Creating .NET C# Applications for Linux 340
An anonymous reader wrote to mention an article on the IBM site entitled Mono brings .Net Apps to Linux. From the article: "Mono gives open source developers the programming power and flexibility to build applications for Linux while maintaining cross-platform capabilities, using a variety of .NET-compatible languages. One of the great advantages of Mono for current .NET developers is providing an easier migration path to Linux. The Mono project has a very open and active development community and provides both developer tools and the infrastructure needed to run .NET client and server applications. Perhaps the most important benefit of using the Mono architecture is that you gain language independence. Mono lets you leverage any existing code from languages supported in the .NET runtime. "
let me get this straight ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Sam
Wouldn't it be funny if... (Score:5, Insightful)
Given that Java was a new language, maybe the migration from MS developers wasn't all that great... but now, with Mono, MS developers can move right over.
Re:let me get this straight ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Yea, that is pretty strange. I would use Java before I'd use
Here we go again (Score:4, Insightful)
maintaining cross-platform capabilities, using a variety of
Why do people even bother with Mono? I know I am going to be modded as a troll but I have yet to see a single app besides a hello world being cross platform? I think the developers looking at C# and Mono in a greater light than Java are ignoring the patent and copyright issues just because C# looks cooler. Thats pretty short sighted.
C# would be the lowest ranked languaged behind visual basic if you want to avoid vender lock in.
What will happen when C# 2.0 comes out? My guess is Linux will be playing catchup again and meanwhile windows will look like a better alternative to businesses standardizing on C# because their geeks mentioned how great Mono is.
Re:let me get this straight ... (Score:3, Insightful)
Why bother? (Score:5, Insightful)
If the Apache Harmony projects succeeds (and it has a lot of backing) there will be a complete open source cross-platform Java implementation. There are already open-source Java versions that are good enough for many applications (gcj, Kaffe).
Mono is a waste of time.
Re:let me get this straight ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Linux programmers will use .NET/C# but they won't use Java?? What's up with that?
I can apt-get install mono, but Sun told me to go fuck myself with a chainsaw when I wanted a .deb of Java1.5. (Yes, there is java-package, which does a great job, but really, it's a fucking mess).
Re:let me get this straight ... (Score:5, Insightful)
This means nothing. These parts are still subject to patents. Sun is prepared to certify any Java implementation as 'Java' providing it passes their compatibility tests. They have even done this for clean-room implementations by rival companies like HP.
That in itself won't give you compatibility with Microsoft applications
Whereas Java gives you a definite guarantee of compatibility.
and you lose nothing by not going to Java.
Except performance, reliability, being able to use quality products from multiple vendors such as Sun, HP, IBM etc, and using the language which is now the de-facto standard for commercial server-side software development.
Re:let me get this straight ... (Score:3, Insightful)
I think Delph did a very good job of the GUI.
I think the interoperability between VB.NET and C# is a good thing, it isn't 100%, but in most cases you're able to write one thing in one language and an other thing in other language, without really getting in trouble. (Two problems: One is overloaded functions in C# vs Default Parameters in VB.NET, the other is the static nature of structures in VB vs everything is an Object in C#.)...
Why so many stories about mono? (Score:5, Insightful)
Why use Mono/.NET when you have ruby, perl, php, and python? All of which are cross platform? As far as only being able to give binary code to your customers ActiveState's Perl Dev Kit allows you to do just this (even though it's not free, but still less expensive than a license for Visual Studio
But honestly can someone who has done development in Mono and and the other aforementioned languages convince me or anyone else for that matter to learn C#/Visual Basic.NET, and enjoy what it has to offer? What does it offer that the other aforementioned languages do not?
but it's non-free (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Here we go again (Score:1, Insightful)
For Windows development, C# and .NET far exceeed anything I have experienced with Java or VB (I get around). I guess I really have a disrespect for Java as 1.0 really sucked hard. The eventing model was worthless, and AWT is just plain out stupid. Hate would be the word I would use to describe how I felt about Java's idiotic way of doing things circa 1998. I have writen stuff on 1.1 and 2.0 since then, but it just seems like it so sooooo friggen slow. We are not talking about a stereotype here. Java, in my experience, is ass slow. On Windows (if that is all you care about) .NET is soooo much better. And nicer. You have to admit that Visual Studio, while it has its own variety of suck, is nominally better than just about any Java IDE out there. And I have tried a lot of them.
As far as running on Linux, we don't really care as we know that none of our clients give a crap about Linux on the desktop. Hell, they would have to port 20 other apps over to Linux first! And as far as server tasks go, all the server dlls I have right now run on Mono on Linux. The strugle for us has been getting the latest/greatest in Mono to compile on AIX.
So, I would be willing to listen to your argument if you were more informed with more experience in the subject.
It's the tools (Score:3, Insightful)
Microsoft has some of the best development tools around, and the best of their stuff targets
Re:Here we go again (Score:3, Insightful)
Right [gotdotnet.com].. of course not all of these are completed, but still. There are also some implementations not listed there like IronPython.
Or you can install Mono or Portable.Net on Windows and compile without resorting to Microsoft tools. The resulting application will run just fine using the MS runtime or any other runtime on any other platform. (As long as you have the libraries you need on every platform.)
IMHO:
Also, so now we have
About vendor lock in. In practice there is no lock in, as stated above C# and
Re:Why so many stories about mono? (Score:3, Insightful)
Why use C++ when you have JavaScript? Why use Haskell when you have BASH? They're apples and oranges.
As far as only being able to give binary code to your customers ActiveState's Perl Dev Kit allows you to do just this (even though it's not free, but still less expensive than a license for Visual Studio
Actually, you can pre-compile
Re:let me get this straight ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Other useful parts of C#/.NET include delegates, enums, automatic boxing of value types, properties, indexers, multidimensional arrays (as opposed to jagged ones) and foreach (for simple iteration through arrays or other indexed/enumerable objects). Hopefully the Java language designers will take notice and adapt some of these incredibly useful features to Java. Microsoft took so much from the Java language design that it should only be fair for Java to do the same to Microsoft's product.
Re:let me get this straight ... (Score:3, Insightful)
Regards,
Steve
Agreed... (Score:5, Insightful)
No thanks.
Oh and MonoDevelop vs Visual Studio? Don't make me laugh. Well maybe one could run VS under WINE to get a decent IDE.
Motivation is what matters (Score:3, Insightful)
Sure they'll do it.
...to pad their resume. Read the classifieds lately? There's a lotta .NET jobs out there. It's nice to learn .NET without having to boot "that other OS", y'know.
Re:Why so many stories about mono? (Score:2, Insightful)
Why does Mono show up so many times on slashdot?
So, why would mono show up often on a discussion site about the world of open source software, linux, and politics? Can you see no reason we might like to discuss this?
In addition - ruby, perl, php and python are all interpreted languages while C# is compiled to bytecode. Java would be a much better question. Personally, I develop in C# for microsoft platforms. The idea that I could install a linux distro and start coding in my favourite language might very well tempt me into doing so.
Re: here we go again (Score:5, Insightful)
The excellent java-gnome [sourceforge.net] project is the Java equivalent of GTK#/GNOME#, but I don't see nearly as many programs being developed for it. In fact, a quick apt-cache rdepends reveals that there are precicely zero applications using libgtk-java in Debian, whereas libgtk-cil is used by projects such as tomboy, graphmonkey, gnunit, beagle and blam. There are also a load of programs that have not yet been packaged; assuming that the same proportion of GTK# and java-gnome apps have been packaged, it seems that there is a lot more developer interest--buzz--around Mono than there is around Java. Mono-based programs are certainly mentioned more often (read: at all) on the feeds I read than Java-based ones; and how many "Creating Java applications for Linux" articles have been posted to Slashdot recently?
So why is this? I recon it's simply down to how easy it is to get started using the platforms in question. Say I want to run Beagle [gnome.org]--I apt-get install beagle. Now let's say I want to run the hypothetical jeagle. I have to navigate, with a graphical browser no less, Sun's gargantuan site; agree to a huge, no-doubt soul-selling bullshit EULA; run Sun's crappy installer that shits untracked files all over my system... and I still can't apt-get install jeagle because Sun's crappy installer doesn't know about dpkg. As a Debian user who actually knows what he is doing, I can use java-package [debian.org] to convert Sun's crap installer into a
"But Mono isn't made by Microsoft! It's not a fair comparison", you might say. To this I reply, I don't care! C# and Java are both nice, modern (perhaps I should say 'fashionable' to avoid being prodded by the Lispniks) languages that make software development fun and easy--but it is easier to get into C# because a platform that lets me use it is only an apt-get away.
Now, perhaps Sun could turn this around by hiring a couple of Debian Developers to make some really high quality Debian packages of Java, and granting Debian permission to distribute them in non-free; but this only solves the problem for users of Debian and Debian-derived distributions. Sun would also have to find someone to create decent packages for Fedora, Mandriva, Suse, Slackware, whatever. But hold on a minute--Mono has people coming out of the walls to package it for their favourite distribution, so why should Sun have to put in extra effort to make this possible--and still be playing catch-up? It's because Mono has buzz! The openess, liberty and low barrier-to-entry have drawn developers to the Mono platform, while Java has languished under Sun's iron fist.
In the end it's not about Java-the-language vs. C#; it's about the openess of the platforms: Java-the-closed/inaccessible platform vs the GPL'd Mono. Development of the components of an open source Java platform has been slow because Sun have already created a 'good enough' implementation of Java on GNU/Linux--but Mono has everything to to play for; the stakes are high, there are no grumpy old gits saying "Microsoft's GNU/Linux
To summarise: Mono is exciting. Java is a pain in the ass.
Re:let me get this straight ... (Score:4, Insightful)
And if you really want someone to understand the power of OOP, give them the VCL chart from Delphi or C++Builder to study for a while.
.NET is not an "open standard" (Score:2, Insightful)
Who cares about portability? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:.NET Windows Forms (Score:3, Insightful)
Seriously, you've just summed up the whole 'bait and switch' flaw with mono.
Re:wxWidgets vs. Qt vs. Windows Forms (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:.NET is not an "open standard" (Score:5, Insightful)
You make no sense. There is not one valid reason why Microsoft would not want this project to exist. Someone is expanding their market reach for them, for free. What they lose in any kind of sales is more than made up for in mindshare.
Sure they could pull the plug, and, sure, Mono is always going to be playing catch up; but it defies logic that Microsoft would radically mess up the framework for the sole purpose of screwing an open source project. Believe it or not, Microsoft is responsible to their developers. They do listen. To radically alter the framework for no apparent reason would just be idiocy beyond compare. If you've never participated in a beta cycle for Microsoft development tools then you would understand how well that responsibility is played out. Anyone can participate in these cycles and the responsiveness of the different teams working on the tools is impressive and commendable.
For Microsoft to harm Mono in any way would harm their own customers, and what company wants to hurt the customers that generate the need for their OS? I think there is a reason that CrossOver office exists beyond simply being compatible with the outside world for document exchange. It's because linux applications are still playing catch up to Windows applications. Gimp still trails Photoshop for professional grade imaging work. Evolution is still trying to play feature tag with Outlook. OpenOffice is still trying to equal Excel, Word, etc. That is not to say any of these efforts don't outclass the Microsoft products in some regards, because they most certainly do. I merely point this out to be an example of where Microsoft's commitment to their developers touches their economics. For the first time, we're seeing free tools for .NET development that are actually useful. I think this will continue with lower licensing costs.
As for the rest of your comments, I'm going to chalk those up to zealotry, closeted or not and simply being ignorant of what good design really is. And just because you spent a few years with ASP.NET doesn't mean you are at all competent.
And though I may sound like a Microsoft bigot, I am not. There is no fiscal or professional gain in being religious about toolsets. The more tools in that box, the more shit you can fix, and the fatter you can make the wallet. While I mostly do .NET consulting now, I still do PHP projects and, every once in a blue moon, a java project. Sure, sometimes I think about how one feature of another language might make a certain chunk of my work go faster, you also need to balance your concentration towards those things about the tool you are working with that are appreciable. I appreciate how quickly I can bang out a PHP site. I appreciate the massive library support and open source tools for Java. I appreciate C#, the .NET framework and Microsoft's dedication to their developers. If you can't do that than you are severely limiting your brain and your bank account.
Also, consider this: If Sun hadn't taken it to the extreme, there would be no .NET. Had they looked for an agreement, instead of seeking injunction, what a better picture for them that would have been than the picture we are looking at now.
Anyways, nice troll.
Why Mono is Currently An Unacceptable Risk (Score:4, Insightful)
1. Microsoft's C#/CLI licensing people, at high levels, are aware of us.
2. Microsoft can choose to do damaging things in the current C#/CLI licensing ambiguity.
3. Microsoft considers the free software / Linux community to be a major competitive threat
4. Microsoft does not "compete" gently
5. A + B + C + D = ?
The word pile amassed below defends points (1) and, in particular, (2). I take points (3) and (4) as given. I leave point (5) an exercise for the reader.
Stupid Disclaimer
Since I'm not a lawyer, I don't know if these disclaimers are important. But given the nature of the topic, I'll play it safe and write one. I'm not a lawyer, and this ain't legal advice, its just a dump my current thinking on an issue. It does not represent my employer's opinion. It may represent my cat's opinion, but only on the second tuesday of summer months.
Restatement of the Issue
Miguel has repeatedly stated that the patents necessary to implement the standards ECMA-334 (C#) and ECMA-335 (CLI) are available from Microsoft "RAND + Royalty Free". This seems like an effective open patent grant and encouraged me initially that we could do Mono. I really like Mono. Its terrific technically, and I'd love to be able to use it. But two problems upon further consideration the past couple months:
1. I've not seen an official statement by Microsoft that will let me trust the royalty free assertion. I think we are remiss if we do not assume Microsoft is looking for ways to, quite frankly, screw us. So unless there is a statement from Microsoft that they will have to stick to in a court, I feel (at the very least) uncomfortable.
2. "RAND + royalty free", can still seriously screw Free Software. I think this is more important than the first point. Even with RAND + royalty free you still have to execute a license agreement with Microsoft, and license agreements can stipulate things that are RAND from a corporation perspective but still screw over Free Software. Also, there is evidence that key Microsoft people are already aware of (or planned?) incompatibilities between the licensing scheme for C#/CLI and, at least, the GPL. The eye of Sauron is upon us. RAND + royalty free is very different from a patent grant.
In short, we are in an adversarial situation. Microsoft does not want us to succeed. Thus we cannot trust Microsoft, even if we'd like to, and must consider Mono based upon the question "What is the worst thing MS can reasonably do?". We can only trust Mono if we are convinced Microsoft doesn't have weasel room. The current situation appears, to me, to have lots of weasel room. The technical merits of Mono are basically irrelevant if its a trojan horse in the long term.
The Horror Story
So here's the obligatory horror story based upon what I see as our current course. Actually, I don't think this is taken to extremes at all. The GNOME actions look to me like the path we are currently on, and the Microsoft actions are not out of character, and look legally tenable based on what I know today. Microsoft can choose to not exercise these actions, but they will have the possibility (and will be more likely to the more successful the Linux desktop is).
* Act 1 - Novell hackers continue to push Mono. Novell hackers code most new independent programs/functionality in Mono and gradually start writing extensions to software like Evolution in Mono. Evolution's core continues to remain Mono free, but if you want features X, Y, and Z you have to use Mono. A few GNOME hackers write apps in Mono, some as toys, and perhaps a couple more serious. Red Hat hackers complain. Some try to weakly push Java and some stick with working in C & Python. Sun makes noise, and does their own thing, starts some wacky projects, tries to push Java with OpenOffice.org, and
Re:Apples and Oranges (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:let me get this straight ... (Score:2, Insightful)