Although the next version of Windows is still about two years from release, Microsoft on Friday offered developers an early look at the new graphics engine that will accompany it.
Microsoft gives developers a glimpse of Avalon
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
Am I the only one who thinks MS for all their resources are incredibly sloooow at “inventing” new technology? XP came out in 2001. Look at Linux distro’s in 2001 and how much they’ve changed. MS doesn’t even have a product yet and wont for a year. Avalon should have been out for ages now. They better get crackin’
No screenshots in the entire article? Sheesh! So far what I’ve seen of Avalon doesn’t compare to Looking Glass or even 3ddesk…
>>”Am I the only one who thinks MS for all their resources are incredibly sloooow at “inventing” new technology? XP came out in 2001. Look at Linux distro’s in 2001 and how much they’ve changed. MS doesn’t even have a product yet and wont for a year. Avalon should have been out for ages now. They better get crackin'”<<
Don’t get me wrong… I’d be the first one to agree with a crack against MS…. but, the main reason you see such a drastic diff. in Desktop Linux is b/c it’s still maturing and playing catch-up in many ways…. There will always be significant and apparent strides in Linux, as long as such huge gaps to fill remain.
In MS’s eyes, they’re still king of the heap… changes and revolutions will come slower just b/c they want to squeeze as much $$$ out of a product they can…. When they release something new, it usually consists primarily of cosmetic changes, rather than functionality…. b/c people buy into that crap…. thus, more milking… and slower significant changes….
There’s a lot more to it… but this is a basic reason why you see what you do.
Yeah, I can go along with that. Linux is behind in many areas, but the trend is the designers are getting things right these days, no more “re-writing”. We have engineers and designers now, not just engineers who think they’re designers. I don’t expect there to be a big desktop war now or even in 5 years, Windows has everything it needs to keep a strangle hold but there is a noticeable momentum shift taking place, I hope it can continue.
I’ll shut up now since I don’t know much about Avalon and thats what this thread is suppose to be about.
They should remain this thing to Half-MS 2 or WindowsNukenForEver based on the amount of hyping and long development time frame alone.
Please, microsoft has never invented ANYTHING, they buy it from people that did the actual work and pay them enough so that they don’t care.
Please, microsoft has never invented ANYTHING, they buy it from people that did the actual work and pay them enough so that they don’t care.
Yeah, it’s called not reinventing the wheel
I have been developing applications in windows with Winforms 1.0 in .NET.
Soon I can use Winforms 2.0.
And by 2006 I will be able to use the Avalon API.
I have always found Windows application development very productive. But at this point I am really considering jumping ship, due to the constant API changes.
Goodbye – it was nice knowing you.
Lars
I have always found Windows application development very productive. But at this point I am really considering jumping ship, due to the constant API changes.
Yeah, but ms does try harder then anyone to also make sure that it’s always backwards compatable. So you can keep developing in winforms 1.0 for at least a few more years.
While MS is playing catchup to Apple with it’s desktop technology, Apple will be catching up to MS with the depth and breadth of software on its platform. We’ll see who can get more software faster.
I have always found Windows application development very productive. But at this point I am really considering jumping ship, due to the constant API changes.
Jumping ship to what? Java..doubtful since you’re probably used to C# and going to Java would be a step backwards.
Besides, if Microsoft is known for one thing, that’s always keeping backwards compatibility. Your winforms 1.0 apps will still run on longhorn and mono. You think things are better in the gtk+/qt/Gnome/KDE API world? Hardly.
< Jumping ship to what? Java..doubtful since you’re probably used to C# and going to Java would be a step backwards>
In whose opinion? Not everyone’s, pal.
<Besides, if Microsoft is known for one thing, that’s always keeping backwards compatibility.>
Only for the base APIs. Not much else.
In the Gnome/GTK+/etc. world you have an OS underneath it (generally) that can run more than one major version of a library (read: API). So running GTK1 apps is possible beside GTK2 apps on the same system at the same time… so your point is kind of … uh … lost.
” Java..doubtful since you’re probably used to C# and going to Java would be a step backwards. ”
java is cross platform and has various advantages over c#. no mono doesnt count
“You think things are better in the gtk+/qt/Gnome/KDE API world? Hardly.”
qt,gtk and everything else is available for windows too
in small updates every 18 months or so.
recall how long it too GNOME to get to 2.0 because they were on a “release when all the features we want are done” now they are flying with the “releases every 6-8 months and the features that are done go with it”
OS X works the same.
This doesnt really work as well for the huge market that MS holds
In whose opinion? Not everyone’s, pal.
In C# developer’s opinions. They’re not going to want to go back to a clearly inferior Java if they have a choice.
Only for the base APIs. Not much else.
.NET 1.X, 2.x, etc.. can co-exist seamlessly
In the Gnome/GTK+/etc. world you have an OS underneath it (generally) that can run more than one major version of a library (read: API). So running GTK1 apps is possible beside GTK2 apps on the same system at the same time… so your point is kind of … uh … lost.
See above
java is cross platform and has various advantages over c#. no mono doesnt count
Mono does count no matter how much the haters whine that Ximian shouldn’t have done it.
qt,gtk and everything else is available for windows too
qt doesn’t count. trolltech doesn’t even offer the windows sdk/libraries for download anymore.
Where I work, the company has just signed a massive deal with MS because word got out that the company was looking at Linux. The deal includes Longhorn. I fail to see why a big business would move to Longhorn when all it seems to be is more eye-candy (ie Avalon). Is there anything in Longhorn that would actually make a difference instead of using XP Pro, for example?
Will Longhorn be a technical leap ahead? I don’t think MS can bring as much to the table as Apple will in Tiger. MS is good at coping others, mainly Apple.
< In C# developer’s opinions. They’re not going to want to go back to a clearly inferior Java if they have a choice>
Thanks for the unbiased opinion, trollbergh. I’ll be remembering not to take much stock in your present or future opinion after that little gem.
Let us know when the number of C# developers even licks the bootheels of Java.
Java is the COBOL of the 21st century. Don’t be bitter because it’s dead on the desktop.
“Java is the COBOL of the 21st century. Don’t be bitter because it’s dead on the desktop.”
Back again, eh Steve?
they really need to get there act together if they want more money everytime a couple new good features are done make a new release apple does it linux does it
When I can do all that I do in Windows on another platform, I’ll jump but no sooner.
Think VST Audio Production
< In C# developer’s opinions. They’re not going to want to go back to a clearly inferior Java if they have a choice>
Thanks for the unbiased opinion, trollbergh. I’ll be remembering not to take much stock in your present or future opinion after that little gem.
Let us know when the number of C# developers even licks the bootheels of Java.
——
well. i think there are more people out there that listen to n’sync then whatever you listen to. so go listen to n’sync.
Besides, i code only python, php and some shell stuff… so you people may not want to list to me after knowing that, but recently i was researching about c# and java to see what i’d start to learn.
By that little research i learned that C# is way better than java. that’s a fact. no matter if there’s more java programers that licks shoes… it’s simple, really, undeniably, a fact.
But all you with torchs, put ’em down. i will not say i liked c#. i’m too spoiled by GOOD languages. i wouldn’t go bakcwards. python is the way to go.
and while C# and java “claims” to be multiplataform… i’m running all my apps, unmodified, in OS x, irix, linux, windows, etc… even fucking BeOS.
Have a nice day.
“I have always found Windows application development very productive. But at this point I am really considering jumping ship, due to the constant API changes.”
“Jumping ship to what? Java..doubtful since you’re probably used to C# and going to Java would be a step backwards.
Besides, if Microsoft is known for one thing, that’s always keeping backwards compatibility. Your winforms 1.0 apps will still run on longhorn and mono. You think things are better in the gtk+/qt/Gnome/KDE API world? Hardly.”
Is backwards compatiblility always a good thing? In many aspects it can hold development behind in may ways. Please, elaborate on how java would be a step backwards.
“Please, elaborate on how java would be a step backwards.”
Because it’s not a Microsoft technology, of course.
What the idiots don’t realize is: C# is an almost exact clone of Java.
Well i’m almost finished with a class that covers C# and Java. I would say that C# is a more elegant language than Java, but Java’s ease or portability is pretty impressive. As far as windows development goes, i’d pick C# over Java any day of the week, but any cross-platform project would be better suited to Java. Yes, the mono project seems to be bridging the gap, but who knows how long that will remain cross compatible as M$ releases new versions.
Regarding M$ not “inventing anything”. I don’t think that’s really fair. M$ played a key role in the creation of the tablet PC, a distinctly different form factor than the laptop or the PDA. Related to the Tablet is the Transcriber handwriting recognition. Maybe i’m uneducated on the matter, but i’m unaware of any piece of pre-existing software that allows the user the write anywhere on the screen in their own natural handwriting and achieve any level of success before Transcriber.
Also the .Net initiative, though somewhat scary, is also a first as far as i know. Again, i could be wrong, but i’ve never heard of an initiative to create a standard set of data types that work accross all programming languages that allows for nearly-seamless language independence.
There’s also the “innovations”. M$ was the first company to release Optical mice. Xbox Live is the first successful console-based online gaming service. In general, M$’s track record on hardware is nearly flawless.
I’m sure that some people will disagree with me, and i wouldn’t be suprised if i was proven wrong on any or all of my points. But as much as I’d like to see M$ be brought down, i don’t think it’s intellectualy honest to suggest that they don’t do anything “new” or exciting. True, they do produce a lot of crap software and release “new” versions of software with little more than consmetic improvements, but that doesn’t mean they don’t do exciting things as well.
Mike
Apple had the Newton a hell of a long time before the “Tablet PC” and it could do better handwriting then a lot of the current software I have seen. Apple found out that market was dead years ago….either that or they were ahead of thier time.
“” Java..doubtful since you’re probably used to C# and going to Java would be a step backwards. ”
java is cross platform and has various advantages over c#. no mono doesnt count ”
Sure, java is crossplatform as long as you run windows or use a US keyboard. For the last four years it hasn’t been possible to write java applications where you can type all characters on your keyboard regardless of locale and OS.
The bug is number 19 on the most wanted fixed list.
See bug 4799499:
http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/top25_bugs.do
At regular intervals Sun closes the bug (whitout fixing it) in the hope that people will forget about it. So the Sun Java API is very stable. Even the bugs stay the same for years.
“Well i’m almost finished with a class that covers C# and Java. I would say that C# is a more elegant language than Java.”
Would be fun to know what features of C# makes it more elegant.
“Also the .Net initiative, though somewhat scary, is also a first as far as i know. Again, i could be wrong, but i’ve never heard of an initiative to create a standard set of data types that work accross all programming languages that allows for nearly-seamless language independence.”
.Net is very similar to CORBA, that is a platform and language independent way of creating distributed systems. Like .Net it contains distributed time, security, object lookup,…
The only conceptual difference is that .Net uses xml to communicate instead of binary protocolls. Brilliant now everybody can manually look at the data communication between objects just like we all always wanted. Not to mention that it put your fast ADSL connection to use.
No wonder that Microsoft never shows any performance data on application spanning more than one host when they go on tour to sell .Net to their followers.
“Would be fun to know what features of C# makes it more elegant. ”
Duh, it’s a Microsoft technology. The FUD patrol like Lumbag can tell millions of reasons why it’s more elegant.
I mean, “using” is at least 100 times more efficient than “import” as it uses more home row keys. and that’s just the beginning.
Oh I forgot, .NET is teh futur3.
The main difference is that newer graphics drivers in Longhorn allow for better performance and newer hardware.
So this stuff will work better with Longhorn because… by the time Longhorn actually arrives, in whatever form it takes, graphics cards will be a lot better?
So are they going to make it impossible for newer cards to work with Windows XP or 2000 machines?
This is either a reall obvious statement, or a hint at something really evil.
In ACPI, Microsoft had a major involvement with hardware vendors.
H323 stack used for voice over IP was initially developed at Microsoft as a part of netmeeting.
I first time saw Intellisense in Visual C++ and it was a major productivity boost. (I think they invented it but i am not sure).
And also, if they buy other products, then its not bad. In fact its much better than someone in OSS stealing the technology, not caring about IP rights and making an equivalent product.
Look for 100s of junkies at sourceforge reinventing the wheel daily…Its much better that Microsoft atleast pays the people who initially developed something cool and needed a big push to seer ahead and go where they have never gone before…
I am tired of you anti-MS guys with constant bashing. Come on guys grow up….its time you learn to accept whos the boss…
I love MS
“In fact its much better than someone in OSS stealing the technology, not caring about IP rights and making an equivalent product.”
Terrific exercise of Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt. Have you tried applying for a job at Microsoft?
“Look for 100s of junkies at sourceforge reinventing the wheel daily…”
I’m one of those junkies giving *my free time* to a Free Software project at Sourceforge. I do it because I want people to enjoy my work and use it to make their lives easier, hoping that they can find it useful. I feel offended by your unfortunate statement, and would like to know what have *YOU* done that gives you this high-ground from which you think you can bash and tear the effort of so many great developers.
Is cash all you can really grasp and comprehend? Are you so clueless and empty? These people are working out of good will, and deserve all the backing and credit they can get. Your words are a slap in the face to all of them, and I feel pitty for you and your narrow views.
…the technology is MS only. With X.org we at least know there will be multiple *Nixes able to run it.
Maybe De Icaza can clone Avalon for Mono, that way we’ll have an option of running “legacy MS tech”.
See, the fangirl has her panties in a bunch because she can’t criticize .NET on its technical merits. Look at the nick. She has thrown a tantrum because Mono was even started.
She can’t stand that it’s trivial to call native methods in C#. That .NET language interop is seamless. That C# has delegates/events, user-defined value types, out/ref parameters, switch on strings, the ability to drop down and use pointers for speed if necessary, unsigneds, that it doesn’t have the stupid CLASSPATH and articifical forced physical namespace hierarchy b.s. She’s bitter that java 5’s generics is a compiler trick (hint it’s still objects under the hood) and thus won’t get any performance benefits and because of the ugly hack of primitives not deriving from objects.
She is bitter that it took Microsoft competition to force Sun to put enums (why did it take so long) in Java, attributes, variable-length arguments, a foeach mechanism and other features that weren’t “necessary” until .NET came along. She’s crying because Swing sucks, everybody knows it (except Sun), and that Java is dead on the desktop. She’s confused that even the linux/open-source fangirls don’t use Java for much.
Too funny.
…and don’t forget about operator overloading and a preprocessor in C#. The list goes on an on. Sun’s stewardship of Java has been a disaster. They should’ve just opensourced it years ago.
Sorry Mr. Lumbergh, but you come come across as more of a ‘fan’ than anyone here. I assume you have no stake in Microsoft. You can’t take glory in their success, or shame in their failure. But the impression you give is that you would like to elevate yourself, and denigrate others by choosing a side.
Name-calling makes your arguments appear weak.
Wrong. I look at it as a tool, and not a religion like the demented Microsoft haters around here (MichaelperformaDaa).
If anything, those making these unsubstantiated claims about C# and the .NET platform are the real fanboys here. At least Lumbergh backed up his statements with facts.
I’m actually pretty excited with the future of Windows. I think that, taken together: aero, avalon, winfs, indigo, etc… render an amazing OS, at least on paper.
The only problem with it all is the timeframe. I imagine this is a consequence figuring out 3rd party development APIs, and attempting to stay compatible with previous Windows, along with multifarious hardware pieces and configuration. Albeit other OSs are progressing nicely, I doubt MS feels a huge amount of pressure to release soon.
There are very smart people in MS, and hence writing their future software off as crap, just because it’s them, doesn’t make sense. I’m not saying that the software is good just because it’s them either, but the discussion needs to be a technical rather than “religious” considerations.
Anyway 2007-8 should be a fun period regarding how Longhorn will stack up to kick-ass OSX and *nix systems.
Both the tablet PC and the optical mouse were invented long before Microsoft started making them. It’s also worth noting that Microsoft don’t make Microsoft mice (and other hardware), they farm the production out to Asian no-name factories like everyone else. So the only good things with Microsoft written on them aren’t made by Microsoft.
I do like Microsoft mice, though Logitechs are still a little better.
See here for tablet computers: http://www.bricklin.com/tabletcomputing.htm
Optical mice, well, to be fair Microsoft’s *was* the first which didn’t need a specially designed mousepad. That type has been around for ages; can’t find a good reference page, but many of the reviews of Microsoft’s first optical mouse mentioned them in passing.
Oh, and I forgot to mention – MS has lost over $1bn on the Xbox so far, hardly a flawless hardware record
“In ACPI, Microsoft had a major involvement with hardware vendors”
yeah, and we all know how wonderfully THAT’S turned out.
“I think that, taken together: aero, avalon, winfs, indigo, etc… render an amazing OS, at least on paper.”
Yeah, every OS Microsoft’s ever made has been the dog’s nether regions…on paper. Win95 was, Win98 was, heck, WinME was supposed to feed the world and kiss babies.
Oh, and you’re quite right, there’s a lot of excellent people at Microsoft. The problem is they’re not in control, and they’re being forced to row in a direction set by idiots. That just means they go in that direction very quickly.
MS is full of IT people that look like Bill Gates, j/k. MS needs to hire Jobs…….oh wait they get Apple design free already, who needs Jobs.
> She can’t stand that it’s trivial to call native methods in
> C#. That .NET language interop is seamless.
As someone who is actually integrating native C++ libraries with C# I can tell you this is not strictly true. Sure, it you can call unmanaged code from managed code is relatively easy, but doing so the other way round is a total pain – and can cause strange integration errors at run-time. You also might like to check out MSDN for the articles that say that mixing managed and unmanaged code is broken in VS.NET 2003 and won’t be fixed until Whidbey. As usual Microsoft provide a membrane that works one way (to get you on to their stuff and keep you there through language extensions). As usual, they have put their strategic plan ahead of their customers – which is why the World, especially Asia, is looking for alternatives to lock-in. This is the real reason people resist .NET, irrespective of any perceived (or actual) technical superiority.
When I first learned Java many years ago I thought that it should have features more like C++. Essentially these have been incorporated into C#. Now that I have plenty of experienced on commercial projects in all three languages (C++, Java, C#) I think some of the additional features of C# cause more harm than anything. Lord knows, the less-experienced guys I lead need all the help they can get in preventing errors.
Also, since C# is not cross-platform (Mono is a good idea but has a long way to go), and is unlikely to ever be besides perfunctory examples for marketing purposes, then it will never be an automatic choice for large-scale (eg. IBM) commerical development. Just because 95% of the World’s desktops run Windows doesn’t mean that the same proportion of software development projects target that platform (a large proportion of the software development work in the world is for servers running on a plathora of OSes).
Like I said Lumberg, I’m using several languages, once you get some decent time up you’ll stop feeling the need to evangelise C#/.NET as the be-all and end-all (quite frankly we are tiring of you doing this, the occasional times when you stop proselytizing your posts sound more balanced and are therefore more interesting).
C# and .NET are not always rejected on technical grounds, most people have the strategtic interest of their project or company at heart (eg. avoiding lock-in) when they choose not to use it. Until you recognise this fact, and can find a way C# could address this, then you will always sound unreasonable – which is a shame since you otherwise seem to have some technical knowledge.
Unlike the illiterate moron ( MichealperformDaa De Izeicazia) who I responded to on my previous post and who likes to troll every .NET/Mono thread because, like the typical fanboy, he tries to anthropomorphize Microsoft into some evil demon, you seem like a reasonable guy so I’ll respond to some of your comments.
Regarding managed-unmanaged integration, I’ve never gone the other way unmanaged into managed so I can’t speak on the problems, but that seems to be the less common case as opposed to managed-into-unmanaged so I’m not surprised they’re bugs (like all software).
The only big feature in C# that I think they could’ve done without is indexers. I believe that indexers have the potential to cause some confusion while reading code, but something like delegates is very nice. In Java, you have to user interfaces and their accompanying adapter classes method to do your callbacks. I find delegates/events to be much more elegant and not as ugly of a code read. Just look at stuff like enums and a foreach that are just getting into Java now. Why the holdout? These aren’t complex features but Sun in its “inifinite wisdom” thought they didn’t need these features until there was enough of an uproar from developers and .NET came out. Maybe you have trouble with your developers understanding the language they’re dealing with, but we’ve all been doing C++ for years and so don’t find a problem with the complexity.
Also, since C# is not cross-platform (Mono is a good idea but has a long way to go), and is unlikely to ever be besides perfunctory examples for marketing purposes, then it will never be an automatic choice for large-scale (eg. IBM) commerical development. Just because 95% of the World’s desktops run Windows doesn’t mean that the same proportion of software development projects target that platform (a large proportion of the software development work in the world is for servers running on a plathora of OSes).
Mono is way over the hump at this point. Some firm in Munich has already done a large scale ASP.NET rollout on Mono and considering the herculean task in replicating something like .NET, the Mono people have done an incredible amount of work in a short time frame. Now that Novell is funding, we should see development speed get even faster.
To my understanding, much of the stuff that isn’t crossplatform is some of the Microsoft namespaces, COM stuff, and Window Forms right now. Windows Forms is getting a rewrite (no more Wine dependency) and development is moving fast. Gtk# is crossplatform already out there and looks very nice on windows these days. In any case, Sun has pulled the wool over many people’s eyes when they claim that binary portability is the holy grail. Reminds me of Sun telling us all that Swing was a good thing.
So don’t tell me that Mono isn’t cross-platform.
Like I said Lumberg, I’m using several languages, once you get some decent time up you’ll stop feeling the need to evangelise C#/.NET as the be-all and end-all (quite frankly we are tiring of you doing this, the occasional times when you stop proselytizing your posts sound more balanced and are therefore more interesting).
Listen pal, I’ve been programming in C++, on linux mostly, professionaly for the past 8 years and have also used C#, Java, and Python in my work, so don’t act like you’re “in the know” more than me. I never evangelized C#/.NET as the be-all and end-all. Stop making shit up. I don’t care if you’re tired of of “this”, look at the moron I was responding to. Look at the constant linux fanboy idiocy we see here on a daily basis. This site isn’t http://www.microsoftsucks.com.
C# and .NET are not always rejected on technical grounds, most people have the strategtic interest of their project or company at heart (eg. avoiding lock-in) when they choose not to use it. Until you recognise this fact, and can find a way C# could address this, then you will always sound unreasonable – which is a shame since you otherwise seem to have some technical knowledge.
So your repeating premise of your comment is of “lock-in”. Well guess what, languages and APIs aren’t the only factors in lock-in out there. There’s also personnel, management, and the supporting infrastructure that surrounds corporate IT. You don’t just pack the code up and move to another platform on a whim. There’s lots of lock-in Linux, Sun, Windows, whatever. We’re locked into Linux because we have code that will only run on linux.
Actually, there is something that can do this.. it’s called Parrot and it lets you share functions and datatypes across many languages/interpreted languages.
It is something that will be interesting.
http://www.parrotcode.org/
”
Parrot is the new interpreter being designed from scratch to support the upcoming Perl6 language. It is being designed as a standalone virtual machine that can be used to execute bytecode compiled dynamic languages such as Perl6, but also Perl5. Ideally, Parrot can be used to support other dynamic, bytecode-compiled languages such as Python, Ruby and Tcl.”
“We’re locked into Linux because we have code that will only run on linux.”
You must be seriously retarded if you believe this is true.
I’ve stopped trying to have any kind of intelligent conversation with you because you have been so deeply brainwashed by Microsoft propoganda.
Your above post emphasizes this.
Hi Lumberg,
Thanks for elaborating your point of view.
> Look at the constant linux fanboy idiocy we see here on a daily basis. This site isn’t http://www.microsoftsucks.com.
Agreed. This is my point, when people are vociferous advocates then people stop listening.
> We’re locked into Linux because we have code that will only run on linux.
I must confess I prefer Linux but that is only because it I find it much easier to isolate platform-dependent stuff than on Windows, eg. the macro mess that is MFC, or the fact that most useful C# programs will go past ECMA and start using platform-dependent stuff that is extremely difficult to isolate. Again, for some people portability doesn’t matter, but in my particular line (scientific software) is matters very much so C# presents real strategic limitations
> So your repeating premise of your comment is of “lock-in”. Well guess what, languages and APIs aren’t the only factors in lock-in out there. There’s also personnel, management, and the supporting infrastructure that surrounds corporate IT. You don’t just pack the code up and move to another platform on a whim. There’s lots of lock-in Linux, Sun, Windows, whatever. We’re locked into Linux because we have code that will only run on linux.
I completely agree. So why would any compentent technical lead choose a system with a single vendor vs. a system with multiple vendors unless the first solution offered *compelling* functionality (ie. something the other platform had), since, as you point out, once you make the decision the inertia gets too big to change easily with any solution.
When my guys write C++ code on Linux I make sure as much as possible can be compiled on Windows, and vice versa (this has saved our bacon more than once as customers want to use *their* OS).
> Besides, if Microsoft is known for one thing, that’s always keeping backwards compatibility. Your winforms 1.0 apps will still run on longhorn and mono.
So you are saying that if your WinForms 1.0 app used to work and won’t on Avalon that Redmond will help you out? Do you really believe this? Would you like to wager some money with me on that.
> You think things are better in the gtk+/qt/Gnome/KDE API world? Hardly.
I have found Java has extremely good backward compatibility both at the binary level and the API level (since 1.2), better even than the .NET 1.0 to 1.1 transition, which is why their implementation of generics was less the optimum possible (just so lots of JVMs [ie. customers] can run it).
Perhaps Java crapped out on you but it has pretty much worked for me.
However, until Mono duplicates sufficient functionality of .NET so that only small corner cases aren’t supported then you can’t say C# is more portable than Java. C# is less clunky for sure, but not more portable, in the sense you don’t need a massive amount of rework to move it between systems – and don’t say use gtk# please, how many winshops would ever consider using that. For now .NET works properly on Windows only. I look forward to the day that you can take a large and very complicated application (eg. mine) written by a Windows only trained programmer Visual Studio and run it flawlessly on Mono (without an ordinary user having to configure Wine). Until that day, I think it is misleading to say C# (ie. the *complete* .NET libraries applications it relies on) is truly portable.
To conclude, I feel it would be easier for other readers if you kept most of your advocacy to pointing out the technical merits of C# with which you have personal experience (which I find useful), not advocating Microsoft marketing spiel where you don’t have personal experience (which I find most unhelpful, as my personal experience is at odds with this) and for dissembling the obvious technical flaws in other people’s arguments, then people will start opening their minds to what you have to say about your C# experiences.
>Am I the only one who thinks MS for all their resources >are incredibly sloooow at “inventing” new technology?
Note that some companies (e.g. IBM) considered WinXP SP2 as a new Windows release.
>MS doesn’t even have a product yet and wont for a year.
Please factor in MS Windows Anvil or MS Windows X64 editions.
You must be seriously retarded if you believe this is true.
Everybody knows you are a complete moron and lack any technical knowledge beyond “Linux rulez”.
And guess what, we are locked into linux with out present code. Specificially the LLC code, which is the underlying protocol that upper-level protocols like SNA and IPX use.
I’ve stopped trying to have any kind of intelligent conversation with you because you have been so deeply brainwashed by Microsoft propoganda.
If i’m so brainwashed by Microsoft propaganda than why have I written more lines of code on linux than you most likely ever will. Our company has funded the developer of LLC and we’ve been using linux on our non-embedded platform for the past 6 years exclusively, and on our embedded platforms for the past 2 years exclusively. So you can take your non-technical, fanboy ass to one of Stallman’s indoctrination sessions and chant mantra on how “free” software will save the world.
Agreed. This is my point, when people are vociferous advocates then people stop listening.
Don’t even compare me with these 14 year old morons who think people will think they’re cool if they run linux and bad-mouth microsoft and type idiotic shit like M$.
I must confess I prefer Linux but that is only because it I find it much easier to isolate platform-dependent stuff than on Windows, eg. the macro mess that is MFC, or the fact that most useful C# programs will go past ECMA and start using platform-dependent stuff that is extremely difficult to isolate. Again, for some people portability doesn’t matter, but in my particular line (scientific software) is matters very much so C# presents real strategic limitations
I guess you don’t know much about the Mono or the dotGNU projects. They go way beyond the ECMA specs. See my previous response to you for more details.
I completely agree. So why would any compentent technical lead choose a system with a single vendor vs. a system with multiple vendors unless the first solution offered *compelling* functionality (ie. something the other platform had), since, as you point out, once you make the decision the inertia gets too big to change easily with any solution.
When my guys write C++ code on Linux I make sure as much as possible can be compiled on Windows, and vice versa (this has saved our bacon more than once as customers want to use *their* OS).
We are a linux shop and thus any systems software that we write has to run on linux obviously. Configuration and software management is a different story obviously since most administrators that will be running our software will just have windows on their workstations or laptops anyway. We sell our software with our specialized hardware that consist of dual-port ram and boards with Motorolla 6809 chips that hand le the serial protocol side of things. Our customers won’t be running their own hardware. Most customers of ours, like banks, just want a box they can turn on, plug in a configuration file and be done with.
However, until Mono duplicates sufficient functionality of .NET so that only small corner cases aren’t supported then you can’t say C# is more portable than Java. C# is less clunky for sure, but not more portable, in the sense you don’t need a massive amount of rework to move it between systems – and don’t say use gtk# please, how many winshops would ever consider using that. For now .NET works properly on Windows only. I look forward to the day that you can take a large and very complicated application (eg. mine) written by a Windows only trained programmer Visual Studio and run it flawlessly on Mono (without an ordinary user having to configure Wine). Until that day, I think it is misleading to say C# (ie. the *complete* .NET libraries applications it relies on) is truly portable.
I never claimed that C# was “more” portable than Java because it’s not at the binary or source level. The corner cases are being worked on and once SWF is done, the vast majority of .NET code will work on Mono unless they’re pinvoking into win32. My claim was that Sun saying that binary compatibility is some kind of holy grail is a joke. Gtk# most likely wouldn’t be used by win shops, but would be used by developers on other systems that want crossplatform.
To conclude, I feel it would be easier for other readers if you kept most of your advocacy to pointing out the technical merits of C# with which you have personal experience (which I find useful), not advocating Microsoft marketing spiel where you don’t have personal experience (which I find most unhelpful, as my personal experience is at odds with this) and for dissembling the obvious technical flaws in other people’s arguments, then people will start opening their minds to what you have to say about your C# experiences.
Show me where I was spewing Microsoft marketing. I said the java language was inferior to C#. I still believe that. I know that the CLR is superior to the JVM. It’s much better suited to a wider range of languages, eg. pointers, value types, and some CIL instructions (I think a tailcall instruction comes to mind). My original post correctly assumed that most C#/Winforms developers would not choose not to go to Java/Swing if they had a choice.
“So don’t tell me that Mono isn’t cross-platform.”
Actually, I have more confidence on Mono being cross platform than .Net. After all Novell have a large windows market to gain by beeing cross platform, just as Microsoft may loose that very same market if they keep compatibility for too long.
So if you like .Net like technology you would probably be better off using Mono even on windows.
In Mono, we published a long list of Release Notes with our
1.0 that exactly pin-pointed what to expect and what not
to expect from mono. We are proud of having set
the right expectations in that document.
Anyone who has used Mono and read that document knows that
moving code from .NET to Mono can be as easy as drag-and-drop
the code over a file system, or requires minimal changes.
But the changes required to “port” from .NET to Mono are
equivalent to what you would find to “port” any Unix tool
from Linux to OSX or OSX to Linux: they turn out to be
tiny little differences (filenames, etc).
Today Mono is a reality: from the rapidly growing set
of desktop applications, to the concerted efforts to port
the open source ASP.NET applications to Mono, more and
more people can run components that would have been
otherwise not available on Linux on Linux.
And we are only getting better every day: as a fairly
vibrant open source project, we are quickly making it
scale, perform better, and we are tuning it quickly.
In some areas we are already as fast or faster than
Microsoft.NET, compounded with Linux, we are a great
choice in terms of performance, price and security.
In some other areas we are slower than Microsoft, and
hundreds of people are looking over at the code base to
improve it and tune it.
Love!
Miguel.
“In some areas we are already as fast or faster than
Microsoft.NET, compounded with Linux, we are a great
choice in terms of performance, price and security.”
The interesting thing is not how well mono works on Linux.
The interesting thing is to make mono and not MS .Net the first choise for windows developers.
This could be done through, supperior development tools or extensions to the framework that Ms .Net lacks. For mono
to be a good choise mono developers must take control of
the future of the mono/.Net platform. Just winning the Linux market isn’t good enough.
Remember that cross platformness cuts both ways. If 50% of the windows users and 50% of the Linux users should decidet to switch to Linux, and Microsoft. It would be a great loss for Microsoft and a big win for Linux oriented companies.
This gives Microsoft a very good reason to make sure that mono crossplatformness fails by legal or technical means. As long as mono doesn’t have that grip over windows developers, project managers will feel uncomfortable and ask questions like what will happen if Microsoft changes the API, will we still be .net compatible.