Most are aware of the success C# is enjoying in the Windows community, and we have been hearing about how the Open Source Community fears the technology in Longhorn enough to take the drastic step of co-opting Microsofts strategy and doing it first. But what about the Apple community? Turns out they have the same idea according to DrunkenBatman. Our past commentary is here.
C# Ruling the Roost?
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
That’s not the “apple community” … it’s just a blogger. Who isn’t a developer.
Basically he’s saying that Apple should go with C#, and that Apple should drop Objective-C, because the important thing is the “framework” and not the language, and damnit, Apple should have continued the YellowBox.
Well, as a developer, I sure would have prefered that Apple continued with YellowBox. But they didn’t, and it’s perhaps because it would have hurt them.. who knows.
In any cases, from my point of view, all I see is an incredible surge of Apple computers in many developer’s circles (even if some run linux on thoses !).
DrunkenBatman seems to say that developers are interested, but nothing is coming. I think more that’s because things evolves slowly. But with all theses developers getting a mac, I think it’s a matter of time. Obviously Apple needs to continue producing attractive computers and developers tools (which it currently does).
Also, Objective-C is really, really great. And arguably, a good part of what makes Cocoa great is due to Objective-C (dynamism and simplicity). Yet I understand its point; it’s better to provides some bindings for others languages (even if what’s long isn’t learning Objective-C (come on, it’s a matter of days), but learning the OpenStep framework).
And of course, I must add that it is already possible to port Cocoa applications to others systems, by sticking to OpenStep and using GNUstep.
Work remains to be done, for sure, but GNUstep progresses everydays. As always, it’s a matter of the number of interested developers.
I hate MS technology in general but I have to say that .NET and C# are really, really nice and I am really excited about the mono project. In the end run, mono will be superior (albeit a little tardy) to MS’s own implementation because of the additional OSS pieces that Mono supports (DB’s, python, perl, numerical libraries, etc.) and true multi-platform portability (mono runs on all kind of stuff).
In fact, I like C# and mono far more than I like Java.
that bugs me about the cocoa frameworks is the ridiculously long method and class names.
[myInstance someMethod:one argTwo:two argThree:three];
is less pleasing to the eye than
myInstance.someMethod(one,two,three);
which is how it is in Cocoa for Java. which is more clear to my C++-biased mind
As I see it, there are currently options for programming ‘industrial strength’ client-side/GUI desktop apps:
– C++
– C#
– Java
– Python
– Anything else I missed?
IMHO, Java is just too damn slow and the GUI (swing) rather clunky. I heard SWT works better (I was rather impressed with Eclipse 3), but only on Windows.
I would’ve probably chosen C++, but I can’t seem to get my head around the semantics of that language
So it came down to a choice between C# and Python – I choose C# because there are more resources available for it out there (compare the number of C# books compared to that of Python), and plus it looks like it’s really taking off anyway.
Of course you could type it like that but with some clever indenting you can have a much more readable;
[myInstance someMethod:one
argTwo:two
argThree:three];
which I prefer by far.
But with tabs of course… silly me.
It makes sense. If OSX and XCode were the ultimate cross-platform Windows/Linux/MacOS environment, it could be a huge boon for Apple.
With all the mega-hype lately, alot of previously MS only software houses are looking at the possiblity of offering software for Linux. If Apple pulled off that cross-platform development thing, and the best choice for simultainious Windows/Linux development were a Mac, then not only does that mean more macs sold (to devs), but more importantly, more devs using Macs, and happier ones too! Now all that software that they wanted to develope for Windows and Linux can be trivialy ported to MacOS! If a truly cross-platform dev environment became the BEST dev environment, we’d have a true three-platform world, instead of the wintel domination of today. Best of all, it wouldn’t be a major problem for the devs either, just more choice for consumers.
Of corse, this would be a large amount of work for Apple, but if they pulled it off, it could be huge.
what books do you need? Learning python, programming in python, python in a nutshell, etc.
first Adobe stopped creating premiere for OS X because Apple created a better PDF viewer and did not enlist adobe’s help with display PDF, so apple makes Final Cut Pro and kicks Adobes but in the middle range video editing market.
Adobe pulls framemaker from OS X and keeps Solaris?!?!? so next year apple will release a new app that will cost half of what freammaker does and do a better job AND perhaps be cross platform.
Adobe decides to pull out all stops and pulls the Photoshop software. Apple buys adobe, if they don’t, they will have a problem with no photo shop workflow.
But why would Adobe pull PS? The mac version accounts for 25% of their sales.
That would be hard to imagine:)
finance.yahoo.com
APPLE COMP INC Market Cap: 9.61B
ADOBE SYS Market Cap: 9.91B
Except if Apple borrows more money that it is worth:) Adobe is bigger than Apple
That’s why I like sites like OSNews – they find some great articles. It’s always fun reading about Apple’s history because unlike Beos and Amiga, it’s about technical excellence with a (so far) happy ending.
But he says about the Mac’s ever-shrinking user base is grim. And I’m not sure that getting Windows app over is going to help all that much.
purchasing a company involves more than the market cap.
Agreed, but it’s very hard to buy company which is bigger than yours:)
Wouldn’t it be better if Microsoft adopted Cocoa?
The answer is no. Why should Microsoft put itself in a situation where it must have its programming language dictated to it by a company that has a vested interest in pubmping up its own technological efforts while making sure that others didn’t have the same advantages.
The same is true for C# and the Macintosh.
“first Adobe stopped creating premiere for OS X because Apple created a better PDF viewer”
Thats not true. Adobe stopped creating premiere for OS X simply because Apple made Final Cut Pro.
Apple made Final Cut Pro because Adobe wouldn’t allow Premiere to take advantage of key Mac technologies that would have given the software a massive speed rush ahead of Wintel.
The PDF spec is an open one. Adobe certinly doesn’t discourage companies from making their own PDF viewer and you might even say that they ENCOURAGE it.
“[i][Adobe is miffed because they ] did not enlist adobe’s help with display PDF”
Why would they get upset with that?
“so apple makes Final Cut Pro and kicks Adobes but in the middle range video editing market.”
Final Cut Pro is not for middle range video editing. It competes in the high end. Shoot, it HAS the high end. Final Cut express competes in the middle with Adobe’s Premiere.
[i]”Adobe pulls framemaker from OS X and keeps Solaris?!?!?”
They pulled it because there are much better tools on the Mac than Adobe’s framemaker. Framemaker sales were doing poorly on the Mac.
“so next year apple will release a new app that will cost half of what freammaker does and do a better job AND perhaps be cross platform.”
Apple only competed with Adobe because Video is a key area of growth for computing now and Adobe refused to inject key technologies into its Mac version of Premiere that would allow it to compete properly. So Apple took matters into its own hands and handed Adobe a large slice of humble pie in the process. That does not mean that it will make a competing app to framemaker. There are already plenty of sucessful apps that compete in this space on the Mac as it is.
“Adobe decides to pull out all stops and pulls the Photoshop software.”
Photoshop is Adobe’s largest selling product… and at the last report… Mac users make are between 35-40% of of those that purchase the software. Killing Photoshop on the Mac would be stupid.
More to the point though… you seem to be implying that there is a vendetta at Adobe against Apple and that they have a rivalry to settle. Adobe’s CEO has since gone on record to say that this is not the case and that their relationship with Apple is very healthy.
“Apple buys adobe, if they don’t, they will have a problem with no photo shop workflow.”
There’s no reason to believe this is concern. Stop being a scare mongerer.
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1572051,00.asp
Wouldn’t it be better if Microsoft adopted Cocoa?
The answer is no. Why should Microsoft put itself in a situation where it must have its programming language dictated to it by a company that has a vested interest in pubmping up its own technological efforts while making sure that others didn’t have the same advantages.
The same is true for C# and the Macintosh.
You seem to assume that Apple is on some kind of level playing field with Microsoft. And it’s not about Apple being dictated to by Microsoft. Heck, Apple already is dependent on Microsoft for Office. Mono is open source so they can do whatever they want with it. Since the libraries are MIT/X11 license based, they could even take the libraries, improve upon them and close-source them if they want.
It’s all about the developers, and since many developers just don’t care about the Apple market anymore c#/mono is an attractive alternative to other Apple development environments.
It’s all about the developers, and since many developers just don’t care about the Apple market anymore c#/mono is an attractive alternative to other Apple development environments.
Don’t you think as a “consumer” you would like to use which ever os you wanted and *still* be able to use your favorite software. Anyhow, hopefully mono (+ related) will work just fine on the mac as more developers focus on it.
developers to pick one which is cross platform so I can use what software I want on the platform I want. Sick of having apps for only one platform. Bring on freedom of choice and platform independence.
You’re comparing apples and oranges. The vast majority of so-called C# books out are not primarily about C# the language, but about the .NET framework(s). C# isn’t really a terribly complex language, though clearly more complex than either Java or Python, but the .NET stuff *is* complex.
In the latter (C++/Java/C#-ish) syntax, how do you know what each argument is for?
Consider the following fictional example:
String * myString = “hello”;
String * subString1 = [myString subStringFrom: 1 to: 3];
String * subString2 = [myString subStringFrom: 1 withLength: 3];
vs.
String * myString = “hello”;
String * subString1 = myString.subString(1, 3);
String * subString2 = myString.subStringWithLength(1, 3);
Now, is the first argument the start index, or the end/length of the desired substring? Guess you’re off to the documentation while the Obj-C programmer merrily continues coding.
developers to pick one which is cross platform so I can use what software I want on the platform I want. Sick of
having apps for only one platform. Bring on freedom of choice and platform independence.
That makes sense for many kinds of software, but not for some others. Multi-platform development usually restricts you and won’t let you easily use OS-specific features, and if you do you end up with products that works differently on different platforms, and you’ll end up with much larger support costs.
Most are aware of the success C# is enjoying in the Windows community…
Success, eh? Why is it I have not found myself saying: “Gosh, I’ve got to download the .Net framework so I can run app X. Its what I’ve been looking for all along.”
I wouldn’t call .NET an unmitigated success, yet. It just seems the fanboys here at OSNews think its the greatest thing since sliced bread.
As for the poster who said he picked C# over Python to learn because their where more books for it. Poor choice. First of all, Microsoft itself makes money off of books. So that adds to the number. Secondly, Microsoft has conditioned people (through certification bs) that there must be books on a subject, and that you must be certified. Non-sence!
Did you just try googleing on “python tutorial”? There is a lot of great info out there on Pythong. Don’t overlook it just because there aren’t 500 books lineing the shelves at your local Barnes and Nobles. Kind of makes you wonder: Is the language/infastructure so poorly designed that you need that many books to allow people to succesfully use the framework? I might have something here…
(from the article)
“… Front-end guys are arguably getting kind of screwed with the mac at the moment, but back-end guys are happier than they’ve ever been, …”
LOL
Success, eh? Why is it I have not found myself saying: “Gosh, I’ve got to download the .Net framework so I can run app X. Its what I’ve been looking for all along.”
I wouldn’t call .NET an unmitigated success, yet. It just seems the fanboys here at OSNews think its the greatest thing since sliced bread.
Because most of the apps you’re downloading were already written or written when .NET was very new. Also, the runtime is a pain as a dependency right now so developers are wary of having to have you download it. Now if service pack 2 comes with the runtime then you’ll probably see more developers targetting .NET.
The point is, if you run windows then at some point in time you will be running .NET apps. In fact, with Longhorn, most of your apps will be .NET.
It’s not whether .NET will be a success because it will have to be a success on the windows platform, because developers are being forced into it.
C# isn’t really a terribly complex language, though clearly more complex than either Java or Python, but the .NET stuff *is* complex.
For the amount of functionality you get, .net is big yes but complicated? I find you can pretty easily find what you are looking for. On Windows, combined with vs .net, you’ll spend almost NO time looking for classes etc via the code completion stuff and the dynamic help stuff.
re: I just don’t see it
I wouldn’t call .NET an unmitigated success, yet. It just seems the fanboys here at OSNews think its the greatest thing since sliced bread.
Just because the consumers haven’t *noticed* .net use doesn’t mean there isn’t an incredible investment by developers happening now. Obviously this isn’t qualified, but the sense I get from developer discussions is that c# (and .net, mono, portable .net) will have an impressive effect on developers and hopefully productivity. Again, I don’t know how much of an indicator this is on local client programs but I don’t know many (if any) persons using old style asp over asp .net.
Secondly, Microsoft has conditioned people (through certification bs) that there must be books on a subject, and that you must be certified. Non-sence!
don’t know if I’m proud of this or just indiferent but I don’t have any ms certs and I make a satisfying amount of money using ms technology and have never participated in any “certification bs”. I may one day – and certainly don’t think it’s actually bs. HR people from big companies seem to think it’s important.
Now, is the first argument the start index, or the end/length of the desired substring? Guess you’re off to the documentation while the Obj-C programmer merrily continues coding.
Actually its quite easy to tell what the first argument is because intellisense pops up a small window below the line telling you not only what the first argument is, but what the second argument is also.
Really!? I wish people would have some stinking proof before they go out spuing crap they only heard others say. Java in most cases is faster then C++. If you run Java bytecode on a JVM (like IBM’s) in compiled mode it will put the smack down on just about anything. So please get some facts before saying nonsense!
you live up to your name sake.
did it occur to you that the fact that MS needs to do that to support the syntax shows just how deficient the syntax and semantics of the language are?
if I looked at that file in a text editor like subethraedit or Kate, I would not have such an aid.
Really!? I wish people would have some stinking proof before they go out spuing crap they only heard others say. Java in most cases is faster then C++.
Yes, really. I used some swing based java applications for my job and this applications was terribly slow (My machine is P4/2Ghz/512MB RAM/120GB hard disc, NVidia GF2 video card). It was very slow both under linux and win XP. And IMHO a java faster then C++ statement is a simly untruh.
Opens source should offer what MS can’t offer, stability, openness, and the sharing of knowledge. Stay out of the entertainment business, that’s MS’s realm.
HR people from big companies seem to think it’s important.
That’s not saying too much. In every company I have worked for, the HR departments are always updating procedures, and following some trend set by someone else in the industry. If their information sources states that certification is required, they always seem to follow. The biggest issue with HR is that they are not typically specialized because they have to oversee so many different positions that they follow what the rest of the industry is doing. This way, if a problem arises, they have market studies and predefined research to blame.
Just my rant, but anyone who works, or worked, in the creative fields has a general disgust for the typical HR policies.
did it occur to you that the fact that MS needs to do that to support the syntax shows just how deficient the syntax and semantics of the language are?
Once you get good at coding and you know the language you are using something like knowing that the first argument is the start of the string comes pretty natural.
If remembering something that simple eludes you I’d say that programming just ain’t your bag in general.
if I looked at that file in a text editor like subethraedit or Kate, I would not have such an aid.
If you can’t read your own source and understand it in a text editor … ummm… *no comment*
Look at the two examples you posted. Basically the same code structured slightly differently. If you can’t look at those two pieces of code and connect the dots, then brother I really can’t help ya.
“The biggest issue with HR is that they are not typically specialized because they have to oversee so many different positions that they follow what the rest of the industry is doing. This way, if a problem arises, they have market studies and predefined research to blame.”
Oh, I totally agree with you. It’s really not welcoming to see that your resume is overlooked because HR people can’t see past that point and/or don’t understand your pitch. My only point is that if HR people are looking for it this is one way to make them notice – hence, it’s not useless getting the cert – it does have *some* value.
excuse me, but you are changing the argument.
you said (paraphrasing) “you don’t need to see what the argument is in the syntax because MS has a cutesy little pop up to tell you”
I argued why that is not an important feature because it is not part of the language.
now you ignore your initial statement and claim that I must be to slow to be able to program? stop trying to win a debate at all costs it just makes you seem like you can’t put more than one sentence together into a coherent thought.
BTW, I am not the person who posted the code, I was simply pointing out the flaw in your argument.
the only value it has is that if it was between a guy with a BS and a guy with a BS and a cert, the guy with the BS and cert would get the interview.
@Debman
yes – that’s *is* value isn’t it?? (aside from any knowlege you might actually aquire)
Anyhow – I’m pretty sure we’re both saying the same thing so I’ll stop splitting hairs.
Personally, I think that Java is somewhat futuristic and requires quite some integration with the underlying OS to be able to perform well. The major reason why I find Java a hog is because
1) it is never idle… its always doing something. This means that it is never a good candidate to be swapped out.
2) It is a memory hog because of all the smart things it tries to do internally.
Obj-C on the other hand is slim. It has the space overhead due to the data it must keep for its dynamism, however, otherwise the runtime remains idle when it is supposed to. There is no garbage collection which takes away the garbage collection overhead.
I actually learnt Java before I came across Obj-C. However, I seem to like Obj-C a lot. Mostly because of its viablity of usage where C API is dominatly used and the fact that it is very much Java without some of its overheads.
c# does not have the market share compared to java,vb,c++ They still rule the roost by miles.
How can this crap be published!
The guy does not grok the GPL/LGPL difference, and he says that you can’t charge for a KDE app. Oh man.
Microsoft is in the entertainment business. They don’t want to empower the developer or make the developer more independant, what they want are developers who are totally dependant on their constantly changing product line. They want to fuel their sales. I think that eventually this road will lead to the total replacement of the developer by automation. The only developers of C# are the people who work at Microsoft. It’s a very bleak future.
I think that eventually this road will lead to the total replacement of the developer by automation.
And this is bad because…
Seriously, this sort of mentality bothers me, technological progress being seen as a bad thing because it will make some jobs obsolete. It happens, it’s happened before, and it’ll happen again, and for the vast majority of the people the quality of life has increased because of it.
For Gawdsakes grow up.
yes it is bad. all the creativity will be gone and people will be subject to picking code snippets and interfaces, basically Star-Dock is almost there, all they need is a code library that the user can just select and you will have it.
is it cool? yeah sort of. should development of software be iApp-ised? hell no, we will end up with tons of crap and a bunch of programmers who don’t even know how programming languages, compilers, algorithms work!!! not to mention maintenance and feature adding will be very difficult.
I love C#, and I wouldn’t mind seeing C# bindings to Cocoa. I am a Windows programmer by trade, but love the Mac and have two at home (with plans for more). But I would never, ever, ever use these C# bindings, even though I think they make strategic sense.
One thing that everyone seems to be missing in these sorts of discussions is that it is the specific capabilities of Objective C that make Cocoa possible: dynamic binding, categories, etc. Yes, you can slap Java (or C#) on top of it, but the result is (IMHO) hideous.
When I use Cocoa, I want to use the language that allows me to get the most out of it, and without a doubt that language is and always will be Objective C. The same is true of .NET. Although many other languages compile to MSIL, one could argue that the philosophy of .NET, the “feel” of it, is the “feel” of C#.
A lot of developers won’t touch Objective C because they turn their noses up at its syntax. I was one for a little while, but after using Objective C I came to love it. I admit I prefer C#’s terse syntax, but that’s as far as it goes. Objective C is a much more expressive language.
Full disclosure: my favorite programming languages, in no particular order, are Objective C, C#, Ruby and Dylan.
excuse me, but you are changing the argument.
Ok fair enough. In that case I’ll tell you what I think when I read your argument. I feel that not knowing that the first arugument is the start of the string is a straight up n00b situation. Just as a n00b probably wouldn’t know to type “1 to 3” in the first example.
So for beginners something like intellisense and code completion make complete sense. Hell for everyday developers it makes sense.
An IDE without code completion is not a modern IDE and is lacking in features.
I hate code completion. it interrupts my workflow. and intenseness interrupts me as well.
This is just a guy very scared about the future of the Mac, and scared about Linux and free software in general, and particularly KDE. He’s not even a developer – and it shows.
He complains about GCC compiled stuff being slow on PPC. Since GCC is what Mac OS is compiled with and is the Mac compiler, I fail to see how any development environment such as Mono is going to help.
He also seems to, bizarrely, think that KDE is a company:
If you want to charge for your app, you have to pay KDE.
History tells us that when it comes to technology, the markets are like water and tend to go towards the path of least resistance.
The stuff on KDE was pretty funny, and very badly disguised. We all know the FUD about licensing, which isn’t actually FUD to corporate buyers and developers – these people want to buy development tools. Again, he seems to think KDE is a company:
No, this isn’t going to be tomorrow, but it’s going to happen. KDE sees something on the wall with this. Why, exactly, do you think KDE is working so hard to port their frameworks over to OSX? Do you think they have a completely altruistic reason (well, not saying they’re doing it for a bad reason) for KOffice running on OSX?
This is quite funny, as it is obvious here that he is scared sh*tless of KDE. This is confirmed in the comments just above:
IE, if you were a betting man, you’d bet that Gnome is going to win the desktop, and KDE is going to end up moving into some sort of niche. Probably a high-end development environment for Gnome (and possibly other) desktops.
Yer, whatever
.
In other words, KDE is very much taking a play from the Openstep playbook here, and if Apple doesn’t watch it their Yellowbox ace-up-their-sleeve is about to be rendered scarily redundant. Apple needs to wise up to this, as I certainly doubt the idea of a developer realizing they can just pay KDE and get Linux, Windows & Mac OSX for free, which is of course what KDE wants.
Goodness me! He’s seeing conspiracies everywhere this guy. KDE, and its development infrastructure, is just plain good and the people porting KDE apps to the Mac are doing so just because they want to. It isn’t even a massive effort. If that seemingly encroaches on Apple’s turf then that’s just tough luck mate.
KDE seems to be really upsetting quite a few people at the moment. I can’t think why.
Ayup, geeks like it that much. It’s not 100% just yet, but it’s getting some big backers, like Novell.
With his criticisms of GCC I hardly think that Mono is going to help here. Quite the opposite in fact. Novell also don’t back it – it is hacked on by a few people whoe are employed by Novell. There’s a difference. If Novell were backing it then they would re-write everything to it. Microsoft are backing .Net because they are re-writing everything.
There are still very few applications written in .Net yet, particularly in the corporate arena as everything is still Win32/COM and will be for a while. People just can’t be bothered to re-write everything, and this will dawn on people as the hype dies down. There are basically no applications written with Mono, even free, open source ones. Mono is still very unproven because of that. Whatever Microsoft says, their underlying technology doesn’t utilize the CLR exclusively. Microsoft compiled apps are a mix of CLR/x86/COM compiled code, and therein lies the rub. 100% CLR compiled applications, more often than not, are just not fast enough. I’m sure Microsoft appreciate Miguel de Icaza’s comments on how fast CLR compiled apps are, though
.
I’ll say this much for Mono. The hype generated around it by many people is so disproportionate to its real-world usage that it must qualify for some kind of record.
If this guy is scared about the Mac being eradicated, and bizarrely, very scared of KDE, then that’s just tough I’m afraid. You certainly get some marks for posting this Eugenia, and the previous article on Apple moving to .Net
. It isn’t going to change a thing though.
Gimme a break – using blogs is very relevant and a ligit source of tech happenings. It doesn’t mean that *everyone* feels the same as the writer – just like any other news! If you don’t like the blog then don’t read it. But just because you don’t agree doesn’t mean that other people don’t find it interesting. Start your own blog if it makes you feel better.
<a href=”http://planet.gnome.org/“>http://planet.gnome.org/ is a cool way to end the day and read about work that you might actually be interested in.
People just can’t be bothered to re-write everything, and this will dawn on people as the hype dies down.
MS first demoed the .net framework in 2000. That was 4 years ago.
Its a little more than hype at this point. Its a movement.
>As I see it, there are currently options for programming >industrial strength’ client-side/GUI desktop apps:
>- C++
>- C#
>- Java
– Python
>- Anything else I missed?
I’m surprise you missed out Delphi and VB, you may not like them but a lot of people develop using them.
MS first demoed the .net framework in 2000. That was 4 years ago.
Its a little more than hype at this point. Its a movement.
So where are all the applications that will make use of .NET? At the moment, client side .NET doesn’t seem to be doing any better than client side Java. At least, Java is doing well on the server.
Apple needs to lweor prices on existing G5’s and upgrade them. Nut I’m not buying the whole market share loss thing. Those are funny numbers to begin with. If Apple as doing that nad then the Apple stores wouldn’t be doing so well and we wouldn’t be seeing all the cool hardware and software becoming avaialbe for the Mac.
So where are all the applications that will make use of .NET? At the moment, client side .NET doesn’t seem to be doing any better than client side Java. At least, Java is doing well on the server.
Yer, I agree. People are looking at .Net on the client and Java at the server end for many future systems, but this hasn’t gone beyond talk yet. Everybody seems to think that they will be using .Net in the future, but no one actually is yet. Many, quite critical, applications are still written utilizing COM on Windows 95, 98, NT, 2000 and XP. NT is still widely used within a lot of organisations, and no one can be bothered to replace it, despite support being dropped. Even Windows 3.1 is still used, and there are still mainframes and COBOL apps in a lot of large organizations. We’re talking thirty years plus of service from these systems here.
The notion that somehow everything will be re-written in .Net tomorrow is just absolutely ludicrous, and paints over the reality of system development and support in many large organizations.
some cool screenshots off DotGNU Website
Aqua with C# — http://dotgnu.org/screenshots/14.png
Winforms on Mac — http://dotgnu.org/screenshots/9.png
Of course it’s not Mono unlike what the article we’re
talking about but it’s still not that offtopic
DotGNU’s been running under OS X for over a year now …
and nobody’s noticed … except for darwin ports…
oh well
So where are all the applications that will make use of .NET? At the moment, client side .NET doesn’t seem to be doing any better than client side Java. At least, Java is doing well on the server.
The apps are being developed. The .net framework is a huge a transition for developers.
Client side I agree, there aren’t many .net applications. I’ve evaluated using .net client side myself and until the framework is more widespread on end user systems I can’t justify what amounts to a 40 meg runtime requirement right now. For now I’m sticking with COM on the client just to keep the system requirements down. I know many developers who feel the same way. They’ll be using .net but probably not until Longhorn ships.
Server side I’ve seen plenty of .net deployment. ASP.NET is so much nicer than plain ASP.
“Really!? I wish people would have some stinking proof before they go out spuing crap they only heard others say. Java in most cases is faster then C++. If you run Java bytecode on a JVM (like IBM’s) in compiled mode it will put the smack down on just about anything. So please get some facts before saying nonsense!”
You exactly do what you accuse others to do, saying crap without any proof. And you try to make us believe that a fully compiled binary, optimized for a specific CPU (C++) is slower than an interpreted, VM op-code (Java) ???? Bahaha !
People say Java is slow because IT’S SLOW and we can easily FEEL IT. I can’t remember using a single GUI-based Java app without wanting to kill myself because of the software being ridiculously too slow AND looking ugly.
Java stopped being interpreted in ’97. Your info is only about 7 years out of date. HotSpot can optimize more than the average C++ compiler without profile guided optimizations because it has information about the runtime execution paths of the code. And it can optimize for the specific CPU architecture it is running on. The only downside is you might get longer startup times, and a ‘warm up’ period when the HotSpot VM is profiling the code. Otherwise, there is no reason why Java can’t be as fast as C++. It gets compiled in the end.
Your ‘Java is slow because I can easily feel it’ argument doesn’t hold much water. I use an app with a Java GUI everyday. Its called MATLAB. You could never guess it was Java, until one day, I got a NullPointerException 😉
The apps are being developed. The .net framework is a huge a transition for developers.
Yes, its a major transition, but 4 years is a long time. Saying the apps are being developed doesn’t cut it anymore. Where are the apps? With all the $$$ Microsoft are throwing at marketing .NET, you’d think that there’d be a lot more client side apps now, or even companies announcing the transition to .NET.
As it stands, client side .NET is more of a myth than client side Java. At least there are some client side Java apps. The problem you mention about the runtime isn’t going to go away when everyone has it installed. That’s the same problem Java is facing. An insanely huge memory footprint.
I don’t say that Java is interpreted at a source code level. Sure Java is compiled into a binary op-code form. But this op-code is meant for a VM, and not a direct CPU execution, right ? If so, then a traditionnal compiled language is still better suited for optimal performance. But if Java is now meant to be compiled to native CPU binary op-codes, then I’m way wrong, but I can’t see how it can keep its portability.
No, the op-codes are compiled into native code, and the latest JVMs even make use of instructions like SSE/SSE2. All this is done during runtime.
So your source code is compiled into portable op-code. And as it is executed, it is then compiled into the native instruction set of the underlying architecture. This has been done since Java 1.1 which was released in ’97. They’ve had 7 years to refine the process and they’ve made many improvements.