Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

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!

DotGNU Ported to PocketPC

CowboyNeal posted more than 10 years ago | from the little-yellow-different dept.

Handhelds 167

t3rmin4t0r writes "The Pocket PC# group has ported DotGNU Portable.net to PocketPC. This is a significant step because the .NET Compact Framework SDK is heavily licensed, unlike the .NET SDK available for free from MSDN. Thanks to PocketPC#, now you can build Window.Forms C# applications for PocketPC without submitting to Microsoft's exhorbitant SDK licensing fees. Portability to embedded/low-end hardware is one of Portable.net's stated goals. DotGNU Portable.net also works on 9 major CPU architectures according to gentoo's portage. The Darwin-ports features a cool package with Windows.Forms for Mac OS X. Handhelds like iPAQ or Zaurus have also ports (the iPAQ one features Windows.Forms). Esoteric hardware like the Sony Playstation 2 or the Microsoft XBox can also run Portable.net."

cancel ×

167 comments

Yet again Open Source plays catch-up. (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9406450)

When will we start to see some innovation from the open source world instead of the constant attempt to copy everything Micro$oft does?

Re:Yet again Open Source plays catch-up. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9406467)

haha, moderation system should not be used instead of proper arguments.

Re:Yet again Open Source plays catch-up. (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9406511)

What are you talking about? This is slashdot. There's no room for intelligent debate here.

Re:Yet again Open Source plays catch-up. (4, Funny)

aussie_a (778472) | more than 10 years ago | (#9406544)

What are you talking about? This is slashdot. There's no room for intelligent debate here.

Then create a login/sign in, post what you think. If you're not a depraved moron most people will like some of your comments, so you're likely to get up to at least a 1 (if I can do it anyone can) at which point some people will have to mod you down (but it means they'll read you). If enough people do this people might change.

On the other hand bitching about it as an AC gets achieves nothing.

Re:Yet again Open Source plays catch-up. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9406902)

Then create a login/sign in, post what you think


I tried that. I got bitchslapped by the editors of this site. What I had to say did not fit in with the prevailing groupthink here at slashdot.

Will anyone notice? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9406452)

Who will use it? Who wants slow, ported from who knows where running on a slow, ported from who knows where machine?

Good News! (5, Insightful)

CommanderData (782739) | more than 10 years ago | (#9406460)

This is great for people looking to develop on handhelds and smartphones such as myself. Programming for these devices really brings me back to the good old days in the 80s where one person could create a killer app or game!

Re:Good News! (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9406474)

You will NOT do a game in this. No way. No how. Hangman maybe but even that would be slow.

Re:Good News! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9406537)

Erm, yeah right. Not all games are speed intensive.

Re:Good News! (4, Insightful)

CommanderData (782739) | more than 10 years ago | (#9406596)

You'd be suprised at the types of games you could make. You don't need to run the latest Quake or Unreal 3D engine to make a game entertaining. I know the CLR adds another layer of abstraction, but I also know that the 2D graphics and bitblt routines contained in the CLR are usually optimized to run on the hardware provided.

DotGNU may not be there yet, but don't discount the power of the newer handhelds out there, which are now reaching speeds of 500mhz. No doubt faster than the hardware some people are using to read this post!

Re:Good News! (2, Informative)

arkanes (521690) | more than 10 years ago | (#9406836)

I can't speak to DotGNU, but the CompactFramework is _not_ optimized for speed, at least when it comes to graphics. The bitmap object is especially bad - on a 400mhz strongarm, a simple transform (to rotate a bitmap to landscape) took roughly 10 seconds to render. Per pixel bitmap access is _slow_ in the compact framework. You can wrap up the GAPI (which basically just gives you an addressable framebuffer) in .NET calls, but all the work is done by C then.

Also, the Compact Framework is NOT heavily licensed. It ships with VS 2003, and while thats espensive (a couple grand, I think) there's no special licensing besides the money.

Re:Good News! (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9406491)


Good News!

It's a suppository?

Re:Good News! (1)

CommanderData (782739) | more than 10 years ago | (#9406620)

I didn't have Professor Farnsworth in mind when I typed the headline, but your response gave me a good laugh anyway!

Re:Good News! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9406639)

This is insightful?

Re:Good News! (2, Insightful)

AKAImBatman (238306) | more than 10 years ago | (#9406670)

Good News! This is great for people looking to develop on handhelds and smartphones such as myself.

Is it? They haven't even finished the bleeding platform, and they're already spreading it thin. Focus, people, focus!

OpenSource (-1, Flamebait)

FunkyELF (609131) | more than 10 years ago | (#9406463)

Man, this is the reason I love open source software. It has always amazed me at how fast these hackers make keygens and cracks for liscensed programs. But open source is even better. Its saying we're not gonna stand for this crap and we'll copy what you have and make a better free version of it, from compilers to operating systems. Long live Open Source

Re:OpenSource (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9406496)

To copy is great if it's Open Source, when Microsoft and other companies do the same, it's wrong. Did I understand that correctly?

Re:OpenSource (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9406638)

No. Copying is fine. But when MS or IBM copies, they subsequently claim to "own" the "innovation" and prevent other people copying further like the hypocritical antiscientific moneygrabbing assholes they are.

It's such tyrannical restriction of the spread of information that is evil. Intellectual "property" laws are the crime, not copying.

Re:OpenSource (1)

Tranzig (786710) | more than 10 years ago | (#9406547)

Free and Open Source does not mean the same. There are Open Source softwares with restricting licenses that forbids modification or redistribution. Open source means you might have a look at the source. Free means you are free to use, distribute, modify the software and distribute the modified version.

Re:OpenSource (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9406600)

Open source means you might have a look at the source. Free means you are free to use, distribute, modify the software and distribute the modified version.

By that definition, it sounds like GPL software is open source and BSD-licensed software is "Free". With BSD software I can do whatever I want with the code, but with the GPL I'm told to give up my right to source code secrecy.

Re:OpenSource (1)

Tranzig (786710) | more than 10 years ago | (#9406653)

Which point of my definition fails for GPL? GPL-ed software can be used freely. It can be modified (retaining the GPL licence). It can be distributed. And the modified version can be distributed (under GPL).

Actually RMS told me these 4 points of freedom, do you think he was wrong?

An example for Non-Free Open Source software is the OpenWatcom compiler. Youngsters should read it's license only under parental supervision.

Re:OpenSource (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9406683)

Ah, but GPL source can't be used in a product unless it too becomes GPL. In addition, you can't take GPL source and hide it in a proprietary app. Thus, GPL software indeed has restrictions to freedom.

Re:OpenSource (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9406703)

Proprietary software itself is a massive restriction to freedom - the very idea that you should have any right to me passing on COPIES of information is fascist and evil. The GPL only restricts you if you beleive in intellectual "property" laws applied to software - Your present ability to have the government slap me in jail for copying a proprietary program is a far greater abridgement of my freedom than the GPL will ever be.

Don't forget many of the Free Software hard-core's line is:
"Without copyright, the GPL would be unenforceable. It would also be unnecessary".

Re:OpenSource (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9406717)

s/you should have any right to me/any right to stop me/
D'oh. That's what I get for not previewing - but damnit, it's a very emotional topic for me - copyright and freedom of speech are fundamentally opposed.

c# is teh schizzle (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9406464)

C# is superior in every respect to Java, including 1.5.

I'm really hoping Gnome chooses c# as their new development language. Havoc Pennington is a fawking genius.

Re:c# is teh schizzle (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9406480)

Ok I didn't write the above post, but how is it flamebait?

Re:c# is teh schizzle (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9406506)

If you have an answer, give it to me instead of modding me down for asking questions.

It's flaimbait because (0, Offtopic)

aussie_a (778472) | more than 10 years ago | (#9406518)

people do not agree with the statement, and it is a touchy subject (for some) and is therefore flaimbait.

I don't agree with it, but hey. That's how things work around here.

Score: -1, Offtopic/Flame-bait.

Re:It's flaimbait because (1)

dekeji (784080) | more than 10 years ago | (#9406698)

people do not agree with the statement, and it is a touchy subject (for some) and is therefore flaimbait.

Let's call a spade a spade: people who are heavily personally invested in some platform and fear for its long-term viability get really zealous about it. On Slashdot, that shows up as a reflex to moderate down anything that state preferences, problems, or issues that may go against that platform. And these people firmly believe that they are right: it's a kind of group think.

There isn't much that can be done about it, it's just a fact of life. People do the same thing in the real world.

You may notice that, while debate between Linux, Windows, and X11 users may get heated, they generally don't mod each other down that much. While those users may dislike each others platforms and vehemently disagree, they are secure enough about the future of their platform that they don't have to resort to suppressing statements they don't like.

Re:c# is teh schizzle (3, Insightful)

fasura (169795) | more than 10 years ago | (#9406521)

It's slashdot. Anything which may be considered a controversial opinion (i.e. one which doesn't bow down to open source) is immediately modded as flamebait as no one will actually defend open source with arguments.

Even if a valid question is raised the gpl fanboys try and hide it. Which is a pain for people like me who use proproatary and open source software all day. I like open source but for some things I need my proprietary apps, I'm a pragmatist more interested in creating products than living to some moral standard.

you got it backwards (1)

dekeji (784080) | more than 10 years ago | (#9406746)

Anything which may be considered a controversial opinion (i.e. one which doesn't bow down to open source) is immediately modded as flamebait as no one will actually defend open source with arguments.

That's completely backwards. C# (in the form of Mono and Portable .NET) represents open source here and Java represents the proprietary solution.

Likewise, postings critical of Apple's GUI and window system, both of which are proprietary, often get modded down. As far as I can tell, postings critical of X11 get modded down much less, even though X11 represents the open source solution. I suspect that X11 users are secure enough about the future of their platform that they are willing to debate, rather than suppress, criticism, while users of those other platforms are worried about their futures.

I'm a pragmatist more interested in creating products than living to some moral standard.

People who advocate open source solutions are pragmatists--they simply are pragmatists with longer time horizons (and probably much more experience) than you. You see, they have lived through a couple of generations of operating systems and languages, and they know the kind of havoc proprietary solutions can wreak on their business.

Or do you seriously think that companies like IBM, Novell, or McDonalds are adopting open source models because of some "moral standard"? They do it because it is good for business and because it works.

Re:you got it backwards (1)

fasura (169795) | more than 10 years ago | (#9406816)

That's completely backwards. C# (in the form of Mono and Portable .NET) represents open source here and Java represents the proprietary solution.

Correct and I missed that. However, C# is so MS tainted that people do forget it's an OS solution in this instance. But there is still a tendency to mod down anything which goes against the current /. groupthink.

People who advocate open source solutions are pragmatists--they simply are pragmatists with longer time horizons (and probably much more experience) than you.

Or at least they hope they're playing on a longer timescale. Apart from in the field of enterprise computing I don't think planning on a long term strat is that great and at the moment I use prop products simply because there is no adequate open source alternative. Also being someone who programs for a living and enjoys their time at home I'm not really inclined to help an OS project. Sad but true.

Re:you got it backwards (1)

dekeji (784080) | more than 10 years ago | (#9406897)

However, C# is so MS tainted that people do forget it's an OS

Given that the posting said "I'm really hoping Gnome chooses c# as their new development language. Havoc Pennington is a fawking genius.", I think that's really implausible.

solution in this instance. But there is still a tendency to mod down anything which goes against the current /. groupthink.

There is no "group think" on Slashdot--there are too many groups. Individual groups may have "group think", but those groups that are most trigger happy with moderation don't belong to the OSS community, they belong to communities of threatened commercial platforms.

OSS advocates will generally not mod you down for saying that Windows does something better, they'll just tell you outright that they think that you are a moron and may proceed with some technical points to back up their claims.

Also being someone who programs for a living and enjoys their time at home I'm not really inclined to help an OS project.

You would help OSS projects simply by using them instead of buying the commercial stuff. And if you also send in the occasional bug report or feature request, you are a gold-level contributor.

Apart from in the field of enterprise computing I don't think planning on a long term strat is that great

It matters far more for desktop and home computing. You have to go out and buy new word processing software, new graphics software, etc. ever couple of years because you support companies that profit from (gratuitous) change--the same change that makes your life more difficult.

and at the moment I use prop products simply because there is no adequate open source alternative.

I frankly doubt that that's true. Maybe you don't know how to use the open source alternative and don't want to spend the time to change how you are working, but there is very little that can't be accomplished as efficiently or more efficiently with OSS than with proprietary software at this point.

I guess trolls stick together (1)

NSash (711724) | more than 10 years ago | (#9406797)

Anything which may be considered a controversial opinion (i.e. one which doesn't bow down to open source) is immediately modded as flamebait as no one will actually defend open source with arguments.

Actually, no. The reason that the great-grandparent was modded troll was because it offered no argument. It was a piece of content-free flamebait. Of course, I wouldn't expect someone with your illustrious posting history to admit or understand this.

Re:I guess trolls stick together (1)

kfg (145172) | more than 10 years ago | (#9406936)

The reason that the great-grandparent was modded troll was because it offered no argument. It was a piece of content-free flamebait.

You, sir, win the prize, being the first to simply supply the correct answer.

KFG

Re:c# is teh schizzle (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9406830)

I'm really really sick at those MS Fanboy ! Every thread is full of that kind of stupid post !! It's becoming hard to find some relevant information about OpenSource or Microsoft/Apple these day. When i want to get info about a OSS or MS technlogy, i'd really want to be informed without the vocal MS Customer useless opinions !!

Re:c# is teh schizzle (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9406626)

And Lisp is superior to either of them. The world is not Democrat vs. Republican, Christian vs. Muslim, C# vs. Java.

BOTH C# and Java are mediocre 21st-century-COBOL languages. Open Source people would do far better writing in less pedestrian languages.

Re:c# is teh schizzle (1)

BarryNorton (778694) | more than 10 years ago | (#9406932)

Lisp?!? Haskell!

Patent s (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9406475)


isn't DOT NET full of patents though (not that its gonna effect 90% of the globe)
doesnt it strike anyone as odd that i have to pay MS to make their product successful

licensing means its never yours so why bother

Re:Patent s (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9406494)

"doesnt it strike anyone as odd that i have to pay MS to make their product successful"

Can you point us to ANYTHING you've done -- on your own -- that would lead anyone to believe you are capable of doing that? S'kiddies are l337 in their own minds.

Re:Patent s (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9406689)

Portable.net : Southern Storm Australia [southern-storm.com.au] .

Take a lesson from IBM, Novell (4, Insightful)

RoundSparrow (341175) | more than 10 years ago | (#9406499)

These two companies have been beaten by Microsoft playing the game better then them.

So what are they doing 15 years later? Playing back with Linux.

Open Source is not about free for these guys, it is increasing becoming a corporate game (Novell and IBM) with big profits.

Mono / dotGNU is about trying to treat the application developers equal. This is a chance to start over with Java-like technology.

Like it or not, don't ignore C# / dotNet. It likely has more users than Sun got in 10 years, anyone have numbers to share on that?

Re:Take a lesson from IBM, Novell (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9406523)

I've got some numbers for you.

We have been working on switching our old Win32 based client-server application to a web based model. We started with Java and IBM Websphere.

It just wouldn't perform. Unacceptably slow.

Then we discovered .NET. We saw a 900% increase in performance almost immediately.

Now we've grown our market share by over 20% - all thanks to our new architecture and .NET.

Re:Take a lesson from IBM, Novell (-1, Troll)

AaronLawrence (600990) | more than 10 years ago | (#9406546)

Is that meant to sound like a sales pitch? Cause it does. Nice astroturfing.

Re:Take a lesson from IBM, Novell (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9406573)

We tired .net, then we discovered PH-fucking-P, we saw a 1000% increase in performance and a 400% increase in programmer productivity for our web apps. Lesson: If you've got a simple web app, you don't need java or .net, you just need php.

it is about being "free" (3, Interesting)

dekeji (784080) | more than 10 years ago | (#9406646)

Open Source is not about free for these guys, it is increasing becoming a corporate game (Novell and IBM) with big profits.

It is about "free", as in "freedom": without the free and open source licenses that this software comes under, companies like Novell, IBM, etc. could never cooperate on these kinds of projects--by the time their lawyers have worked out their IP agreements, the market opportunities have evaporated. It is the freedom guaranteed by free software licenses that allows big companies to cooperate. The fact that they also don't have to pay licensing fees is related, but it isn't the deciding factor: everybody knows that free software still has non-zero cost of ownership (and companies like Microsoft are just stating the obvious when they point that out).

Like it or not, don't ignore C# / dotNet. It likely has more users than Sun got in 10 years,

I suspect it's not up to Java levels yet. But it will be: C# offers exactly what Sun/Java lacks: the freedom to do with it whatever you want, and the freedom for big companies to contribute to the same piece of software without getting lawyers involved and without having one contributor benefit disproportionately.

Re:it is about being "free" (1)

RoundSparrow (341175) | more than 10 years ago | (#9406756)

I suspect it's not up to Java levels yet. But it will be: C# offers exactly what Sun/Java lacks: the freedom to do with it whatever you want, and the freedom for big companies to contribute to the same piece of software without getting lawyers involved and without having one contributor benefit disproportionately.


Oh, lawyers will get involved :) Patents and stuff will be the next area of dotNet portability. Microsoft so far has let it slide, but is that because law is slow or because they intend to let it go?

I'm glad that dotGNU / Mono / Portable.net are out there - this is the best hope for the future of having true competition against Microsoft.

Cloning an API / programming langauge is one area that Microsoft seems mixed on. Didn't they start to challenge Samba? But WINE has gone untouched? Good to see we are fighting the good fight.

Re:it is about being "free" (1)

dekeji (784080) | more than 10 years ago | (#9406856)

Oh, lawyers will get involved :) Patents and stuff will be the next area of dotNet portability. Microsoft so far has let it slide, but is that because law is slow or because they intend to let it go?

Because of the large amount of fear of Microsoft that exists, this has been extensively examined by lots of people, including the Mono developers and their lawyers, and the conclusion seems to be that Microsoft simply does not have any patents that generally read on these kinds of implementations. So, the answer is: it's neither of the two choices you give.

Furthermore, Microsoft has publicly stated that it is their intention that people can implement ECMA C# (which includes a lot of .NET libraries) freely.

Cloning an API / programming langauge is one area that Microsoft seems mixed on. Didn't they start to challenge Samba? But WINE has gone untouched? Good to see we are fighting the good fight.

I wouldn't put it in such dramatic or general terms. I don't know what Microsoft did with Samba, but each such issue needs to be taken on a case by case basis. And even in cases where a company like Microsoft has a valid patent claim, people can almost always work around it (you may notice that Samba is still here).

C# is simply a decent language and runtime that has an open standard and has received extensive legal scrutiny. Using it for some philosophical reason would be the wrong motivation.

Re:it is about being "free" (2, Interesting)

Decaff (42676) | more than 10 years ago | (#9407145)

I suspect it's not up to Java levels yet.

You are right - its no where near, and will never be until, like Java, all aspects of .Net are under multi-organisation control and available for hundreds of platforms.

But it will be: C# offers exactly what Sun/Java lacks: the freedom to do with it whatever you want, and the freedom for big companies to contribute to the same piece of software without getting lawyers involved and without having one contributor benefit disproportionately.

You seem to have little or understanding of how Java is developed. Java is controlled by the Java Community Process (JCP). Changes to Java are submitted to the process and voted on. There are no lawyers and no disproportionate benefit. (For example, some major new technologies for Java have been approved in spite of objections from companies as large as IBM and Oracle). If you personally want to suggest an extension to java formally, join the JCP - its free for individuals.

Of course, anyone can add non-core extensions to Java (and thousands do) if you use your own namespace. It would be pretty stupid if you could ship Java with your own personal version of java.util.Date that was incompatible. You are totally free to ship my.org.Date.

Re:Take a lesson from IBM, Novell (1, Insightful)

Decaff (42676) | more than 10 years ago | (#9406749)

Like it or not, don't ignore C# / dotNet. It likely has more users than Sun got in 10 years, anyone have numbers to share on that?

Yes. This is nonsense.

As far as I can see on most USA job searches new C# jobs count for less than 1/3 the number of new Java jobs. In non-USA job markets (where there is usually a stronger desire to be independent from Microsoft) the ratio seems to be about 10 java jobs for every C# job.

The phrase you should have used is 'has a lot less users'.

Re:Take a lesson from IBM, Novell (0, Offtopic)

GoldMace (315606) | more than 10 years ago | (#9406924)

Can all search engines handle C#?

Quite a number of them can't handle C++. Java is much easier thing to search for, though you sometimes find things related to coffee.

Re:Take a lesson from IBM, Novell (1)

Decaff (42676) | more than 10 years ago | (#9407008)

Quite a number of them can't handle C++. Java is much easier thing to search for

Job search engines are designed for this: Imagine a job search that could not cope with C++!!

Re:Take a lesson from IBM, Novell (1)

tshak (173364) | more than 10 years ago | (#9407203)

You need to broaden search for .NET, not C#. A lot of .NET jobs are VB.NET, and a small percentage account for COBOL and FORTRAN .NET as well (a lot of mainframe migration projects use those languages).

Re:Take a lesson from IBM, Novell (2, Interesting)

Decaff (42676) | more than 10 years ago | (#9407311)

There was no need to broaden the search.

The number of COBOL and FORTRAN .NET jobs is virtually non-existent on job search engines.

Visual Basic.Net job ads occur with frequency about 1/3 of C# jobs.

The plain fact is that .Net still has not had a huge impact in the commercial coding environment.

Re:Take a lesson from IBM, Novell (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9406986)

> Like it or not, don't ignore C# / dotNet. It likely has more users
> than Sun got in 10 years, anyone have numbers to share on that?

I don't have any numbers about the size of the current .NET and Java developers population, but we can be reasonably sure that .NET will overtake Java in a few months to one year.

Netcraft had this to say in March: "ASP.NET Overtakes JSP and Java Servlets"
[http://news.netcraft.com/archives/2004 /03/23/aspn et_overtakes_jsp_and_java_servlets.html]

And Forrester research found that 56% of enterprises surveyed will be using the .NET Framework as their primary development environment in 2005 [compared with 44% J2EE].
[http://www.forrester.com/Research/Documen t/Excerp t/0,7211,34266,00.html].

Cost of Compact Framework? (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9406504)

I'd never heard of a runtime fee associated with .Net compact framework.

Is this a lack of research or is there truth to this?

Re:Cost of Compact Framework? (1)

leerpm (570963) | more than 10 years ago | (#9406517)

The runtime is still free as far as I know. But it is not the same as the SDK for it.

Re:Cost of Compact Framework? (0)

Utopia (149375) | more than 10 years ago | (#9406568)

I never heard of anyone paying for the SDK either.

Re:Cost of Compact Framework? (4, Informative)

Aphrika (756248) | more than 10 years ago | (#9406875)

The problem is that there's no SDK for the .NET CF 1.0, meaning you have to develop for it in Visual Studio 2003.

However, the reason is that they ran out of time, evidently a whole different kettle of fish from 'heavy licensing requirements' that's touted in the story. That's basically FUD.

So without an SDK, the only licensing requirement you have to satisfy to develop for it is a Visual Studio.NET 2003 license, there is no licensing attached to the runtimes. However, an SDK is pencilled in [msdn.com] for the .NET CF 2.0 release.

Re:Cost of Compact Framework? (5, Informative)

michael.creasy (101034) | more than 10 years ago | (#9406669)

Lack of research.
Windows Mobile Developer Resrource Kit [microsoft.com] All the SDKs on DVD/CD. I clicked through to order and the price of the kit was $0.00

Re:Cost of Compact Framework? (1)

SailFly (560133) | more than 10 years ago | (#9406975)

Not quite...

Subtotal: $0.00
Shipping and Handling: $5.50
Estimated Tax: $0.39
Total: $5.89 (USD)

Re:Cost of Compact Framework? (2, Informative)

Shaklee39 (694496) | more than 10 years ago | (#9407099)

Or you can download [microsoft.com] it for free

Shipping + Ownership of your Soul (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9407115)

Shipping charges + One Soul Male.
Soul on delivery.

Dude, That's a single user EULA . And needs you to buy Visual Stuido.NET (~2000 USD) to use.

While the normal .NET SDK will work without VS.NET (then why can't this one).

Clickage.. (5, Interesting)

hot_Karls_bad_cavern (759797) | more than 10 years ago | (#9406516)

Take a look at the screenshots page. Spin through those shots and just try to keep a smile off of your face. Seeing OSX, windows, and foss all on the same screen and system? C'mon, it wasn't that long ago that all of this was just little dreams in some heads. Seriously, the linux kernel and gnu software have started what i see as pretty serious revolution. Did it not strike anyone that MS is finally, and visibly showing concern about the gnu/linux advances? This is really exciting stuff, well, to me anyway.

i know i'm wandering, but think about it, longhorn is a long way off, linux is moving....and very fast, i might add, and besides the ridiculous prices, OSX/Apple will be the only real competitor in the next few years. This nonsense involving Sun's current flip-flopping is merely hope confused with death throes.

So, the window is open and with more tools like DotGNU wrapping systems together, damn, i'm looking forward to what will happen in the next few years. Good stuff, i think.

Lend a hand :) (1)

Gopal.V (532678) | more than 10 years ago | (#9406603)

DotGNU has about 5-6 developers working on everything :)... lend a hand ...

Re:Lend a hand :) (1)

hot_Karls_bad_cavern (759797) | more than 10 years ago | (#9406622)

" DotGNU has about 5-6 developers working on everything :)... lend a hand ..."

You know, i just might. i've recently graduated with a computer engineering degree and am rather enjoying my evenings to myself, but have been thinking of which, if not my own, open source project i would like to give some time to. i've used the work of thousands over the short time i've used linux, i figure, i'd be my right place to give something back. So, today i'll look into the DotGNU and see if that's where i'd like to put my time. Thanks!

Re:Lend a hand :) (1)

Gopal.V (532678) | more than 10 years ago | (#9406656)

visit irc.freenode.net #dotgnu ... talk to t3rmin4t0r

**Disclaimer**
I'm a recent CS graduate who has been working on DotGNU for the last 3 years (yes, three years this August).

Yet another clone from the OS world (-1, Troll)

ehack (115197) | more than 10 years ago | (#9406530)

We had a clone (gcc) of the proprietary (Bell Labs) C language, a clone (Linux) of the proprietary (Bell) Unix system.

Now the leading OS of the day is this lousy Microsoft stuff, and Open Source developers are "giving" us clones of the horrible Microsoft software.

Pretty please, could we have something new, or at least something pleasant to use ? More Microsoft interface clones do not in my book make the world a better place.

And yes, I know you will class this as a troll, but frankly as a beta-tester of Berkeley Unix back in 1983 I got exactly the same functionality then as I get from Linix now. Your moderation will not make this sad truth go away.

Edmund

Re:Yet another clone from the OS world (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9406552)

I don't like what you're saying. I have absolutely no counter-arguments, so next time I have modpoints, watch out!

Re:Yet another clone from the OS world (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9406609)

Yeah, I remember how 1983 unix had loadable kernel modules, a /proc filesystem, Video4Linux APIs and hotplug device detection. Idiot.

Re:Yet another clone from the OS world (1)

kfg (145172) | more than 10 years ago | (#9406827)

Pretty please, could we have something new, or at least something pleasant to use ? More Microsoft interface clones do not in my book make the world a better place.

Well, the number of Microsoft interface clones is completely irrelevant to your complaint. The only thing that matters is how many nonclones are available, and there are a number (starting with the UNIX console clone).

So, let's be constructive, shall we? What is it that you're looking for?

Have you tried the open source Plan 9/UNIX II? Is this closer to what you want or further away? In what ways?

Is the Apple interface more to your taste? Ratpoison? A jack into your skull? A magic wand?

I'm not going to just yell "Show me the code!" at you. I happen to believe that noncoders have a perfectly acceptable, even valuable, role to play in the development of software in the discourse phase of things.

But discourse requires discourse, not just complaints. Point in a direction rather than just bitch about where you're standing. Any damned fool can bitch, thus there is no particular shortage of bitching in the world, thus most of it simply gets ignored.

As it well should be.

KFG

Re:Yet another clone from the OS world (4, Insightful)

ites (600337) | more than 10 years ago | (#9406920)

C is an ANSI standard language and has been implemented by hundreds of groups and companies, including all the major OS vendors.

Unix was largely standardised as POSIX long before Linux existed.

Both these (and many other technologies, such as parser generators, editors, networking) form basic layers of what has become a huge and sophisticated pyramid of applications.

Layers like .NET and this implementation are attempts to define, control, and open (or close) these basic layers. So if you take .NET seriously (which I do not, but that's a personal opinion), an open source equivalent is obvious and necesssary. Proprietary platforms extract a huge tax on their developers and customers: the lesson of Bell Labs' inventions and how they ended-up changing the world shows that gcc, Linux, and the thousands of other "clones" represent heroic and vital investments in reducing the cost of IT so that its benefits can reach beyond the elite.

If you are still using the same applications as in 1983, then you have some catching up to do. In 1983 I was using vi and assembler and some C, and seriously, things have changed a little bit since then...

How long... (4, Funny)

JessLeah (625838) | more than 10 years ago | (#9406560)

...before the Nastygram(TM) from MS's lawyer corps arrives?

please be specific (1)

dekeji (784080) | more than 10 years ago | (#9406655)

What legal basis would Microsoft's lawyers have to complain? C# and large parts of the libraries clearly are not Microsoft intellectual property.

Re:please be specific (1)

JessLeah (625838) | more than 10 years ago | (#9406678)

Microsoft's legal basis to complain would be, basically, that they are Microsoft. Hardly any well-heeled (read: well-bribed) politician in the world could argue with that "logic".

Re:please be specific (1)

dekeji (784080) | more than 10 years ago | (#9406788)

Microsoft's legal basis to complain would be, basically, that they are Microsoft.

Microsoft has engaged in all sorts of questionable business practices, but they have used the legal system to intimidate other companies comparatively rarely. Usually, Microsoft has been at the receiving end of such threats and lawsuits, for example from Apple or Sun.

So, going by their corporate history, Microsoft seems less likely to send legal nastygrams than other companies. The Microsoft way would be to change .NET incompatibly and make Portable .NET run poorly on PPC.

Some screenshots (5, Informative)

Simon (S2) (600188) | more than 10 years ago | (#9406597)

here [dotgnu.org] , here [dotgnu.org] , here [dotgnu.org] and here [dotgnu.org] .

Mod parent down! Contains Goatse and Freinds (0, Troll)

anonymous coword (615639) | more than 10 years ago | (#9406687)

Enough said.

What is wrong with the current license? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9406662)

Anyone care to elaborate on why the .NET Compact Framework is so "bad" compared to the regular desktop .NET framework?

I don't have time to dig it out but I'm sure others are curious as well.

Additionally why C#? I came from a C, C++, Java and PERL background and began using VB .NET in the last year. Its WAY different than 6.0 and in many ways it really looks like Java (does anyone else notice that?) toString, stringbuffer, now inheritance, interfaces, now it has threading...lots of stuff Java was famous for. Did anyone else notice that? I've heard C# is like Java but crap, I think VB .NET is moreso in many ways...

C# suck (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9406704)

I cant believe Slashdot would post this story. C# is a horrible terrible language. It is surely never going to be a great savior like JAVA. Plus it came from Micros$loth the evil empire, doesnt that rule it out completely anyway. MANLY PROGRAMMARS USE JAVA!

DotGNU has a Java Compiler too (3, Interesting)

Gopal.V (532678) | more than 10 years ago | (#9406727)

DotGNU's java compiler can compile stuff like this [dotgnu.org] (which was my Demo program for a LONG time).

It uses parts of classpath + C# glue and never got fully developed because nobody was interested. (and the javalib therefore never hit the CVS)

Re:DotGNU has a Java Compiler too (1)

Gopal.V (532678) | more than 10 years ago | (#9407188)

For the adventurous , Java lib [dotgnu.org] is included in that tarballs as javalib. Press make there and you'll have a very minimal java.lang.dll

Java to IL examples [dotgnu.org] ...

A dangerous idea (5, Insightful)

Decaff (42676) | more than 10 years ago | (#9406711)

This is using open source to provide free marketing for Microsoft. First, take a microsoft technology (.Net), then spend a lot of time and effort duplicating a subset of .Net, which will never be a complete implementation as Microsoft haven't given out all the libraries. Microsoft then have cut-down versions of '.Net' distributed on a range of systems, with no effort required from them, and they can say 'for the real, full, professional .Net experience come to Windows'. I view the .Net clones as persisting the (wrong) impression that open source software is an amateurish attempt to copy professional software.

There are better ways. Why not use Java? Its free, and there are many Java clones that are full-featured and run on Pocket-PC and PalmOS.

If you don't like Java.. why not actually be innovative and develop a new portable bytecode and languages to run on it? If not a new bytecode, why not help the work on parrot? Why not show that in VM technology open source coders can do more than simply play catch-up with Microsoft?

DotGNU isn't just a clone (1)

polveroj (786638) | more than 10 years ago | (#9406994)

"DotGNU will be a complete replacement for .NET (and not just a Free Software implementation). The goals are to provide a reasonably compatible system and then improve on what Microsoft is offering."

In other words, they're trying to embrace and extend DotNET. Once they get enough of the .Net market, they can start innovating. There's certainly room to improve .Net, and with backwards-compatible free software there isn't much of a barrier to switching away from MS's version.

Re:DotGNU isn't just a clone (2, Interesting)

Decaff (42676) | more than 10 years ago | (#9407068)

"DotGNU will be a complete replacement for .NET.."

I seriously doubt this. For example, where are the enterprise libraries of .Net? I can't see them on the DotGNU website, and Mono state clearly they have no plans to implement them for now.

This is what seriously worries me. There is nothing to stop Microsoft from continually adding (or pre-announcing) new extensions to their .Net and forcing DotGNU and Mono to keep playing catch-up. Microsoft are in a hugely powerful position to control other .Net implementations by changing things arbitrarily.

Collaborative systems like Java and parrot involve discussions amongst many organisations and people about what extensions and libraries are to be added.

Re:DotGNU isn't just a clone (1)

tshak (173364) | more than 10 years ago | (#9407213)

Microsoft are in a hugely powerful position to control other .Net implementations by changing things arbitrarily.

You have to remember that has a huge installbase of .NET and while they can add new features, making breaking changes will have a negative impact on their customers.

Re:DotGNU isn't just a clone (1)

akb (39826) | more than 10 years ago | (#9407298)

There is nothing to stop Microsoft from continually adding (or pre-announcing) new extensions to their .Net

Yeah there is. They can only force independent application developers to rewrite their apps so many times. They'll need this especially in the short to mid term as a newish technology looking to gain traction via mind share, competeing against the established Java community.

Does this mean more free apps for the pocket PC? (3, Interesting)

xot (663131) | more than 10 years ago | (#9406732)

I just bought a new Ipaq which is pocket pc based.I've been trying to find good apps for it but theres hardly anything thats free and good.Most Pocket PC apps come to you with a "relatively" hefty price tag.
So like many others wondering about this, would DotGNU Ported to PocketPC bring more free and good applications for the users?? I think thats the bottomline rather than the C# or C++ issues.

Re:Does this mean more free apps for the pocket PC (1)

SphericalCrusher (739397) | more than 10 years ago | (#9406933)

While running DotGNU, of course. Keeping your standard Palm OS... nope. It's just like running Windows (PocketPC) or Linux (DotGNU) today.

Heavily Licensed? Are you sure? (2, Informative)

Aphrika (756248) | more than 10 years ago | (#9406805)

I may be wrong here, but last time I looked, the only 'heavily licensed' part of developing for the .NET Compact Framework I could find was that I had to buy Visual Studio.NET 2003 in order to use it. There are no licenses per se for developing/deploying with the .NET CF, so what exactly does Pocket C# exist for?

Now, as far as I know, no SDK exists for Compact Framework 1.0, but one is slated for 2.0, as mentioned in this post [msdn.com] . It seems an SDK doesn't exist due to time constraints, rather than licensing requirements.

correct link for Mac portfile is here... (1)

ubiquitin (28396) | more than 10 years ago | (#9406941)

pnet.darwinports.com/ [darwinports.com]

go47 (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9406942)

AT&T and Berkeley lube is wiped off gig in front of THINGS THE RIGHT mire of decay, Long term survival has steadily Needs OS. Now BSDI though I have never FreeBSD had long it attempts to else up their asses g0od to write you other members in large - keep your Head spinning reformatted and distraction of the warring overly morbid and best. Individuals may do, may not invited back again. and sold in the coomon knowledge

Java (J2ME) is much better in PDA and handheld (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9406997)

I have been developinh java in Handheld and smart phone for the past 2 years and J2ME just rocks

J2ME is more mature

-1, wrong (1)

iamacat (583406) | more than 10 years ago | (#9407150)

j2ME has a childish UI library that assumes 1D screen with no layout. If your device is so limited, why even bother with applications? In every other area, the built in class library is severly crippled and you keep having to write classes yourself. And lack of native code/regular filesystem access? Argh!

Compact framework actually shares many of the same "features" but at least has native code and it's possible to write usable UI with heavy hacking. Now that Sun and MS are pals, Javasoft should just bite the bullet and release official, well working Personal Java for CE. Why should Zaurus have all the fun?

Re:-1, wrong (2, Insightful)

Decaff (42676) | more than 10 years ago | (#9407256)

J2ME has a childish UI library that assumes 1D screen with no layout.

Nonsense. FIrstly, screens are 2D! Secondly, there are loads of GUI toolkits for J2ME, some open source. The latest J2ME version includes a 3d-game api.

And lack of native code/regular filesystem access? Argh!

Why would you want native code access on a secure VM designed to run portable binaries?

who doesn't see THIS coming.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9407002)

so now we've got a some free software that is causign MS to lose lots and lots of money (because maybe people will go with this rather then MS's SDK)...

I give this about 3 days before MS finds a way to shut it down...

What Would Miguel Do? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9407210)

I love the dot net framework, but beware, only the C# language is free, not the .NET libraries. Because of that the Mono team wisely developed Gtk libraries besides the .NET port. I don't know if DotGnu has that, please enlighten me.

C# just sucks (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9407245)

.Net and C# is still like VB very immature and sucks like hell.
I still prefer java and J2ME over .Not.
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>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...