microsoft, because otherwise MS will have room to extort us. Secondly we don’t need .NET I am currently experimenting with ways to create a full alternative, to rival .NET using Java (to rival c#) and every other OO language OSS uses still on the drawing board and with only me working on it until I release it to the community will only support C++ to start but hopefully once my new site is up I will go on to full development (my research should be finished by then!). 2003-11-21 11:44 am Anonymous .. that was the only flaw I could see last time I played around with it. Even if I like the C# programming for realtime computergraphics is pretty useless – thats a pitty (and not a fault of C# rather than .NET) 2003-11-21 12:04 pm Anonymous There is no “Mono and friends”. Ximian and therefore Novell is behind Mono and they are almost done with 1.0 within a year. for a while framework thats not that much time. Within a year of what? Mono is more than 2 years old already, and like a previous poster said, this gap between Mono and MS is just going to increase over time. 2003-11-21 1:02 pm Anonymous I am a long time Linux user and I really used to like Linux, but lately I looked at alternatives like MacOSX and got excited by them. If Linux on the desktop means Gnome, OpenOffice and Mozilla I am not interested anymore. In my opinion, Gnome tries to copy MacOSX, but if you compare it to the original, many people will not get really excited by Gnome. OpenOffice might do the job, but from a technical point of view, even MS Office is probably better and Mozilla is also a huge monster application. And I also don’t like Mono. MacOSX does has its own really well-designed framework, Windows will have .NET. If Linux just clones .NET as a development framework (and it will probably be a bad clone because MS will always add some nice features that are not in Mono) what reason should there be to use Linux from a technical point of view? In my opinion, the future of Linux doesn’t really look that bright anymore especially if you look at MacOSX 2003-11-21 2:14 pm Anonymous “In my opinion, the future of Linux doesn’t really look that bright anymore especially if you look at MacOSX” I agree. Linux strenghts are UNIX and GPL. Most of the features that exist for Linux also run on the *BSD, so we can’t say that it makes Linux special. People are hoping to see some sort of GPL’ed MacOSX to come out from Linux, but that’s hard to happen because the GUI coherence in the UNIX software base sucks. It’s very far away from Windows or OSX, just a bit better that Windows 3.11. The problem is that the Linux userbase puts choice before coherence. That’s why Gnome and KDE interworking is so late. That’s why freedesktop.org exists. Linux and the rest of the open-source UNIX are very good on the command-line, but that’s it. 2003-11-21 2:27 pm Anonymous “This is a minor bugfix release to support an imminent mono release.” What release are they taling about .3? 2003-11-21 2:44 pm Anonymous They’ve been planning to release 1.0 for some time now. Can’t remember how long it’s been since I’ve heard that, but that probably means that a 1.0 is ‘imminent’. 2003-11-21 4:02 pm Anonymous what’s that Linux/Gnome/Mono future don’t look bright talk. If you guys would follow the news you should notice they all do extremly well lately 2003-11-21 4:04 pm Anonymous In the same sentence as the word imminent, the article says .29. Hence “an imminent Mono 0.29 release. ” Do people read anymore? 2003-11-21 4:10 pm Anonymous show me where in http://lists.ximian.com/archives/public/mono-list/2003-November/016… is that statment. You should jump to conclusions. 2003-11-21 4:18 pm Anonymous OSnews had a great article a while back that stated that MS maintains dominance because the installed program base is so huge. It’s just too expensive to switch and translate those programs. Maybe that’s why MS had to shoot Java – because the inter-operability would undermine their dominance. I’d imagine they have to strike at Mono for the same reason. If DotNet is the foundation for most future windows apps, they can’t have those apps running on Linux or OSX under Mono or what’s to keep people from switching? I think that’s the heart of the battle. I for one could care less about Windows – but I need windows-only apps for work. 2003-11-21 4:51 pm Anonymous One thing that you are missing is that they are moving all their apps to .Net or providing CLR compatible API’s. This is one place where Mono won’t be able to compete. Because currently .Net is free and if somebody wants to write an app against Exchange they can do it in Windows. However even if it was possible in Mono why would you do that when .Net Framework is free in Windows. Lets look at another senario they move all server API’s to Webservice type Remoting, or something and you can create an interface from Mono to run on Unix. Microsoft still doesn’t loose. They are still selling you the server software, so either senario they make money. So Mono succeding doesn’t really limit their in take of money at all. All that it does is expand their market so that they now can market .Net servers to all Linux shops. I mean what ever your grip about Exchange or SQL 2000. Nothing in the *nix world comes close to them in funcationlity and price. Oracle I have to admit is a powerhouse, but the price out ways it’s usefullness for a website. Tell me if you can think of any more senarios where Microsoft wouldn’t gain money from Mono succeeding or failing. Either way Microsoft wins and that is why their marketing people and architechure design people get the big bugs 2003-11-21 5:07 pm Anonymous I take it you’re referring to my comment about the mono 1.0 release. If not, well, these articles are still interesting. http://www.infoworld.com/article/03/05/22/HNmono_1.html http://www.linuxworld.com/story/32686.htm And finally, from OSNews as well http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=3632 I know they are talking about a 0.29 release, but given their previous plans of releasing a 1.0 by the end of the year, they might just decide to make 0.29 a 1.0 release. 2003-11-21 5:42 pm Anonymous Excuse my ignorance, but I have a question about C#… If it is interpreted by a virtual machine like Java, why people say that is is faster than Java ? I think C# is only a Java clone and M$ is making a lot of marketing about its .Net strategy. I prefer the old and good C and/or C++ or even Objective-C. I can compile it in my linux box and I have no dependency of M$. 2003-11-21 5:48 pm Anonymous “In my opinion, the future of Linux doesn’t really look that bright anymore especially if you look at MacOSX” It would be true if MacOS X could run in cheap PC hardware. Apple’s hardware is expensive and has no marketshare outside of USA. I think that desktop linux isn’t better tham MacOS X but is sufficient for most of people. 2003-11-21 5:58 pm Anonymous Because it is not interpreted. C# is compiled ahead of time, not just in time. It’s not jit but aot/ >Excuse my ignorance, but I have a question about C#… If >it is interpreted by a virtual machine like Java, why >people say that is is faster than Java ? >I think C# is only a Java clone and M$ is making a lot of >marketing about its .Net strategy. >I prefer the old and good C and/or C++ or even Objective->C. I can compile it in my linux box and I have no >dependency of M$. 2003-11-21 6:00 pm Anonymous Because CLR is almost equal to JVM. 2003-11-21 6:04 pm Anonymous C# is not compiled to a native binary like C++ usually is. C# is compiled to an intermediate language like Java usually is. 2003-11-21 6:27 pm Anonymous “Excuse my ignorance, but I have a question about C#… If it is interpreted by a virtual machine like Java, why people say that is is faster than Java ?” Just because it is interpreted, does not mean that the .NET CLR is not faster than the JVM. C# is indeed faster, and it is NOT just a clone of Java. It has definitely benefited from Java, but MS was able to use hindsight to avoid the mistakes that the Java inventors made. If you take a second and look at the .NET framework, you will begin to scratch your head and wonder what crack Sun was smoking. The .NET APIs are much more logical and clean. -G 2003-11-21 7:19 pm Anonymous There are a lot of differences, such as no primitives, as well as it compiles to a common CLR which [http://www12.brinkster.com/brianr/languages.aspx] all of these langueges can compile to. Imagine porting your old COBOL system to .Net so that it can be put on the web and use some of the newer hardware avaibliable. 2003-11-21 7:58 pm Anonymous I havn’t seen much speed diffrence in java and C#(.NET), GUI’s are faster, since Swing does most things in java while C# relies heaviy on the native framework. SWT for java is just as fast. 2003-11-22 1:52 pm Anonymous A couple of people have bought it up. Microsoft is an extremely dominant position and the fact remains, it is harder to gain market share than lose it. Look how long it took for Netscape to lose their market share vs. Mozilla gaining market share. The fact remains, people aren’t going to move unless; the alternative is absolutely “out of this world” better OR the dominant player drops the ball so many times, it becomes a better solution to simply move than stay. As for “developing new ideas”. What Linux needs, and is doing, is providing a two prong strategy. Develop compatibility, .NET and Java, and new ideas such as ALSA which provides LOWER latency than WDM. What Linux needs on the desktop isn’t more buzzwords but a strong feature set that works first time, every time. Sure, we’ll never have a “standard” desktop but the consumer will decide. If the market keeps moving the way it is, GNOME will become the defacto standard. As for the comments about OpenOffice.org by some people. It sounds more like the “tall poppy syndrome” coming to light than any actual constructive criticisms. 1.x was to get the basic new technologies; XML file formats, porting to new platforms; IRIX, FreeBSD, NetBSD, Linux ARM/PowerPC, MacOS X and loads of others are on the cards, including OpenVMS, HP-UX, AIX and so forth. Version 2.x will be the release with a nice new GUI with a cleaner layout. 2.x will when the radical changes will take place, however, until then, stop making rash judgements based on “oh, it looks different” rather than, “can I do zyx using it”. As for .NET, I’m not going to jump on it, however, why should Mono stop because a few don’t like it? I’m a libertarian, and if people want to do something, as so long as it isn’t going to effect me, I quite frankly couldn’t give a tinkers-cuss. If Miguel has concluded that providing a .NET like framework would be good for *NIX and GNOME, then I say, “fill your boots Miguel”, do it and lets see what the outcome is. Why should a few anti-Microsoft zealots hell-bent on controlling the actions of all and sundry dictate the direction of the OSS community? Isn’t the whole point of hating Microsoft in the first place; the excessive control Microsoft exerts over the development community?