Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Microsoft Linking Silverlight, Ruby on Rails

ScuttleMonkey posted more than 6 years ago | from the trying-too-hard dept.

Microsoft 232

CWmike writes "Friday Microsoft will demonstrate integration between its new Silverlight browser plug-in and Ruby on Rails. Microsoft's John Lam, a program manager in the dynamic language runtime team, said in a recent blog item: 'Running Rails shows that we are serious when we say that we are going to create a Ruby that runs real Ruby programs. And there isn't a more real Ruby program than Rails.' Also at the event, Microsoft officials will demonstrate IronRuby, a version of the Ruby programming language for Microsoft's .Net platform, running a Ruby on Rails application."

cancel ×

232 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

That's Right (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23631921)

What is the last think Open Sores software linked? Failure to body odor?

Bad Article, Bad Summary (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23633075)

The actual news in question is that IronRuby, a .NET implementation of Ruby, successfully hosted an unmodified copy of Rails and dispatched some simple requests through it.

The only connection with silverlight is that the DLR and IronRuby will ship with the Silverlight 2.0 SDK (it's in Beta1 right now). Microsoft will continue to improve both IronRuby and IronPython, and enabling it to be used to script silverlight content.

Nothing to see here people. Move along.

SLASHDOT SUX0RZ (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23631959)

_0_
\''\
'=o='
.|!|
.| |
Microsoft linking silverlight, goatse [goatse.ch]

Nice ASCII art... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23631999)

I thought it was a dude on a bicycle, cycling towards me and leaning right a bit into a corner. Maybe a lady on a bicycle, actually.

Re:Nice ASCII art... (1)

hostyle (773991) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632725)

and wearing a miners helmet (for obvious reasons)

"Version of xxx" (3, Insightful)

EmbeddedJanitor (597831) | more than 6 years ago | (#23631965)

Embrace, extend,.... now wait for it.

Re:"Version of xxx" (5, Funny)

mark72005 (1233572) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632145)

...exaggerate?

I don't think so. (0)

Hankapobe (1290722) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632297)

Embrace, extend,.... now wait for it.

MS' ass is still bleeding from the reaming over Java.

Re:I don't think so. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23632453)

Yeah right. Java is still oinkin' from the boinkin'

Re:I don't think so. (1)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632945)

Yeah, Java bent over for MS's IronPython! [codeplex.com]

There's one difference (4, Insightful)

mangu (126918) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632793)

Embrace, extend,.... now wait for it.

MS' ass is still bleeding from the reaming over Java.

Only thing is, it wasn't Java the language, it was Sun the corporation behind Java that sued Microsoft. Now tell me, which is the big corporation behind Ruby with deep enough pockets to face Microsoft at the courts?

Wrong. (1, Informative)

recoiledsnake (879048) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632913)

Embrace, extend,.... now wait for it.

MS' ass is still bleeding from the reaming over Java.

MS accomplished what they set out to do with Java. They turned it into a non-entity for web(applets, not server) and desktop applications. The real fault lies with Sun though. All MS did was make extensions that made MS JRE(available only for Windows) run way faster and better than Sun Java(available for all major platforms). Developers started using those extensions because it made applets way faster and zippy compared to Sun Java.

Sun realized this quite a bit late, sued MS and got a nice settlement close to a billion, but that made MS drop Java like a hot potato and go with .NET(they had plans for .NET from way earlier though, but dropping of MS Java was triggered by the lawsuit). This is why suddenly you couldn't download a runtime from MS and had to download only from java.sun.com.

I can't say I'm not happy with the result though. The JRE makes any decent machines go down on its knees when it starts and occupies a huge chunk of RAM for itself. It's as if suddenly 80% of your RAM and CPU are gone once the JRE starts. I remember running Azureus for a while on a 256MB laptop and waiting for minutes for Opera to show me web pages. Once I found a decent BT client that didn't use Java, I dumped Java apps(including OO.o :/ ) except for occasional Yahoo! Games. I hear it's better now, but like Lotus Notes, if it was once horrible, the new version can only be barely usable. Java is relegated to the backend of servers, calculating business logic and serving web apps, though .NET seems to be overtaking Java there too.

Not quite (4, Informative)

CustomDesigned (250089) | more than 6 years ago | (#23633183)

The legal MS extensions to Java, the ones in the com.ms.* packages, were fine (well, except for the Morgan Stanley company having their standard java package prefix usurped), and were not what the lawsuit was about. They created Java applications superbly integrated with Windows - but not portable to any other platform, and were perfectly legal. That should have been enough lock in for even Microsoft. But that wasn't good enough for them.

The lawsuit was about their extensions to the java.* core packages - which were expressly forbidden in the license. The license was an actual signed contract. Microsoft tried to argue in court that the contract only applied to Java 1.0, and they could do whatever they wanted with future versions. The court didn't agree.

Having the core Java packages unpolluted is important for making it simple to ensure your application is run anywhere. (Well, except for bugs in native libraries or JVM.) To undo the damage, Sun ended up having to create the 100% Pure Java campaign with a program to check for core extensions.

Re:"Version of xxx" (5, Insightful)

jnadke (907188) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632321)

Microsoft:
1. "We love Silverlight!"
2. "We love Ruby!"
3. "We love Ruby so much, we're making Ruby.NET***!"
4. "Hey look, Silverlight and Ruby.NET play together!"
5. "Hey everyone, develop for Silverlight and Ruby.NET!"
**Everyone embraces Silverlight and Ruby.NET**
6. "We're discontinuing Ruby.NET, please refer to Silverlight."

***Not compatible with normal Ruby

P.S. Oddly enough, my CAPTCHA today is "strategy". Intelligence perhaps?

Re:"Version of xxx" (4, Funny)

AnyoneEB (574727) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632743)

P.S. Oddly enough, my CAPTCHA today is "strategy". Intelligence perhaps?

Yes, actually Slashdot has a learning algorithm where it uses the topic and thread to determine which word to use for the CAPTCHA and checks the post for references to the CAPTCHA to see if it guessed correctly. Eventually this will evolve into autotagging and the ability of Slashdot to respond to comments on its own followed shortly thereafter by the Slashdot webserver achieving sentience.

Reminds me of the old joke (4, Funny)

goombah99 (560566) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632339)

Boss: were have a problem. how do we get a persistence API for our silverlight environment?

Young turk: I know! we could tie the rail and silverlight APIs

Crusty the Unix programmer: yes you could, but then you'd have two problems.

"Learn How to Become" More Transparent? (4, Insightful)

Lumenary7204 (706407) | more than 6 years ago | (#23631967)

From the article:

"The IronRuby project in general has featured processes that make it easier for Microsoft to develop open-source projects, said Lam.

"What we learn from building IronRuby will be applied in other product groups to help us become more open and transparent than we have been in the past," Lam said."

How does an company like Microsoft "learn" to become more "transparent"?

Re:"Learn How to Become" More Transparent? (4, Funny)

Gnavpot (708731) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632135)

How does an company like Microsoft "learn" to become more "transparent"?

And why do they need to be more transparent? These guys gave us windows. What can be more transparent than that?

Re:"Learn How to Become" More Transparent? (5, Funny)

Hankapobe (1290722) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632259)

How does an company like Microsoft "learn" to become more "transparent"?
And why do they need to be more transparent? These guys gave us windows. What can be more transparent than that?

Baddabump - tchsh.

That was the comic stylings of Gnavpot. He'll be here all week. Be sure to tip your waitress.

Up next, Steve Balmer and his chair act.

How do they learn? (-1, Troll)

twitter (104583) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632193)

By a 24% drop in revenue, but this is nothing new. They have always jumped on things others do, claim to be friends and then do everything possible to claim all the revenue and good will. Real transparency will include:

  • Use of real standards.
  • Elimination of all DRM.
  • Liberation of their source code.

No promise they make means anything if you don't have the four software freedoms on their platform.

Re:How do they learn? (-1, Troll)

willyhill (965620) | more than 6 years ago | (#23633163)

By a 24% drop in revenue

I hope I can go back over your posting history and see that you commented on how positive it was that they posted record profits last quarter. In the name of fairness, you know. And that would probably lend some relevance to your inclusion of that here, as opposed to making people think that you're doing nothing more than that obnoxious out-of-context bullet point evangelism you seem to enjoy so much.

Use of real standards.

I hope you're not referring to ODF, considering Microsoft have the defacto standard in the office suite platform. That doesn't excuse what they did with OOXML, of course (though it does explain a lot, considering IBM's involvement). What other standards? HTML? CSS? IE7 and 8 are steps in the right direction for them, I think. I'd love to see them support SVG though. They have a lot to do in this area, but they're getting better. It won't happen overnight.

Elimination of all DRM.

You are quick on the draw to complain that the hardware makers are to blame whenever someone mentions a piece of hardware doesn't work with Linux, but you're apparently incapable of making the connection between the media producers and DRM. Why don't you write a few strongly-worded letters to Universal and News Corp. asking them to stop being so paranoid and greedy, and then Microsoft or Apple won't have to add DRM to their operating systems. Unless you want to explain to your cousin Joe Bob why the DVD he bought at Wal-Mart doesn't work on his new computer. I can assure you he won't care a bit about the "DRM is evil" spiel.

But then you're just being intentionally obtuse [slashdot.org] in the name of the cause, aren't you?

Liberation of their source code.

If this is your measure of their success, I expect they will continue to fail. Release of source code is an altruistic (or practical/commercial if accompanied by the expectation of community involvement) gesture, not a moral imperative.

Re:"Learn How to Become" More Transparent? (2, Insightful)

Chris Burke (6130) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632239)

How does an company like Microsoft "learn" to become more "transparent"?

Same way you make your own life transparent when guests come over: By hiding everything you don't want anyone to see in your bedroom closet, sweeping all the dust under the rug, and pretending like your largely empty but tidy living room where the guests are allowed is always that way.

Re:"Learn How to Become" More Transparent? (2, Interesting)

davidsyes (765062) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632515)

Reminds me of when years ago i worked in a pizza restaurant. I was cleaning the food prep counters and beneath the insert. I went to reinsert an insert, but the railing to support it had vanished. I hailed out, "One of my rails is missing!".

The supervisor replied "Are we talking... DRUGS... here?"

Naively, i couldn't respond. Later, someone told me "rails" referred to needles, i guess as in shooting up.

So, ever since Ruby on Rails came out, i've always recalled the "rails" context. Now, msoft with silverlight and rails.... sounds like self-injecting mercury into the bloodstream...

Re:"Learn How to Become" More Transparent? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23633061)

Just FYI, rails is used to describe powders that have been arranged in lines for snorting, not a specific drug.

Re:"Learn How to Become" More Transparent? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23633133)

Right, a needle is a "spike".

Re:"Learn How to Become" More Transparent? (1)

Mateo_LeFou (859634) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632495)

It's quite simple: You start attaching the word "transparent" to all of your proprietary, trade-secretive, obscure-as-hell protocols. Look for Microsoft Transparent Office XML coming to a standards body near you!

Re:"Learn How to Become" More Transparent? (1)

hostyle (773991) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632741)

Opening the curtains a tad? Removing the shutters? Putting in less stained glass next time. Oh right ... different windows

What's MSFTs Point? (1, Funny)

mikelieman (35628) | more than 6 years ago | (#23631979)

Since Silverlight isn't cross platform, why bother?

Re:What's MSFTs Point? (5, Informative)

Lumenary7204 (706407) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632009)

Um... Actually it is:

http://www.mono-project.com/Moonlight [mono-project.com]

Microsoft is assisting in Moonlight's development:

http://lwn.net/Articles/248198/ [lwn.net]

Re:What's MSFTs Point? (5, Interesting)

Lumenary7204 (706407) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632085)

The upshot is that you should also be able to run IronRuby on the Mono Common Language Runtime, presuming that Microsoft's implementation adheres to it's own ECMA-"approved" CLR standards...

Re:What's MSFTs Point? (3, Interesting)

cbrocious (764766) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632329)

Not only that, the DLR and IronRuby are both released under the MS-PL, which is OSI-approved. If anything depends on proprietary libraries, it can be swapped out with a free alternative.

Re:What's MSFTs Point? (2, Insightful)

segedunum (883035) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632353)

The upshot is that you should also be able to run IronRuby on the Mono Common Language Runtime, presuming that Microsoft's implementation continues to adhere to it's own ECMA-"approved" CLR standards...
Fixed that for you.

Re:What's MSFTs Point? (1)

Lumenary7204 (706407) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632479)

Either way... :-)

Re:What's MSFTs Point? (4, Interesting)

ranjix (892606) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632209)

quote from the mono project FAQ (http://www.mono-project.com/FAQ:_General): "The Mono API today is somewhere in between .NET 1.1 and .NET 2.0, see our Roadmap for details about what is implemented."

while looking at the MS website it seems that the latest .Net framework is 3.5.

frankly at this point I would seriously doubt that MS (or Novell, for that matter) has any serious intention of implementing .NET on anything else than Windows. Let's get real and see that the Mono or Moonlight projects are just PR... thanks.

anybody needs my tinfoil hat?

Re:What's MSFTs Point? (5, Informative)

Kalriath (849904) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632289)

.NET Framework 3.5 is merely .NET Framework 2.0 with an enhanced class library (includes WCF, WPF, and so on). If Mono supports custom .NET classes, it technically is .NET 3.5

Re:What's MSFTs Point? (5, Informative)

spec8472 (241410) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632427)

There's two main versions of the .NET CLR (Runtime): 1.1, and 2.0. .NET 1.1 runs on .NET CLR 1.1 .NET 2.0 through to .NET 3.5 runs on .NET CLR 2.0

Effectively, .NET 3.0 and 3.5 were language extensions on top of 2.0. They still execute ontop of the same CLR.

If memory serves, Mono has recently announced full feature compliance against .NET 1.1, and they're now targetting full feature compliance against .NET 2.0.

That doesn't mean .NET 3.5 apps won't run. It just means certain bits (such as LINQ, WPF, WCF, Anonymous Types, etc) are either not present or not completely implemented yet.

In either case, Silverlight/Moonlight are seperate from the .NET / Mono codebases. Yes, they have shared code, however since Silverlight 2.0 is a vastly cut down version of the .NET Framework.

This makes full feature compliance of Silverlight 2.0 by the Moonlight crowd that much easier, since the majority of the functionality that is used in Silverlight is already implemented in Mono.

As for Moonlight/Mono being just MS PR, I think Miguel De Icaza might have something quite strong to say about that.

- Novell is actually using Mono to implement apps on their Linux desktop.

- Second Life, amongst other reasonably big apps, is using Mono to provide (or improve) pluggable/scriptable functionality in their apps.

Re:What's MSFTs Point? (5, Insightful)

segedunum (883035) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632223)

Ummm, actually it isn't, because Silverlight encompasses a lot more then just a subset of WPF and XAML. There are related technologies, particularly related to multimedia, around Silverlight, Windows Media in particular, that are very much a part of creating Silverlight content as we see it now on Microsoft platforms. Everyone else is going to have to replicate that, and even worse, keep up with the moving target of successive implementations. It's another classic example of Microsoft keeping their implementation ahead, and first to market, and it's a well worked routine now.

I'd love to be able to say otherwise, but these 'olive branches' that we're seeing are all designed to get the usage of Microsoft technology on the web to some sort of critical mass. Nothing more. If that is ever achieved, your guess is as good as mine as to whether those branches will stay strong and whether Microsoft will ever have a continued, vested interest in Moonlight or Ruby or Rails. I just find what people say around these stories fascinating. There's all sorts of articles and blog entries written by various people about how Microsoft is changing or asking "Is Microsoft changing?", "Is Microsoft Open Sourcing....." etc. etc. It's ridiculous.

At the moment, I'm trying to get over to a female acquaintance why it's a bad idea to get back together with exes. She persists in believing that it's better the second, third or fourth time around and that things will change. Nothing ever does change though. Any apparent change you think you see is short-lived, a leopard doesn't change it's spots and if it ever was going to happen, well, it would have happened by now. You can't get past someone's history, their history is their problem not yours and you only end up getting used.

Re:What's MSFTs Point? (2, Insightful)

Lumenary7204 (706407) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632327)

I disagree...

The object of Moonlight is to essentially be a "feature-complete" implementation of Silverlight, minus those pesky, patented, DRM-laced multimedia codecs.

The question is, then: "Does your Silverlight-based business application really need to use these pesky, patented, DRM-laced multimedia codecs?"

Which, in the vast majority of cases, is "probably not." Much of this kind of functionality can be had via calls to external (and FOSS) libraries.

Re:What's MSFTs Point? (4, Insightful)

segedunum (883035) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632737)

The object of Moonlight is to essentially be a "feature-complete" implementation of Silverlight, minus those pesky, patented, DRM-laced multimedia codecs.
Then it's essentially useless because the reference implementation that is first to market is Microsoft's Silverlight, and you can bet your bottom dollar Microsoft's tools will be creating Silverlight content with Windows Media and other components right, left and centre. What comes down in practice is what you have to support.

The question is, then: "Does your Silverlight-based business application really need to use these pesky, patented, DRM-laced multimedia codecs?"
If history has taught us anything, it's that people are just not going to ask themselves pointless questions like that.

Which, in the vast majority of cases, is "probably not." Much of this kind of functionality can be had via calls to external (and FOSS) libraries.
You don't get a choice. You have to deal with whatever comes down, and what comes down will have pretty much all been created on Windows systems. The key thing to remember hear is that people are not writing content for Moonlight. They are writing it for Silverlight. If it stops working on Moonlight they're simply not going to care when it boils down to it.

Really? These are well worked standard tactics from the past twenty-five years. Do they really need to keep being explained?

Re:What's MSFTs Point? (1)

hahn (101816) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632455)

At the moment, I'm trying to get over to a female acquaintance why it's a bad idea to get back together with exes. She persists in believing that it's better the second, third or fourth time around and that things will change. Nothing ever does change though. Any apparent change you think you see is short-lived, a leopard doesn't change it's spots and if it ever was going to happen, well, it would have happened by now. You can't get past someone's history, their history is their problem not yours and you only end up getting used.
It sounds like you're blaming the ex. But if you actually got back together a second, third, or fourth time, then she's not the only one who believed that things would be better. And so if you're bitter and cynical now, it's not entirely her fault. Now what were we saying about Microsoft again...? :)

In all seriousness, best wishes in getting over the ex.

Re:What's MSFTs Point? (1)

segedunum (883035) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632813)

It sounds like you're blaming the ex.
Not really. Some people just have a hard time believing that things don't change and people just don't undergo magical life changing transformations ;-).

But if you actually got back together a second, third, or fourth time, then she's not the only one who believed that things would be better. And so if you're bitter and cynical now, it's not entirely her fault. Now what were we saying about Microsoft again...? :)
I'm not entirely sure you got the right end of the stick from what was written, but you've loosely described the concept of being used ;-).

Re:What's MSFTs Point? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23632497)

At the moment, I'm trying to get over to a female acquaintance why it's a bad idea to get back together with exes.
At first, I thought you were explaining why it's a bad idea to go back to a computer full of .exe programs.

Re:What's MSFTs Point? (1)

pembo13 (770295) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632225)

If Moonlight == Silverlight does OO.Org == MS Office?

Re:What's MSFTs Point? (1)

miffo.swe (547642) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632229)

Its as platform independant as Windows applications is with Wine. That some lunatic tries in vain to make a plugin in Mono does not make it platform independant. The current implementation, Moonlight, do not work in its current alpha state and lags heavily behind Silverlight. Note that Moonlight will probably never be able to render silverlight content properly. The other bad thing for Moonlight is that it has a huge patent threat hanging over it so nobody in their right mind touches it with a ten foot pole.

Is Word platform independant because you can run it through Wine? Is MSN an open protocol because people have succeeded reverse engineering it?

Re:What's MSFTs Point? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23632337)

independent.

If you can consistently spell something wrong, you can consistently spell it right too.

Sun Java. (1)

Odder (1288958) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632241)

Was nothing learned in the Java fiasco? Do you trust Microsoft to be kinder to Mono than they were to Sun when Microsoft holds the patents this time? Moonlight is a colossal waste of time because Microsoft will never let it thrive on or off their platform.

Re:Sun Java. (1)

cbrocious (764766) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632343)

Microsoft is giving them support and all of the licenses involved have patent release clauses. MS wouldn't have a leg to stand on legally here (not that that's stopped companies with lots of money from burying the competition in legal fees before).

Re:Sun Java. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23632907)

twitter, you already posted [slashdot.org] on this article with another account. Please try to keep it down to one account per article. And please forgive everyone if they dismiss whatever you have to say about Microsoft offhand [slashdot.org] .

No, it isn't cross platform. Just tested (w/log) (3, Insightful)

mikelieman (35628) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632319)

I went to Silverlight's site:

http://www.microsoft.com/Silverlight/ [microsoft.com]

Allowed the site in no-script.

Hit the "click to install" button.

And it downloaded a file called "silverlight.exe"

I clicked on it, and Firefox asked me to choose an application to open it.

I opened a terminal, and here's the results.

[mike@orion ~]$ l Silverlight.exe
-rw-rw-r-- 1 mike mike 1427520 2008-06-02 18:23 Silverlight.exe
[mike@orion ~]$ chmod 775 Silverlight.exe
[mike@orion ~]$ ./Silverlight.exe
bash: ./Silverlight.exe: cannot execute binary file
[mike@orion ~]$
[mike@orion ~]$

So, what's MSFT's point again?

Re:No, it isn't cross platform. Just tested (w/log (2, Informative)

vux984 (928602) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632757)

Mac OS X:
http://www.apple.com/downloads/macosx/development_tools/silverlight.html [apple.com]

Well, that right there satisfies 'cross platform' as far as I'm concerned. I mean sure, it might not run on -every platform- but very few things that call themselves cross-platform run on my Amiga.

Of course, this is slashdot, so by cross-platform you must mean does it run on linux... and apparenty the implementation that DOES is called Moonlight...

Linux:
http://www.go-mono.com/moonlight/ [go-mono.com]

Does that count as cross platform support too? Personally, I think it does. After all, lots of FLOSS software is developed by a core team of developers on one platform, some even are only developed for one distro, and the ports to other platforms and distros are managed by completely other independant groups, yet we don't deny them being cross platform.

Re:No, it isn't cross platform. Just tested (w/log (1)

rts008 (812749) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632837)

"So, what's MSFT's point again?"

Swallow you whole into MS's Monoculture.

Re:No, it isn't cross platform. Just tested (w/log (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23633187)

> So, what's MSFT's point again?

That you're as dense as fucking neutronium and know full well it doesn't work on Linux.

The sad thing is, you probably thought you were being witty.

Re:What's MSFTs Point? (4, Interesting)

slarrg (931336) | more than 6 years ago | (#23633005)

I still remember when most users were using Netscape browsers and Microsoft had a pitiful browser they wanted everyone to use instead. Many technical users pointed out that Netscape was cross-platform and a better choice for a browser. So, Microsoft created Internet Explorer for Macs, Unix and Windows to show that Microsoft understood the importance of a cross-platform browser and would continue to make the browser for all platforms for free. Once they propagated their browser to the bulk of the users, these cross-platform versions stopped being updated. Of course, it was all just a ploy to gain market dominance by confusing the marketplace.

I wish people were smart enough to realize that this latest attempt to tie Ruby to Microsoft is simply the same tactic, used repeatedly by Microsoft, to confuse a marketplace while jamming more poorly conceived Microsoft software into businesses that are not clever enough to look further into the future than the current quarter. Sadly, past examples show that business managers will not learn that Microsoft does not have the best of intentions when they announce any new technology.

Re:What's MSFTs Point? (2, Interesting)

Jugalator (259273) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632025)

It works on Safari on Mac OS, and might be useful to have when the Linux support [tirania.org] is done too. Heck, it's early even for use on Windows. Things only get moderately interesting for me once Silverlight 2 is done, and it isn't yet for any platform.

Re:What's MSFTs Point? (5, Funny)

turgid (580780) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632027)

Since Silverlight isn't cross platform, why bother?

What are you talking about? It runs on all modern versions of Windows.

Re:What's MSFTs Point? (1)

Vectronic (1221470) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632059)

Two comments above you...

http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=571487&cid=23631965 [slashdot.org]

But I really don't see the last part of it comming, I think Ruby is a little to "Stable" unto itself for Microsoft to really be able to pull it off, Ruby will just continue on...

Re:What's MSFTs Point? (1, Flamebait)

JoeCommodore (567479) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632119)

Since Silverlight isn't cross platform, why bother?
What part of Microsoft's "Windows Strategy" did you not hear about?

It has been quoted by Balmer, MSs entry into open source is "to bring better value to OUR customers" (emphasis is mine). If they get RoR developers to make Silverlight front ends, it benefits mainly MS customers (euphemism for MS may make more $ sales) - goal met.

Re:What's MSFTs Point? (1)

maxume (22995) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632201)

Man, when you accuse a business of trying to make money, you do it with style.

Re:What's MSFTs Point? (4, Insightful)

CannonballHead (842625) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632325)

As opposed to, hm, Apple, which definitely does not want to benefit primarily Apple customers. Which is why iTunes has been released for Linux... ??

Plus, open source people definitely want, primarily, to benefit people that don't use open source.

Seriously. What business DOESN'T want to bring better value to their customers? If your object is to benefit people that aren't your customers, your company (or your investors) won't last long.

If you're going to flame Microsoft, do it on good grounds.

Re:What's MSFTs Point? (1)

ady1 (873490) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632733)

Apple never claimed to be OPEN and TRANSPARENT and neither am I aware of any attempt by them to hijack standards.

Have a nice day trolling.

GHynson (0, Flamebait)

GHynson (1216406) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632005)

Great,..more crap from M$. Now their gonna F&*^3 up Ruby.

Sorted (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23632035)

How will any software engineer worth there salt take silverlight seriously now?

But then I gotta give it to MS, they know how to do business.

Rails. . . In the Browser? I'm confused. . . (2, Interesting)

JSBiff (87824) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632093)

I confess I don't know a lot about Ruby on Rails, but I've looked into it once or twice. I thought Rails was a Server-Side technology for creating dynamic websites? I thought SilverLight is a Flash-clone, for implementing client side interfaces and rich media playback? Is Microsoft talking about a SilverLight-based user-interface which connects to a Rails backend running on the server? Or actually Rails running in the browser? What benefits would Rails in the browser bring you?

Also, slightly off-topic, but is anyone else concerned about the security implications of pushing more and more languages/capabilities/functionality into the web browser, which can be controlled by scripts/code loaded from remote, un-trusted, servers? Why can't a web browser just be a web browser?

Re:Rails. . . In the Browser? I'm confused. . . (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23632153)

Embrace, extend, confuse, un-secure ... PROFIT

Re:Rails. . . In the Browser? I'm confused. . . (1)

Drakonik (1193977) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632159)

I agree with both the security risk assessment and the comment on web-based technologies.

Don't get me wrong, it's nice to be able to access my GMail from anywhere via the web interface, but I primarily use Thunderbird and IMAP to handle email. Maybe I'm a minority, but I have very very shifty internet access. either my ISP or my router/modem are faulty, but either way, I'm lucky to stay connected for five minutes. What web services always assume that the users will have constant connectivity.

The desktop is a good platform. Sure, throw in the ability to sync to a webserver, but putting a full-featured document editor into a browser into a possibly bloated OS is just too much overhead.

Re:Rails. . . In the Browser? I'm confused. . . (1)

TeknoHog (164938) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632165)

In the great /. tradition, I didn't read the article, but the summary suggest that this is a proof of concept. Running Rails demonstrates that you can implement a full Ruby environment in Silverlight. Anyway, I agree with your point about the ever-extending capabilities of browsers -- I thought Emacs should already have served as a warning.

Guys, I got this. (1)

Hankapobe (1290722) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632293)

I thought Emacs should already have served as a warning.

Ooooo, aaahh, dude.....um, yeah. Uh, some folks here are a bit sensitive about that....if you know what I mean....

Re:Rails. . . In the Browser? I'm confused. . . (1)

zappepcs (820751) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632187)

This is the opposite of FUD, or rather something I'd call DUF(f) ... for the English, we understand that. Anyway, when MS is telling you that they are improving, embracing, extending, becomming transparent, supporting OSS, and using someone else's technology to do so... they are hyping up the buzzwords to draw you, get your distracted attention.

It's of little concern that they are not inventing their own version of Ruby, they are only modifying to use it, then you won't have to have OSS as MS will have a .net alternative for that, and throw in SilverLight for more busswordiness, and the marketing droids just juice themselves all over.

We are making .net compatible with Ruby/Rails and giving it SilverLight functionality as well. This should help us keep our name in the spaces that Ruby is now pretty much commanding the buzzword marketshare.

There, does that make sense?

How about this: MS training certs now cover Ruby/Rails (well sort of) so you can put that on your resume too. Of course, you won't know shit about it really, but you'll get the cert through .net training.

Does that make more sense?

Sorry, but yes, I'm cynical when it comes to MS.

Buzzword marketshare? (1)

RingDev (879105) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632363)

This should help us keep our name in the spaces that Ruby is now pretty much commanding the buzzword marketshare.
They are targeting your mother's basement?

Ruby is interesting and all, but I would hardly call its "buzzword" presence in the private sector "commanding". I don't think I'd even venture so far as to call it "significant".

-Rick

Re:Rails. . . In the Browser? I'm confused. . . (1)

QUILz (1043102) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632227)

Well, let's just hope Microsoft doesn't allow Silverlight applications to run with the same permissions that ActiveX applets could...

Re:Rails. . . In the Browser? I'm confused. . . (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23632251)

Rails converts a number of things you write with its API into Javascript.

Presumably, these could instead hook directly into the Silverlight frontend.

At least, that's what it seems like, not having RTFA.

Re:Rails. . . In the Browser? I'm confused. . . (1)

Trojan35 (910785) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632269)

"Why can't a web browser just be a web browser?"

Because there's a whole lot of idle CPU cycles out there, and it's a lot faster and cheaper for people to render things on their desktop rather than have your server crunch and send it back through the web.

Ajax/JavaScript (2, Interesting)

JSBiff (87824) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632399)


Don't get me wrong, I don't necessarily think that something like JavaScript, where the DOM can be manipulated dynamically to create more dynamic webpages, is necessarily a bad thing, or Ajax where data can be sent to the browser to render into the DOM. There could, potentially, be the chance for there to be some kind of buffer overflow in the browser that attackers could exploit - but that is potentially even a problem with straight html + images. I just have to trust the browser developer to do a decent job of coding securely, and to fix found exploits quickly. I'm pretty confident with Mozilla's ability to do that, as well as Apple (Safari), Opera, Konq, etc. Even to some extent Microsoft.

My problem is this concept of putting full-fledged programming languages with full access to the .Net framework libraries (which has lots of system-call type objects/methods, e.g. file access, registry modification, program execution, etc). The article (yes, I did read it) made it sound like Microsoft was going to put a full Ruby implementation into SilverLight, and give that Ruby implementation full access to the .Net framework? Am I reading that right? Does SilverLight already give developers using 'traditional' .Net languages full access to the framework? That just seems like a plain bad idea.

I don't mind something like Flash or SilverLight if it only lets developers draw stuff on screen, receive mouse/keyboard events, and play sounds, but I don't like the idea of stuff I load from the Internet having access to system calls. That's just scary.

Re:Ajax/JavaScript (1)

Joebert (946227) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632783)

In my experience Microsoft stuff in the browser was quite powerfull, it was actually nice being able to work with all of the things you mentioned there & being able to do such things was something I missed as I started getting into doing cross-browser stuff & hearing about security.


In conclusion, we should go back to beating our children.

Re:Ajax/JavaScript (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23632845)

Question 1. The article (yes, I did read it) made it sound like Microsoft was going to put a full Ruby implementation into SilverLight, and give that Ruby implementation full access to the .Net framework?

I'm not sure if that is true, as Ruby is not a .Net language (currently). The article is a bit sparse on details, but I would assume that part of the aim of IronRuby is to add Ruby as part of the .Net family of languages. If that is true, then the answer to your question is a definite yes.

Question 2. Am I reading that right?

See question 1.

Question 3. Does SilverLight already give developers using 'traditional' .Net languages full access to the framework?

No, there's a SilverLight security model, similar to Java Applets in a sandbox and what Flash can do on the client. SilverLight cannot call native code directly and all code must be verified before it can run. Therefore, malicious code execution in SilverLight is theoretically impossible. Like all software, I'm sure that there are potential undiscovered holes in the SilverLight security implementation. How many holes are discovered and how quickly MS patches them will determine how secure SilverLight really is.

Re:Rails. . . In the Browser? I'm confused. . . (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23632277)

Also, slightly off-topic, but is anyone else concerned about the security implications of pushing more and more languages/capabilities/functionality into the web browser, which can be controlled by scripts/code loaded from remote, un-trusted, servers? Why can't a web browser just be a web browser?
Thank goodness for Firefox+NoScript.

Re:Rails. . . In the Browser? I'm confused. . . (1)

Sancho (17056) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632281)

Because internet-enabled applications are the way of the future, but your average joe-on-the-street thinks that "Internet Explorer is the Internet."

Seriously, for Web Applications which follow the standards, it's a write-once, run-everywhere situation (well, mostly, except for those places where IE mucks things up.) Want to support Windows? It works. Want to support Linux? It works. Want to support Mac? You get the picture. Any platform with a browser which adheres to the standards can "run" your web app. No need to port your application. No need for users to run complicated installers that ask difficult questions.

Of course, the trade-off is in security, as you point out. But hey, the people demand software which is easy to use.

Re:Rails. . . In the Browser? I'm confused. . . (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23632411)

Question 1. I thought Rails was a Server-Side technology for creating dynamic websites?

Yes, and it utilizes scriptaculous and prototype out of the box for client-side programming like DOM Manipulation and Ajax calls.

Question 2. thought SilverLight is a Flash-clone, for implementing client side interfaces and rich media playback?

Well, not really a clone, more like a competitor. It doesn't utilize ActionScript (which is essentially a JavaScript clone) but instead C# or other related MS .Net languages. You can write some rather nifty client side widgets with SilverLight.

Question 3. Is Microsoft talking about a SilverLight-based user-interface which connects to a Rails backend running on the server?

Yes. The same thing can be done with Flash, utilizing things like Ajax calls and JSON or XML parsers.

Question4. Or actually Rails running in the browser?

No, Rails is a server-side technology, a web application framework, similar to J2EE, POJOs + Hibernate/Spring, TurboGears, etc. etc.

Question 5. What benefits would Rails in the browser bring you?

None, because the question is invalid. Rails is a web application framework, and by nature is dealing with server side technology.

Question 6. Also, slightly off-topic, but is anyone else concerned about the security implications of pushing more and more languages/capabilities/functionality into the web browser, which can be controlled by scripts/code loaded from remote, un-trusted, servers?

Of course, but that's true for any application (i.e. Office Macro Viruses).

Question 7. Why can't a web browser just be a web browser?

Because things evolve and progress demands that web applications be much more interactive than simply static forms and web pages. The world is no longer simply hypertext links. Because rich web applications with interactive interfaces are the logical evolution of the web.

Re:Rails. . . In the Browser? I'm confused. . . (5, Informative)

Shados (741919) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632503)

I'm not amazingly knowledgeable about Flash' technicality. However, I can say the following about Silverlight: While Silverlight can (in the 2.0 version) be compiled as a kind of CLR-based BLOB that runs in the client, Silverlight can also (and exclusively so in its 1.0 variant) be used as a simple markup, generated from any source. ANY Source.

That is, you can have a PHP page generate a bunch of ECHO statements that make up valid silverlight markup and you're good to go... So that you use PHP, ASP.NET, Ruby on Rails, whatever... markup is markup. Instead of outputting the markup for an HTML form with HTML input, you output the market for a canvas with whatever controls Silverlight supports... its still just text interprated by the browser, with a little bit of Javascript to inject it in a placeholder (usually a DIV tag). It becomes part of the DOM to some extent, can be manipulated with normal javascript, etc. It is basically just a fancier more integrated DOM extension, than anything else.

To make things short, there's basically no "linking" involved between the two. You just change the format of the string you output, nothing more, nothing less.

Re:Rails. . . In the Browser? I'm confused. . . (1)

DragonWriter (970822) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632527)

I confess I don't know a lot about Ruby on Rails, but I've looked into it once or twice. I thought Rails was a Server-Side technology for creating dynamic websites? I thought SilverLight is a Flash-clone, for implementing client side interfaces and rich media playback? Is Microsoft talking about a SilverLight-based user-interface which connects to a Rails backend running on the server?


Yes, specifically, they are referring to a Silverlight-based UI which is presented by and connects back to a Rails backend running on Microsoft's IronRuby on the .NET platform on the server.

Blame Google (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23632589)

Why can't a web browser just be a web browser?
If you're concerned about your browser getting bloated by applications, you have to look no further than Google. To a lesser extent, you can blame Sun, who pushed for Java applets a decade ago, but market conditions have pushed Java to the server side.

But now we've got AJAX this and Flash that. The main culprit is Google. They're pushing Google Apps and documents to (1) show more ads, and (2) unseat Microsoft's dominance on the desktop. You can also put some blame on Adobe, who's trying to make Flash and Flex be a full programming platform. Put all that together, and that's why you have Microsoft responding as they are.

huh? (1)

wardk (3037) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632181)

is there an actual story here?

when MS USES Ruby and then actually contributes ANYTHING with a license that isn't viral, report back.

Re:huh? (1)

cbrocious (764766) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632285)

The DLR and IronRuby are released under the MS-PL which is OSI-approved. Stop spreading FUD, asshat.

Re:huh? (1)

wardk (3037) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632929)

I am sure it's got the Good Housekeeping Logo too.

check back after the first lawsuit

Ruby stinks anyway (1)

thetoadwarrior (1268702) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632369)

Why pick Ruby unless they're just trying to look trendy.

Marketing towards a group (trend whore web designers) of people that switch technologies more often than than undies won't help your technology take off. Certainly when these people usually have shit programming skills so their advocacy for these new technologies never go that far.

Re:Ruby stinks anyway (3, Interesting)

Shados (741919) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632443)

The world is trendy, they're just going where the money is. If people say "we want Ruby", they'll deliver. .NET is a platform made to support multiple language, and aside when core mechanics are required (dynamic vs static language), making a new language on top of the CLR is actually not all that much work. So today its C#, Python and Ruby.... tomorrow it will be language XYZ.... a language is a fairly insignificant thing in this day and age: its all about the platform.

They want it so that no matter which language you prefer, you can use their technology, for better or worse. It is quite a brilliant really. Why should the language be tied to the platform anyway? That I pick native compilation, the Java runtime, or the CLR.... I should still be able to use the language I want.

(Side note: I despise Ruby. Doesn't mean I think it shouldn't be offered as an option...)

Re:Ruby stinks anyway (1)

Jack9 (11421) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632637)

If people say "we want Ruby", they'll deliver.
I barely hear "Ruby is good" much less a mass of developers saying "we want Ruby".

Re:Ruby stinks anyway (1)

Shados (741919) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632909)

I hear it all the time. Mind you, its mostly coming from "Joe Developer I never heard of Model-View-Control and Object Relational Mapping until I heard of Rail", and only rarely (but it happens!) from good, professional, skilled web developer, but these people will use Ruby either way...may as well give em a few more choices.

Re:Ruby stinks anyway (1)

DragonWriter (970822) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632557)

Why pick Ruby unless they're just trying to look trendy.


Probably to compete with Sun and JRuby (which isn't, per se, a Sun project, but it is a project Sun is participating in directly.) And dynamic languages (including, but not limited to, Ruby) aren't "trendy" for no reason -- they deliver real value. Sure, there's lots of hype around them, but there is something underneath the hype as well. Anything Java has, especially if it is something Sun is backing directly, Microsoft needs to show that .NET can match. Not, of course, that IronRuby is anywhere close to matching JRuby in any meaningful way.

Re:Ruby stinks anyway (1)

Cal Paterson (881180) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632691)

It's so disappointing that this is such an obvious troll; because it's so true.

Microsoft has lost control of the web (3, Insightful)

Vexorian (959249) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632421)

Help them recover it, use silverlight.

Re:Microsoft has lost control of the web (1)

ady1 (873490) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632751)

I would if only I could find a single website which actually uses it. Reminds of that thing called zune which was suppose to help me get social.

When did Microsoft ever "control the Web"? (4, Insightful)

PCM2 (4486) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632923)

Having a large share of the browser market doesn't necessarily mean you control it -- not when the majority of Web companies are unwilling to give up the other segment of their potential audience. If you'd said that Microsoft controls the intranet, I could maybe believe that... but between PDF and Flash, you could argue that Adobe controls more of the Web than Microsoft does.

Penny-Arcade (1)

GradiusCVK (1017360) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632491)

Kinda reminds me of this comic [penny-arcade.com] .

Psst! Hey, kid, wanna piece of candy? (0, Troll)

littlewink (996298) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632631)

I hope no one thinks Microsoft is trying to help anyone other than themselves with this initiative.

Silverlight and RoR? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23632779)

I've been following RoR for a while and plan to get into it when I get back into web dev. One thing I've noticed is that the RoR community has quite a few Mac users, and a large number of people who follow web standards and place a lot of emphasis on usability. Microsoft and Silverlight seem like something to avoid for many of these people and it seems weird (or perhaps desperate) for Microsoft to think they are going make any headway into this community.

warning or slashvertisement? (1)

Xtifr (1323) | more than 6 years ago | (#23632803)

I notice we already have the embraceextendextinguish tag on the story, but is there really a story here? Looks to me more like a slashvertisement. Ooh, MS wants to merge some unnecessary proprietary* crap with a trendy-but-flakey web rad system. Why should I or anyone care? And if they want to get the word out, why don't they pay the normal advertising rates rates like anyone else? Why is this news for nerds?

*Yes, I know about moonlight, but this clearly says silverlight, and the two have not yet been shown to be compatible. Plus, both require a huge, ugly back end to be installed. There isn't enough money in the world to persuade me to install mono on my servers or even my clients. And I'm certainly not interested in locking out our customers by requiring them to have silverlight/moonlight installed.

Re:warning or slashvertisement? (1)

chromatic (9471) | more than 6 years ago | (#23633189)

Looks to me more like a slashvertisement.

Are you seriously suggesting that someone paid Slashdot to link to a Computerworld article to promote Silverlight? IronRuby? Computerworld?

May I recommend you put down Dan Brown and pick up Focault's Pendulum? The conspiracy theories there are immeasurably better.

Bad Article, Bad Summary (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23632867)

The actual news in question is that IronRuby, a .NET implementation of Ruby, successfully hosted an unmodified copy of Rails and dispatched some simple requests through it.

The only connection with silverlight is that the DLR and IronRuby will ship with the Silverlight 2.0 SDK (it's in Beta1 right now). Microsoft will continue to improve both IronRuby and IronPython, and enabling it to be used to script silverlight content.

Nothing to see here people. Move along.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?