Total Rubbish
Posted Mar 14, 2004 13:32 UTC (Sun) by
davidl (guest, #12156)
Parent article:
Will Mono Become the Preferred Platform for Linux Development? (O'ReillyNet)
If it does, Linux fails, but it is highly doubtful. There are a lot of
awful things that Microsoft are doing to .NET to make it into a general
purpose programming environment. Microsoft can just about manage this -
Ximian can't. Through weight of numbers, rather than patents, Microsoft
totally controls the development direction of .NET, and henceforth, Mono
in any incarnation.
There are no serious deployments of Mono - period. Miguel de Icaza and
Nat Friedman have been talking about deployments of what they are doing
for years and it is totally evident that it just isn't happening. It
sounds like Miguel is trying to justify this expensive vapourware (and
non-ROI vapourware at that) to Novell more than anything else. For crying
out loud, Microsoft is trying to get some serious deployments
of .NET!
Developers were able to take their ASP.NET web applications and run
them under Mono, after a little accounting for a few pieces of
non-portable code.
What utter rubbish! Who in their right mind is going to take their brand
new ASP.NET code, brand new Windows 2000/2003 servers and trash them to
move to Mono? If someone has already made that investment when I take a
new job, whatever I feel about Windows, I just can't throw everything
away on a whim. If Mono/ASP.NET is indeed taking over then why aren't
people throwing out their PHP/Java implementations?
From conversations with some of the early adopters at the meeting,
it's plain that the Windows migration strategy is working.
Since .NET is so new, and no one is really using it, I highly doubt that
anyone that has moved to .NET will then suddenly decide to move to Mono
after such a short space of time. That is total BS.
There's benefit to them in more implementations of the common runtime,
but the wholesale duplication of Windows APIs is causing them some
concern.
.NET are not Windows APIs - those are still COM with .NET wrappers.
Longhorn will merge .NET and Windows APIs, and that will be damn near
impossible to pick apart.
A great deal of serious end-user application coding on Linux still
goes on in C or C++. Using Mono vastly reduces the amount of boilerplate
code that must be written, along with the opportunity for bugs to creep
in.
That already exists, and you can compile natively, which will be highly
important for many applications. You can't do that with Mono. You will be
able to do that with Longhorn .NET, but it will happen transparently. As
a Windows C++ developer, that is what I want to see.
So far, there's a surprising enthusiasm for Mono and C#. Perhaps the
respect Miguel de Icaza and Nat Friedman command makes developers willing
to try Mono.
It seems as though this guy wants to get down and kiss their feet for
some reason.
The expectation for GNOME 3.0, however, is that a lot of the platform
will use Mono, rather than the C implementation it has now. While no
formal announcements have been made to this effect, it seems to be the
strong hope of Ximian personnel.
Well it would be wouldn't it? I doubt whether some people will take
kindly to this, especially given Miguel's promise that it would not
happen like this:
http://linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=2002-02-06-011-20-OP-GN-MS
The Windows migration stuff is just total rubbish, simply because there
is not enough people using .NET to migrate from. I've never heard such
rubbish as migrating people from a future Microsoft technology. Past yes.
Future? Are you a masochist? Linux technologies need to create mindshare
on their own I'm afraid, and Mono is doing, and will do, an incalculable
amount of damage to the prospect of widespread Linux-desktop usage.
However, I suppose saying that you are developing an open-source version
of .NET is fashionable, creates a lot of media interest, attracts
venture-capital and makes it look as if you are actually doing
something :). Maybe I'm missing the point.
Unfortunately, there are, however, a lot of other things people need to
migrate from, that perhaps aren't quite as fashionable :), that need to
be addressed, and haven't been, rather than hyping this meaningless piece
of vapourware. Makes sense?
This article is total and utter BS, and the writer has obviously got
suckered in. Dumbill. He deserves that name.
(
Log in to post comments)
