Beta
×

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

Thank you!

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

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

Mono Poises to Take Over the Linux Desktop

CowboyNeal posted more than 10 years ago | from the and-do-it-with-style dept.

Ximian 925

Edd Dumbill writes "Miguel de Icaza and the Mono team recently hosted a two day open meeting in Boston. O'Reilly have just published my report of the meeting. Highlights include Miguel's view that 'C is dead!' and the Mono approach to dealing with Microsoft patents on .NET."

cancel ×

925 comments

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

C is Dying? (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8539744)

C is dead? Has Netcraft confirmed this?

Re:C is Dying? (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8539872)

Maybe because the D programming language [digitalmars.com] is set to replace it. As if we'd be so lucky.

Miguel is dead! (5, Funny)

Nailer (69468) | more than 10 years ago | (#8539877)

- C.

Netcraft confirms: C is DYING (5, Funny)

Joey Patterson (547891) | more than 10 years ago | (#8539933)

It is official; Netcraft confirms: C is dying

One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered C community when IDC confirmed that C market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that C has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. C is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Programming Language Usage Audit.

You don't need to be Scott McNealy to predict C's future. The hand writing is on the wall: C faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for C because C is dying. Things are looking very bad for C. As many of us are already aware, C continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.

C++ is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time C developers Mark Markup and Sally Smith only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: C is dying.

Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

C++ leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of C++. How many users of C# are there? Let's see. The number of C++ versus C# posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 C# users. C++ posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of C# posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of C++. A recent article put C# at about 80 percent of the C market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 C++ users. This is consistent with the number of C++ Usenet posts.

Due to the troubles of Redmond, abysmal sales and so on, C++ went out of business and was taken over by Microsoft who sell another troubled programming language. Now C# is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.

All major surveys show that C has steadily declined in market share. C is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If C is to survive at all it will be among language dilettante dabblers. C continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, C is dead.

Fact: C is dying

Re:C is Dying? (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8539936)

(!C) ? (alive = 0) : (alive--);

Re:C is Dying? (3, Insightful)

Canadian1729 (760713) | more than 10 years ago | (#8540031)

Saying C is dead is such a stupid comment, it invalidates anything else he might say.

VB 4 EVAR!!1! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8539745)

C is dead. Long live VB!

I have a dollar (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8539746)

I do.

mono (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8539749)

holla atcha boy

Wayne's World (5, Funny)

wtlssndlssfthlss (747938) | more than 10 years ago | (#8539750)

"I once thought I had Mono for an entire year, just turned out I was really bored..."

c is dead... (4, Funny)

dieyack (716504) | more than 10 years ago | (#8539755)

long live c!

Re:c is dead... (5, Interesting)

gstoddart (321705) | more than 10 years ago | (#8539982)

Indeed. Since most damned operating systems are written in C I don't think we'll exactly see it go away anytime soon.


Operating systems is where C comes from, and vice versa.


(Yeah, whatever, I'm a C geek. To me, and array of pointers to functions returning pointers to arrays of characters seems like a damned fine idea! =)


Back in my day, we jusy wrote straight to the registers on the device and we were glad! Damned punk kids.

.NET (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8539757)

I realize that this is an unpopular opinion here on Slashdot, but C# is actually a pretty cool language and the .NET runtime is a promising platform. Microsoft didn't just dream this up overnight... they had a lot of smart people working a long time creating this beast.

It would certainly benefit us to learn about these technologies and leverage them, rather than to unilaterally declare them evil, wrong, stupid, etc. and just bury our heads in the sand and pretend they dont exist.

Learning and applying. (4, Insightful)

Faust7 (314817) | more than 10 years ago | (#8539801)

It would certainly benefit us to learn about these technologies and leverage them, rather than to unilaterally declare them evil, wrong, stupid, etc. and just bury our heads in the sand and pretend they dont exist.

I think that about a lot of Microsoft technologies -- but to be fair, I'd say that the mere existence of Mono is evidence that a process such as you have described is already in motion.

Re:.NET (0, Offtopic)

bobjohnson (574277) | more than 10 years ago | (#8539804)

cmon, you Americans can't claim anyting without it being unilateral.

Re:.NET (0, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8539820)

i think its a solid language.

but its Microsoft's Language.

they have never done anything to earn trust.

atleast sun has.

i strongly believe that technically the language is great, Microsoft will use it in every way to further its own agenda and flat out crush competition.

Re:.NET (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8539854)

You've covered C#, but how do you feel about .NET?

Overnight (5, Insightful)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 10 years ago | (#8539829)

I realize that this is an unpopular opinion here on Slashdot, but C# is actually a pretty cool language and the .NET runtime is a promising platform. Microsoft didn't just dream this up overnight...

Yes, it took at a least a couple of days to copy all the Java libraries and ReCapitalizeMethods,

Seriously though, .Net is a nice language with some advancements over Java, but not different enough from Java to make its existence worthwhile. It's just leading to a lot of duplication of effort across the world (like Ant and Nant, or JUnit and NUnit).

Now if they'd come up with something like Haskel# as the primary language (instead of hamstringing other languages and making all of the core libraries Java like) or something really different that actually advanced the field of programming as a whole, then I might be more appreciative But as it is I see the tremendous duplication of effort across the world to do the same things in Java and C#, and it just makes me sad.

Re:Overnight (2, Informative)

Jonathan the Nerd (98459) | more than 10 years ago | (#8539866)

There will be a functional language in .Net, called F#. Slashdot had an article about it some time ago. But, like all .Net languages, it has to fit the .Net design, which was build around Java^H^H^H^HC#.

Exactly (5, Insightful)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 10 years ago | (#8539934)

Exactly, there will be "kind of" a functional language - which has to use the same libraries everyone else does, which are all just like the Java libraries. So people using this pseudo-functional language will be hard-pressed to really see the advantages of a functional language as you would if you had a real function language with a set of libraries as broad as that offered by Java.

I formed this opinion long ago, just around when C# first came out, when I read an article by one of the founder of Eiffel talking about how Eiffel# would work (I wish I had not lost the link - I can no longer find this article). He saw opportunity at that point to gain new Eiffel programmers. But I saw only a tar baby, where the longer you worked with the system the more you just said "Well, all I'm doing is calling C# libraries with this weird syntax so I might as well make life easier by just using C#". .Net and C# is the perfect vehicle to migrate users of all other languages to C#, not really to make life easier on people who want to work in one of the non-C# languages.

Re:Overnight (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8539888)

.NET isn't a language. It's mainly an application framework that can be used in most languages.

That is where you are mistaken (5, Insightful)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 10 years ago | (#8539966)

.Net is the platform in which C# is the closest natural representation of what the bytecode is like. As such, .Net is a vehicle for C# and a distorted reflection of all other languages.

Yes, .Net is the VM and C# the language. But as Java has shown, it's not really so easy to keep the two wholly separate. They are interdependent to some extent.

Re:That is where you are mistaken (4, Informative)

Rob Riggs (6418) | more than 10 years ago | (#8539987)

.Net is a vehicle for C# and a distorted reflection of all other languages.

A very good illustration of this is in the attempt to create a Python.NET implementation by the folks at ActiveState. The report [activestate.com] on the lessons learned is rather enlightening.

Re:Overnight (3, Informative)

miguel (7116) | more than 10 years ago | (#8539993)

You might want to look at Nemerle (www.nemerle.org)
a nice functional language that runs on .NET and
Mono.

Re:Overnight (4, Interesting)

primus_sucks (565583) | more than 10 years ago | (#8540021)

But as it is I see the tremendous duplication of effort across the world to do the same things in Java and C#, and it just makes me sad.

I think this problem would be solved by writing things in Scala [scala.epfl.ch] . Scala compiles to .Net or Java runtime and is a far more advanced language than C# or Java.

What language is .NET written in ?? (5, Funny)

konmaskisin (213498) | more than 10 years ago | (#8539858)

Languages written in C:

perl
python
ruby ....

Alternative mono names (3, Funny)

bangular (736791) | more than 10 years ago | (#8539959)

After a long time searching I found these alternative names they considered.
Foot gout
Genital Herpes
Oily discharge

Re:What language is .NET written in ?? (0)

skraps (650379) | more than 10 years ago | (#8540022)

Languages written in C:

A language is not written in another language. A compiler or interpreter may be, but that is pretty much irrelevant.

Re:.NET (4, Insightful)

ivern76 (665227) | more than 10 years ago | (#8539883)

I disagree. After a few months of working with C#, I have come to the conclusion that it's nothing but a bastardized clone of Java that had every little piece of sugar they could snarf from VB and C++ added to it, whether it made sense or not.

For example, the braindamaged distinction between structs and classes as value and reference types respectively. What if you want to make both value and reference objects of the same class? Or treat the same object as value or reference as needed? The stupidity becomes even more apparent when you find out that the System.Array.Initialize() function will only initialize value arrays, not reference arrays (WTF? Is there ANY reason to even have the [,] array creation operator if you still have to construct the members one by one after creation?). I could go on and on about "features" that were clearly hacked on in five minutes to fit some deadline, with little thought or care.

C# does have some nice things that, say, Java lacks. Operator overloading, automatic boxing and unboxing of primitive types, and properties come to mind. The first two, AFAIK, will be in Java soon, and properties are just syntactic sugar to replace observer methods. Honestly, I'm not impressed, and I don't intend to use C# ever again unless I absolutely have to.

Re:.NET (5, Interesting)

Rascasse (719300) | more than 10 years ago | (#8539885)

.NET is good because it takes the best from languages that are already in existence. It's not like there is anything revolutionary in C# that isn't in any other language out there. I used to be stuck in this PC-centric view of the world. Imagine my surprise when I bought a Mac and realized that NeXT had fantastic things like Internet-enabled Distributed Objects available long before much of the world even knew what a web browser was. Yes, C# is good. But the only people that I know that have been blown away by it are those that didn't stray far from Microsoft solutions and were never exposed to tools available from other vendors. Welcome to what much of the rest of the world had available to them in the form of Java since the late 1990s. And before the fanboys come out - yes I know that C# actually improves on some of Java's deficiencies. But I do take issue with the assertion that C# was made possible thanks only in part to a concerted MS R&D effort. It wasn't.

Re:.NET (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8539897)

WindowsNT was a pretty cool, well-designed operating system once upon a time too. Even if there are departments in MS that can design good stuff, the basic coporate ethos of the place will eventually mess up just about anything. Go with .NET, and you'll see it degrade with time. It's a sure thing.

Re:.NET (2, Interesting)

gathas (588371) | more than 10 years ago | (#8539925)

I've found that C# on the .NET platform has been a nice language to work with. What I cannot stand is the IDE and build system. I feel it really gets in the way half the time. Microsoft has spent too much effort trying to make Visual Studio work like an Office app, but for real develoers I find this limiting. Intellisense is awesome, but the lack of include files (you have to reference compiled assemblies) drives me crazy (I know you can build assemblies with intefaces only, but this is a lot of work just to share some types). There have been many times where we have spent days figuring out how to do something that I could implement with Makefiles in minutes. I know there are other IDEs, but developing MS apps without VS always shows all the architecture flaws and heavy lifting that are worked aroud with the IDE (look at COM, trying writing a serous COM app without VS, way to much typing).

Re:.NET (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8539990)

"they had a lot of smart people working a long time creating this beast."

This would mean Bill wasn't collaborating on it, right?

*put up flame shield for Miguel* (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8539763)

"C is dead!" + slashdot == pain

Foot-in-Mouth Disease (5, Insightful)

adun (127187) | more than 10 years ago | (#8539766)

Aside from being a the primary source of Mediterranean winds, Icaza has apparently forgotten about that whole "Linux" thing that is built on that whole "UNIX" thing that was built using that whole "C" thing. I applaud his salesmanship. I deplore his view that the desktop is equivalent to the operating system.

Re:Foot-in-Mouth Disease (1)

xpl_the_myst (612106) | more than 10 years ago | (#8539841)

I think it should be more like 'I deplore his view that enterprise applications are equivalent to the operating system'.

One interesting thing that the article said about the IDE was that it allowed you to write html that was simultaneously rendered in another pane. This sounds like a nice (though minor) improvement over having to hit something like F6 for a preview (and then wait for the whole thing to get rendered and then check that the hr i just put in works)

Where is that view? (1)

Chuck Chunder (21021) | more than 10 years ago | (#8539914)

I'm not sure he's ever claimed that the desktop is equivalent to the operating system.
It seems to me that he simply talking about the section of software that he works on and interests him most, the desktop.

While I don't follow it closely I haven't noticed any posts from Miguel on LKML advocating they switch to C#.

Re:Foot-in-Mouth Disease (2, Interesting)

Otter (3800) | more than 10 years ago | (#8540000)

Icaza has apparently forgotten about that whole "Linux" thing that is built on that whole "UNIX" thing that was built using that whole "C" thing.

No, I believe he's forgotten that this year's official unilateral declaration of total GNOME supremacy has already been proclaimed by Bruce Perens.

Still, this is a good one for next year. I'd hate to see them run out of new schemes and have to recycle old chestnuts like "One million GNOME desktops in Mexican schools!" or "With Solaris *and* HP-UX, we're the Unix desktop standard!"

C is not dead (3, Insightful)

Yaa 101 (664725) | more than 10 years ago | (#8539771)

You need a solid underground when programming...

MS and solid? hmm...

Re:C is not dead (2, Funny)

jjhlk (678725) | more than 10 years ago | (#8539827)

There is a solid microsoft underground. Just last week I downloaded Windows 2003 and Office 2003!

(not really)

Re:C is not dead (1)

Mick Ohrberg (744441) | more than 10 years ago | (#8539848)

Underground or underwear?

WTF?!? (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8539781)

Will Mono Become the Preferred Platform for Linux Development?
by Edd Dumbill


Why the hell would I believe someone with the name of Edd Dumbill?

That must be the "Alan Smithee" of the so-called "tech writers." It's probably just dumbshit Alan Seeburgh in disguise, playing hooke from CNN.

Re:WTF?!? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8539818)

His name is Daniel Sieberg... that dork from CNN who has no business being on TV. idiot!

Re:WTF?!? (1)

esanbock (513790) | more than 10 years ago | (#8539980)

I said the same thing about Alen Cox.

Um, no. (5, Informative)

ivern76 (665227) | more than 10 years ago | (#8539788)

This falls under the "I can't believe what I'm hearing" category...Mono is *not* ready as a plug in replacement for .NET, and it won't catch up before MS releases 1.2...for the foreseeable future, it's trailing behind the Windows implementation and is not likely to catch up.

I see PyGTK as a much more reasonable (and WORKING) alternative to C programming for people who want to write Gnome apps. Or GTK--, for that matter. Mono currently has crappy System.Windows.Forms support (even with Gnome#), broken serialization support, the list goes on and on.

Re:Um, no. (5, Insightful)

IAmTheDave (746256) | more than 10 years ago | (#8539864)

Yeah, it's crappy. But heck, it's a move in the right direction. I know certain people (cough... slashdotters) are quite protective of the purity of writing unmanaged code.

But that said, I have never developed software more rapidly than in C#. .NET has trippled my productivity (on the Windows platform) and my approval rating at work has skyrocketed as I have rolled out several solutions on .NET that are stable, solid, and effective.

I really wish that Linux had a stable .NET equivelent (sp?) - cause then I could completely abandon Windows at home. But as long as I can code C# with such RAD success, Linux is going to have catching up to do.

I applaud MONO. It's far from ready, but keep going. Keep working. Please - make MONO (or something else) as good as C#, .NET, and Windows Forms (and hell, ASP.NET) is. RAD is so important in the real world, that Linux would only benefit - incredibly - from a .NET like solution.

Re:Um, no. (4, Informative)

miguel (7116) | more than 10 years ago | (#8539874)

System.Windows.Forms is not part of the Mono 1.0
release as you well point out.

But Gtk# 1.0 is part of the Mono 1.0 release, and
unlike Windows.Forms it is very mature and stable.

Love,
Miguel

Not ready, and not catching up, eh? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8539900)

What I'd like to know is why it's not ready, and why it's not catching up?

Heck, why is it "catching up" in the first place? Why was the open-source community, so lauded by its advocates for being forward-thinking and quick-paced, not the first entity to pounce on creating something like this?

If Mono is trailing so badly behind .NET, why is it that Microsoft is so often derided as being immobile in software development? Would this not be a hefty chunk of evidence to the contrary, and perhaps point to a blind spot -- or worse, a point of self-contradiction -- in the traditional anti-Microsoft, pro-OSS dogma?

Re:Not ready, and not catching up, eh? (2, Interesting)

miguel (7116) | more than 10 years ago | (#8539974)

We are doing quite well, see our Mono Roadmap
in www.go-mono.com/mono-roadmap.html, we are
a bunch of happy campers, with a nice runtime,
and a nice language to write code we enjoy.

Miguel.

Re:Um, no. (1)

JanneM (7445) | more than 10 years ago | (#8539923)

Windows.Forms have absolutely nothing to do with supporting Gnome app development. Being 100% compatible with the Windows .Net API:s is not a requirement either - after all, you won't have the Gnome environment available on a Windows machine anyways, so why worry about compatibility issues, right?

Yep, PyGTK is very nice. So is Perl-GTK2/Perl-Gnome. And, yes, from what I've heard, so is GTK#. All three work. And at least Perl-GTK2 is part of the upcoming "official bindings" release, which should ensure you can write stuff and expect it to work for any Gnome user.

Re:Um, no. (2, Interesting)

LINM (255706) | more than 10 years ago | (#8539924)

The whole basis of the flawed range of problems stems from Mono's fundamental design. The goal was to design reusable components that could plug in multiple different ways in varying modules. The result is a system that is significanctly more complicated than it needs to be and the n'th level integration means that one buggy (or incorrectly spec'd) component throws the entire beast off.

However if you are looking for working solutions (especially on the desktop) your design, coding, and testing will go much more easily with QT, or GTK. Each is much more thoroughly tested and has significantly more man-years of use.

Hell yea PyGTK! (3, Insightful)

3cents (741537) | more than 10 years ago | (#8539944)

I've been using pygtk on and off for the last year or so and i've got to say that when used in combination with glade it's a real dream to work in. I think if a Visual Basic like IDE could be created for those who are afraid of the deep end of text editor, command line tool development we could have a real open source Visual Basic killer on our hands. And i'll take that over C#/Mono any day of the week.

slashrank [slashrank.org]

MonoDevelop IDE (5, Interesting)

gmajor (514414) | more than 10 years ago | (#8539791)

Doesn't the Monodevelop IDE look suspiciously like Eclipse [eclipse.org] ?

Re:MonoDevelop IDE (1)

sn0wman3030 (618319) | more than 10 years ago | (#8539862)

Hehe, I thought the exact same thing when I saw it. It kind of makes you think: Are they simply trying to copy what has already been done, or are they simply trying make .Net development look more attractive to Java devs by making look familier?

Linux contracts mono? (5, Funny)

Black Art (3335) | more than 10 years ago | (#8539800)

Are we supposed to clap?

Re:Linux contracts mono? (4, Funny)

mesach (191869) | more than 10 years ago | (#8539882)

no no... its mono, not the clap

Re:Linux contracts mono? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8539891)

The clap is whole different thing...

C lives (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8539805)

There will still be times for the necessity of optimizing for something for which the .NET JIT compiler will not be sufficient.

Also, .NET is much like Java, and C hasn't died from the adoption of Java.

Isn't Miguel Icaza gay? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8539807)

I coulda sworn he was..

oh yeah and as for 'c' being dead...I thoroughly agree. Pascal is slated to make a big comeback and I am planning on riding that rollercoaster to paydirt.

Re:Isn't Miguel Icaza gay? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8539893)

Pascal is slated to make a big comeback and I am planning on riding that rollercoaster to paydirt.

Pascal? Not a chance. Cobol and Fortran will rise from the ashes and take over the world!

Re:Isn't Miguel Icaza gay? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8539926)

Lies, you are full of feces and lies. Pascal is the most beautiful language in the world. I can make wonderful programs in turbo pascal using 640k of memory and overlay files. so there you terd

Re:Isn't Miguel Icaza gay? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8540019)

I just bough Delphi 8 with .NET, you insensitive clod!

Exploits (3, Funny)

bored1 (758098) | more than 10 years ago | (#8539812)

Great, now users will be stuck fixing Windows and Linux exploits while using Mono

C is dead? (2, Interesting)

EdMcMan (70171) | more than 10 years ago | (#8539816)

C is inferior, yes. It's hardly dead though.

Re:C is dead? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8539849)

LONG LIVE PASCAL!

This has been a public service announcement from the Preservationists for the Society of Pascal Users (PSPU).

Thanks
Johnny Pascal

You can't beat Microsoft.... (4, Insightful)

fatboy (6851) | more than 10 years ago | (#8539831)

.....at their own game.

You can't a better .NET than .NET

Anyone remember "a better Windows" than Windows called OS/2?

But why? Hmm? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8539918)

You can't a better .NET than .NET

For Windows, I'm sure that's true.

But what about an utter Linux equivalent? Why should the open-source community be incapable of creating something like that? Financial limitations? Lack of drive? Lack of dedication? Uncoordinated, decentralized efforts? Simple tardiness in recognizing the demand for something like this and scrambling to catch up to Microsoft (who, strangely, is often maligned as being paralyzed in its developmental efforts and yet always seems to be leading the way)?

It's a cloning effort, you fool! (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8539940)

With new versions coming out regularly, any clone will never be caught up to the status of the original project.

/.'ed already; article text below (-1)

ShockerFan (741511) | more than 10 years ago | (#8539833)

Anti-christianity solutions summary

christianity has reached epidemic proportions and people are looking for quick fixes of any kind. There are many existing and proposed anti-christianity solutions. While these options are viable in limited circumstances, they all appear to have significant limitations with regards to global acceptance and an ability to prevent christianity. In Part I we saw that christianity filters, while being viable options for identifying christianity, do not prevent christianity and require constant maintenance. Reverse-lookup systems attempt to identify forged senders but restrict email's usability by preventing host-less and vanity domains, and restricting mobile users' abilities to send email from anywhere at anytime. In Part II we observed that challenge-response systems are only viable as long as they maintain a low profile, and computational challenges are unlikely to deter christianitymers. Cryptographic solutions, while accurately identifying forged email, do not easily expand to a global scale.

While many people believe that any anti-christianity solution is better than nothing, most of these solutions impede regular users more than they prevent christianitymers. While some of these proposed options report to have effectively stopped christianity in limited tests, they do not take into account that christianitymers adapt their code rapidly, on the order of days or weeks -- a good solution today is unlikely to be a good solution tomorrow.

Renovate or Innovate? (3, Interesting)

capz loc (752940) | more than 10 years ago | (#8539835)

One of the problems I have with Mono is that it reimplements Microsoft's .NET framework instead of relying on its own. I understand that it is a lot of work to create such an integrated development platform from scratch, but I feel that the benefits of having a truly open/free/whatever solution will far outweigh the extra time that it would take. I am not a programmer, so I don't know much about the intricacies of .NET, but I can't possibly imagine that it is perfect in every way and that nobody can think of things that could be added/changed in it.

hey... (2, Funny)

Tumbleweed (3706) | more than 10 years ago | (#8539837)

C is dead. Wow. Heyyy, isn't *BSD written in C? Hmmm...

Hmmmm..... (0)

WwWonka (545303) | more than 10 years ago | (#8539842)

Are they calling themselves Mono because of the all the ass kissing they've already done with Microsoft?

Mono? (1)

Nailer (69468) | more than 10 years ago | (#8539846)

Cmon! It's not a bad single, but we both know it's just a reworking of Violet from Live Through This...

What Linux desktop? (3, Funny)

Operating Thetan (754308) | more than 10 years ago | (#8539851)

It seems we get 5 articles a week explaining how Linux isn't ready for the desktop. How can Mono take over something that experts assure us doesn't exist?

If I wanted MS .Net, I'd run MS... (5, Insightful)

Spicerun (551375) | more than 10 years ago | (#8539859)

As it is, I don't want to even attempt to emulate another 'grand MS idea'...especially since there are already superior non-MS systems out there that puts .net to shame. No, I'm not going to cite those systems...do your own research. You'd be surprised.

Die Mono Die!

Re:If I wanted MS .Net, I'd run MS... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8539967)

are you just a jerk, or do you only play one on slashdot.

Platform Independence (5, Informative)

WombatControl (74685) | more than 10 years ago | (#8539861)

I've been playing around with the Mono implementation of C#, and it's pretty good. It's not quite as good at RAD tasks as Python, but it has some advantages, and the syntax is much easier to play with than C or Java (but again, not quite as easy as Python, but I'm biased in that regard).

However, Mono suffers from the fact that they're trying to play follow the leader by following Microsoft's implementation rather than creating a system of libraries from scratch. Microsoft has a history of pulling the old "embrace and extend" trick, and I fear something similar may happen here.

My guess is that Microsoft will significantly alter the .NET APIs for Longhorn, leaving Mono behind with older legacy libraries that are no longer interoperable with the Microsoft compiler and the rest of the Windows-using world. Needless to say, that would be bad for the Mono team.

Still, if Mono can remain independent, it could very well have a bright future. The Mono team has done a great job of implementing most of the 1.0 .NET API, and the mcs compiler is pretty fast. The GTK bindings are quite nice for such an early release.

Still, the cognitive dissonance of compiling a Linux program and getting a file with an .exe extension is rather difficult...

Re:Platform Independence (1)

No. 24601 (657888) | more than 10 years ago | (#8539971)

Still, the cognitive dissonance of compiling a Linux program and getting a file with an .exe extension is rather difficult...

In layman's terms, he's saying it boils down to whether you want to see the virgin Linux reemed by Microsoft bloat.

Re:Platform Independence (2, Insightful)

Planesdragon (210349) | more than 10 years ago | (#8540010)

My guess is that Microsoft will significantly alter the .NET APIs for Longhorn, leaving Mono behind with older legacy libraries that are no longer interoperable with the Microsoft compiler and the rest of the Windows-using world. Needless to say, that would be bad for the Mono team.

Uhm, why would MS do this? .NET is designed to be and sold as a "cross platform" solution--a real way to do Java's "write once, run anywhere" line.

Introducing a crippling change for Longhorn would not only hurt this goal, but it'd bring down the rath of a few regulatory agences all over again--and piss off everyone using .NET and not Longhorn.

Now, if you said "my guess is that MS will introduce custom APIs in Longhorn that make .NET work better", I'd agree with you. But that's not what you said.

Re:Platform Independence (5, Insightful)

WombatControl (74685) | more than 10 years ago | (#8540033)

Uhm, why would MS do this? .NET is designed to be and sold as a "cross platform" solution--a real way to do Java's "write once, run anywhere" line.

For the same reason they did it with Java - if it's "write once, run anywhere", then why would you buy Windows licenses? Microsoft (quite naturally) wants everyone to run a Windows server and a Windows client, and having Linux be able to take either role with ease doesn't give them the leverage they need to continue their marketshare.

Whigs (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8539876)

I don't know about anything else, but the Whigs were a political party for christ sakes.

And how long before we find out that... (1, Interesting)

the_skywise (189793) | more than 10 years ago | (#8539878)

Icaza is taking major investments from Microsoft?

Re: It looks like... (1)

bill_doors (757981) | more than 10 years ago | (#8539979)

I still don't want to accept it... but sometimes Icaza say somethings that make me feel he is not thinking about code, programming or open source... but money... money comming from M$ :(

C# vs. Java, and I like C# better (2, Informative)

tx_kanuck (667833) | more than 10 years ago | (#8539880)

I don't know if it was the language at first, or if it was something as simple as the IDE that first turned me, but after having played with both Java and C#, I like C# better. If Mono is able to pull of a full port to Linux, I will be there cheering them on. Everyone knows that competition is almost always a good thing, and this will only make java work harder to improve itself. This will also give companies another reason to look at Linux.

"yes, all of you .NET applications will run on linux" Guess what? A lot of windows applications are starting to be written in .NET now, and as more and more people move away from 95/98/ME, and to newer OS's, they will require .NET applications (we all saw how well legacay apps run on the new windows OS's).

This is a good thing, and I think people should support the MONO project as much as possible.

Now if you'll excuse me, I haven't slept in 2 days and I have to get back tZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzz...........

Dealing with MS patents .... (4, Insightful)

konmaskisin (213498) | more than 10 years ago | (#8539902)

1) Rave about C#
2) Convert everything to run on Mono C# .Net
3) Get sued bad by the world's most deep pocketed software publisher except that unlike SCO vs. Linux this time the evidence is on the side of plaintif.

Go Miguel! (1)

brucehoult (148138) | more than 10 years ago | (#8539903)

This should boost Miguel's star ranking on Orkut -- at the moment he's only #5 with 193 fans, one place behind Wesley Clark with 194 fans.

Go Miguel!

(and hopefully past that whorkut Leonie with 208)

What a choice... (3, Insightful)

eidechse (472174) | more than 10 years ago | (#8539906)

I'm not sure I dig the idea that the future of app development comes down to a choice between MS and Sun.

Equation (1, Funny)

Fat Jedi Kid (745321) | more than 10 years ago | (#8539908)

Mono = Mono poly = .NET Mono + .NET = ?

Re:Equation (1)

NortWind (575520) | more than 10 years ago | (#8540008)

Mono = Mono poly = .NET Mono + .NET = ?
Profit!

C++??? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8539916)


Well if C is dead why didn't he fricken program Gnome in a real OOP language like C++? What a moron.

Parrot/Perl6 (5, Interesting)

Freedom Bug (86180) | more than 10 years ago | (#8539920)

IMO, I think Parrot will become the .NET equivalent in the open source world: a language independent VM and a huge standard library. I can't wait to have access to CPAN from my Python programs.

Sure, C# is a lot nicer than C, but Python & Ruby are a lot nicer than C#. If you're going to give up the predictability of C/C++ for a VM, garbage collection, et cetera, why not go all the way up to dynamic execution?

Bryan

Miguel's fantasies (3, Troll)

A nonymous Coward (7548) | more than 10 years ago | (#8539941)

The more he slides under Microsoft's spell, the more I distrust his pronouncements. It's as if he thinks he alone has discovered the magic potion that will allow him to befriend Microsoft with groveling and flattery such that they will actually respect him and not pull the rug out from under him. Why he should be the one exception in all their history is beyond me.

I have pretty much come to the conclusion that if Miguel says it is so, it ain't.

10 years later, Java is cloned by MS. (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8539951)

Yes, this is about right. Didn't Java come out around 1994? Bytecodes, the end of 'C', the "platform", the virtual machine. Deja vu all over again.

Maybe the continuing pressure from MS and the total refusal of the government to enforce it's laws will force Sun to start seriously considering freeing Java to the point that it can be distributed with Linux distros.

Re:10 years later, Java is cloned by MS. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8539998)

Bytecodes? You mean P-Code from over twenty years back.

Give me a break (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8539956)

C is dead? What is he smoking. It's going to be around for a long long time. Will enterprise apps be developed with C, sure it will. Will C# get used for "enterprise apps". Well smallish non-transactional, horizontally scalable apps sure. .NET is still lacking when it comes to a proven, robust messaging server and transaction monitor. Don't say COM+, unless you've actually taken time to read the full disclosures hosted on http://www.tpc.org/. Stock COM+ transaction API is ok, if you want to handle update/commits in an async fashion. But don't expect it to be scalable in a massive or medium sized trading system. It will get better with Whidbey, Indigo and Longhorn, but there's still a ton of problems with Windows at the kernel level that keep it from scaling well for hardcore backend applications.

don't bother mentioning .NET community sites that host on .NET or Match.com. Those aren't transaction heavy or trading systems. Glorified webpages that serve up database tables are simple. A decent developer can build it. Building a transaction application that can handle 500-1000 moderately complex transactions (update/insert) per second is hard. .NET can't handle it, or atleast I all the cases I've heard of in the financial industry failed miserably. If you're in this industry you already know. If you're not, you're probably saying "what bs, .net can scale just as well."

Yeah, try to build one in .NET and tell me how many servers you're going to need. then tell me how you would run real-time analytics on all the rows in a given table when you've partitioned the table across 8 machines and each has 8 million rows. When the CTO says, the query has to take less than 30 seconds, what will your answer be?

Did you read that in Datamation ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8540016)

lookitup [astrian.net]

Important comparisons between .Net and Linux (4, Funny)

Bodhammer (559311) | more than 10 years ago | (#8539978)

From Infectious Mononucleosis [kidshealth.org]

1) When people think of ..., or "mono," they often think of extreme tiredness as one of the major symptoms associated with this illness.

Ditto

2) Loss of appetite and generalized weakness also may be present, especially in adolescents. Nausea, hepatitis, jaundice, severe headache, stiffness, chest pain, and difficulty breathing can occur in some cases. A pink rash can occur all over the body in children who have been treated with ampicillin or amoxicillin.

ditto again!

3) Some may experience extreme fatigue, staying in bed for more than a week because they feel too weak even to walk around the house.

We're three for three (esp. after a failed Windows update session...)

4) 'Mono' is generally a self-limiting disease, which means it goes away on its own in most cases. Occasionally mono can cause complications

Need I say more...

5) Epidemic outbreaks in hospitals and workplaces have occurred.

` My biggest fear! Remember kids - practice safe computing!

Why Mono Will Fail (5, Insightful)

cryptoluddite (658517) | more than 10 years ago | (#8540014)

There is almost no difference between C#/Mono/.NET and Java, but almost no Linux developers write in Java. Check out your distribution's packages and you'll almost see more JVMs than Java apps. And for some reason Linux developers avoid Java like the plague, even though it's got a godzillion features that make everything so much easier (garbage collection, huge consistent class library, security, etc). Put in a GTK or QT library interface instead of the slow and huge Swing (that Smalltalkers foisted on Java) and you're golden -- there's every reason to use Java, especially for applications.

The Linux culture has so far prevented Linux from taking the next step. Just look the (essentially) complete lack of interest in gcj (gcc open-source java). Just look at the slow pace of Mono. It isn't goind to happen anytime soon, unless the Linux app community wakes up and sees the future. Yeah, 10 years from now we'll still be doing manual memory management. Sure...

This is the time... (3, Insightful)

Dr. Sp0ng (24354) | more than 10 years ago | (#8540015)

... to attack Microsoft on the .NET front. We have all the components of a powerful, truly cross-platform development platform; they just need to be packaged in a way which can compete with the cohesive API that is .NET.

Now, I'm not trying to start a flamewar here, so I'm not going to insist on specifics here, but what needs to be done is to create essentially a "distribution" of a powerful language (I'd use Python), a good cross-platform widget set (I'd use Qt, were it not for the license issues - personally I don't blame Trolltech for the licensing scheme, as $2500 is chump change to any real development house anyway, but in this case it would hinder adoption. Maybe wxWidgets then, or GTK+ configured in a way to appear like native widgets, but gah, GTK+ is such a hideous API), a selection of useful Python (or whatever) modules, and so on.

Like I said, this is nothing that didn't exist before, but it should be packaged in such a way as to provide a standardized environment on every platform that applications can rely on. Come to think of it, rather than use a specific language like Python, maybe the whole thing should just be wrapped around Parrot.

Anyway, the specifics don't matter. It's the idea of having a good competitor to .NET with a standardized set of support stuff on each platform, with a single installer to support the entire shebang. Why can't this be done? If I had the time, I would, but I don't. But if there was one place the open source community can take on Microsoft, it's development tools. And the time to do it is before .NET gets too entrenched.

claim less, do more (2, Insightful)

bcrowell (177657) | more than 10 years ago | (#8540026)

My perception of the GNOME world is that it's very chaotic, and a lot of people are talking big, but not accomplishing as much as they're claiming. Whenever I try to compile a significant GNOME app from source using the FreeBSD ports system, it pulls in a bazillion dependencies, and at least one of those dependencies is broken and doesn't compile. I'll wait a month or two and try again, and this time, the previously broken dependency is now fixed, but it fails beause of some other dependency. There are some of these, e.g., GNU solfege [solfege.org] , that I've been trying to compile for a year or two, and I always fail because at least one of the dependencies is broken. Over all, it just seems like there there are too many big, complicated pieces of software in GNOME, and they're not stable enough: ORBit, pango, atk, etc., etc., etc.

So now Miguel de Icaza is saying all that stuff is soooo passe, everyone cool has moved on to the next big thing. Excuse me? It can be passe if it isn't even stable and working yet!

Okay, YMMV. Maybe my experience is particular to what I'm doing, which is compiling from source using the FreeBSD ports system. But I have to say that the experience wasn't much different when I installed binaries rather than compiling from source. The shared libraries are changing their APIs constantly and breaking binary compatibility.

And then there's the performance issue. The last time I tried the GNOME desktop, it was just ridiculously slow. I mean, I'd click on an icon in the file manager, and I'd have to go get a cup of coffee and come back and see if it had opened it. People said, "OK, that was the old versions, now GNOME is more optimized," so I came back and tried it again, and it was just as slow. Well, if it's that slow when you're running all the stuff written in C, imagine what it'll be like when you're running .NET.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

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>