Weekly Edition
Return to the Announcements page
| |||||||||||||
Moonlight sent into twilight (The H)
The H looks
into the death of Moonlight, a free software implementation of
Microsoft's Silverlight platform. "Microsoft has been playing down Silverlight over the last year and a half, after previously promoting it as strategically important. In Windows 8, Silverlight is taking a back seat to HTML5 in the browser and for applications. Without Microsoft's weight behind Silverlight, the future for Moonlight has looked less and less promising."
(Log in to post comments)
Moonlight sent into twilight (The H) Posted May 30, 2012 20:20 UTC (Wed) by juliank (subscriber, #45896) [Link]
You're missing an " H " after the "The" and before the "looks".
Moonlight sent into twilight (The H) Posted May 30, 2012 21:07 UTC (Wed) by ballombe (subscriber, #9523) [Link]
Cyrnfr qb ABG cbfg glcbf va gur negvpyr nf pbzzragf, fraq gurz gb yja@yja.arg vafgrnq.
Moonlight sent into twilight (The H) Posted May 30, 2012 21:16 UTC (Wed) by ris (editor, #5) [Link]
> You're missing an " H "
Well, I was. If you'd sent an email to lwn@lwn.net with that information we wouldn't have 3 off-topic posts on the subject :)
Moonlight sent into twilight (The H) Posted May 31, 2012 8:39 UTC (Thu) by juliank (subscriber, #45896) [Link]
Right, I did not read that lwn@lwn.net bit above the comment editor.
Moonlight sent into twilight (The H) Posted May 30, 2012 20:55 UTC (Wed) by flammon (guest, #807) [Link] It's ironic that Miguel de Icaza, who seems to understand the importance of free software has a tendency to develop products (Evolution + Ximian Connector, Mono, Silverlight) that depend on closed, patent ridden and closed technologies controlled by a single, ruthless and dishonest company - Microsoft.
Moonlight sent into twilight (The H) Posted May 30, 2012 21:26 UTC (Wed) by leifbk (subscriber, #35665) [Link]
Considering that Microsoft is a market leader in several areas, I don't see how it would help the OSS community to pretend that MS doesn't exist. That would leave us without Samba and Wine, both great products that IMO is more likely to benefit OSS than not. A lot of us also play Windows Media files on our Linux desktop computers.
I don't like Microsoft either, but it's hard to ignore the fact that there's an elephant in the room.
Moonlight sent into twilight (The H) Posted May 30, 2012 22:52 UTC (Wed) by pboddie (subscriber, #50784) [Link]
If one has to have interoperability with Microsoft products, at least give the user the chance to migrate from them. Samba actually allows people to replace Microsoft technologies with other implementations; Moonlight was yet another figleaf that allowed Microsoft to claim cross-platform support for their technologies, and it gave Microsoft leverage in negotiations with (or the coercion of) content providers on the issue of technology adoption for the delivery of multimedia content (the US presidential inauguration being a Silverlight-only experience, for example).
The idea is not to sustain closed platforms and de-facto standards by merely rewarding their vendors with a larger audience, but to offer people a way of moving to open platforms and standards.
Moonlight sent into twilight (The H) Posted May 31, 2012 8:23 UTC (Thu) by niner (subscriber, #26151) [Link]
Mono for one didn't allow me to migrate away from Microsoft products. Instead, it allowed me to stay on Linux and free software. Mono allowed me to complete my studies which included a whole semester of basically every current Microsoft technology all using free software exclusively.
So I am extremely grateful to the people who made this possible. Sometimes one has simply no choice.
Moonlight sent into twilight (The H) Posted May 31, 2012 11:42 UTC (Thu) by pboddie (subscriber, #50784) [Link]
I'm certainly happy that you were able to follow a curriculum centred on Microsoft technology (whether this technological emphasis was foreseen or desirable or not), but the observation on establishing interoperability with proprietary systems still stands: don't legitimise closed standards and platforms by building a larger audience for them by only leading people in one direction (towards their use).
One can always argue that things like Mono allow people to avoid running Windows, but that doesn't consider the matter of having to track a moving target and the resulting pressure on people to switch to Windows for a "superior experience" because the imitator doesn't support the latest features.
Moonlight sent into twilight (The H) Posted May 31, 2012 12:07 UTC (Thu) by drag (subscriber, #31333) [Link]
Users use applications. OS exists for the sole purpose of running applications. If the OS doesn't support the applications that people need or want then the OS is worse then useless.
It is irrelevant if Silverlight is in a moving target in control by a hostile corporation if the people's applications need it. Caring about technical difficulties, politics, and technical correctness of a Silverlight just means your missing the forest for the trees.
Moonlight was never in a position to help or hinder Microsoft because Linux Desktop was and is remaining completely irrelevant to the general computer population and business community at large.
Luckily for us Silverlight never really caught on.
Moonlight sent into twilight (The H) Posted May 31, 2012 13:10 UTC (Thu) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946) [Link]
Well except for Netflix which seems to be still using it and thus not usable on Linux since they use DRM which Moonlight never supported and that would have been a impressive feat.
Moonlight sent into twilight (The H) Posted May 31, 2012 13:32 UTC (Thu) by pboddie (subscriber, #50784) [Link] It is irrelevant if Silverlight is in a moving target in control by a hostile corporation if the people's applications need it. Caring about technical difficulties, politics, and technical correctness of a Silverlight just means your missing the forest for the trees. I think that by denying the factors at work, you oversimplify things to the point where your only advice is for everyone to sit back and enjoy the ride. For a start, political reasons have a significant influence on whether a technology is considered acceptable. If you end up with a reliance on a single vendor for everything, this sets alarm bells ringing at least in reasonably well-managed institutions. Sure, you can pretend that in the vacuum of an unregulated market, "the people" demand and their vendors deliver, and eventually "the people" get to demand only what their vendors deliver. I don't see why we should be dignifying those vendors: if they can steer people towards their platforms, we should be using interoperability to steer people towards open platforms. (Really, I'm surprised I have to point this out.) Moonlight was never in a position to help or hinder Microsoft because Linux Desktop was and is remaining completely irrelevant to the general computer population and business community at large. If the iPhone were able to run Silverlight, would it have suffered the same fate? Apple seems to know full well what the effect is of putting bottoms on other people's seats.
Moonlight sent into twilight (The H) Posted May 31, 2012 17:09 UTC (Thu) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link] If the iPhone were able to run Silverlight, would it have suffered the same fate? Who knows? Android does not support it, too - and it's quite popular nowadays. Apple seems to know full well what the effect is of putting bottoms on other people's seats. Sure. That's why it signed agreement with Microsoft in 1997 and started developing Safari, iWorks, etc basically at the same time. If you don't have enough clout then your moves are irrelevant. If you need to bow and scrape before "the powers that be" to gain this clout then you need to bow and scrape. Later, when you've gained some recognition and your decisions can realistically affect someone you may try to demand something. Yes, this is politics and yes, it's nasty. There are few organizations who can play it well in FOSS world (for example FSF does it relatively well), but in general technical people just don't understand that game at all and believe technically better solutions should always win. This is not so.
Moonlight sent into twilight (The H) Posted May 31, 2012 18:29 UTC (Thu) by pboddie (subscriber, #50784) [Link] If the iPhone were able to run Silverlight, would it have suffered the same fate?Who knows? Android does not support it, too - and it's quite popular nowadays. Maybe I should have been clearer. I meant to ask whether Silverlight would have suffered the same fate had the iPhone (or Android) supported it. That's the point here: Apple and Google didn't indulge Microsoft and those who presumably insisted that Silverlight was "necessary" for those devices to be a success. The upshot of this is that people have to make content available in other forms for those devices. And the end result is that Silverlight has been deprived of the opportunity to compete effectively even with stuff like Flash.
Moonlight sent into twilight (The H) Posted May 31, 2012 9:41 UTC (Thu) by job (guest, #670) [Link]
Windows file sharing using the SMB protocol is indeed useful for interoperating with Windows machines, which has a large market share. But Silverlight has zero market share, no one uses it. The only reason for Moonlight was to benefit Silverlight in the market place. (And, of course, the naysayers would contend that after some great time together, having got that market share they would break ties and never call again.)
Moonlight sent into twilight (The H) Posted Jun 1, 2012 7:58 UTC (Fri) by Cato (subscriber, #7643) [Link]
Silverlight has not been a big success, but it is used by many commercial video streaming services such as Netflix and Lovefilm (owned by Amazon), because it has better adaptive streaming than Flash, and of course supports DRM.
In fact the lack of Moonlight with full DRM is why I can't watch Lovefilm films on my Linux desktop, and this plus general codec/GPU support is why I ended up building a Windows HTPC.
Moonlight sent into twilight (The H) Posted Jun 1, 2012 11:06 UTC (Fri) by krake (subscriber, #55996) [Link]
The problem with Silverlight DRM is that Microsoft explicitly denies lisenses to other destop implementations, they only grant lisenses for settop boxes and so on.
Unfortunately service providers like Netflix fell for the "interoperability" message suggested by Moonlight marketing.
Moonlight sent into twilight (The H) Posted Jun 1, 2012 16:14 UTC (Fri) by raven667 (subscriber, #5198) [Link]
> Unfortunately service providers like Netflix fell for the "interoperability" message suggested by Moonlight marketing
I call BS, I don't think Netflix or other service providers are at all confused or have been tricked with regards to platform support. I don't think Moonlight is factored into the decision making process at all. The world just doesn't revolve around the Linux Desktop in that way.
Moonlight sent into twilight (The H) Posted Jun 1, 2012 19:56 UTC (Fri) by pboddie (subscriber, #50784) [Link]
Commercial services like Netflix may not be swayed, but public broadcasters that theoretically have some accountability to the authorities and taxpayer are able to use such arguments when adopting technologies.
For example, the BBC's choice of technologies for on-demand video was highly controversial, and although the usual excuses referring to mainstream and majority platforms were made (Britain's institutions aren't generally very forward-looking when it comes to open standards and platforms), the organisation eventually went with Adobe-supplied solutions partly because of the supposed cross-platform availability of those solutions.
Certainly, the proliferation of mobile platforms not able to run the Windows-specific technologies in the original iPlayer also helped to decide the matter.
Moonlight sent into twilight (The H) Posted Jun 2, 2012 5:00 UTC (Sat) by raven667 (subscriber, #5198) [Link]
> Certainly, the proliferation of mobile platforms not able to run the Windows-specific technologies in the original iPlayer also helped to decide the matter.
That's a huge factor, something that has made changes in the market that legal action and decades of crowing about "standards" were not able to accomplish.
Moonlight sent into twilight (The H) Posted May 30, 2012 21:30 UTC (Wed) by kragil (subscriber, #34373) [Link]
I find it more concerning that he abandons projects and makes people believe that they are still maintained.
Stuff he makes will always be niche products with an uncertain future (and yeah I know about MC, Gnome and Gnumeric)
Moonlight sent into twilight (The H) Posted May 30, 2012 21:38 UTC (Wed) by juliank (subscriber, #45896) [Link]
Miguel uses OS X, and develops closed-source products with his own company. I think he totally lost the connection some time ago already.
Moonlight sent into twilight (The H) Posted May 31, 2012 7:20 UTC (Thu) by alankila (subscriber, #47141) [Link]
Note that the same sort of thing can be said of virtually anybody who works for a corporation and writes code, as it's rarely open source and it's often done on a windows or indeed OS X laptop (especially if target platform is iOS).
Moonlight sent into twilight (The H) Posted May 31, 2012 8:34 UTC (Thu) by mpr22 (subscriber, #60784) [Link] The key difference being the "his own company" bit.
Moonlight sent into twilight (The H) Posted May 31, 2012 8:38 UTC (Thu) by valhalla (subscriber, #56634) [Link]
In my opinion there is a bit of moral difference between working on proprietary code + proprietary platform for some random corporation and doing it for your own company.
I Wonder What This Means For Windows Phone Posted May 30, 2012 23:48 UTC (Wed) by ldo (subscriber, #40946) [Link]
Windows Phone 7.x APIs are based on some subset of Silverlight 3. Now that Silverlight is dead, what happens to Windows Phone? There is some speculation that Windows Phone 8 will be built on an entirely different basis. Which in turn raises the question: what happens to backward compatibility?
I Wonder What This Means For Windows Phone Posted May 31, 2012 1:04 UTC (Thu) by bronson (subscriber, #4806) [Link]
WP7 goes out the window, WP8 will be based on Metro, and some MS developers are howling.
A mildly entertaining article but probably not representative of MS devs as a whole:
http://www.extremetech.com/computing/121015-windows-8-may...
I Wonder What This Means For Windows Phone Posted May 31, 2012 10:01 UTC (Thu) by jamesh (guest, #1159) [Link]
The WP7 phones I've seen already looked like they were running with a "Metro" style user interface.
I Wonder What This Means For Windows Phone Posted May 31, 2012 22:48 UTC (Thu) by bronson (subscriber, #4806) [Link]
Yes, but they were written using a Silverlightesque environment. I understand devs are now expected to dump all that in the garbage and start using HTML 5.
Wonder what they'll have to do for Windows Phone 9...?
I Wonder What This Means For Windows Phone Posted Jun 1, 2012 9:22 UTC (Fri) by jamesh (guest, #1159) [Link]
The Wikipedia article says WP7 apps are either Silverlight apps or written with XNA (another .Net based API, also available on the Xbox).
Even if they are pulling back on Silverlight I doubt they're removing XNA, so you're likely to see C#/.Net on their phones for some time.
I Wonder What This Means For Windows Phone Posted Jun 1, 2012 16:37 UTC (Fri) by bronson (subscriber, #4806) [Link]
In the past MS played down XNA, saying it's really only good for games: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ff402528(v=vs.92).aspx
They recently said that XNA will not be ported to Windows 8, leaving it phone-only. It's very unlikely that XNA will run on tablets. So, it's not a real good choice for a lot of apps.
We'll see when WP8 draws closer.
I Wonder What This Means For Windows Phone Posted Jun 1, 2012 17:35 UTC (Fri) by Lovechild (guest, #3592) [Link]
You can use XNA in that context via MonoGame. It is increasingly becoming the tool to deliver cross platform XNA content, e.g. Bastion in the latest Humble Indie Bundle uses Mono to run on Linux.
XNA on Windows 8 is going to be possible, whether or not Microsoft ports their implementation.
I Wonder What This Means For Windows Phone Posted Jun 1, 2012 19:40 UTC (Fri) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link] Bastion also uses Mono to run in Chrome.
I Wonder What This Means For Windows Phone Posted May 31, 2012 3:20 UTC (Thu) by cmccabe (guest, #60281) [Link]
Just more "fire and motion." http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000339.html
And Mono on Linux? Posted May 31, 2012 1:10 UTC (Thu) by bronson (subscriber, #4806) [Link]
Any chance they'll cancel Mono too? It seems to be disappearing from distros about as fast as Silverlight is disappearing from the web. (i.e. not super fast, but the trend is unmistakable)
And Mono on Linux? Posted May 31, 2012 5:51 UTC (Thu) by elanthis (guest, #6227) [Link]
We can only hope so.
Programming C in contextually-unaware text editors is just so much more satisfying and productive than C#. I mean, I absolutely hate having a development environment that has fail-proof project-wide refactoring capabilities. Code-completion saves me way too much time digging around in incomplete/missing man pages and makes me cranky. Features like delegates/events, CodeDOM, runtime type introspection with user annotations, asynchronous methods, LINQ, generics, or high-performance bare-metal programming with managed-code ease/safety just take all the fun out of programming. Type safety with generics makes apps too robust and takes all the exciting danger out of C or Python and makes life depressingly boring. All the time saved and extra quality in apps is letting far too many developers get high-paying jobs in the industry instead of being forced to work at Starbucks and rewriting the Linux desktop paradigm for the fiftieth time in their evenings off, and that just sucks.
I hope all the bright, talented, enthusiastic people at Microsoft who work on C#/.NET and enjoy making better programming environments burn in Hades for working for such an evil company. Hopefully Miguel goes blind and is stricken deaf and dumb for supporting Microsoft's evil plans of creating pleasant, productive, and powerful development tools. All the hard-core, experienced C++ super-devs who keep trying C# and going "omg this is amazing" are clearly just being bought off by Bill Gates or Ballmer or some other evil Microcraftian elder being.
Obviously to everyone one of us, Miguel starting Mono had absolutely nothing to do with C# actually being a really awesome language. It's all part of a secret plot to DESTROY LINUX FOREVER by making it just too darn easy to actually write high-quality applications. Without the inefficient development cycles of C or the infinite number of AttributeError exceptions large Python apps generate, we wouldn't be able to revel in the glory of the early 1970's that is UNIX.
The madness must end. Ban Mono!
And Mono on Linux? Posted May 31, 2012 6:08 UTC (Thu) by hfg22 (guest, #84898) [Link]
You're confusing C# and Mono's implementation of C#.
Perhaps if the C# language was separated from Mono (ie. without all the .Net cruft) there might be something worthwhile. For example, adding C# support to GCC or Clang.
Also, what does C# bring to the table that is not present in C++11 ?
And Mono on Linux? Posted May 31, 2012 16:53 UTC (Thu) by rriggs (subscriber, #11598) [Link]
What does C# bring to the table that is not present in C++11?
Ever try to develop a context-free AST for C++? It's impossible as long as the C preprocessor exists. This makes full-featured, error-free refactoring tools impossible.
Don't get me wrong, simple refactoring tools are possible. It's the "full-featured" and "error free" part that's not. Change or add one #define and the whole program changes meaning. I've refactored code that could be compiled on both Unix and Windows. After a fairly simple automated refactoring on a Linux system, the Windows build no longer worked. That's because the Windows-specific code was invisible to the refactoring tool.
With that said, it's all a trade off. I can do things with the C++ pre-processor in terms of code generation that's impossible to do in C#. But for most general programming needs refactoring tools, runtime introspection, and the ability to freely mix static and dynamic languages are far more valuable.
And Mono on Linux? Posted May 31, 2012 21:48 UTC (Thu) by Cyberax (✭ supporter ✭, #52523) [Link]
How about LINQ? Including PLINQ and other nice xLINQs. Or dynamic typing?
>With that said, it's all a trade off. I can do things with the C++ pre-processor in terms of code generation that's impossible to do in C#. But for most general programming needs refactoring tools, runtime introspection, and the ability to freely mix static and dynamic languages are far more valuable.
If you want to do complex metaprogramming (and I think one shouldn't do it easily) then you should use a good language. For example, Nemerle ( http://nemerle.org/About/ ) can do things C++ preprocessor can only dream of while staying refactorable and autocomplete-friendly.
And Mono on Linux? Posted May 31, 2012 9:42 UTC (Thu) by dgm (subscriber, #49227) [Link]
> Programming C in contextually-unaware text editors is just so much more satisfying and productive than C#
Yeah. It's incredible how anybody could event get the simplest code written. To be frank, the claim that a bunch of amateurs could even create something as complex as Operating Systems, compilers or database engines seems just ludicrous. Unless they secretly are using Big Corp. Secret Sauce(TM), that is... Wait a minute! I just had an idea for a lawsuit that's going to make me RICH!
Mono and no Visual Studio Posted May 31, 2012 14:15 UTC (Thu) by man_ls (subscriber, #15091) [Link] I am too old to try to rebate your most trollish points, like Linux devs being Starbucks workers. But it is funny to see that you believed the hype of managed platforms...I used to believe that IDEs, autocomplete, automatic refactorings, runtime environments and so on made my life simpler. That is, until I started coding Python with vim and found out that I was much more productive -- and happier! Then I continued with JavaScript and PHP, same tools, same result. Going back to Eclipse for some Android coding was like going to the parents' house and finding that everything is small and a bit shabby, and things that didn't work still don't work right. Sure, all those fancy features of Eclipse, RAD or Visual Studio would make your life easier... if they worked all the time, and they didn't bring such a baggage of boilerplate to make the simplest tasks, and always guessed right what you actually want to do. Nowadays I find an Xfce terminal with a few vim tabs open is productive bliss. When you get the hang of it, doing refactorings by hand is almost as productive and much less error prone. I would use such a setup for Android development too, except that the baggage of the framework is so high that it is nearly impossible. Even with an IDE it is just painful. C# is, just by virtue of being a modern Java clone, just as bad. I have not used ANSI C lately, but it is hard to imagine anything at that level of pain.
No wonder it takes an IDE to refactor these monsters...
Mono and no Visual Studio Posted May 31, 2012 14:35 UTC (Thu) by Cyberax (✭ supporter ✭, #52523) [Link]
PHP?
You're clearly doing something wrong if you can't use modern tools to your advantage.
Mono and no Visual Studio Posted May 31, 2012 14:51 UTC (Thu) by man_ls (subscriber, #15091) [Link] Perhaps it is a case of two "wrongs" making one "right": using vim to edit PHP forces me to write code so dumb and simple that it is impossible to fall into one of the many PHP pitfalls. Not using elaborate graphical tools means that I feel just as home on a headless server using SSH than on the local machine. Developer bliss, I tell you...
Mono and no Visual Studio Posted May 31, 2012 21:26 UTC (Thu) by wahern (subscriber, #37304) [Link]
There's a vim clone plugin for Visual Studio. I've never used it, but I knew someone who loved it.
This may be it: http://www.viemu.com/
Mono and no Visual Studio Posted May 31, 2012 22:01 UTC (Thu) by apoelstra (subscriber, #75205) [Link]
Note that this plugin costs an additional $100.
Very irritating, given that no programming editor for Linux would ship without such essential functionality.
Mono and no Visual Studio Posted May 31, 2012 22:21 UTC (Thu) by man_ls (subscriber, #15091) [Link] That would be like tying a horse behind your motor car to simulate the bliss of horse riding. For me the fun is in having your whole environment be Terminal, Bash and vim; not in having vim-like functionality in an IDE.
Mono and no Visual Studio Posted Jun 1, 2012 1:06 UTC (Fri) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link]
Meanwhile, I went the other way, moving from an Emacs with cc-mode and basically nothing else (so I had autoindentation and that was all), to an Emacs-with-CEDET-and-GLOBAL setup, giving me automatic near-instantaneous semantically-aware tagging and some degree of refactoring across entire multi-language projects. And it's really really useful. (I just wish the syntax highlighting used the same engine rather than being based on, ew, regexps.)
And Mono on Linux? Posted May 31, 2012 16:19 UTC (Thu) by cmccabe (guest, #60281) [Link]
There are plenty of statically typed, managed languages as good or better than C#. Java, Scala, Vala, and Golang come to mind. These languages have active open source communities, which you can and should join if you feel a burning desire to convert the C and Python-using heathens.
C# itself is just a rehash of Java with a few small improvements and a lot of Windows-specific libraries. The game plan was to make a non-portable version of Java. Microsoft tried to do this with Visual J++, but Sun wouldn't allow it, so they created .NET.
This gets explained every time the topic of C# comes up, but some people just never get it. There's no point in a C# runtime for Linux, because the whole point of C# is non-portability and reliance on Windows-specific libraries.
And Mono on Linux? Posted May 31, 2012 16:27 UTC (Thu) by raven667 (subscriber, #5198) [Link]
> This gets explained every time the topic of C# comes up, but some people just never get it. There's no point in a C# runtime for Linux, because the whole point of C# is non-portability and reliance on Windows-specific libraries.
Maybe people understand you but just don't agree with you.
And Mono on Linux? Posted May 31, 2012 16:54 UTC (Thu) by Cyberax (✭ supporter ✭, #52523) [Link]
Java (and Scala) are tied to Sun/Oracle/OpenJDK JVM. Which has its own strengths and weaknesses.
Vala is something that nobody outside GNOME really use and Golang is not yet used widely.
By now C# is definitely _not_ a rehash of Java. C# 1 was Java with a bit different syntax, C# 2 was a better Java (with real generics) and C# 3 is a vastly better language than Java. Personally, I'd use it for my projects if I had a really good VM for it (no, Mono does not cut it) and a good Linux IDE for it.
And Mono on Linux? Posted May 31, 2012 23:06 UTC (Thu) by bjartur (guest, #67801) [Link]
What about Ada?
It has been successfully used for mission-critical projects in the transport sector (think, most flight control systems and a railway system or two). I don't know how well it works on Windows, but it works.
And Mono on Linux? Posted Jun 1, 2012 0:06 UTC (Fri) by Cyberax (✭ supporter ✭, #52523) [Link]
IMO, Ada is a bit braindead. It's mislabeled as a 'safe' and 'reliable' language because a lot of high-profile reliable software is written in it. So it has a lot of stuff that was thought necessary back in 70-s for reliable language (for example, range checking for numeric types) and a great resistance for new features. For example, lambdas and closures are unthinkable in Ada-style code.
However, real reliability in software in Ada is achieved by thorough reviews and testing, not really by any virtues of the language itself.
The state of art for reliable software has moved on - we now have languages with dependent types and typesets, for example.
And Mono on Linux? Posted Jun 1, 2012 5:00 UTC (Fri) by cmccabe (guest, #60281) [Link]
I know I shouldn't get involved in Yet Another Programming Language Flamewar, but come on. Java is too tied to Oracle-- compared to Mono? (Especially given the recent court rulings?) Vala and Golang are not used widely enough on Linux-- compared to Mono? Just add "compared to Mono?" to any one of your statements and it instantly becomes clear how ridiculous they are.
I understand that some people may be more familiar with C# compared to other languages, but that's not a reason for dismissing them outright. There literally are open source programming languages for every taste, from the most lax old-school Perl coder to the most fastidious functional programmer. Let's try to light a candle rather than curse the darkness.
Richard Feynman's lectures: the only motivation for Moonlight! Posted May 31, 2012 10:03 UTC (Thu) by nicku (subscriber, #777) [Link] The is exactly one reason why I wanted to make moonlight work: Richard Feynman's Messenger Lectures. I tried to see them with moonlight, and failed. If anyone knows where I can see them in a free format, I would be most grateful.
Richard Feynman's lectures: the only motivation for Moonlight! Posted May 31, 2012 10:12 UTC (Thu) by engla (guest, #47454) [Link] The lectures seem to be on Youtube, just search around. Here is the first: Richard Feynman - The.Character of Physical Law.
Richard Feynman's lectures: the only motivation for Moonlight! Posted May 31, 2012 10:42 UTC (Thu) by marduk (subscriber, #3831) [Link]
That even worked with HTML5.
Richard Feynman's lectures: the only motivation for Moonlight! Posted Jun 12, 2012 15:02 UTC (Tue) by TRauMa (guest, #16483) [Link]
Recently I watched some youtube videos and did other web 2.0 stuff until I went to some old flash site at the end of the day, at which point I realized that I accidentally had flash deinstalled the day before. Imagine my joyful surprise!
|
|||||||||||||