×

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!

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

598 comments

first (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#28642881)

first~~~

mono it's what your mother gives you coming out the vagina

Good (-1, Flamebait)

diskofish (1037768) | more than 4 years ago | (#28642885)

I took some Java courses back in school. I haven't worked with Java in the field, but I must say. .NET is a lot more productive compared to the early days of Java (haven't used it recently, so don't know if it's gotten any better). It seemed like Java constantly made you walk around the block to get next door. With .NET, there is loads of stuff built in so I am not doing a lot of low level coding. That's all the better. Just give me a good solid, well written library and I'll use it rather than roll my own.

Re:Good (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#28642925)

Of course not. Java hasn't improved over time. It is exactly the way it was in version 1. All you can build with it is very slow animated buttons and stuff for web pages.

Are you kidding me? Comparing Java 1 with .NET (which is a copy of Java 1.4 without maintaining backwards compatibility)?

Re:Good (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#28643047)

You swine. You vulgar little maggot. You worthless bag of filth. As we
say in Texas, you couldn't pour water out of a boot with instructions
printed on the heel. You are a canker, an open wound. I would rather
kiss a lawyer than be seen with you. You took your last vacation in
the Islets of Langerhans.

You're a putrescent mass, a walking vomit. You are a spineless little
worm deserving nothing but the profoundest contempt. You are a jerk, a
cad, and a weasel. I take that back; you are a festering pustule on a
weasel's rump. Your life is a monument to stupidity. You are a stench,
a revulsion, a big suck on a sour lemon.

I will never get over the embarrassment of belonging to the same
species as you. You are a monster, an ogre, a malformity. I barf at
the very thought of you. You have all the appeal of a paper cut.
Lepers avoid you. You are vile, worthless, less than nothing. You are
a weed, a fungus, the dregs of this earth. You are a technicolor yawn.
And did I mention that you smell?

You are a squeaking rat, a mistake of nature and a heavy-metal bagpipe
player. You were not born. You were hatched into an unwilling world
that rejects the likes of you. You didn't crawl out of a normal egg,
either, but rather a mutant maggot egg rejected by an evil scientist
as being below his low standards. Your alleged parents abandoned you
at birth and then died of shame in recognition of what they had done
to an unsuspecting world. They were a bit late.

Try to edit your responses of unnecessary material before attempting
to impress us with your insight. The evidence that you are a
nincompoop will still be available to readers, but they will be able
to access it ever so much more rapidly. If cluelessness were crude
oil, your scalp would be crawling with caribou.

You are a thick-headed trog. I have seen skeet with more sense than
you have. You are a few bricks short of a full load, a few cards short
of a full deck, a few bytes short of a full core dump, and a few
chromosomes short of a full human. Worse than that, you top-post. God
created houseflies, cockroaches, maggots, mosquitos, fleas, ticks,
slugs, leeches, and intestinal parasites, then he lowered his
standards and made you. I take it back; God didn't make you. You are
Satan's spawn. You are Evil beyond comprehension, half-living in the
slough of despair. You are the entropy which will claim us all. You
are a green-nostriled, crossed eyed, hairy-livered inbred
trout-defiler. You make Ebola look good.

You are weary, stale, flat and unprofitable. You are grimy, squalid,
nasty and profane. You are foul and disgusting. You're a fool, an
ignoramus. Monkeys look down on you. Even sheep won't have sex with
you. You are unreservedly pathetic, starved for attention, and lost in
a land that reality forgot. You are not ANSI compliant and your markup
doesn't validate. You have a couple of address lines shorted together.
You should be promoted to Engineering Manager.

Do you really expect your delusional and incoherent ramblings to be
read? Everyone plonked you long ago. Do you fantasize that your
tantrums and conniption fits could possibly be worth the $0.000000001
worth of electricity used to send them? Your life is one big
W.O.M.B.A.T. and your future doesn't look promising either. We need to
trace your bloodline and terminate all siblings and cousins in order
to cleanse humanity of your polluted genes. The good news is that no
normal human would ever mate with you, so we won't have to go into the
sewers in search of your git.

You are a waste of flesh. You have no rhythm. You are ridiculous and
obnoxious. You are the moral equivalent of a leech. You are a living
emptiness, a meaningless void. You are sour and senile. You are a
loathsome disease, a drooling inbred cross-eyed toesucker. You make
Quakers shout and strike Pentecostals silent. You have a version 1.0
mind in a version 6.12 world. Your mother had to tie a pork chop
around your neck just to get your dog to play with you. You think
that "not being a douche" is the name of a
rock band. You believe that P.D.Q. Bach is the greatest composer who
ever lived. You prefer L. Ron Hubbard to Larry Niven and Jerry
Pournelle. Hee-Haw is too deep for you. You would watch test patterns
all day if the other inmates would let you.

On a good day you're a half-wit. You remind me of drool. You are
deficient in all that lends character. You have the personality of
wallpaper. You are dank and filthy. You are asinine and benighted.
Spammers look down on you. Phone sex operators hang up on you.
Telemarketers refuse to be seen in public with you. You are the source
of all unpleasantness. You spread misery and sorrow wherever you go.
May you choke on your own foolish opinions. You are a Pusillanimous
galactophage and you wear your sister's training bra. Don't bother
opening the door when you leave - you should be able to slime your
way out underneath. I hope that when you get home your mother runs
out from under the porch and bites you.

You smarmy lagerlout git. You bloody woofter sod. Bugger off, pillock.
You grotty wanking oik artless base-court apple-john. You clouted
boggish foot-licking half-twit. You dankish clack-dish plonker. You
gormless crook-pated tosser. You bloody churlish boil-brained clotpole
ponce. You craven dewberry pisshead cockup pratting naff. You cockered
bum-bailey poofter. You gob-kissing gleeking flap-mouthed coxcomb. You
dread-bolted fobbing beef-witted clapper-clawed flirt-gill. May your
spouse be blessed with many bastards.

You are so clueless that if you dressed in a clue skin, doused yourself
in clue musk, and did the clue dance in the middle of a field of horny
clues at the height of clue mating season, you still would not have a
clue. If you were a movie you would be a double feature;
_Battlefield_Earth_ and _Moron_Movies_II_. You would be out of focus.

You are a fiend and a sniveling coward, and you have bad breath. You
are the unholy spawn of a bandy-legged hobo and a syphilitic camel.
You wear strangely mismatched clothing with oddly placed stains. You
are degenerate, noxious and depraved. I feel debased just knowing that
you exist. I despise everything about you, and I wish you would go
away. You are jetsam who dreams of becoming flotsam. You won't make
it. I beg for sweet death to come and remove me from a world which
became unbearable when you crawled out of a harpy's lair.

It is hard to believe how incredibly stupid you are. Stupid as a stone
that the other stones make fun of. So stupid that you have traveled
far beyond stupid as we know it and into a new dimension of stupid.
Meta-stupid. Stupid cubed. Trans-stupid stupid. Stupid collapsed to
a singularity where even the stupons have collapsed into stuponium.
Stupid so dense that no intelligence can escape. Singularity stupid.
Blazing hot summer day on Mercury stupid. You emit more stupid in one
minute than our entire galaxy emits in a year. Quasar stupid. It cannot
be possible that anything in our universe can really be this stupid.
This is a primordial fragment from the original big stupid bang. A pure
extract of stupid with absolute stupid purity. Stupid beyond the laws
of nature. I must apologize. I can't go on. This is my epiphany of
stupid. After this experience, you may not hear from me for a while.
I don't think that I can summon the strength left to mock your moronic
opinions and malformed comments about boring trivia or your other
drivel. Duh.

The only thing worse than your logic is your manners. I have snipped
away most of your of what you wrote, because, well ⦠it didn't
really say anything. Your attempt at constructing a creative flame was
pitiful. I mean, really, stringing together a bunch of insults among a
load of babbling was hardly effective⦠Maybe later in life, after
you have learned to read, write, spell, and count, you will have more
success. True, these are rudimentary skills that many of us "normal"
people take for granted that everyone has an easy time of mastering.
But we sometimes forget that there are "challenged" persons in this
world who find these things to be difficult. If I had known that this
was true in your case then I would have never have exposed myself to
what you wrote. It just wouldn't have been "right." Sort of like
parking in a handicap space. I wish you the best of luck in the
emotional, and social struggles that seem to be placing such a
demand on you.

P.S.: You are hypocritical, greedy, violent, malevolent, vengeful,
cowardly, deadly, mendacious, meretricious, loathsome, despicable,
belligerent, opportunistic, barratrous, contemptible, criminal,
fascistic, bigoted, racist, sexist, avaricious, tasteless, idiotic,
brain-damaged, imbecilic, insane, arrogant, deceitful, demented, lame,
self-righteous, byzantine, conspiratorial, satanic, fraudulent,
libelous, bilious, splenetic, spastic, ignorant, clueless, EDLINoid,
illegitimate, harmful, destructive, dumb, evasive, double-talking,
devious, revisionist, narrow, manipulative, paternalistic,
fundamentalist, dogmatic, idolatrous, unethical, cultic, diseased,
suppressive, controlling, restrictive, malignant, deceptive, dim,
crazy, weird, dyspeptic, stifling, uncaring, plantigrade, grim,
unsympathetic, jargon-spouting, censorious, secretive, aggressive,
mind-numbing, arassive, poisonous, flagrant, self-destructive,
abusive, socially-retarded, puerile, and Generally Not Good.

Re:Good (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#28643123)

YOSPOS BITCH

Re:Good (4, Informative)

turgid (580780) | more than 4 years ago | (#28642971)

A lot has changed in the last 10 years. Your comment is very telling, and not very helpful. It's so bad, it's not even wrong. I'm sorry that's what you think.

With .NET, there is loads of stuff built in so I am not doing a lot of low level coding.

There are orders of magnitude more stuff "built-in" to Java (the platform), 3rd-party stuff, independent implementations, and it's had a good decade and a half of hardening in real-world situations (top businesses etc.)

gcc even has a java (the language) compiler now (OK for about 5 years) that generates native machine code (what everyone used to whinge about) and there are independent implementations of the Java libraries (e.g. GNU Classpath).

Mono needs to die a death. Please ignore it and hopefully it will go away.

Re:Good (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#28643049)

Your comment is very telling, and not very helpful.

It's so bad, it's not even wrong.

My brain hurts... is Youtube being DDOS now?

Re:Re:Good (0, Flamebait)

iCantSpell (1162581) | more than 4 years ago | (#28643073)

I second turgid, and I will raise a toast to him.

compare for fuck sake.
http://www.javacamp.org/javavscsharp/getStarted.html [javacamp.org]

Re:Re:Good (1)

Jerry Coffin (824726) | more than 4 years ago | (#28643565)

Personally, I don't care one way or the other (I don't care for either one), but I'm left wondering: could anybody honestly consider the "comparison" on the cited site useful in any way, shape, form, or fashion? Even if it provided a comparison that was deep enough to have a hope of meaning something, do you think there's just a hint of a possibility that a web site hosted on "javacamp.org" might have (and provide) a slightly biased view in a comparison between Java and any perceived competitor?

Re:Re:Good (0, Flamebait)

Excelsior (164338) | more than 4 years ago | (#28643817)

Did you even bother to click the link? There's nothing biased about the comparison. It's not very compelling if you asked me, but it's definitely without bias.

Re:Good (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#28643139)

Mono needs to die a death. Please ignore it and hopefully it will go away.

.NET is an extremely popular platform. Mono is a great back door for Linux to get into the business environment by being able to say that you have Linux servers AND .NET support. There will be less worries about moving applications.

And as far as the parent is concerned, I have to agree. Java class hierarchy is a big pain in the ass! Trying to find needed classes and having to include things that aren't needed just to use certain features. It's as bad as MFC in that regard.

Nope, I think .NET is better in that regard than Java is.

Re:Good (2, Insightful)

sbeckstead (555647) | more than 4 years ago | (#28643509)

You obviously don't work with .NET on a daily basis. Same crap different syntax, different names on the box..

Re:Good (5, Informative)

Freetardo Jones (1574733) | more than 4 years ago | (#28643723)

You obviously don't work with .NET on a daily basis. Same crap different syntax, different names on the box..

I use it almost every day and in many ways I prefer it to Java (though I use Java often too for certain things it does better). I never get why people cares so much about what languages other people like to code in.

Re:Good (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#28643761)

Mono is a great back door for Linux to get into the business environment

BS. If you are running on Mono, then you are getting Mono or .NET into your environment. Mono is no more a great back door for getting Linux into your business environment than Java was for getting Solaris into your business environment.

Re:Good (1)

Freetardo Jones (1574733) | more than 4 years ago | (#28643165)

There are orders of magnitude more stuff "built-in" to Java (the platform),

I don't think you know exactly what that term means. The BCL of 3.5 .NET framework defines 294 libraries which each contain hundreds of interfaces, classes, enumerations, structures, delegates, etc. So now to do the math according to you Java must have at least 2 orders of magnitude more of everything (as you said orders) so if your claim is correct Java contains at least 29400 built-in libraries for a combined total of 2940000 interfaces, classes, structures, etc. I'm sorry, but the facts just don't bear your hyperbole out.

Re:Good (1)

alexborges (313924) | more than 4 years ago | (#28643279)

Aw jeeze.... ever heard of figures of speech?

Anyhow, the guy you reply two included 3rd party libraries in that figure. I would say he is not that far of the mark: one order of magnitude is more apropriate, but still, thats "an order of magnitude" larger.

Re:Good (0, Troll)

AlexBirch (1137019) | more than 4 years ago | (#28643343)

Java is dying. Python is good so is C#. I love attributes, LINQ, Master Pages, etc.
I'm not an MS fan, but C# is just so nice.
For the record I'm writing this on my debian sid laptop using Iceweasel.

The Wolf Crows at MidAfternoon... (5, Funny)

Tetsujin (103070) | more than 4 years ago | (#28643489)

Java is dying. Python is good so is C#. I love attributes, LINQ, Master Pages, etc.
  I'm not an MS fan, but C# is just so nice.

For the record I'm writing this on my debian sid laptop using Iceweasel.

Programming is fun. Did you know that rabbits aren't rodents? Storm clouds are the ones they call cumulonimbus. I forgot to bring lunch today so I ate my hat. In "Transformers: Masterforce" they showed news clippings in which the Destrons were referred to as "Decepticons", that seemed like a nice nod to the Transformers we knew in America... I'm going to write an Emacs clone that uses Brainfuck for its scripting.

Re:The Wolf Crows at MidAfternoon... (1)

AlexBirch (1137019) | more than 4 years ago | (#28643601)

I haven't seen any Transformers, if bubble-bee isn't a vw-bug, then it's not real.

Re:The Wolf Crows at MidAfternoon... (1)

Tetsujin (103070) | more than 4 years ago | (#28643703)

I haven't seen any Transformers, if bubble-bee isn't a vw-bug, then it's not real.

I liked him as a beat-up old muscle car... Can't say much for the movie he was in, though. I hear they made some kind of sequel or something? I don't know...

Re:The Wolf Crows at MidAfternoon... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#28643625)

I'm going to write an Emacs clone that uses Brainfuck for its scripting.

You realize that if you actually did this, you would become a god. That might prove inconvenient for many of the powers that be.

Re:The Wolf Crows at MidAfternoon... (1)

Tetsujin (103070) | more than 4 years ago | (#28643673)

I'm going to write an Emacs clone that uses Brainfuck for its scripting.

You realize that if you actually did this, you would become a god. That might prove inconvenient for many of the powers that be.

Yeah, then they'd probably maneuver me from the shadows, hiding their conspiracy with the protective prescience of a Guild Steersman, and make various attempts to either get me under their thumb or turn me into something that I hate so much that I'll die rather than let it continue...

Re:The Wolf Crows at MidAfternoon... (1, Troll)

gbjbaanb (229885) | more than 4 years ago | (#28643709)

Programming is fun

absolutely, that's why people code in C#. Nothign to do with professionalism, fgood code, efficiency, and al the other bits and pieces that have been forgotten in today's rush for "developer productivity" (at the expense of end-user productivity, of course).

that's why, for example, Tomboy leaks memory [softpedia.com] like a sieve. Who cares, its fun to code note-let apps in the new language that doesn't have memory leaks anymore.

Or as this blog note [wordpress.com] says: I have to admit, however, that I admire Jo's sincerity when he makes this point: it's not the users who want it, it's the developers. It can't be denied that .NET was indeed instrumental in the development of Gnote

But who cares about the users nowadays?

Re:Good (1)

Vahokif (1292866) | more than 4 years ago | (#28643429)

it's had a good decade and a half of hardening in real-world situations (top businesses etc.)
.NET builds on Java's experiences as well, and according to Miguel they did a better job of addressing Java's main criticisms than Java itself.

gcc even has a java (the language) compiler now (OK for about 5 years) that generates native machine code (what everyone used to whinge about)
Mono has that too. [tirania.org]

and there are independent implementations of the Java libraries (e.g. GNU Classpath).
Mono IS an independent implementation, along with DotGNU.

Mono needs to die a death.
No, it doesn't. Please stop talking out of your ass.

Re:Good (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#28643439)

If you dont like it, dont use it. Why wish for it to go away? Personally I prefer C#/Mono over Java, but life is too short for me to be preaching to others not to use it.

Re:Good (1)

Darinbob (1142669) | more than 4 years ago | (#28643775)

I don't use either. Back when I was interested in Java it was too much of a moving target. But I get the impression that both today are basically glue languages combined with lots and lots of libraries and frameworks. Knowing the languages seems less important than knowing the libraries and which pieces to glue together.

What is strengthening Java according to TFA? (4, Interesting)

Jugalator (259273) | more than 4 years ago | (#28642899)

but recent changes could strengthen Java's hand, SD Times is reporting

OK, I've glanced over the article twice now, and can't see anywhere where they bring up what could be strengthening Java's position in the future?

I'm assuming it's updates to Eclipse, but they never state it explicitly, just that some Linux distros have weaker IDE support compared to MonoDevelop? *shrug*

Re:What is strengthening Java according to TFA? (5, Informative)

rdean400 (322321) | more than 4 years ago | (#28643699)

It isn't helpful that TFA is wrong on at least one point. It said that Eclipse 3.1 lacks code completion, refactoring, and debugging features. Unless the build in Debian is horrifically broken, it has all of those, including thread-level debugging, which it's had since before Eclipse 3.x. My assumption has always been this is because the progenitor of Eclipse -- IBM -- was more interested debugging server-based Java applications than standalone ones).

no mono (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#28642927)

we have java apps where i work. and ZERO mono. ha ha ha.

Eclipse is stagnating (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#28642945)

Since Eclipse 3.1 is barely distinguishable from Eclipse 3.5 (other than an even greater mess in the preferences and project properties windows), I have to agree with the Debian team. Why bother upgrading?

Anyone who currently uses Eclipse: try NetBeans or IntelliJ for a week. You'll never want to go back.

Re:Eclipse is stagnating (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#28643005)

The difference between Eclipse 3.4 and 3.2 is night and day when you actually use it.

Just because it looks the same (a shock to people who might want to change their hentai GTK theme every week) doesn't mean it is the same.

It's like those idiots that uses Java 1.1 in 1998 and think that Java 6 is pretty much the same.

Re:Eclipse is stagnating (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#28643573)

Since Eclipse 3.1 is barely distinguishable from Eclipse 3.5 (other than an even greater mess in the preferences and project properties windows), I have to agree with the Debian team. Why bother upgrading?

Anyone who currently uses Eclipse: try NetBeans or IntelliJ for a week. You'll never want to go back.

You obviously aren't actually using Eclipse since you don't know what you're talking about.

"a certain class of developers" (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#28642955)

Making it difficult to work with Java on Linux gave Mono a "couple years head start," RedMonk's O'Grady said. "That plus the Mono experience, and the fact that there is a certain class of developers that prefers C# over Java leads to a pretty decent desktop story for Mono on Linux."

Yea, and that certain class of developers would be the talented, intelligent developers.

Re:"a certain class of developers" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#28642999)

Talented, intelligent developers would choose neither. Oh, and the word is spelled "yeah" damn it!

Re:"a certain class of developers" (1)

Chabo (880571) | more than 4 years ago | (#28643183)

Maybe he was speaking in Middle English!

In this context, "Yea" is a perfectly acceptable word to use when starting a sentence.

Re:"a certain class of developers" (1)

alexborges (313924) | more than 4 years ago | (#28643309)

Yep..

They "would be" talented, intelligent developers if they had chosen python or whatever the fuck else that has no ties to microsoft patents (or like jjava...).

I don't think there ever were any (2, Informative)

itomato (91092) | more than 4 years ago | (#28642963)

This is like saying touch-enabled applications have made great gains in iPhone application share.

Or that there are more MFC apps than Java equivalents for Windows productivity.

Heh? Someone bought tickets to the spin train.

No mention of X-platform (1, Insightful)

Twillerror (536681) | more than 4 years ago | (#28643011)

Cross platform is a huge reason why I've been loving Mono.

I've used java for years because it took common programming tasks and made them not only cross platform, but some what standard. .NET/Mono borrowed from that.

Think of network sockets, file access, threads, and a bunch of other things that quite frankly are annoying to do in C or C++. Even worse they are way different on Windows and Linux and so you end up writing big chunks of code twice...for really no reason. Apache portable runtime hopes to do it for C++ apps...but it's quite frankly a pain.

Bottom line if you want to write a GUI based type app Mono is better than Java Swing and better than playing around with C++ and GTK+...unless you need something to the scale of Firefox or openOffice. Even then I think Mono could scale.

The Java VM was a good idea, but Sun never bothered to port other languages to it. With Mono you get a choice of languages, a common library, and apps that really can run anywhere without a whole lot of extra work.

Porting other langauages : (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#28643051)

  Please see this [java-source.net] .

Yours In Parentheses,
Kilgore Trout

Re:No mention of X-platform (2, Insightful)

Jugalator (259273) | more than 4 years ago | (#28643089)

Keeping themselves on the Swing train instead of evolving things like SWT was among Sun's greatest mistakes IMHO. :(

It looks horrible on all platforms, because it needs to work on all platforms without using native controls.

Sure, it's *hard* to make native controls work out well in cross-platform apps, but with enough thought put into it, it can be done pretty well after all. Qt is quite successful, for example. There have been apps I've thought was native using Win32 or GTK, when they were built on Qt. And then I'm a nitpicking guy that often notice when the pixels are off. Running Swing is like watching a puke dry in comparison. For no special reason, because it's shown that native-like controls can be done quite successfully.

Re:No mention of X-platform (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#28643125)

My biggest reason for C#/.Net instead of Java?
Visual Studio

Re:No mention of X-platform (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#28643129)

Hmm, I think you should investigate languages that compile to the JVM, it's where all the cool languages are.

The only think I agree with is that Java screwed up the GUI big time, twice. AWT was too basic, and Swing was too bulky. GUI design tools took years to arrive. JavaFX is rather late to the party, but could be more interesting if work is put into it.

When it comes to server applications, Java is pretty much your only choice in most large companies. Java and Oracle. Sorted.

Of course Java has some issues, slow language/platform development, lacking features like closures, and runtime generics. Still, people cope. Beats fighting C again.

Re:No mention of X-platform (5, Informative)

DragonWriter (970822) | more than 4 years ago | (#28643299)

The Java VM was a good idea, but Sun never bothered to port other languages to it.

Well, except that in reality there are lots of implementations of non-Java languages for the JVM, several of which (Jython and JRuby, among others) have Sun resources behind them, and some of which are even Sun created (Fortress, JavaFX Script.) There were non-Java languages for the JVM before .NET existed.

Re:No mention of X-platform (1)

WeirdJohn (1170585) | more than 4 years ago | (#28643337)

The Java VM was a good idea, but Sun never bothered to port other languages to it. With Mono you get a choice of languages, a common library, and apps that really can run anywhere without a whole lot of extra work.

You mean copying the Smalltalk VM was a good idea. And there are many dynamic languages that run on the JavaVM now.

Re:No mention of X-platform (5, Interesting)

pherthyl (445706) | more than 4 years ago | (#28643675)

>> Think of network sockets, file access, threads, and a bunch of other things that quite frankly are annoying to do in C or C++.

You're just using the wrong C++ libraries.
Using Qt I can do all the things you mentioned and just about everything else in the C# and Java class libraries. Cross platform, without the performance and resource penalty of a virtual machine. Also the final product will appear more native on more platforms than C# or Java.

Also because of Qt's design, I barely have to bother with memory management in my GUI apps. So far I'm averaging one delete statement per 1000 lines of code. Everything else is cleaned up automatically. If I thought a bit harder about my design I could probably get rid of most of those deletes as well.

Re:No mention of X-platform (3, Informative)

rdean400 (322321) | more than 4 years ago | (#28643737)

You might want to research before posting next time. There are more JVM-based languages than there are CLR-based languages.

Microsoft shill (5, Informative)

El_Muerte_TDS (592157) | more than 4 years ago | (#28643029)

RedMonk analyst Stephen O'Grady, the guy being quoted in the article, is a Microsoft shill. And the whole article is filled with FUD.

Re:Microsoft shill (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#28643153)

Maybe Microsoft needed someone to quote as saying "... Mono/.NET development has leapfrogged Java development on Linux, by a long shot" for yet another "Get The Facts" campaign ?

MS Is Making Fools Out Of The Open Source World (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#28643529)

The Microsoft 'community' - Microsoft friendly press, clowns like Miguel De Icaza, etc. all are playing hardball to fuck Linux on the desktop up and the Open Source community is just rolling over like pathetic little dogs.

That incompetent little Microsoft fanboy De Icaza successfully managed to derail the basic window/desktop management into to a pointless and futile war.

And now with this mono garbage they are derailing Linux application development. And you idiots are falling all over yourselves trying to prove to the world how 'open minded' you are for actually using patent encumbered Microsoft technology.

What a fucking joke.

Open source community - you're nothing but a bunch of suckers and losers.

Letting mono worm its way into Linux application development is like Microsoft making Linux hit itself in its face with its own fist like some contemptuous older brother who wants to see just how far he can humiliate his younger brother.

The execs up in Redmond must be shaking their heads in disgust at being faced with such a bunch of fucking losers.

Re:MS Is Making Fools Out Of The Open Source World (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#28643751)

After all the years of just how invincible and all powerful open source is it is staggering to look at how easy it was to stop it dead in its tracks:

A simple fork of the current main desktop package and the Linux world has been wasting their time in KDE vs Gnome flamewars for years now.

And then you had Sun performing the thankless task of keeping Java free from destruction by Microsoft while the stupid little kids here on Slashdot were screaming about how Java isn't 'GPL'.

And now the Linux community is actually starting to willingly include a Microsoft patent mess right into the heart of distributions - and for what? A few shitty and poorly written apps that already have faster, lighter, and better C++ versions.

Anyone see Apple fucking around with Mono? Nope.

Anyone see Google fucking around with Mono? Nope.

You would either get laughed at or outright fired if you made such an inane suggestion.

But the Linux community never fails to seize an opportunity to shoot itself in the foot.

Re:Microsoft shill (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#28643611)

If anyone needed any proof that Slashdot's moderation system is a failure, here it is. One of the few "+5 Informative" posts, and it's a baseless attack using the words "shill" and "FUD".

Miguel de Icaza - How much more damage can he do? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#28643815)

You would think that after creating the Linux desktop Gnome versus KDE war and turning 'Year of Desktop Linux' into a joke and now something not even funny anymore, that Linux developers and distro managers would have gotten a clue.

How many more times is Lucy(Miguel de Icaza) going to hold that football out there for you Charlie Brown(Linux community) before you catch on?

One sentence that summarized it all for me (2, Insightful)

bogaboga (793279) | more than 4 years ago | (#28643083)

...Packaging has also been a detriment to Java on Linux, said O'Grady...

To this, [Linux] zealots will defend the status quo saying choice is working for Linux as if there are no draw backs.

This same problem is being reflected on the choice of desktop environments. No wonder after a decade of "Linux on the desktop", we in the Linux world still command a very small percentage of active users of desktop Linux. Some say we are irrelevant. It's sad.

Re:One sentence that summarized it all for me (2, Insightful)

jipn4 (1367823) | more than 4 years ago | (#28643465)

To this, [Linux] zealots will defend the status quo saying choice is working for Linux as if there are no draw backs.

The problem with Java packaging on Linux has been Sun and their insane requirements, not Linux.

we in the Linux world still command a very small percentage of active users of desktop Linux

And you know this... how? As far as I can tell, there are probably as many Linux desktop users as there are OS X users. Is OS X irrelevant, too?

Re:One sentence that summarized it all for me (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#28643603)

Is OS X irrelevant, too?

Yes?

Java still rules server side (5, Insightful)

sprins (717461) | more than 4 years ago | (#28643091)

Oh give me a break. For server-side development Java is still king in the performance and feaure department. Perhaps Mono/.NET/MS it catching on, but that's only due to comprehensive copycatting of Java technology.

Although I agree we shouldn't underestimate MS copycatting...

Re:Java still rules server side (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#28643247)

MONO it's what your mother gave you on the way out the vagina

TFA is poorly written, but... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#28643105)

There's a lot of truth to the distros not keeping up w/ Eclipse, or its plugins. Eclipse is a good IDE if you've got a couple of people on your team who can set it up, resolve plugin dependencies, etc., but a lot of shops are finding those kinds of engineers in short supply.

Java is struggling at this point, and there's not much new development going on in Java from what I can see. However, Mono on linux (desktop or web) is yet another technology that middle-managers find confusing, alienating, and intimidating, and that will prevent it from becoming as widely adopted as Java was, unless something major changes with respect to Novell's marketing. MS always wins the marketing battle, and as much as I dislike their OS, the dev tools are pretty good, and a lot easier than Eclipse to work with once the license fee is paid.

And before you start telling me that it's so easy to download and install a new Eclipse, remember that a lot of shops don't have more than a couple people who know how to do this kind of thing on a Linux desktop...I even have several VM images ready to go, but it's too alien/new/disconcerting for a lot of folks to try out when mgt. has bought VS2008 licenses, is disruptive to project schedules, etc. If it were up to me I'd be using python as a high-level and c++ where needed.

Re:TFA is poorly written, but... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#28643185)

And before you start telling me that it's so easy to download and install a new Eclipse, remember that a lot of shops don't have more than a couple people who know how to do this kind of thing on a Linux desktop

It's a developer tool. Pull down the archive and run it. If it's that difficult for you, you have no business getting paid to develop code.

Re:TFA is poorly written, but... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#28643559)

What's your point? there's a lot of people in the computer industry that have no point being there.

Re:TFA is poorly written, but... (1)

digsbo (1292334) | more than 4 years ago | (#28643717)

Thanks, this was a big part of my point the other guy didn't seem to understand.

Re:TFA is poorly written, but... (1)

digsbo (1292334) | more than 4 years ago | (#28643701)

Yeah, I can do it, have done it, and have found it pretty easy. But as I said in my post, I have VMs ready to go. Most shops employ people who won't go to the trouble of learning how to use a repository installer let alone a tar/gz/rpm install, and I'm in a shop like that now. Last job, no problem--but go to an MS shop and tell me what you find...

Re:TFA is poorly written, but... (1)

hattig (47930) | more than 4 years ago | (#28643423)

I'm sorry, but Eclipse just runs from the decompressed download, even if it's on your desktop.

If you need help adding a shortcut to your menu when you are a developer, you're in the wrong business. Maybe you need to be using .NET.

uh. cuz it's the browser, stupid. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#28643205)

The browser is where it's happenin, doods.
Java is the new cobol. Another bad attempt at extending C. It's for immigrants to program in.
Mono is Mickeysoft and yet another pathetic attempt to extend and objectize K&R C. It's for losers.

From a user perspective (-1, Flamebait)

Diabolus Advocatus (1067604) | more than 4 years ago | (#28643213)

Java sucks. It's slow and a resource hog. It just doesn't feel 'right' when using programs made from it.

On the other hand, I've never really had a problem with any .net apps that I've used.

Sure Java might be more open but as a user I'm going to use what is better for me - not what's better for the developers.

Re:From a user perspective (2, Insightful)

Toonol (1057698) | more than 4 years ago | (#28643395)

I don't program in either, so I can't speak to the advantages from the development side; but I know that with Mono/.net apps, I've never experienced that 'Oh, crap, this is Java' feeling that I feel about twenty seconds after launching a new program.

I know that, theoretically, java apps are fast, compile well, and so on... but in practice, they just feel like trudging through sludge. Every single time. Perhaps that's just because I'm dealing with them on the desktop, instead of on the server... but still, when I've got dozens of examples and it's invariably true, it eventually stops being anecdotal and starts becoming data.

This is beyond garbage (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#28643217)

I quota from TFA: "Eclipse 3.1 lacks features that MonoDevelop has, including code completion, integrated debugging, refactoring, and unit testing capabilities"

Excuse me !? That stuff was even in Eclipse 2.0. Claiming a Java IDE without code completion exists is just stupid.

Another quota from TFA "Most Java developers on Linux use JetBrains IntelliJ, he claimed. IntelliJ is a commercial product that is not open source."

Who says most developers use IntelliJ, I personally know NONE. Everybody I know is on Eclipse or Netbeans.

I'm not even going to bother with the rest of the article. This article is written by one bunch of ill informed people.

How much money do I need to pay to get an article on the frontpage ? Do I get a volume discount if I want five of them ?

Re:This is beyond garbage (5, Informative)

hattig (47930) | more than 4 years ago | (#28643471)

Why is he talking about Eclipse 3.1 anyway? 3.5 just came out, 3.4 came out a year ago, 3.3 a year before that, 3.2 a year before that...

Does he talk about .NET 1.0? I doubt it.

The only problem Eclipse 3.5 has is the minor hassle of getting SVN working, as it isn't integrated out of the box. I suspect this was because of subclipse and subversive bickering.

Re:This is beyond garbage (1)

smartr (1035324) | more than 4 years ago | (#28643779)

translation: It's too complicated for programmers using Debian to get things like recent versions of Eclipse or NetBeans... It's too complicated to install things on Debian, they need a Windows installer.

Re:This is beyond garbage (2, Insightful)

ElMiguel (117685) | more than 4 years ago | (#28643757)

I quota from TFA: "Eclipse 3.1 lacks features that MonoDevelop has, including code completion, integrated debugging, refactoring, and unit testing capabilities" Excuse me !? That stuff was even in Eclipse 2.0. Claiming a Java IDE without code completion exists is just stupid.

In fact, Eclipse's code completion, integrated debugging and especially refactoring capabilities are stellar. Can Visual Studio do "extract to local variable" and "extract to method"?

who uses mono anyway? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#28643229)

Who is using Mono besides the Tomboy guys anyway? I know I'm not. Of the two, I've only really used Java.

Re:who uses mono anyway? (2, Informative)

Freetardo Jones (1574733) | more than 4 years ago | (#28643469)

The Banshee guys, the Beagle guys, the Blam! guysm the Diva guys, the DotNet BlogEngine guys, the GNOME Do guys, the F-Spot guys, the FusionFall guys, the Graffiti CMS guys, the iFolder 3 guys, the KeePass 2 guys, the Second Life guys, the MonoTorrent guys, the Muine guys, the PHP4Mono guys, the Smuxi guys, the Sky Net guys, the Unity guys and the VistaDB guys. Just to name a few.

Re:who uses mono anyway? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#28643705)

I find all the Linux apps that you listed are buggy and/or slow. Thankfully the pkg manager removes them all when mono gets removed. If Gnome ever depends on mono, then we're switching to KDE/Qt. Just can't take the chance that MS will screw us over in the future. Ya, ya, I heard C# is a 'free, open standard'. Don't eat that, Elmer, that's horseshit!

Can Mono/.NET do this? (1)

bogaboga (793279) | more than 4 years ago | (#28643267)

Can an informed authority tell me whether Mono or Microsoft's .NET can stream data over the internet? Very useful in Forex Trading. This [netdania.com] is what I mean.

Re:Can Mono/.NET do this? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#28643597)

Of cource. Plus you have Silverlight/Moonlight for web integration. Java is a mess in comparison

Compatibility != Equality (necessarily) (1)

Ohio Calvinist (895750) | more than 4 years ago | (#28643271)

I think the problem is that while Java is cross-platform, it's apps have always been treated like second-class citizens on Windows and Mac platforms. They behaved different, had a very different UI for most of its' life, had a slow big runtime for the dial-up days that every app seemed to have a different version of the VM to run and took forever to load or update.

For that reason, I think a lot of developers have avoided it on Windows and since Windows has such a market share, if you're primarily a Windows developer, Mono is a good choice. Mac development has always been a niche job and learning the specifics library methods to make Java apps "work" like native mac applications I can't see much reason in not just writing it in Objective-C. Apple has always lagged behind Sun in releasing recent VMs and for OS X 10.4, which is still very in use as many Mac users don't upgrade for the sake of upgrading, it still hasn't been given Java 6.

.NET (at least on Windows) has always had a form designer which is very quick to learn and rapid develop over Swing/Eclipse which has been code-based (I know, behind the GUI forms is code in .NET), but for a lot of us (like me) our CS programs focused on CS, not software development/engineering and we've had almost no exposure to the GUI packages in Java or C, which have a bit of a learning curve even for the educated.

Re:Compatibility != Equality (necessarily) (4, Insightful)

pak9rabid (1011935) | more than 4 years ago | (#28643463)

...and we've had almost no exposure to the GUI packages in Java or C, which have a bit of a learning curve even for the educated.

Actually, GUI programming in Java via Swing is really quite nice. There's a little bit of a learning curve (not so much if you're already familiar with the GUI event model), but you can pick it up really quick. C on the other hand...I havn't really had any direct experience with creating GUI's in C/C++, but if I had to I'd probably pick up Qt (especially after Nokia LGPL'd it), as from what I hear it's quite a pleasure to work with.

Re:Compatibility != Equality (necessarily) (1, Troll)

jipn4 (1367823) | more than 4 years ago | (#28643505)

I think the problem is that while Java is cross-platform, it's apps have always been treated like second-class citizens on Windows and Mac platforms.

It's even worse on Linux. Java's cross-platform features are a failure on all platforms.

Outpaces? (3, Insightful)

popo (107611) | more than 4 years ago | (#28643283)

"Outpaces" is one of those sketchy words often used to describe comparative speeds. It is almost a sure sign of a release designed to manipulate public opinion.

e.g.: If Microsoft is growing at 3% annually, and my small one-man software company is growing at 20% annually -- I can put out a press-release saying that I'm "Outpacing Microsoft". But that doesn't mean I'm creating real competition for Microsoft.

Disclosure: I haven't RTFA -- I'm just calling b.s. on semantics...

Not the kind of articles to get linked by /. (5, Insightful)

moria (829831) | more than 4 years ago | (#28643291)

From TFA:

Eclipse 3.1 lacks features that MonoDevelop has, including code completion, integrated debugging, refactoring, and unit testing capabilities

Nothing to see here. Move on.

I don't think so (3, Insightful)

jipn4 (1367823) | more than 4 years ago | (#28643331)

Mono is becoming popular for Linux development because it does not try to be cross platform. It feels much more natural than Java programming.

mono in website programming. (1)

chode8 (1594993) | more than 4 years ago | (#28643355)

mono is used often in the indie radio programming. www,dflshow.com is one example with the whole livestream thing.

Not for me! (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#28643441)

Java is irrelevant for the desktop at this stage and Mono simply isn't welcome on my machines. Vala is shaping up nicely and has none of myriad issues afflicting Java or Mono. There's nothing worse than Mono zealots, despite plenty of people making it clear that they don't want their software these obnoxious mono people keep trying to push it as a dependency.

No thanks.

No code completion or debugger? (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#28643745)

"Eclipse 3.1 lacks features that MonoDevelop has, including code completion, integrated debugging, refactoring, and unit testing capabilities, Hargett claimed. "I've found in my consulting that people who install Eclipse 3.1 through the [Debian] package manager say, 'This is terrible.' " He said that customers that have installed a version of Eclipse beyond 3.1 like it."

Just out of curiosity, I just downloaded a copy of Eclipse 1.0. This build is from November 2001.

http://archive.eclipse.org/eclipse/downloads/drops/R-1.0-200111070001/index.php [eclipse.org]

For the record, it has code completion and integrated debugging. I do remember back in 2004 thinking IntelliJ IDEA's refactoring support was far better, so I suppose that was roughly the 3.0 timeframe. I guess I could track the JUnit plugin history and see which version of Eclipse started including this, but I think I've already made my point. I've got nothing against Mono, but geeze, what a load of BS...

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...