×

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!

.NET for Apache

chrisd posted more than 11 years ago | from the apache-ain't-done-till-.net-won't-run dept.

Microsoft 541

PerlGuy was so kind as to forward us the news about the joint Apache/Microsoft combined press conference scheduled from Wednesday at the OSCON Quote: "We will announce news related to the Apache web server and Microsoft's development technology, .NET. This should be one of the biggest announcements of the conference..."The email he recieved: Covalent Technologies will be holding a press conference at the O'Reilly Conference on Wednesday at 3:15 in suite 415 (during the afternoon break). We will announce news related to the Apache web server and Microsoft's development technology, .NET. This should be one of the biggest announcements of the conference and an interesting follow up to Microsoft's appearance last year at the show as well as to their general comments on open source. Executives will be on hand to answer questions or to conduct one-on-one interviews after the announcement.

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

541 comments

Apache for .NET???? wtf! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3934452)

First off I must admit that I am a staunch supporter of President Bush's 'War On Terror'. However when I first read this article (The Drudge Report is my AOL homepage), I thought it was a stupid idea to even consider recruiting someone above the age of 16 to spy on their neighbours. The best way to go about this would be to teach young children to keep a close eye upon their parents and neighbours. This would best be taught in the state run schools that cost so much tax payer money, and refuse to swear to the Pledge of Alligance. By teaching them to watch over America, there would be a huge re-injection of patriotism back into the education system. Using children, has a number of advantages because children are more likely to go along with orders delivered by a state authority. Secondly, they are innocent, and would be able to gather information readily without raising suspicions of the terrorists they would surveil. And lastly they could be rewarded easily and cheaply with videogames and candy etc. Lastly, the Boy Scouts of America could be put to use, by doing reconnaissance missions in the remoter regions of the American wilderness; the Girl Guides could supply them with food. I'm sure the terrorist camp in Oregon would never of formed if there were 100 Boy Scouts roaming the wilderness looking for Arabs every weekend. In general I support the idea, but think it needs to be reworked to include only children to be the most effective.

so the muffin says (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3934454)

holy shit, a talking muffin!

Mono? (1)

HisMother (413313) | more than 11 years ago | (#3934460)

Presumably, this will be an announcement for a "mod_mono," or something of the sort. I feel a cold, cold finger on my spine.

Re:Mono? (5, Interesting)

AirLace (86148) | more than 11 years ago | (#3934492)

The Mono project hasn't started work on an Apache module yet. But Mono's ASP.NET support is designed such that an Apache 2 module shouldn't have to be longer than around 80 lines of code. It's trivial when you have the right framwork, but we are still a few weeks away from that.

If the guys who've done this have based their work on Mono, they certainly haven't informed the project. My educated guess is that this uses the .NET framework on Windows and Apache 2 for Windows. No great deal.

Re:Mono? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3934546)

On the other hand, we could just pretend that tomorrow they're going to announce a functional, cross-language mod_parrot with a parrot-based cross-language object framework for web services, as a ".NET killer", as a competitor to mono..

Let's just pretend it's true, until the ugly truth is revealed. The pretty lies are the nicest things we can tell ourseives...

Re:Mono? (3, Funny)

AJWM (19027) | more than 11 years ago | (#3934592)

Nah, the real announcement is that Microsoft has finally faced up to the insecurity of IIS and is discontinuing it in favor of Apache. They will provide (for a modest licensing fee, this is Microsoft) a tool to convert ASPs to JSPs.

(And if anyone really believes that, please contact me about this money in a Nigerian bank I need help with transferring...)

Re:Mono? (1)

JWSmythe (446288) | more than 11 years ago | (#3934707)

But it was a nice fantasy.. It would be an ideal world for MS not to continue development on a perpetually broken application, but to start bundling very functional free packages.. As I recall, they have interest in Perl too (ActiveState)..

Of course, they'll find a way to completely mess it all up, but I'll remain optimistic.

edonkey (0, Offtopic)

jrs (27486) | more than 11 years ago | (#3934463)

Kinda offtopic, but the newest version of edonkey is .net based. Is it worth it to install all that .net shit (also for future programs). I'm just using the command line version now.

And the news is...? (1)

1010011010 (53039) | more than 11 years ago | (#3934467)


Microsoft and the Apache Foundation will be working together on a fuel cell?

Microsoft will be teaming up with Apache to port Apache's httpd to DirectX?

What? Something about "IIS out, Apache in?"

Rotor?

Eh? (tap tap) Is this thing on?

Now THAT would be interesting... (4, Insightful)

sterno (16320) | more than 11 years ago | (#3934585)

Microsoft using Apache instead of IIS. Now that's an interesting thought. Microsoft would have no issues with using Apache because it's license would allow them to lock up their changes without a problem. They write a module to let it use .net and *whamo* they look like open source advocates. As long as it's the right kind of open source.

Re:Now THAT would be interesting... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3934696)

That would be great (a mod_dotnet or whatever) for them to do. At least its a start.
Now matter what they do or how well intentioned though, most will assume the worst because of their rep.

Thanks Apache (-1, Troll)

Cardhore (216574) | more than 11 years ago | (#3934468)

I have had Apache for about 6 months now, and all I can say is that the software is brilliant. I am genuinely stunned by how good this is. And I am genuinely thankful to all the people who made this possible. I know it is a little unfair to mention anyone by name but;

Richard Stallman; I think you are a genius.

Linus; many thanks for making your magnificent kernel available to us all forever via the GPL. If I had ever written anything this good, I would have been reluctant to part with it, but you gave it away. I hope you are soon rich as well as famous.

ESR; what can I say, keep up the good work I guess. Try not to take everything that is said too personally. Like all the others, I don't agree with everything you say, but I think your contribution is overwhelmingly positive. And I think you write well. This is something not all good programmers can do, or want to do.

So far I have Apache running on 3 machines. I have the complete home LAN going with IP masquerading and all that. I have never had a crash, but to be honest sometimes I have screwed up my systems so badly the best way to recover was just to reboot and start again. Quicker than reading the manual if you know what I mean, just hit it with a bigger hammer. I have a real talent for screwing up routing tables.

I would guess that Apache has saved me at least USD$5,000-00, and maybe USD$10,000-00. I base this estimate on the software savings (the missing BLOATware), hardware savings and over priced upgrades to both that I can now permanently avoid. My gateway/server box is a P75 for instance, with an 8 gig drive. Intra-LAN pings take 0.5 milliseconds on 100 meg PCI cards with a 10 meg hub. Me, I can wait 0.5 microseconds for a packet. Especially when it puts 10 grand in my pocket.

There was an 'astroturfed?' thread here a while ago about everyone who uses Apache having a ton of books and CD's lying around essentially as papers weights with no useful system to show for it. In my case, I have 4 distributions already, but I also have a very useful system. I will try an explain... I have all these distributions because they are so cheap, and because whenever I want some new component for the system, like StarOffice 5.1 for instance, the download is too big and if you buy it from StarDivision (here in Freemont) they want $39-00. If you go to Fry's (the local electrical store) you can find a complete distribution containing the single thing you want, plus upgrades for all the others for $24-95. I am thinking of Caldera 2.2 here. So why not just take the whole thing? So invariably, I do.

In summary, it is difficult to believe that something this good could be produced in such an unusual way. If I had not seen it with my own eyes I would not have believed it.

My advice to anyone is just try it. You will save a small fortune, learn a lot, have a lot of fun.

Re:Thanks Apache (2, Funny)

linuxhack (413769) | more than 11 years ago | (#3934519)

In summary, it is difficult to believe that something this good could be produced in such an unusual way. If I had not seen it with my own eyes I would not have believed it.

The parent in this thread is actually Bill Gates part of the press release. Unfortunately the poster forgot to mention it...

Re:Thanks Apache (1)

CapnRob (137862) | more than 11 years ago | (#3934663)

Jeez, man. Anybody who's posting to this already knows all this. In detail. Better than you do. Get a grip.

Re:Thanks Apache (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3934681)

And not to mention the post has been posted before by the same author on NetBSD

http://bsd.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=36541&ci d= 3934099

Don't scream (5, Insightful)

Uruk (4907) | more than 11 years ago | (#3934478)

Before people get in a huff, we should mention that Apache has a history of integrating well with other technologies, those considered to be "evil" by some people, and others as well. I mean, look at Apache and Java [apache.org]. What about XML [apache.org]? Not to mention perl, PHP, TCL, and others.

Java is not a warm and fuzzy free technology. I daresay it's every bit as proprietary as .NET, just in a different way. Apache is wise to be as flexible and accomodating as possible - it's a good thing that it supports .NET, since it will most likely do it in a free way and expose more people to free software. On the other hand, it could always *not* support .NET, lose more market share to IIS, and generally piss people off who are using .NET technologies by wider corporate edict.

Re:Don't scream (-1, Flamebait)

AJWM (19027) | more than 11 years ago | (#3934506)

I daresay [Java]'s every bit as proprietary as .NET,

Oh? Is there an equivalent to the Java Community Process for .NET? Can I download compilers that target .NET (ie, the CLR) from Microsoft for free (gratis) like I can the Java SDK from Sun?

Java may be, strictly speaking, proprietary, but it is nowhere near "every bit" as such as anything from Microsoft.

Re:Don't scream (2, Insightful)

smaug195 (535681) | more than 11 years ago | (#3934527)

Yes, you can download free compilers, the .NET SDK is actually free, granted it's windows only... but still, it is in fact free. VS.NET is just built on top of that :).

Re:Don't scream (5, Informative)

TheAncientHacker (222131) | more than 11 years ago | (#3934536)

Yes and Yes. Go to http://www.asp.net and you can download compilers and participate.

Sorry to disillusion you.

Re:Don't scream (1, Flamebait)

torinth (216077) | more than 11 years ago | (#3934562)

Can I download compilers that target .NET (ie, the CLR) from Microsoft for free (gratis) like I can the Java SDK from Sun?

Yes [microsoft.com], so get off your ignorany little pony and open your eyes. Conecpts behind open source and free software are permeating *every* company these days, so although they may not release Windows under the ownership-stripping GPL, even Microsoft recognizes that to be competitive in some markets (web browsers like IE, Graphic API's like DirectX, and ystem-neutral platforms like .NET), even they need to give stuff away for free.

You are free to download the ".NET SDK", link it into an XEmacs mode and develop all you want for the CLR. If you happen to want a full-fledged high-quality IDE and an amazing documentation browser along with it, you'll need to dish out a few dollars for Visual Studio.NET, but the compiler and libraries are in fact, free.

-Andrew

Re:Don't scream (1)

MagPulse (316) | more than 11 years ago | (#3934699)

If you happen to want a full-fledged high-quality IDE and an amazing documentation browser...

or simpler things like an optimizing compiler...

OUCH !! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3934601)

Don't you feel like an ignorant fool.

Re:Don't scream (0)

DemENtoR (582030) | more than 11 years ago | (#3934611)

Well soon enouth (or already) you will be able to use mono. So not only is it goign to be free as money but free as in speach too. http://www.go-mono.com/ If i would have the choice of using ms tools (somewhat free), and mono (free as in speach. I would definately go for mono.

Re:Don't scream (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3934683)

What is "speach"? Is is the secure version of the "peach" protocol?

Speech.

Re:Don't scream (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3934649)

Oh? Is there an equivalent to the Java Community Process for .NET? Can I download compilers that target .NET (ie, the CLR) from Microsoft for free (gratis) like I can the Java SDK from Sun?

Java may be, strictly speaking, proprietary, but it is nowhere near "every bit" as such as anything from Microsoft.


Bad example; you could have done better in refuting the statement that Java is every bit as proprietary as .Net.

Its not the fact that the compilers and runtime are free (as in beer) that is important, its the fact that the process by which Java and its libraries are developed are more open (although not totally) than .Net, and in the way that not only Sun can develop these components. IBM, Oracle, etc. are involved in determining the direction of Java, and no, Sun doesn't always get their way (see the Java Spec Request for RMI security, which was vetoed by non-Sun members of the committee). Does MS have a formal, documented process whereby outside vendors, some of whom are competitors of MS, can determine the directon of .Net? How about implementations. IBM has implementations on a number of platforms, including Windows. They obtained a license from Sun to release these versions (and actually obey the license terms, unlike MS), but there are clean room versions as well, such as from GNU. If mono tries to duplicate the entire .Net platform, will they be safe from MS IP claims? I am skeptical.

Java is not written to favor any one operating system. Sun delivers versions for Windows, Linux, and Solaris (their own OS) simultaneously. Can we say the same about .Net? Will ADO.net work on Linux or Solaris at all, ever? Again I am skeptical, and I have to say, for good reason.

Re:Don't scream (1)

MikeApp (151816) | more than 11 years ago | (#3934660)

Yes, they're free - for MS OSes. Sun has made a commitment to supplying implementations for Solaris, Windows, and Linux. I see a difference here. I believe that MS is making a version of .NET for another platform (BSD?) to make it through the standards body, but I don't imagine we'll see them actually supporting it.

One question I've been left with after reading all of this anti-Java FUD: is there really anything stopping you from implementing a Java compiler and the APIs under an Open Source license? Isn't this what Kaffee was doing?

Re:Don't scream (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3934604)

Java is not a warm and fuzzy free technology. I daresay it's every bit as proprietary as .NET, just in a different way.

What a bunch of whiney bastards you people are! Waah! If it's not GPL it's evil! Companies should believe in the communism of the GPL! They should spend millions on a technology then sign off all their rights! Yeah! That's right! And they should like it!

Now... Really, how is Java as bad as .net? You can download the entire SDK's source code for free and port it to any platform you want. What more do you want? You want the language spec to be open? Well, first off it it was, you would be bitching about how Microsoft ruined Java portability right now. And anyway, I rather like Sun having control of Java. The absurd feature flamewars that go on in the open source community are something that nobody needs.

Re:Don't scream (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3934653)

> Java is not a warm and fuzzy free technology. I
> daresay it's every bit as proprietary as .NET,

How can Java be as proprietary as .NET? I didn't know .NET was a programming language. What is it like? Is the specification open and free for anyone to implement like Java?

Perhaps you meant to compare C# with Java and .NET with J2EE (I don't know which you mean), both of which are about equal in openness (or proprietaryness :)).

Uh-oh (0, Interesting)

Quantum Singularity (594841) | more than 11 years ago | (#3934481)

I really hope Apache stays free. The internet itself depends on it! Though it could be improved with some . NET capabilities.

Re:Uh-oh (1)

dacarr (562277) | more than 11 years ago | (#3934502)

Near as I can tell, Apache will stay free. Remember, .net is a development facility, more or less a bag on the side of apache, not unlike, say, PHP or Perl or something

Maybe I'm drinking the kool-aid here, but I have to admit, on the surface it certainly looks good. We'll have to wait and see what they have up their sleeve, but perhaps this is Microsoft's way of saying that they want to help?

But that's just my opinion. I could be wrong.

-Dennis

Re:Uh-oh (0)

Quantum Singularity (594841) | more than 11 years ago | (#3934510)

I think you're right. That optimistic outlook seems to jive with the current state of affairs. I admit, I really don't know what .NET is. Though Apache is open-source, and companies can just pluck that out of the air.

Re:Uh-oh (1)

FatRatBastard (7583) | more than 11 years ago | (#3934690)

On the surface it also makes a tonne of sense for Microsoft. What is more important to MS? IIS vs apache installations on Windows or seeding .NET? As far as I can gather this is simply apache on windows. There's no sense in cutting your nose off to spite your face. Once you've sold a windows server you've also sold IIS. If the user doesn't want to use it no skin off of MS's nose, as long as you allow them to continue to use .NET, which is what MS wants.

hell in a handbasket (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3934482)

ever since Rasterman, declared that linux desktop was dead..everything has gone to the dogs...

Re:hell in a handbasket (0, Troll)

sjgman9 (456705) | more than 11 years ago | (#3934556)

If you want a Unix system with a real desktop, get a Mac running OSX. Spend the money, it's worth it.

Re:hell in a handbasket (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3934617)

Bullshit. OSX is a just another proprietary software money pit. Don't waste your time with it because you will always need the next paid version to get the bug fix you have to have.

Re:hell in a handbasket (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3934636)

No.. OS X is godlike compared to [X Windows+(your favourite window manager here)/Windows]

Pigs are flying (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3934485)

the joint Apache/Microsoft combined press conference
And in related news, Linus is putting out Linux under the BSD licence, Richard Stallman has shaved off his beard, Mozilla 1.0 is out and IBM are nice guys again.

Re:Pigs are flying (1)

ergo98 (9391) | more than 11 years ago | (#3934689)

I really don't find it that bizarre or surprizing that the Apache team would coordinate with Microsoft on doing something that could potentially benefit Apache: The Apache ideology (expressed through the liberal, BSD style license) has nothing in common with the maniacal ravings of some of the GPL nutjobs.

Re:Pigs are flying (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3934711)

This message was posted with Mozilla 1.1b

Hmm...... (2, Funny)

doc_traig (453913) | more than 11 years ago | (#3934489)

Smells like a trap. I'm sending in a robot to blow it up.

- DDT

MOD THIS UP!!! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3934545)

Get it? Robot? Like when there is something suspicious???? Up mod!!!!!

Re:Hmm...... (0)

jedie (546466) | more than 11 years ago | (#3934552)

Smells like a trap. I'm sending in a robot to blow it up.

omg, this was so funny, I had to comment on it :)
brought goddamn tears to my eyes ;D

maybe this is a good thing? (1)

DavidJA (323792) | more than 11 years ago | (#3934490)

Because according to this ZDNEt/EWeeks [eweek.com]review, .NET [eweek.com] scales A LOT better then Java on [DB2, MSSql, MySQL & Oracle] [eweek.com].

Your links say the opposite. (3, Interesting)

AJWM (19027) | more than 11 years ago | (#3934569)

Funny, those links don't seem to have much to do with Java scalability, they just shows how SQL Server scales much worse than any of the DBMSs mentioned.

Of course, this was at least partly due to the crappy Microsoft JDBC driver (which they couldn't even get to stay up for 8 hours).

Why am I not surprised that in a test of the Microsoft JDBC driver vs .NET that Microsofts own technology might do better?

These studies just point out that you're better off going with a non-Microsoft solution.

Re:Your links say the opposite. (1)

MagicMerlin (576324) | more than 11 years ago | (#3934587)

Look at his links again and you will see that the best databases top out at 600 pages/sec, and the .net server hits 900 on the same hardware.

Re:Your links say the opposite. - Your way off (0)

JDAustin (468180) | more than 11 years ago | (#3934645)

You way off here.

Funny, those links don't seem to have much to do with Java scalability, they just shows how SQL Server scales much worse than any of the DBMSs mentioned.

Of course, this was at least partly do to the crappy Microsoft JDBC driver (which they couldn't even get to stay up for 8 hours).


This was due entirly to a BETA driver. SQL Server could Scale just fine with a proper driver. BTW the uptime was for the web server, not SQL Server.

Why am I not surprised that in a test of the Microsoft JDBC driver vs .NET that Microsofts own technology might do better?

Maybe this has something to due with the BETA JDBC driver? Of course using all MS tech would perform better, but drivers due mature and I would assume the JDBC driver available now is better then the one used in this study (done 6 months ago).

These studies just point out that you're better off going with a non-Microsoft solution.

How so? When the same App was ported to .NET, it could perform better under a heavier load then any other database. It does show that some solutions are better then others, in this case a all-MS solution is better in then anything else they tested. To be fair tough, lets see the performace of this app under .NET w/ a MySQL, Oracle, or Sybase DB backend.

(of course this opens you up to the vulnerabilities of going with a all-MS Solution).

I'll knock MS when there is a reason, but I won knock them around for knocking them arounds sake.

Re:Your links say the opposite. - Your way off (3, Insightful)

the eric conspiracy (20178) | more than 11 years ago | (#3934714)

When the same App was ported to .NET, it could perform better under a heavier load then any other database.

Well, I would say that porting applications to a different code base for benchmarking is an exercise in futility. The fact of the matter is that both architectures are amenable to considerable optimization that would not be done in this sort of study, and the 700 - 900 range in page load performance does not represent a difference that any experienced person would consider meaningful.

It does NOT say anything close to that, TROLL (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3934598)

What is says is that M$'s shitty JDBC driver for their own database can't scale.

It also plainly states, and you f'ing know it, that SQL Server was blown away by every other database tested. And not by a little, either:

[eweek] [eweek.com]

Re:maybe this is a good thing? (1)

f00zbll (526151) | more than 11 years ago | (#3934637)

According to those charts, SQL Server 2000 sucked compared to Oracle. The comparison between Microsoft's .NET and BEA weblogic is totally pointless. If you look at Microsofts .NET application server page, it states emphatically it does not support state or state replication. If you look at the config.xml file for BEA, you will see they've set up weblogic to cluster. Gee, I wonder why ASP.NET beat BEA.

Also, if you look at the clustering described on .NET application server, you will see it is basically round robin load balancing. What Microsoft calls clustering isn't application clustering. It's load balancing.

My take on it is this. For a simple bookstore app, you don't really need stateful transactions. Not unless you have a very complex system that absolutely needs to be transactional and have to be totally fail safe. If someone wanted to do the opposite and show how bad .NET application server is, they could write a stateful application and make .NET crawl.

Not to defend microsoft, but their test case is absolutely on target because they're going for medium sized businesses that want something which scales better than IIS with Microsoft Transaction Server. And by far, .NET does that without a doubt. But comparing a full fledged application server that is mature and industry tested to a glorified stateless transaction server is just plain old wrong and stupid. Like anyone with real experience with transactional systems is going to believe that one. Now I could be wrong, but from the examples files the page provided, it's pointless to setup clustering in BEA. Anyone with BEA experience will tell you this particular example it's better to throw a local director infront and leave clustering off.

Possibly a good thing, maybe really bad (1)

billatq (544019) | more than 11 years ago | (#3934491)

Well, if this is what I'm imagining everyone thinks it is, microsoft is going to release a module for apache that allows ".NET" software to run with it. Of course--and this is if they do that--this would mean that they aren't going to release it open source, and it's going to be buggy and full of security holes. But hey, don't customers love monopolies and proprietary technologies?

Cool... or Uncool? (5, Insightful)

tcc (140386) | more than 11 years ago | (#3934493)

Microsoft actually validating apache as a competitor big enough to not crush them (right away) by closing their .NET framework only to IIS?

Question is, is it good to see Apache embrassing a Microsoft framework so that it remains in the race of the .NET deployment... ...or is (history repeating) a "good thing" only in the short run:

"Hey! Apache runs .NET stuff, let's learn .NET. God! it's so simple and easy, and object-oriented to the bones, I'll stay on that for all of my applications"

1-2 years later Microsoft closes the .NET2 to IIS-only, and since a lot of developpers moved or learned from scratch on .NET, they will migrate on IIS to continue or update their work.

Usually, this scenario is typical of MS... so what would be different here? They have everything to gain right now to broaden their .NET framework because they NEED people to USE it and gain acceptance... once they get that, they apply.monopoly(.NET);

Re:Cool... or Uncool? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3934583)

I can't believe so many folks are drinking the Kool Ade [cnn.com].

Reminds me of the old Aesop fable where the camel stuck its nose in the tent ..

Re:Cool... or Uncool? (3, Insightful)

ergo98 (9391) | more than 11 years ago | (#3934638)

Microsoft really is doing the exact same tactic that Sun has attempted with Java: Propagate your standard on many platforms to get wide interest and adoption, with the natural goal that people will eventually migrate to the one "preferred", "superior" platform when the barriers to switching are low enough (which with .NET web applications with text configurations would be trivially low: Move some web folders). I don't think there is any surprize that Microsoft is trying this, though you have to wonder why anyone developing for .NET wouldn't be using a Windows platform machine anyways (which is why the non-Windows platform is so marginal of importance).

On top of that, you don't need something quite so overt as a non-supported .NET version 2 to close the door: All you need is a subtle performance advantage with the preferred platform, and just a general instance of "Quirks" on the non-preferred platform (and I guarantee that mono is not 100% compatible with .NET: It'll be 99.99%, with those tiny quirks every now and then that make you go "Damnit...why am I not using the official platform?"

.HELP (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3934497)

i just wanted to say:
apache? MICRO FUCKING SOFT?? GET THE HELL AWAY!!!
They'll stop at nothing to crush apache, get real. I wouldn't have a fucking thing to do with them.

by the way, lameness filter my ass - i like lots of puntuation

Function (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3934500)

So anyone figured out what .NET does yet?

No big surprise (4, Interesting)

Xthlc (20317) | more than 11 years ago | (#3934501)

Microsoft needs maximum market penetration for .NET, otherwise the initiative fails. EVERYBODY has to play in this particular sandbox, or MS' dream of a services-based software market (with far better growth potential for a monopoly than a product-based market) is bust. IIS is *one product*, one that, in the grand scheme of things, it would be worth sacrificing if it meant .NET ubiquity. The majority of the web runs on Apache, therefore for Microsoft to not support .NET on Apache is to lose the majority of the web. QED.

What makes me curious is what platforms they'll support Apache on . . .

Re:No big surprise (1)

dacarr (562277) | more than 11 years ago | (#3934518)

To add to my previous reply on Apache staying free, remember, you don't have to support .net.

-Dennis

SOAP, WDSL, etc. (1)

ergo98 (9391) | more than 11 years ago | (#3934662)

The "web service" model that Microsoft and IBM has pushed has nothing to do with .NET (though, from a technical perspective, it may very well be implemented in .NET on the server side, it could equally be implemented in PHP, Java, etc), but rather standards such as SOAP and friends.

The only real advantage I can see to Microsoft supporting .NET is the old "lure 'em in" technique: Lots of otherwise anti-MS open sourcers will run out and install .NET on their Apache servers (thereby legitimizing Microsoft while cutting the foundations out of their own arguments) and may very well develop projects based on it for clients and employers. Soon enough they'll have deployed ".NET" solutions that would run even better if you use SQL Server rather than Oracle (because of course with SQL Server you can use the super high performance, SQL Server only ADO.NET objects), and of course it'll run best on its native platform: Windows .NET Server.

Re:SOAP, WDSL, etc. (1)

ergo98 (9391) | more than 11 years ago | (#3934708)

I should also mention that lots of people involved with spec'ing systems often want to avoid single vendor "lock-in", and this may very well be the ticket that gets Microsoft in the door: "Don't worry about having all your software developed for the .NET platform, because if MS really pissed you off you can (theoretically) switch over to FreeBSD/Apache". With all of the "monopolistic" press that Microsoft has been getting, this is a very important factor for becoming a chosen technology these days.

At a prior contract I literally heard this play out, with management concerned about Microsoft lock-in, and I heard a Microsoft keener (a VB-no-idea-how-to-program moron) exclaim that Microsoft "Soon would have .NET on all sorts of other platforms....like Java!".

RedHat/Microsoft Announce Linux.net (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3934521)

What next?

Vatican/Microsoft announce MonoTheism.net?
US Govt/Microsoft anounce MonoPoly.net?
Soundblaster/Microsoft announce MonTonous.net?

Did I miss some? ;)

Re:RedHat/Microsoft Announce Linux.net (1)

iago (4917) | more than 11 years ago | (#3934596)

Your Sister MonoNucleosis.Net

Couldn't resist.

Running apache (1, Interesting)

MC68040 (462186) | more than 11 years ago | (#3934530)

After running apache for over a year now I think it's great, and .NET support can't be bad, makes it easier to persuade companys to switch to linux with apache because afterall, 'it supports .NET and you know how good that is', well, that is what you would say to your windows-biased CEO. =)

Just IMHO.

wow...... (1)

JoeBlows (581471) | more than 11 years ago | (#3934534)

perhaps MS realy is trying to be more open and inclusive.....

or perhaps MS is just so damn sure of them selfs that .NET will cause more folks to be locked into there platform that they do not care who the hell gets to be in the party since they will all be smushed into a tiny little corner with none of the hotties.

Biggest announcement? Ha! (3)

geekd (14774) | more than 11 years ago | (#3934538)

This should be one of the biggest announcements of the conference

Who really cares about this? Is anyone really all gung-ho to deploy .NET? Do consumers really want "Web Services"?

I'd rather run my office apps on my local box, and keep my data private, thank you.

On a side note Covalent spammed the hell out of OSCON attendees. I'm really dissapointed that O'Reilly gave out my *work* email address to them. I wasn't all that hot on Covalent products before, and now that they spammed me, I'll think twice before looking at them again.

Re:Biggest announcement? Ha! (1)

King of the World (212739) | more than 11 years ago | (#3934679)

RSS and RDF are web services.

Apple's Watson (snigger) is the greatest piece of software since Napster. It's that impressive, and it's all about queries and xml feeds. Do some searching on it - it's bloody great, and consumers love it.

Web services is a buzzword, but it's a more formalised version of any interactive website.

Re:Biggest announcement? Ha! (4, Insightful)

danheskett (178529) | more than 11 years ago | (#3934687)

Who really cares about this? Is anyone really all gung-ho to deploy .NET? Do consumers really want "Web Services"?

I'd rather run my office apps on my local box, and keep my data private, thank you.
Once again, another person posts who have no idea what web services are all about or what the point is. Really, seriously, look into it a bit. Few, if any vendors are planning on using web services to replace traditional binary applications. Many, many, many vendors are looking at ways to enhance those apps with web-services/soap/xml.

But yes, in fact, many people are gung ho about developing for .NET/deploying it. Anyone Win32 developer who has spent literally hours working around 10 years of bugs and hacks can appreciate the cleaner interfaces, cross-language portability, and speed of development.

yup... (5, Insightful)

gyratedotorg (545872) | more than 11 years ago | (#3934543)

i guess this would be the "embrace" part of "embrace and extend."

Re:yup... (2)

the eric conspiracy (20178) | more than 11 years ago | (#3934642)

i guess this would be the "embrace" part of "embrace and extend."

It's "embrace, extend, extinguiish".

My mother used to say that if you are going to sup with the devil, you had better bring a long spoon. Never has that advice been more appropriate.

A link to the article would have been nice... (5, Insightful)

Lethyos (408045) | more than 11 years ago | (#3934560)

But though the editors were lazy or Slashcode was buggy, I'll put in a couple of cents anyway.

First of all, this is bad. Microsoft are not adopting the "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em" ideal. Apache dominates web servers. No doubt about it. [netcraft.com] To defeat this, Microsoft are going to do what they do best: embrace, extend, erradicate.

Based on Microsoft's history, any components they write for Apache will be closed source. If it is not entirely closed, the crutial parts will be. Microsoft are not interested in opening up their IP. Consider this as one of the many possible scenarios:

Following initial proof of concept, first stage deployments and so forth, Microsoft will begin the trouble. It will strangely cease to work. Apache will be to blame and sites will like have to apply patches from Microsoft or just deal with them. At the same time, IIS will lack these problems. They will work to create inroads into the *nix space with Win.NET and IIS.

Keep Microsoft out of open source. They have no business being here. Instead, Apache people should look at either of the two .NET initiatives that are Free.

Great! (1)

MagicMerlin (576324) | more than 11 years ago | (#3934564)

As a web appliation developer, I really hope they get .net working for apache. I think asp.net is pretty neat stuff, except for that one minor problem you have to run IIS to use it. Otherwise, I'll stick to php, thanks. Merlin

Just curious... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3934573)

Why does the "Open Source" movement continue to support Microsoft in its activities? If you hate Microsoft, supporting its .Net project is like personally driving a bus full of 2nd grade boys to the Neverland Ranch so they can 'play with' Michael Jackson and his pet monkey, Bubbles. There has got to be a better idea to work with than the .Net initiative -- you are letting Microsoft set the standard.

We claim to have a bevy of eyes, why don't we engage the brains powering those eyes to come up with a better standard instead of just taking "advantage" of the future the 800lb. gorilla is predicting? Most consumers don't understand what .Net means in the first place. Steve Jobs took advantage of that with the iTools upgrade to .Mac announcement during the keynote. He likened the $100 a year service (a great deal for your mother or the girlfriend you have in Canada -- not you) to Microsoft's .Net. Do you think anyone outside of hardcore computer users understood the joke in Job's keynote? Yet, "journalists" dumped Job's B.S. in pages and pages of newsprint.

Like they say, 'The iron is hot'. If the "Open Source Community" really wants to make a name for itself, killing .Net with a better system now is key. You have a general public that only thinks .Net will screw them when an idiot at a winery accidently breaks racks and racks of the current vintage. Silly PDA users...

Hrm (5, Insightful)

interiot (50685) | more than 11 years ago | (#3934578)

Alliances aren't always a good thing. When a stronger enemy is fighting many small opponents, if the strong guy can get a few of the small guys to take a break for a bit, that's really just a win for the bigger guy.

Re:Hrm (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3934713)

dude, you just illustrated your point using a quote from babylon 5. the geek patrol are on the way to your house now to award you your 'special achievement' award.

.Net clones: how many do we need? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3934582)

Portable .Net. Mono. Apache .Net.

Its like KDE and GNOME all over again.

You disgust me! (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3934591)

As a native american descendent I am shocked and horrified by the name you have chosen for your web server. The Apache were a strong and noble people forced from their homeland after being the target of genocide. Do you think this is funny? Do you think this is tasteful? Your lack of respect ( I mean all of you taking part in this discussion, so don't tell me to complain to the project ) is an insult. I suppose you thought that none of had net access so we would never know. What's next, the Gypsy web server? I think you should rename it the "Pale-skinned, dog-faced, land-stealing white devil" web server.

THE MODERATOR IS A PIG!!! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3934688)

I'M SERIOUS!!!

Re:You disgust me! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3934705)

On the off chance that this isn't a troll:

When this server was first developed, way back when the HTTP was only recently published, the server s/w wound up with quite a few maintenance patches over its (at the time, short) life. It was A Patchy server - and the name stuck (and was respelled).

Other than the homonym spelling, there was never a connection to that native American people.

--

If this *was* a troll, congrats, I bit.

I ring to rule them all.... (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3934595)

Bill Gave them the ring of .net and they put it on their finger...

Re:I ring to rule them all.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3934712)

..but if they have good situational awareness, like the elves, they'll immediately take off the rings once it's realized what they do.

BSD License is Microsoft compatible (1)

TheNarrator (200498) | more than 11 years ago | (#3934616)

Now it becomes evident why Microsoft hates the GPL. They hate it because it is not "embrace and extend"(TM) compatible. The BSD license however poses no "viral" problems for them.

.net is not evil (5, Interesting)

psicE (126646) | more than 11 years ago | (#3934627)

Call me a heretic, but I think .net is a good thing. Not .net as made by Microsoft, but .net as an open standard - for example Mono. The concept of making Web services as easy to run and use as regular applications.

I don't want to have everything run on a server and use a dumb terminal. No sense making it even easier for Ashcroft to read my stuff than it already is. But Web services, by nature, are things that already use the Internet - things that might as well be hanging on a building in Times Square, for all Ashcroft cares.

To check stocks, I have to go to cnbc.com. It's an ugly interface. Why can't I double-click on a program that uses native widgets and displays that same information? To read and reply to Slashdot, I have to slashdot.org. It's uglier than a female dwarf (or KDE). Why can't I have Slashdot in a Win32-native interface? Think NNTP, but better-looking and more powerful.

To write a document, I open up AbiWord. If I'm writing a story about the stock market, why can't I just open up my stock market program, drag a box into my document, and have live numbers for the Dow? If I'm writing a story about AMD, why can't I just open up my Slashdot program, drag a box into my document, and have a link to the story inserted into my document; and why can't the person on the other end open the document, double-click my link, and have the Slashdot story opened in place - without needing a web browser? .net is simply recognizing the reality that the Internet is a dynamic medium, and it requires a new way of designing programs; a way that makes using the Web identical to using your computer locally. All of the examples I just gave can be done now with existing programming tools on any platform, but .net makes it much easier and more straightforward. It's nothing particularly difficult, and open source will be quick to replicate it.

As Miguel de Icaza said, you shouldn't just not use Mono because it's a copy of a MS product - after all, Linux itself is a copy of non-free UNIX from AT&T. If/when the time comes that Microsoft decides to cut off .net for Apache support, Mono will be ready to take its place.

hmmmm (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3934644)

There aren't enough -1 posts on this thread.

I like black frankenstein.

Damn straight ... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3934661)

There aren't enough -1 posts on here, but I'll change that.

I don't like black frankenstein.

That should be all I need to get a Flamebait moderation

Carcass! (-1)

GafTheHorseInTears (565684) | more than 11 years ago | (#3934651)

EMBRYONIC NECROPSY AND DEVOURMENT

...Aborted gestation...foetal mutilation... ...Abortive secretions...embryonic fermentation...

Your crotch spawning afterbirth
A congealing sprog basted in cess
Palpitations spew a foetus
Sprawling in this mess...
Flowing lochial discharge
Of copious womb lining torn
The mutilated still-born mangled
By the whiplashing umbilical cord...

Mixing together post-natal juices
The dead infant used as stock
Slurping this horrendous concoction
Eat the cervical slop...
Ladling out aborted debris
Oozing guts chomped in your maw
The caesating premature baby
Nurtured in post-partum gore...

Suck cess on a plate, lick its pus from a spoon
Gnaw at rashes on a dish, munch on the expelled womb...

Its testicles incised - the foetus liquidized
Whisk the parasite - the gross remains baptised...

(Solo: paturient paste sandwich)

Stagnant placenta and smelly fluids
The stiffening dead babe's crib
Disemboweling and gutting

Grating bone and rib
Fragile limbs pulverised
Dismemberment is so cruel
Soggy organs and paturient broth
Give piquance to this sickly gruel...

Mixing together post-natal juices
The dead infant used as stock
Slurping this horrendous concoction
Eat the cervical slop...
Ladling out aborted debris
Oozing guts chomped in your maw
The caesating premature baby
Nurtured in post-partum gore...

Drink bile from a cup, gulp its phlegm from a pot
Eat mucus on a saucer, choke on embryonic clots...

(Solo: Pasteurised foetus goulash)

I've been thinking this would be possible... (0)

X=X+0 (142003) | more than 11 years ago | (#3934655)

Ever since I've started playing with the .NET CLR and development tools, I've realized how easy it would be to integrate Microsoft's .NET technology into Apache 2.x for Windows.

In my opinion, Microsoft has stolen so much from Java, that it seemed obvious to me that the CLR was the equivalent of Java's JVM, and could be tied into Apache just the same way Java has on the server side. I would like to throw out an interesting idea, and maybe I'll get shot down for it, but it seems to me that it should be very easy to install an Apache web server that could support both .NET and Java server-side technologies.

To take that idea even further, wouldn't it be interesting if we could share state information and session variables via a standard interface so that both environments could work together in a single web application! Of course, we could roll our own session variable mechanisms using a common database or something, but wouldn't it be pretty if the handling of session data were abstracted and standardized across platforms?

BTW, I'm just serious geek who's always looking for a cool way to tie stuff together, even if it is from Microsoft. I code all kinds of things using both Java and Microsoft technologies.

Whatever fits....

Just brainstorming here... What do you guys think???

So, what was the deal? (1)

Joe Tie. (567096) | more than 11 years ago | (#3934677)

Microsoft agrees to this, and in exchange Slashdot has to post a "Linux is dead" article every week along with the visual studio ads? Suddenly it all makes sense!

Not the first time (2)

DrSkwid (118965) | more than 11 years ago | (#3934680)

Microsoft released frontpage for Apache.

The PR machine might pretend that there is no other software in the world but there is some pragmatism in there.

Since when is apache == covalent? (1)

f00zbll (526151) | more than 11 years ago | (#3934691)

Covalent developers have contributed tremendously to apache, but let's make one thing clear. Covalent working with apache != apache.org working with microsoft. There's nothing wrong with apache.org working with micrsoft as long as MS agrees to apache's license agreements.

Who needs who more? (1)

wrinkledshirt (228541) | more than 11 years ago | (#3934700)

I just wonder if this is going to affect Apache's work with Java.

On that note, is anybody even really using .NET much yet?

END SLASHDOT ADS WITHOUT SUBSCRIBING! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3934709)

If you're like me, you're probably wondering just why the hell anyone would pay for Slashdot, let alone want to support it. As it turns out, Slashdot already has all the features you need to completely disable all advertisements without paying those greedy slobs at VA Software a cent. All you need is a DOM-compliant browser, such as Mozilla or Konqueror, and the User Slashbox. With disgustingly-placed new full-page ads [pknet.com] now arriving, the time has come to show that we users will not let ourselves be advertised into submission.

Follow these five easy steps and never see another Slashdot ad again:

1. Go into your Homepage Preferences [slashdot.org].
2. Scroll down to the "User Space" textarea, and paste the following four lines of HTML in there:

(click here [pknet.com] to download the adkiller javascript code and put it on your own webspace, in case you don't trust me :-)
3. Scroll down the list of slashboxes, and make sure the "User Space" checkbox (inexplicably located between "MP3.com" and "Myther.com") is checked.
4. Return to the front page [slashdot.org], and your Slashbox should be there, quietly zapping all iframes and banner-shaped images on the page.
5. There is no step 5!! It's that easy.

There are a few problems, however:

* Opera doesn't seem to work with this at all.
* Internet Explorer won't automatically remove the ads, but by appending the following to the above code:
Click to delete ads and clicking the new link in your Slashbox, the ads will go away.
* The User Slashbox only shows up on index.pl and articles.pl pages, so comment and user pages will still have ads. Luckily, the article pages seem to be the only ones running the obnoxious new full-page ads [pknet.com], so this shouldn't be too annoying.

If you are a Javascript wizard and know how to make this script work on Opera or IE, please tell me. Ad-free Slashdot should be available to everyone!
--
If you like Apple, then please press your right mouse button.

Reposted by Rezn0r

All well and good but... (1)

Thomas A. Anderson (114614) | more than 11 years ago | (#3934715)

Who besides M$ actually wants .net? Has anyone ever said "hey, I really want what .net is going to provide me?". Hell, how many people ubnderstand what .net is going to provide - somedays I'm not sure I understand.

I'm just getting tired of this 8 gazillion pound gorilla making all the decisions - most of which are not in my best interest (or rather, their customers - since I'm not a customer of theirs).

It does make me wonder what impact .net will have on non-windows users...

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...