Sun's (un)official response to .NET 286
siliconghetto writes "Sun decided that to post a response to .NET on it's Java home page. According to Madhu Siddalingaiah, "Microsoft is spinning [.Net] as innovative new platform but what they're really doing is giving developers an updated set of handcuffs."
"
Re:Good! Mictosoft .net looks pretty flakey anyway (Score:2)
deliver?
Re:.NET and the CLR (Score:2)
I'm still researching it, but it seems that SOAP is, like HTTP, a protocol anyone can implement.
Now, let's look at
I wonder if and when Microsoft will hijack the SOAP protocol and have SOAP SCUM (SOAP - Supplied Completely Under Microsoft) which won't work with anything else, just like *ahem* J++ *ahem*
Not everything from MS is bad, but... (Score:3)
The ideas behind
Re:Article Full Of Inaccuracies (Score:4)
Not true. CORBA has bindings right now for just about as many languages as .NET is planning to support, and these systems can all interoperate. In fact, Java's network and component specifications are going towards a more language neutral format with RMI over IIOP and the next generation CORBA specs and products that allow IIOP access to EJBs and deployment of EJB-like services in any language.
I know this is true because I write Java applications in a three tier system that use C++ components in the middle tier and PL/SQL code in the database tier. We also have Perl code that calls Java components in the middle tier.
There are also many languages that can be compiled into Java bytecode and use Java classes and services.
The real facts are that Java probably gives you more choices and makes it easier to use systems written in other languages and on other platforms than any other language. (C may be slightly more ubiquitous, but much more difficult)
I know there had to be a moderator who is a jerk (Score:2)
Re:'Nother great article - Microsoft Goes Bonkers (Score:2)
If Microsoft really are going this direction they are in a hell of a lot of trouble. It's like implementation (always hard for them) proved so frustrating that they're abandoning it entirely and going with nothing _but_ 'mindshare'. I will be interested to see how far they get. It'll make a good litmus test for who can think and who just recites propaganda, since there are NO ideas in .NET, apparently.
Re:I'm sorry... (Score:2)
between an operating system and a platform, is vaporware.
CLR is the VM... which would you rather use? (Score:2)
The problem you have with using CLR on any other language is the ease with which native code might end up in libraries. WIth the
But that's not even the real issue. The problem I have is that since the CLR is essentially a VM - why would I want to switch to that? VM's have spent the last couple of years improving at a tremeddous rate, and I have trouble imagining the Microsoft team (last I read, four people) can outmatch them anytime soon.
An VM's are here now, on a number of platforms. They have mature (and maturing!) API's for hooking in profilers and debuggers. It seems like you'd be crazy to pick what is essentially a beta VM that runs only under Windows to run production stuff on.
Re:I'm sorry... (Score:2)
There are many reasons for that. One is that for native Windows programs, the OS doesn't account for all the resources in the process size: shared libraries and other resources are not mentioned. Another is that supporting some of the functionality in Java requires more runtime support, like dynamic compilation and reflection. Those are very useful, but they aren't cheap. There are some parts of the Java libraries that ought to be optimized (more packed representations for images, for example), so if you are using a lot of images, your process might be larger than an equivalent Windows program. And memory management by the Java runtime may appears to use more memory than it actually does anyway.
If you want to, you can batch-compile Java just like you batch-compile C++ or .NET, and you get executables with similar size and similar behavior. But you also get similar limitations on dynamic loading and reflection as you would get in C++ and .NET.
Java process sizes already aren't a problem for most applications (in particular, server applications). In a few years, they'll seem miniscule, just like the humungous Windows executables from a few years ago are the lean and mean applications of today.
Obligatory MS crack joke (Score:5)
Maybe they already have.
Announcing: .ORG (Score:4)
.ORG!!!
Re:Be very afraid! (Score:2)
Re:Gold plating the Shackles (Score:2)
Re:Want some cheese with that WHINE? (Score:2)
Visual InterDev 1.0 in Pittsburgh, the Microsoft speaker swore up and down that activex, MTS, and ASP support was "just around the corner" for solaris, linux and macintosh....
http://www.chilisoft.com/ [chilisoft.com]
Try that out.
Simon
Gold plating the Shackles (Score:2)
How can you have any system mean to be cross-paltform (the CLR layer) when the primary language for it (C#) encourages native code fragments!! And as a bonus the compilers also let the people writing code compile directly to native code instead of going to CLR code.
Today, it is easy to have services running on ANY server (not just Win2K) that talk to mainframes and UNIX servers, using Java. Perhaps the use CORBA, or RMI, or sockets, or even just URL scraping. It doesn't matter - Java does not have to be the only language you use.
If you don't think of CORBA and RMI (over iiop) as generic communication solutions, then I don't know what to say.
Re:.NET and the CLR (Score:2)
Re:Good! Mictosoft .net looks pretty flakey anyway (Score:2)
Re:I'm sorry... (Score:2)
I've never really been a java fan, but if you get the chance, you should really check out the most recent version of the jre (1.3). It runs about 3x faster than any previous version.
Cool.
Yes.
Does it run on Mac? No?
No - no Mac version at the moment. It will be along presently.
Supported in major browsers? No?
Supported by Netscape 6 and Mozilla M18+ - runs nicely on both Windows NT and Linux.
I think I'll stay "cross-platform" and stick with 1.1.7.
I'll concur on the need for Java 2 RE to spread to more platforms - I assume there is a Sparc version in there somewhere, and MacOS will be there soon I believe. Not too shabby.
Cheers,
Toby Haynes
Re:I'm sorry... (Score:3)
> seen it being used at shows.
"Any sufficiently advanced technology is
indistinguishable from a rigged demo."
Chris Mattern
I'm a beta tester (Score:2)
It is expected that Microsoft will make BETA1 available to anyone who wants it (minus a small SH fee). You can check this page for more info on
http://msdn.microsoft.com/net/
I just find it amusing that so many people (including the author of the article, with whom I am corresponding via email) jump to conclusions, without having read the documents or at least beta tested the software for more than 10 minutes.
My judgements on Linux are certainly based on more than a few hours/days/months of work, and I think anyone who wishes to be fair owes the same to ALL platforms and solutions.
-----
Re:Python *and* Java will rule the CLR and the JVM (Score:2)
Python has pretty crappy lambda support, and I wouldn't call it anywhere near the quality of LISP's lambda. I do like Python, but it certainly isn't LISP with a traditional syntax.
Re:Early assessment is correct! (Score:2)
Seriously though, the one thing that Microsoft have always seemed dedicated to, though not perfectly so, is legacy-support. They sacrifice technical excellence/security for legacy support, something many people are not willing to do, much less even think about. Microsoft does SOME forward thinking and always want to be sure that they can support legacy stuff. This is one of the reasons they have such dominance - if you came out with new versions of OSes that breaks legacy support, where would you be? Microsoft understands their market only all too well.
Remember Win16? Win32s? I'm sure there would be some problems transitioning to Win64, but I'm sure it would work out, it's just a matter of relevance of PC platforms from here on.
Re:I've always found Python to be too *constrictiv (Score:2)
Re:Ugly focus (Score:2)
My condolenses. Y ou're probably used to crappy C++ debuggers, and simply are ignorant of anything better.
No, debugging doesn't require a console. I don't doubt that gdb and other very primitive debuggers do. (I've only used gdb in the C world) In Smalltalk, even Squeak [squeak.org], with a relatively primitive debugger (at least compared to IBM's VisualAge Smalltalk) it light years ahead of the trash you C++ coders have to deal with.
Oh well, i suppose it comes with the job.
Re:MS CODE -shudder- (Score:3)
I think we're seeing pretty much eye-to-eye on the general merits of the two languages. I use VB a fair amount when I'm just trying to get something done quickly and I know it doesn't need to run anywhere but on Windows. VB is a great tool for that. I was mainly taking issue with comparing VB to Java because I felt the comparison wasn't fair. They are really two different languages used for at least two different reasons. VB is great for rapid Windows development. Java is great for writing portable software (and happens to be pretty decent for rapid development, though not quite as easy as VB). I think they both do well at what they are designed for.
but Sun the corporation swung from their goal of creating something that would help people to something that would hurt Microsoft.
I don't think I know what you're talking about here.
Sun isn't concerned with whether or not their stuff will actually be useful. They're more concerned with bashing Microsoft.
I don't see it. The way I saw things happening, Microsoft took the initiative in trying to spoil Java. Sun WAS trying to create something useful, and Microsoft was trying to undermine that creation so that it would not undermine their monopoly power. If Sun doesn't protect its creation from that sort of interference, then it could very well end up as another footnote in computing history and nothing more. Microsoft is an extremely powerful competitor with little in the way of scruples to stop it from doing whatever it takes to eliminate what it sees as a threat. I don't think the Linux comparison fits either. Apples and oranges.
Oh Please (Score:2)
How did so many /.ers forget? The intention of .NET is to be a runtime environment to run on all platforms, not just on Windows. What, did you all lose your critical thinking facilites just because of some marketing BS from Sun?
The ultimate goal of .NET is pretty close to the holy grail of programming IMO - be able to write a program in any language that will run on any platform that has the .NET runtime. Mix and match languages if its appropriate and still run on any platform.
My analysis? The linked story is FUD and Sun is scared. Ignore .NET if you want, but also be prepared to cut yourself off from a lot of business that will be focused on it.
I watch the sea.
I saw it on TV.
In theory, inaccurate- but MS's track record's bad (Score:2)
Well now, I wish I could believe that. Certainly the way
What worries me is Microsoft's track record. They take a standard, argueably add functionality in a Microsoft-brand superset of the standard, and then get programmers addicted to the easier development cycle of selling out to Bill's new tools at the expense of having crossplatform code (which, it should be noted, is not always a bad thing). Look not only at Java, but JScript, DHTML, CSS, and a whole host of web-specific technologies (not that Netscape is ethically clean -- remember the "layer" tag?).
So though
"This may be the fault of the interpreter, in which case HE is the hippopotamus." Boris Yeltsin, 60 Minutes
"This may be the fault of the interpreter, in which case HE is the hippopotamus."
Re:I'm sorry... (Score:2)
D
----
Re:Early assessment is correct! (Score:2)
I was just remembering a post that said IE5 on Solaris had practically the whole of Win95 in it.
What if the ports for C#/CLR came with huge chunks of Win2k to provide the api's? .NET would then be protable, bloated but protable.
Just a thought.
Miss the point... (Score:2)
And you know what? That's okay. As consumers of media, we all need to be able to separate the business-driven hype from the objective news. This is very important when we reference the web site of a company with vested interests.
Re:I'm sorry... (Score:2)
Actually, the Mac OS X Beta comes with a 1.3 VM with the HotSpot JIT. I believe the class library is still 1.2.2, but that should be updated in the next release.
Use Perl for RAPID development... (Score:2)
Maybe you should learn to program in Perl; I find it takes me about a tenth (or less) as much time as C or C++, not merely a third. (No, I'm not exaggerating; if anything, I'm understating.) It's also highly cross-platform, including a GUI (Perl/Tk) that works identically under Linux, Unix and Windows...
Oh, like Java doesn't already shackle programmers. (Score:2)
Wake up, mister Buhrupgupta. Any Java program is already spat upon, since being programmed in Java results in a lag of at least 100ms per function call. Javalag(TM) is so notorious that sometimes entire websites are avoided simply because of shoddy scripting or too many frivolous applets that take so long to load. And that annoying IBM SurePay POS (Point of Sale, or Piece of S#!&, take your pick) system that CompUSA uses? That POS program runs entirely on Java. It lags like hell, causes the printer to stutter, and gives the keyboard a keystroke acceptance rate similar to that of the PCJr.
It's funny how the Sun programmers are complaining of Microsoft building another set of shackles when Java has programmers shelling out hundreds of dollars to put themselves in irons.
Java is to the programming world as trolls are to Slashdot. And I'm not biting when the time comes for me to choose an API.
DISCLAIMER: Javalag(TM) is a trademark of Sun Microsystems, Inc., LLC, CRAP, ETC.
Re:no .NET here (Score:2)
The last means of accessing COM objects from Java I worked was the Visual J++ COM "compiler," which put references to all the Windows-native calls into comment blocks in your Java source, and added the low-level code at compile time. Not exactly pleasant to debug, and completely non-portable.
Re:I like Java but... (Score:2)
However, Java on the server makes sense, and works consistently. I write J2EE apps for a living, and I can tell you with confidence that code that I write that relies on nothing but pure Java will run reliably on Solaris, Windows, and Linux at minimum, UNIX, and if I play it safe with my choice of runtime libraries (not core language or logic, just convenience classes), on MacOS, BSD, AIX, Tru64, HP/UX, OS/390, and a few others that I'm forgetting at the moment.
Don't get me wrong -- Perl is great. The minute you start taking advantage of your 'closer access to the OS', though, you restrict yourself to a small subset of the possible environments it runs on (POSIX is not universal).
Re:Announcing: .ORG (Score:2)
Re:A Closer look at the Article ... Dont Flame Me. (Score:2)
JSP/ASP (with or without version numbers, plus signs, etc.) are:
The fact that Corel has signed an agreement with Microsoft to be port the .NET framework if Microsoft requests it does not impress me. Microsoft could do the exact same thing, if they liked -- they have more programmers than most anyone, and Linux is not so complex that a decent development and runtime environment couldn't be hacked together in a matter of a few months.
Lastly, Java is not interpreted! The first-generation JVMs treated the bytecode like an interpreted language, but the more recent high-performance JIT environments (as well as native compilers, like gcj) remove that bottleneck, while still allowing for compatibility on systems that don't have (or want) native compilation.
The goal of .NET is to perpetuate the lock-in that they've had on RAD tools (and the projects created with them) by preventing the mass exodus away from VB and VC++ that would otherwise be inevitable in the next few years. Yes, distributed objects, transactions, and inheritance will be available to users of those coding in a number of different languages, but that's simply the effects of using XML as a universal exchange protocol, not some mystic MS voodoo.
Of course, it makes good business sense, and if there's anything MS doesn't consistently screw up, it's business. PHBs will eat this shit up, and I forsee a long, dark winter for would-be liberators trying to urge their employers away from MS-specific development environments, langauges, and tools.
Re:MS CODE -shudder- (Score:2)
This debate really isn't so cut and dried.
Handcuffs? (Score:2)
Maybe it's time to bring out the fisticuffs and see how well they fight back?
---
Re:Oh, like Java doesn't already shackle programme (Score:2)
And what is this 'hundreds of dollars' that programmers are paying to use Java? I have written several commercial Java applications, and even more non-commercial ones, and never once encountered a requirement that I pay a licensing fee for a basic Java runtime environment or libraries.
My only hope is that your second-to-last paragraph indicates a sense of irony, and that your entire posting was intended to be taken a a single large sarcastic wisecrack.
.net (Score:2)
Re:MS CODE -shudder- (Score:2)
I'm not saying that interpreted Java isn't the right solution for SOME problems. Like I said, I use it rather frequently for things that really need to actually run on several platforms. Where I'm taking issue with your statement is really with your last comment in your reply. If you write something that works on the Microsoft/x86 platform, you've already reached the great majority of the places it's going to be used. And it's easier. You've gotten the most bang for the buck available in all the programming world. For each platform you want to support, it takes longer and consequently costs more money. Sometimes that's okay, sometimes trying to please everyone makes the project overly ambitious. Lots of times you really only DO need to support Windows users to be the most successful.
I think Microsoft's approach has been far from perfect, but is in many ways the best game in town. They wanted to hit the largest portion of the population they could and make it easy for programmers to adopt their language. I think the concept behind making Java was a good one, but Sun the corporation swung from their goal of creating something that would help people to something that would hurt Microsoft. And that's not what it's supposed to really be all about.
To swing back to the
Re:Want some cheese with that WHINE? (Score:3)
Really. Java is platform independent. While Sun did not succeed with the initial performance claims for Java (ala same speed/execution times) for the various platforms, you can write Java code that can be easily ported to any platform. I say easily as a friend did manage to write some code that he had to modify so that it would work on a Mac (he later learned what he did wrong there). This latest 'offering' my M$ is for the Windows only environment(s).
Now I don't deny them the right to produce for just their product, but to try and claim that it would become a 'standard' is a little annoying. Now I haven't read a counter-point to the original article on
Eric Gearman
--
Re:Article Full Of Inaccuracies (Score:4)
Not to mention that it is very simple to use an RPC over HTTP using XML for interchange model, and in doing so, remove any laguage dependancies. At my last job, we used HTTP RPC to call into a ProvideX system from a J2EE system. If we needed to call into Microsoft, it would have been no problem.
It is very easy to pick an RPC architecture that is friendly to disparate platforms.
Microsoft sells Microsoft (Score:2)
Second, Microsoft - and Sun, to be honest - is a corporation whose primary objective is to make money for itself. The execs in Redmond don't care if something is innovative or even technically impressive, so long as it is popular and profitable. (Yes, that is an exaggeration - MS may be the Empire, but there are real, live people there, too.)
Finally - and most importantly - Microsoft's .NET platform is going to be attractive primarily to developers and companies who are already using Windows-based products. They already have a large user base and a brand name that will attract new customers. All they have to do is keep coming out with new things often enough to keep people's interest.
MS doesn't expand its user base by developing creative new products, it wins people over by marketing a perception that its products are easy (or at least easier) to use. It's up to the developers to wrestle technical shortcomings under control so that the users never know there's a problem.
But that will always be our job: keep technology looking like magic. ;)
--- --- --- --- ---
Re:Corel is doing the .NET port for UNIX systems (Score:2)
In the wed. edition of the biggest Danish newspaper (called Jyllands Posten), there was an interview with Steve Balmer where he states pretty clealy that they have absolutely no intention of porting
Greetings Joergen
Re:.NET is not just a development language (Score:2)
SOAP around DCOM. Good ol Microsoft. They'll keep putting the ame crud ina differen't colored boxes til you buy it.
At least they are predictable.
Re:Wow... (Score:4)
I'm sorry, but until I see proof that C# and or .NET is actually up and running...
AND someone shows me how superior it really is to everything that has ever been
Sorry to sound flamebaitish
-jerdenn
Good! Mictosoft .net looks pretty flakey anyway (Score:3)
Slatting of .NET (Score:2)
Re:Well as least that wasn't biased. (Score:2)
Re:A Closer look at the Article ... Dont Flame Me. (Score:2)
Language lock-in. Java, being supported very well by both Sun and IBM with completely different VMs, and by the FSF with gcj. That's still not vendor lock-in. You want language lock-in, look at Visual Basic. Seems to be only one implementation of that language. And it doesn't have a published, open, although unfortunately not ISO specification. Your point is non-existent.
Second, JSP a ripoff of ASP. Please. Both are derived from CGI + OOP. Did you just start monitoring the industry last week? Or did you grow up on Cnet articles?
I do agree with you on C# being a good evolution of the MS tied VB and visual C++. VB is very useful on certain problems, but lacks a lot of features that I enjoy in both C++ and especially Java. C# looks like a good move, but a lot depends on how they implement. Objective-C was a brilliant evolution that died on C++'s altar as well.
As for Corel, although I had a lot of hope for them, the implementations of their own products on Linux, which I paid for and tried, were rather weak. StarOffice is way beyond that. So I don't have a lot of faith in them for the cross-platform torch of MS.
On that note, look at the COM legacy. Marketing FUD and renaming aside, it's a weak version of CORBA. But the desktop strength is had is great, and is being adopted by CORBA in v3. Just as COM+ is evolving to be a CORBA competitor. Problem: Platform lockin again. At least with CORBA, if Sun pisses me off on implementation of OS, I can move to IBM, HP, MS, or Linux. COM+? SoftwareAG's product isn't cutting it. COM an open standard? Find me a document that reflects the MS implementation on Windows 2000. I believe it is you who doesn't know what they are talking about. Perhaps you should follow your own advice.
As for implementation security, never mind. You don't get it. The VM is the environment in Java. In .NET it appears to be the OS again. Solaris isn't the risk necessarily. The JVM is. But .NET, it's still the MS OS that's at risk.
As for the interpreted language article, I think you had better check your facts. Many of the JITs, and not just Java, are pulling within percentage points of the native code. And it will get closer. I used to agree with your stance that interpreted wouldn't get there, but for one that's not true anymore, and for two, sometimes that doesn't matter.
My few humble opinions. Take them as you will.
Re:Want some cheese with that WHINE? (Score:2)
That is not what the guy was talking about.
He specifically said that it would
be an official MS product.
---
RobK
Sum it up in one word (Score:5)
Re:MS CODE -shudder- (Score:2)
It's fine using something like .net or C# or VB, as long as you're willing to put up with Microsoft's idea of the Future.
If they decide to drop support for VB in favour of C#, you're screwed. If they decide the C# isn't really all they hoped it was, you've wasted your time learning it. If Linux manages to gain a 50% desktop share, you've locked yourself out of 50% of the market (like you're really expecting MS to support a competetor?)It's your money, your time and your life. Good luck.
`ø,,ø`ø,,ø!
Re:Python *and* Java will rule the CLR and the JVM (Score:2)
.NET is what their customers want. (Score:2)
.Net is about letting people write their apps on the MS platforms using MS tools. Apps that can use internet standards to interoperate with other servers using internet standards.
.Net is going after the large amount of businesses that haven't yet gone to J2EE. Heck the large amounts of businesses that don't even know what XML is and why it would help them, that employ geeks like us to show them the way.
.Net is that warm fuzzy feeling that MS is going to take care of you by selling you and your VB developers that design SAP packages and intranets and interal discussion boards and online sales catalogs the thing you need to solve your problem, and back you up when you need it solved.
But
.Net is MS selling things to the people who are already their customers, and people who don't want to know another way. Which is most people.
.Net is making writing software on the windows platform and the windows internet platform easy.
Technology is nothing compared to what technology is used for. Solving problems.
Microsoft doesn't care about the 10% market that knows what they're doing and doesn't want a nice IDE because they're using Emacs or Vi. They want the 90% of the "normal people" that do IT for large companies and small businesses.
They don't care that much about the hardcore slashdot audience.
or, We're the DOT in .NET (Score:3)
Sun is the DOT in .NET
I wonder if MS can enforce a trademark on "dot NET", even if it's in common parlance already. ("Windows" was unenforceable trademark but "Microsoft Windows" is okay.)
CORBA is a broken specification (Score:2)
Java shackles developers by forcing them to use the Java[tm] platform for all development in all three tiers of a client-server application if they plan to use the Java[tm] language for any aspect development
You said:
Not true. CORBA has bindings right now for just about as many languages as
CORBA is a broken specification, and this has lead to the creation of the CORBA Component Model based on EJB which is modelled after DCOM and MTS.
With
In
PS: If you are interested I've written a paper comparing CORBA, DCOM and RMI [gatech.edu] which points out the myriad shortcomings of CORBA.
Second Law of Blissful Ignorance
Re:.NET??? (Score:2)
Re:I love M$...No wonder you have a small dick boy (Score:2)
At any rate, around 15 years ago most corps were getting a lot of complaints at their shareholder's meetings about "corporate behavior", dealings with employees, environmental issues, etc. (GTE was about the hardest hit, as well as GM and GE).
Now? Hardly anyone questions corp. behavior...that is, people are so obsessed with greed and profits, they have lost their ability to "detach" themselves from their investment and analyze the possible ramifications of their investments.
Microsoft is an excellent example. If the employees/shareholders were able to detach themselves and look at the bigger picture, I would expect at least 20% or so to form some type of revolt and officially complain to the board.
But there is not a peep -- nothing. This is scary to me, since I believe the following:
"Microsoft shareholders and employees would be FAR BETTER OFF staging a revolt against their companies' current policies of isolation, and demand a complete and total adherance to standards and cooperation with other computing platforms"
Why? because the current philosophy of isolationism is great for the short term, but possibly devastating in the longer term.
By failing to (honestly) join in with other companies, they risk losing the lawsuit in a couple years.
By failing to (honestly) join in with other companies, they put the long-term viability of the USAs software leadership at risk...they force competition between the USA and other tech nations to be an "all or nothing" deal...that could come up nothing for the USA.
I just find it amazing that MS continues this march...with the
Even more amazing is that some of the groundbreakers at Microsoft, people were in early, and are now phenomenally wealthy and have almost nothing to loose, can't detach themselves and do a employee or shareholder's revolt.
The short term embarrassment and financial losses might be distaseful/painful, but the long term benefits and stability of a truly open and cooperative Microsoft could be mind-boggling -- not only for the USA but for the whole world.
It's just a shame that the employees and 'neauveau riche' of Microsoft can't see past their pocketbooks.
Not so bad for present MSFT developers (Score:2)
That said, the .NET hype machine is clearly aimed at PHBs, not tech-heads. Microsoft's had some big wins by aiming their PR this way (the people who write the purchase orders are, as they say, where the money is), and they aren't going to stop now.
Re:And this was expected (Score:2)
Re:Sun already has the alternative! (Score:2)
I think they're letting the Marketing team go crazy with this one. It's not about cross-platform, barely cross-language.
All it is, is the next reiteration of the COM+ DNA architecture. And a 10 word description of DCOM is being able to run a DLL off of another computer's resources.
COM components are mostly DLL's that are encapsulated, allow you to access their methods. Then you have an architecture explaining how they talk to each other, and the way they access their data. A possible middle-tier solution in a 3-tier environment. And almost as an afterthought, it happens to be usable with a web-base front end.
That's the thing that gets me. It's not really web-centric at all. Oh well.
So first there was COM, then COM+, and not .NET
They're just trying to squeeze their Visual Studio closer together. Sprinkle some more XML support, try to get a CLR running (Common Language RUntime) (Which by the way, won't include FoxPro playing with the CLR, and is why VB 7.0 will have to be retooled)
I doubt anyone's reading this since it's so low on the Slashdot front page, but oh well. Just had to mention the extreme un-importance of .NET with the rest of the world.
I want some cheese with WINE. (Score:2)
unless you think microsoft might port it's window's APIs
This, in a thread whose subject is one letter away from WINE [winehq.com]? The WINE project has been creating a free reference implementation of WinAPI that will be very useful for creating .NET class libraries.
Run on Linux? (Score:2)
Coderhacker
Re:Python *and* Java will rule the CLR and the JVM (Score:4)
Not exactly like Java bytecodes + JNI + JVM, but close enough. Unless you know what you're looking for, the end result is indistinguishable from a compiled C/C++ app.
The guy in charge of Software at my company analyzed the bytecodes and concluded that reverse engineering them is nearly as hard as for Java, although there are definitely some ops that are less primitive.
PS: Look for freeze.py in the python distribution.
Re:.NET and the CLR (Score:2)
And I'd rather read about a protocol developed and implemented by MULTIPLE companies than one that's implemented by ONE. Where's the document on the deep internals of how
Watch your library, not your language (Score:3)
My case story: I spent six month last year trying to develop a spacecraft telemetry decoder in NT4 using C++ in MFC. I quit after I realized NT4 simply is designed the wrong way, from the GUI downwards to the kernel. After following every instruction I could squeeze out of Microsoft documentation regarding real-time programming, I found that, with the PII-333 I was using, the CPU wasn't fast enough to run the digital signal processing code for FM detection and write the results to disk at the same time. Even after doing the most efficient hand optimization of assembly code in the inner loops of the program, there were gaps in the recording.
Seeing no other alternative, I decided to try Linux, using the Qt toolkit and Kdevelop as the development environment. In ten days I had rewritten the GUI part of the program, which I linked with the C++ FM demodulator I had written first, without the assembly optimization.
Surprise! It worked flawlessly, not a single bit was lost. Running "top", the system usage analyzer, I found that the same program that the Pentium II-333 was unable to run in NT4 used only 12% of the CPU, of which 10% was for updating the screen and 2% was for the digital signal processing. None of the profiler, debugger, and analyzer tools I had tried in NT4 had told me this. I had lost six months trying to optimize 2% of the system, while 98% was being wasted by NT4.
Today in my workplace there are two Linux computers running in the desktop, used by a team of satellite controllers to perform maneuver calibrations on a fleet of five satellites. They have adapted well to it, but they still use the dual boot to Windows 95 for all other tasks. Conditioning is hard to overcome, although, in my case, I use now Linux for everything but "Need For Speed - Porsche Unleashed".
In conclusion, in my experience, nothing beats C++ plus the Qt library and Kdevelop for both rapid development and portability (Qt is available for other platforms, although it's GPL only for Linux).
Re:MS CODE -shudder- (Score:2)
.NET and the CLR (Score:4)
What no-one seems to be talking about with the Common Language Runtime (CLR) is how M$ can potentially write a CLR engine for other OSes. With that, developers would have many language choices that could run in an OO environment on many platforms.
So with Java you get one language on lots of platforms (and lots of VMs per platform, I might add) and with .NET you have the potential for many languages on many platforms.
I was actually at PDC2000 this year and saw all of this stuff up-close.
I love Java, C# is cool too. Either way the developer has a great tool to work from.
I'm sorry... (Score:5)
Sun's point, in the article is that Java allows you to access the same API calls, and they'll function on any machine imaginable, which is true. But if you're going to be programming FOR a Windows box (and, last time I checked, developing code to run native in an OS was still the way your program would run the fastest)
Perhaps I should change my login to slashdot to 'Devil's Advocate'. =) Java has it's niche, though. And it does what it was intended to do - make code HIGHLY transportable. But you can't outrun native code, no matter how good your universal language is.
uhhh (Score:2)
Other than, say, having to write a new compiler backend?
"writing a new interpreter for the platform" is actually as simple as pickup up the JVM source code (yes, Sun releases source to their JVM) and recompiling it on the target platform.
MS cross-platform history (Score:2)
This thing was written for the transition from WIN16 to WIN32, and suggested that if you just port your code to WIN32, they'd give you Macintosh support as well from the same source code.
For a hefty sum, they sold you an add-on to vc++ 4.0 that indeed provided a Mac compiler and DLL's to run WIN32 code on the Mac. And it (almost) worked - that is, it almost produced workable Mac applications.
Of course, it really worked for MS, because what they apparently intended was to focus all development to WIN32, killing then rival OS2's chances, and seriously limiting the amount of native Mac apps.
Oh, and by the way, then they pulled the plug on the thing, and now only MS gets to use the WIN32 for the Mac DLL's.
And some of you think C# will be supported on non-Windows platforms!
Browser lock in (Score:2)
I can't believe that the SUN folks missed the gun, however. They are arguing that this will undermine Java by MSing network applications while maintaining control.. HOWEVER, the real danger is that MS makes the number one browser. They completely control what gets put into it. It's one theing to fight over HTML standards, it's another to fight over plugin standards.
Currently, if you want compatible cool stuff on you web page, you use flash (who's goal is to reach every platform and desktop). MS has tried various techniques to make sure that the only browsers out there are MS, and that the "best" place to run their browsers is Windows. Ideally, many features would only work if you had their full Office suite, which is where they can really tie in the money.
IF, they succeede in making everyone love C# as the code-base, along with
As with the above, the only reason MS would want an open standard on things like IE or C# or even
MicroSoft - Incredibly small, yet powerful. Just like the virus.
Re:Handcuffs? (Score:2)
Re:MS CODE -shudder- (Score:2)
I think the handcuffs statement was fairly appropriate. Microsoft is known for doing everything possible to make people use Windows. They don't create portable languages. They don't do things to make it easier for you to switch to another platform. Java is a portable language that helps make it easier for you to switch to whatever platform you want without having to rewrite all your applications. Microsoft's .NET is just another way for Microsoft to try to get people to tie themselves to Windows. If you want to use Windows, then great. If you want to use multiple platforms or any platform other than Windows, then you don't want to use Microsoft's languages to create software for those platforms.
Re:Sun get pist!! (Score:2)
It _would_ be very appropriate for a first class (for some values of appropriate) because there is NO actual content or technical information involved. .NET is nothing but an idea, and the idea is "If everyone uses Microsoft products for everything, you can use any language you could possibly want, solve any problem ever, and be part of the rest of the world all of which is using Microsoft products for everything you could possibly imagine".
This is a very primitive concept, thus it makes perfect sense for a 'first class in CS'. It's kind of like, 'these are the axioms, now read on'. The fact that it makes no sense and belongs to religion more than computer science is not likely to upset many universities at this point o_O
Re:Ugly focus (Score:2)
I don't use Perl, I use C++ instead, but I feel the same way about devices.
Certainly the most time lost in programming is debugging. (well, maybe not by the programmers of certain software companies who seem to do no debugging at all...) And debugging *demands* a console. What is simpler, 'printf("got to xyz, variable xpto has value %d\n", xpto)', or setting breakpoints, opening variable display windows, scrolling to the variable you want, etc, in a debugger? I seldom use debuggers at all, the printf way is so much better.
Having said all this, what can I say of Microsoft Windows *, where programs have no consoles? Sure, you can go all the way and create a console window. You can even format text and display it in the console window you created. And it's simpler to create consoles in Windows 95+ than in the 3.* series. But I still think writing 'printf' is easier and faster.
"cross-language object reuse is easily done" (Score:2)
How, exactly?
You see, this is the whole, central absurdity of .NET- at some point you have to stop crying out "Cross language object reuse is easily done!" and actually IMPLEMENT it. It's all very well saying that, but what evidence is there that this makes any sort of sense in the real world?
Here, I'll answer you with an equal counter-argument: In CORBA, cross-language objects give you freshly baked chocolate chip cookies unlike in selfish, mean old .NET, which cries like a little baby when it can't get people's undivided attention.
How is your nonsensical, hypothetical claim any different from my nonsensical, hypothetical claim? Are you claiming freshly baked chocolate chip cookies don't exist? *g*
Re:Releasing the Shackles (Score:2)
.NET Handcuffs? (Score:3)
Sun's point is valid. Its nifty that Microsoft takes it upon themselves to implement a bunch of tools and services for the internet. Unfortunately for Microsoft the Internet is a hardware independent beast. If Microsoft creates a bunch of software that only works on their OS and refuses to be open about their communication protocols then
Microsoft should be open as possible with their Internet products. If they don't, there will be hacking on their protocol to reverse engineer the protocol. If Microsoft refuses to write software to support other platforms and they refuse to keep as much of it as open as possible then it leaves those who want to work in other hardware and software configurations with little alternitive.
I'm sorry. I can't even type anymore. =) (Score:3)
I type too fast, and think too slow. Maybe I should use the preview button or something.
Re:.NET Handcuffs? (Score:4)
"Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life."
Corel is doing the .NET port for UNIX systems (Score:3)
As regards java being platform independent,
java ports on platforms other than Windows/Solrais
leave a lot to be desired.
Re:Want some cheese with that WHINE? (Score:3)
Re:I'm sorry... (Score:5)
And what stops you from compiling a Java program with gcj [redhat.com]? And notice that gcj not only can compile Java source code into native code; it can compile bytecode into native binary!
Be very afraid! (Score:3)
It's nice that they're trying to make this thing stable and secure, but they're taking it to the extreme and don't realize the problems they are creating. They seem to have notion that all developers use VB, and are creating
This all stems from MS attempting to make every product they ship, into a development environment. I don't need my browser to run my system. I need my system to run my browser, which in turn, I only need for loading web pages. They are trying to allow everybody to become a developer, and the truth is, not everybody should.
Cross-Platform compatibility, security and stability. We need these things, but do we need to give everything up for them? I don't want to have code everything in low-level assembler, but I don't want to eliminate my ability to use it if I need to.
I'm really hoping that
Re:I'm sorry... (Score:3)
That is usually the case, very true, but cases do exist where interpreted code (or byte compiled interpretation like java) has performed just as good or better. This [aceshardware.com] article illustrates that better than I can say it in a reasonable amount of words. It all comes down to just how parallel the java instructions in the bytecode are to the native instruction set of the underlying processor, and the ability of the jvm to remove its own overhead.
B1ood
A Closer look at the Article ... Dont Flame Me... (Score:5)
Yeah Right.. The same one Java Developers wear
..Essentially,
Tell me whats wrong with that Bozo !!.. Both these languages has still a huge market share than anything else in the world. And most of the existing systems currently being ported and rewritten to other languages are developed in it. What Microsoft is doing is trying not to lose market share, and in turn come up with a Loosely coupled architecture for integrating and deploying heterogenous systems. Yup..Flame Me.
....There are no third party vendors of ASP+. In contrast there many vendors of JSPTM solutions for a variety of platforms...
First off all, JSP was a ripoff from ASP. ASP has a much bigger developer base and ASP developers has been crying for better features and thats where ASP+ comes in. Now ASP+ will use Visual Basic, C#, and possibly other languages for code snippets. All get compiled into native code through the common language runtime (as opposed to being interpreted each time, like ASPs). So you could mix and match languages and not be tied to Java alone.
...Microsoft has not suggested or even hinted that the
First of all, Sun doesnt work well with IBM or anyone else in opening up Java. Now they cry wolf when MS doesnt open up the Framework For
..The Java language, VM, and APIs are all vendor neutral. There is no vendor lock in....
Yeah right..except that you are locked in to one language who still dont deliver in terms of Portability.
.....The key difference is that the Java platform is a mature cross-platform solution with no direct ties to any underlying operating system.....
Where does this guy live ? Antartica ? Corel would work with M$ in porting the
...This means that any nontrivial application built on the
Tsk..tsk.. This guy just dont realise..does he..
...Apparently, the underlying goal of
Pure Unadulterated FUD.. No wonder since SUN sponsors this guy's Chopper Trips
....Sun is not the only vendor of the Java platform. IBM, Symantec, Apple, as well
Well didnt we all hear sometime back that these other vendors were planning to liberate Java from Sun ? tsk..tsk..
...Third parties have inspected the Java platform's publicly-available source code for security holes.....
True.. But Sun should rather worry about closing the holes in Sun Solaris 2.7 before they comment on Windoze.
Ultimately, no Interpreted language would ever handle a candle to something that compiles to native code. M$ is leveraging that to provide integration across heterogenous platforms through the CLR. Like it or not..its going to happen and thats what make sense.
My two cents.. Thanks for reading.
Corel announced it offeres MS it can do it (Score:3)
Your memmory don't serve you...
In an agreement (made when MS bought some non-voting shares in Corel), Corel agreed MS may optionally have Corel port MS
Ugly focus (Score:4)
I dual boot Linux and Windows... but in the programs I've been developing lately, I've been booting more to Linux using PERL than to Windows using VisualBasic. Why, when VB is set up with more of the functions I desire, would I do that? Simple: Microsoft locks the user into inflexible paradigms of "device" metaphors, making it nearly useless in several circumstances.
I went from DirectX to OpenGL back when MS was pushing "vertex buffers" and "callback routines" just to draw a single triangle on the screen. The device metaphor was crippling. In PERL, I can write a generic script whose output can easily be diverted to console, file, or device. In VBA, the object modelling constrains you to cast your functions against specific application objects... bleh.
Microsoft got their start in business licensing MS-BASIC to every home computer they could. Once they started the Windows gig, they said "Empower the user?!? What were we thinking!" Now their VBasic bundle is only found in applications, and empowerment comes at a price.
I cannot fathom their adversarial stance over their own customers. I believe the backlash is coming sooner rather than later.
Early assessment is correct! (Score:5)
Make no mistake about it: the
Probably the only useful bit of "portability" the Microsoft CLR will achieve, is that it gives them a migration strategy for upcoming 64-bit Windows. It allows developers to write on Win32 and run on Win64. Oh, how portable!
--
I like Java but... (Score:4)
Now, I don't write much Java, being a Sun sys admin and all I tend to use Perl more because I need closer access to the OS. And the few I have written have not been GUI oriented and would probably run on all platforms. But it seems that if Sun really wants to get into the 'one language for all platforms' that Madhu Siddalingaiah says, then they still have a lot of work to do for anything but trivial programs.
For example, a current program our developers are working on uses the Sun plugin for IE. The same Java applet performs differently in Windows 98, Windows NT, and Windows 2000. And I don't even want to talk about the problems they had with the Netscape browser....
Come on Sun
Microsoft, can't live with 'em, can't shoot 'em....
Re:MS CODE -shudder- (Score:4)
As for platform independence, I think it's highly overrated by slashdot readers. All it really does is force you to leave out advanced features and code for the weakest link in the system. Don't get me wrong, I have to swallow the pill and dumb down a lot of the work I do so it will run correctly on a Mac or Netscape to reach all of the target audience sometimes, but much 'sweeter' applications can be developed in LESS time if you consentrate on a target platform.
Lastly on platform independence, just realize that Java isn't any more platform independent than anything else, it's just got an interpreter that has been written for each platform! If a new platform comes out, it won't run Java at all until someone writes an interpreter for it and when new releases of Java come out Macs and other platforms lag behind on the new releases so you STILL get code that doesn't work everywhere.
Microsoft utilized VB to allow one easy to use, fast language to work across the most popular platform. I think they did more for application development with that move than all the effect Java has had being just another language to learn that still can only be used in certain places.
Releasing the Shackles (Score:5)
A core basis for it's existence is Cross-Platform support. Microsoft understands that companies do have multiple systems in their environments which need to work together.
Unlike Sun, Microsoft is not suggesting that you should write all your software using Java. Instead they are saying... write your software with whatever language you want and then using
Microsoft's goal is to have services which run on Win2k servers talking to services running on Mainframes or Unix servers.
This happens today, but you need to devise some custom solution to make them talk with each other. Microsoft is simply providing a generic framework for you, so you can focus instead on the solution details.
Article Full Of Inaccuracies (Score:4)
I love Java, but this is simply bullshit. The main purpose of
Currently there are plans for
Obviously this scares Sun and that's why they are publishing this propaganda because it begins to show the truth that Java shackles developers by forcing them to use the Java(TM) platform for all development in all three tiers of a client-server application if they plan to use the Java™ language for any aspect development (yes, I know about JNI, but it is currently subpar).
Second Law of Blissful Ignorance
Python *and* Java will rule the CLR and the JVM... (Score:5)
Post or moderate? Post or moderate?
POST!
Don't like Java's (too low) level of abstraction? Tired of being stuck on Windows because of your employers obsession with VB?
Convert them to Python! They'll be happy how fast you get things done AND they'll love the easy portability to Linux, Solaris, Macs, etc.
It just makes sense. Today, I can even run Python in a JVM. I can run Python in the
If Microsoft never ports the CLR to OSs other than Windows, you STILL win.
Now, here's the kicker: Java will be available for
Now, observant people will point out that regardless of the fact that you would be using Python or Java, the fact that you're using it in a JVM or CLR naturally means you will use the libraries in those environments. And that's true. However, it's nothing a good designer couldn't mitigate to a large extent (not perfectly I know) using the GoF strategy pattern and other abstraction techniques. Furthermore, most of Python's standard libraries are already ported to the JVM. It's just a matter of time before they show up for the CLR too (and for Java too).
Also, learning both sets of libraries and both Java and Python will simply be good for your career. You'll honestly be able to claim multi-architectural proficiencies, from the comfort of a high-level development language (or at least a "higher-level" development language in the case of Java).
Now, anyone who can poke substantial holes in this will be doing me a favor. My general career direction in the near future will be Python/Java heavy because of my assumptions above.
Just to clarify something: I approach this purely as a corporate applications designer and developer. I have no interest in systems-level stuff, embedded systems, real-time systems, etc. Very little of the above even matters for those area (although there are embeddable versions of Python AND Java, as well as a hard real time version of Java).
Thanks in advance for your rabid attacks!
Re:I'm sorry... (Score:3)
What stops me from using gcj is the lack of documentation. Things like Rather sucks, wouldn't you agree? And Is rather hard to decipher...
Re:MS CODE -shudder- (Score:3)
just realize that Java isn't any more platform independent than anything else, it's just got an interpreter that has been written for each platform!
Exactly, which makes it many times more portable than anything made by Microsoft.
If a new platform comes out, it won't run Java at all until someone writes an interpreter for it
So? Do you have a better idea? Interpreters will be written for any platform that needs it. Once the interpreter exists for the platform, then the java compiler will run on that platform and you can use your code there. Again, much more portable than anything Microsoft has done.
and when new releases of Java come out Macs and other platforms lag behind on the new releases so you STILL get code that doesn't work everywhere.
Well, if you decide to update your code to take advantage of new features, and you know you have to support multiple platforms, then you just hold off on releasing changes until updated interpreters are available for those platforms. They will likely be in the works while you are busy updating your code anyway.
I think they did more for application development with that move than all the effect Java has had
Perhaps, but only if you need to support only Windows users and nothing else. Microsoft solutions will always be limited by Microsoft's ambition to be the only game in town.
being just another language to learn that still can only be used in certain places.
Which amounts to a hell of a lot more places than any Microsoft language can be used.