Bemused...it's a good word
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| Ridcully Jun 06, 2011 5:54 PM EDT |
Given the huge discussion on an earlier thread in which I expressed my negative views on Mono and its likely use as a patent honey-trap by Microsoft, I am sitting back and quite bemused as these events unfold. Let's see if I have it straight: Because Microsoft has developed .NET, Miguel puts together Mono for Linux based on .NET protocols, and he is supported by Novell. Moonlight is developed as a Linux variant of Silverlight. (We can argue that .NET was based on a Redmond desire to control the internet, but given present developments I suspect that's becoming less relevant.) However, all of the cosy Mono arrangement goes to pieces when Novell is sold, the Mono team is fired and Miguel sets up his own project called Xamarin - and looks for cash supporters. SUSE support for Mono is now "questionable" ? But meanwhile back at Redmond Ranch, the general moves to HTML5 mean that the worth of .NET has suddenly gone out the window {sorry about that pun... :-) } and all those .NET developers ain't got nuthin' to do - or migrate to Mono, and/or build apps for smart phones. I know my distrust and distaste for anything based on Redmond's software led me to indicate in that previous thread that I could wish Mono would steadily disappear, but as events are panning out, it almost seems that real world circumstances are slowly leading to pretty much the same results. Personally, I have no use for the Mono project's outputs, but I can appreciate that others may be in a very different position. I'd be very interested to see other people's perceptions of this......I may be just a "tiny" bit biased but it doesn't mean I wouldn't like to hear the other person's side of the matter - and my somewhat cynical summary of the events may be wrong and need correction. |
| tracyanne Jun 06, 2011 6:47 PM EDT |
Quoting:I have no use for the Mono project's outputs... Rid, I suspect you do, probably 10 - 20% of the website you personally visit are using .NET in their infrastructure, and certainly over 50% of the ones that are powered by IIS are also using .NET. I can also tell you that a small percentage of Websites running Linux are serving up their websites using .NET in the form of Mono, so wether you realise it or not you do to some extent rely on the mono/.net infrastructure. |
| Ridcully Jun 06, 2011 7:18 PM EDT |
Many thanks Tracyanne.......and this is EXACTLY the sort of response I was hoping to get......I am rather..no strike that.....I am very, very naive when it comes to understanding some of the underlying internet structures. I have no need to understand them given my particular use of computers.......I can see I am going to have to understand .NET a little more.......sigh. Emphasis "little", since I won't be developing stuff like that. Thanks again. :-) |
| tracyanne Jun 06, 2011 7:25 PM EDT |
I just read the article, Brian Proffit misses the point. In what way does KDE4 or GNOME3 no longer rely on C/C++ now that these desktop UIs provide the means for developers to build interfaces that utilise HTML and JavaScript? In what way does the backend of applications that utilise HTML and Javascript UIs no longer use C/C++, Python, Perl, PHP, Ruby, Java or any other language that is available on Linux, including C#/Mono? So in what way will Windows 8 no long rely on C/C++, VisualBasic, C#/.NET, Python, or any other language you can build applications on Windows with? The language/infrastructure used to build UIs does not determine the back end, and nore does the backend determine the UI. That may have been the case in the past, for example when I was programming in COBOL or even more recently when programming in VisualBasic, but since the introduction of Web technologies the UI has become more and more disconnected from the "backend". The thrust of software development has been to disconnect the various "layers" of software, so that you can build a UI using one framework/language set, the "enabling" layer using another, the "logic" layer yet another, and the "data" layer a different one again, and there is the database itself. So Brian completely misunderstands the effect of Windows 8, or indeed KDE4 or GNOME3, for that matter. C#/Mono, C#.NET, C/C++, Python, Ruby, PHP, etc etc are just as necessary as they aver were, the difference the framework/language set of preference for builing UIs is now HTML and Javascript. So all that means is that those of us who already work in this disconnected UI layer, the Web applications builders, have a head start on anyone who still thinks in terms of building UIs that rely on the Language they build the enabling layer and the Logic layer and the data layer with. The whole point of Microsoft's .NET and the programming Tool Visual Studio, and therefore Mono and MonoDevelop is to enable the building of applications using multiple langauages/frameworks, and linking them at runtime. And that too is how KDE4 and GNOME3 work. That is the point of Object Oriented programming, and I think we are finally seeing how it can benefit developers. |
| hkwint Jun 07, 2011 4:44 AM EDT |
TA: A JS interpreter written in .NET? Really? In my opinion, it seems Microsoft is porting ARM Windows Phone 7 to ("desktop") x86 Windows 8; not "Windows 7 to ARM" as I and many have thought before. And as far as I'm aware, Microsoft wants 'mobile development' to happen in Silverlight and HTML5. Not the first time, they made huge shifts like this before. Because, after all, if you want you can still develop your .NET backend in VB6 (but why on earth would you?), even if Microsoft left it. But nobody does so; if Microsoft shifts focus, their developers follow sooner or later. |
| tracyanne Jun 07, 2011 6:25 AM EDT |
Quoting:TA: A JS interpreter written in .NET? Really? What in the world for? Quoting:Microsoft wants 'mobile development' to happen in Silverlight and HTML5. Not the first time, they made huge shifts like this before. That isn't as big a shift as you might think. Silverlight depends on .NET and XML and HTML. So you program the nabling layer in C# or VB or any other .NET language. In fact the Microsoft way of programming Silverlight is to use Visual Studio.Net. |
| hkwint Jun 07, 2011 6:54 AM EDT |
Quoting:What in the world for? Well, exactly my point. Because if the Javascript-engine is not implemented in .NET; there's no need for .NET at all. Just like if the .NET - CLR is not programmed in VB6, there's no need for VB6 anymore - and that's why developers / MS left it. I don't think Silverlight will be succesful as long as it doesn't run on WebOS/QNX/Android/iOS; and given the shift to mobile it does mean on the client side it's no longer (that) important. Of course; maybe for those focussing on the Windows/Linux desktop it will remain important. But there's no growth potential in those platforms, and as a result there's no growth potential for .NET. So only those IIS servers remain; but what's the point of the Sharepoint/Exchange/IIS combi if users use a plethora of non'-MS devices to connect to the server? Which means on the server side there's almost no growth potential for MS too. Moreover, do Sharepoint/Exchange/IIS run on ARM? They'd better do, because I see a shift to ARM in data centers as well. Of course all of this might take five years or so, but I think if you're heavily into .NET, you won't be pleased it's growth potential is already gone - and in five years from now it won't be that important anymore. |
| gus3 Jun 07, 2011 7:53 AM EDT |
A JS interpreter in .NET doesn't bother me. After all, we also have Fabrice Bellard's x86 simulator in JS. |
| tracyanne Jun 07, 2011 9:10 AM EDT |
Quoting:Well, exactly my point. Because if the Javascript-engine is not implemented in .NET; there's no need for .NET at all. What? You don't get it do you. What in the world does the javascript intepreter have to do with it? They can implement it in the best language for the job, and it has no effect on wether .NET is relevent or not. Quoting:Just like if the .NET - CLR is not programmed in VB6, there's no need for VB6 anymore - and that's why developers / MS left it. Of course it's not implemented in VB6, it's implemented in C#. Windows programmers abandonded VB6 because Microsoft no longer supports COM (Component Object Model) based languages, and instead supports CLR based languages. Quoting:I don't think Silverlight will be succesful as long as it doesn't run on WebOS/QNX/Android/iOS; and given the shift to mobile it does mean on the client side it's no longer (that) important. Silverlight was designed to be a replacement for Flash, or at least a strong competitor, and to become the UI framework of choice for .Net applications, now it's apparently only to be used on Windows Phone 7, next week they may abandon it completely as a failure, because HTML5 is a more popular choice among competitors, and frankly is a more flexible UI framework. the .NET infrastructure doesn't "care" what the UI framework is, it can be legacy objects built on top of the programming language (C#, VB.Net etc) or Silverlight, or HTML5, it makes no difference to the underlying application, which can be built in any or all the .NET languages. Quoting:Of course; maybe for those focussing on the Windows/Linux desktop it will remain important. But there's no growth potential in those platforms, and as a result there's no growth potential for .NET. You really don't know what you are talking about. What in the hell do you think all the web applications I build are written in? Hint C#.NET, with an HTML/javascript UI running in any web browser. And guess what the javascript engine is written in the same language the browser is written in, usually C/C++. There is plenty of growth potential for .NET and Mono, for that matter. All that has changed is the UI framework, in the case of Windows 8. Quoting:So only those IIS servers remain; but what's the point of the Sharepoint/Exchange/IIS combi if users use a plethora of non'-MS devices to connect to the server? Which means on the server side there's almost no growth potential for MS too. Sharepoint and Exchange are irrelevent to the discussion on the viability of a programming language, and IIS is only relevent with respect to Web applications, and still has no baring on the viability of a programming language. Given that those applications are actually written in C++, you would be better making the argument that C++ is now less viable, because of the use of HTML5 and javascript as the UI framework. But I'd simply point to KDE4 and GNOME 3 as to why you're wrong on that. Quoting:Moreover, do Sharepoint/Exchange/IIS run on ARM? They'd better do, because I see a shift to ARM in data centers as well. Of course all of this might take five years or so, but I think if you're heavily into .NET, you won't be pleased it's growth potential is already gone - and in five years from now it won't be that important anymore. Once again Sharepoint/Exchange/IIS are irrelevent. You are clearly very confused. |
| hkwint Jun 08, 2011 6:47 AM EDT |
Well, because sooner or later, on the client side Javascript will be all that matters, that's the whole point, and the engine indeed is in C. Microsoft will eventually end CLR support just like they ended VB6 support. That's not confusion, that's just looking forward. Of course, you don't have to believe me. Future will proof me wrong or right anyway. I can live with both, and I can understand .NET programmers OTOH can't (see the recent uproar amongst .NET developers - one of them filling a forum with F-words). Look at what FT announced today: Ditched their iPhone-app and went HTML5. Multiple-browser support is coming. Suppose a level playing field: Why on earth would they choose to go with Windows servers and program their WebApps in .NET? No reason at all. Like said, they'd only choose Windows if they're dependent on IIS/Sharepoint/Exchange, currently run their server infrastructure on Windows or all there devs know .NET really well (which means: No level playing field). No Windows means no .NET; as the status of Mono is a bit unsure at the moment. Moreover, if I were them, I would be looking at ARM servers, just like Facebook was considering. Saving 60% on the energy bill is possible when ditching Intel. Currently, Windows is no option for ARM servers AFAIK. I can't see how FT today announcing exactly what I said yesterday can be explained as me being confused, it's more a vision than confusion. I'm afraid anyone who has vested interests in .NET will have to live with it, though I understand those people keep advocating the importance / benefits of .NET to keep their skills look relevant. So yes, I'm bemused to, as currently what I envisioned is happening. But like said, if it happens at all, it will take at least five years. |
| tracyanne Jun 08, 2011 9:00 AM EDT |
I guess eveyone with vested intersts in Python, Perl, Ruby etc will alsohave to live with no Desktop applications other than a web browser as wel. Ther goes my future, up in smoke. Just when I was learning these languages. Oh well. |
| skelband Jun 08, 2011 1:04 PM EDT |
Microsoft's vision for something like .NET was actually a good idea. A common platform and a variety of languages that support it. The big FAIL was that it was for Windows only. Anyone looking with a cloud-based, platform agnostic vision will most certainly NOT be interested in .NET for this reason. |
| Fettoosh Jun 08, 2011 2:02 PM EDT |
Quoting:I guess eveyone with vested intersts in Python, Perl, Ruby etc will alsohave to live with no Desktop applications other than a web browser as wel. Fear not Tracyanne, :-) KDE 4 Plasma Desktop, Plasma Netbook/Tablet, and Plasma Mobile with Qt are still and will continue to be around for long time. Learn Qt, it is supported on multiple platforms. :-) |
| tracyanne Jun 08, 2011 5:24 PM EDT |
@Fettoosh, I do fear not, that non fear for the demise of includes the above languages and Mono/.Net, and COBOL, which rumour has is dead on several occassions. |
| Fettoosh Jun 08, 2011 6:13 PM EDT |
Quoting:includes the above languages and Mono/.Net, and COBOL, which rumour has is dead on several occasions I was being sarcastic about the confusion between Framework and Programming Languages. I agree with you that .Net is a framework not a programming language. Programming languages are used to build a work-space of a certain framework. . |
| hkwint Jun 13, 2011 3:09 PM EDT |
To me it seems Microsoft throw both QT and .NET out of the window(s) and yep, indeed in favour of the HTML5/JS interface of Windows Phone 7; the one which also showed up in Windows 8. It remains to be seen how many people can live without desktop-apps, but given the recent developments on both the smartphone / tablet platforms, I'd say the demand for such applications is declining. And yes, that's also less demand for Ruby, Python, Perl or whatever. Question is, how will Javascript be 'enhanded': Will it be like the way Perl was enhanced - meaning more and more features, a bit like the way Mozilla is pushing with the newest JS versions, or will it remain the slow developing 'website language' it used to be. And what will be the preferred platform for the Microsoft application stores: At this moment, I guess it will remain Silverlight for a while. |
| Fettoosh Jun 13, 2011 5:44 PM EDT |
Quoting:To me it seems Microsoft throw both QT and .NET out of the window(s) ... @hkwint, I don't think MS threw away .Net or Qt just yet, it is too early to says. They merely are trying to follow the steps of Google by offering an HTML Web interface similar to Chrome OS. They are afraid it will succeed and be left behind, so they are matching their steps. Qt & .Net are frameworks and need programming languages to create their work-spaces, and guess what, Qt will be having widgets and an interface for HTML in 4.7 release. Hope these links would be of help. http://www.qtweb.net/ http://cgg.mff.cuni.cz/~vajicek/qt/qt_windows_howto.html http://doc.qt.nokia.com/4.7-snapshot/examples-webkit.html http://qtwui.sourceforge.net/ |
| hkwint Jun 14, 2011 5:01 AM EDT |
I was merely pointing to Nokia sold QT licensing to another company. Call me conspiracialist or whatever as I don't care - I'm sure "selling" Qt it was a move whispered in Nokia's ears by both ex-MS business CEO Elop and some bags of billions of dollars from MS. You know what's funny? At this time, AFAIK, you can't develop .NET for Android; except for when using MonoDroid, which is not supported by Microsoft and not open source. OTOH, MS is pushing 'porting' Android-applications to Windows Phone 7. Now, if they were really pushing .NET, I suspect they would be all in on making it available on iOS and Android as well. But it seems they're not, and you can't blame them. Because obviously both Apple and Google don't want to give away control of their platform. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!