> Its quite simple...
Apparently it's not that simple.
> If multi-platform development is of vital importance to you,
> why are you wasting time on a dotNet list?
> Java gives you what you want.
That aside, why would anyone use Mono if multi-platform was of no
importance? Afterall, there's .NET 2.0 which runs fine on
every windows box.
> Sitting on this list and trying to convince people that Mono
> is the wrong answer because it didn't work for YOU AND THE
> SPECIFICS OF YOUR SITUATION is wasting everyone's time. If
> you don't care about ever moving to another platform? Great!
> dotNet solves all of your problems by itself. I envy you.
Relax. No-one came over to your cubicle and hit you in the face with a
thick System VR4 manual. You first said: if
multiplatform is vital, use java, yet, now you seem to suggest that mono is
also a candidate.
Which one is it now?
> MS-Only shop but curious about whether Mono might be helpful
> to you or open new opportunities never available before? Then
> check it out for yourself.
> For every BAD thing said about Mono here, I could dig up a
> successful story of ports. Some of which are MINE and
> seen/typed firsthand.
thats great, but these examples aren't more than 'it can work, look!'.
Fact is that some people have a hard time with mono,
others will have a walk-in-the-park-experience, that's life.
> Mono will not solve everyone's problems. But it will
> certainly solve many of them. I read people complaining about
> whether EnterpriseServices have been ported... Does everyone
> USE them? Is anyone here suggesting Mono REPLACE dotNet in
> your shop? If they did, I must have lost that message.
You didn't get the point. You have: Win2k3 + .NET 2, and you have Linux
+ Mono. Well, which one would it be? If it's Linux +
Mono, why pick that one? Why not choose either Win2k3 + .NET 2, or Linux + Java
+ JBoss ? The point is that if you are writing a
large enterprise application, (think 1000's of tables in your db), running on a
large server farm, would Mono provide the enterprise
framework you need, for example for something silly as oh, distributed
transactions?
Likely not. If it doesn't, then what's the point of picking Mono over
Java + JBoss _IF_ you want to use Linux? Because, the
OS that's the core point here. If the OS is already determined to be Windows,
this whole discussion is meaningless, as we've .NET 2
on windows.
> If dotNet works for you and your needs, then you are set. If
> your needs GROW, or you wish to investigate new
> opportunities, then Mono is there and getting better every
> day. In an earlier exchange, someone stated some "fact"
> about Mono that was later admitted to be based upon 2 year
> old knowledge. I find that "pattern" typical in these
> debates. I'd encourage every technician here to check it out
> FOR THEMSELVES as to whether its appropriate for their needs.
why? You run every app on linux as well to see if it can replace what
you already have? I bet mono runs the code which is
compiled against it fine. That's not the point. THe point is to go through the
trouble USING it _INSTEAD OF_ other choices.
We get requests from time to time if our code runs on Mono. While we
don't support it directly, our makefiles offer
compilation of the code on mono, and with a few changes here and there, it's
easy to get it running. Though is it important enough
to invest time in Mono support? No. The sole reason being that despite the
effort poured into Mono, it's still a very small platform
compared to alternatives. If you as a developer have to make a choice which
platform to developer for, you have to have a heck of a
lot of reasons to choose mono over the alternatives as the alternatives
(including windows + .net 2!!) outpace it in every way,
simply because java, .NET 2 have more features (still) and a far bigger
community and group of companies behind them. That says
nothing about the quality of Mono, but about the reason WHY one would use mono.
> I'd likewise say that if you have no need for other platforms
> and no plans to pursue them, then dotNet and its development
> tools are superior.
No they're not. MS is still catching up and it's still a long road to
go. As .NET still hasn't cross-appdomain object
awareness, having a true objectcache cross-serverfarm for example is still not
possible without serious effort, while this is
possible in Java, for example in JBoss. Silly example? Perhaps, but it's of big
importance in enterprise applications which run on
multiple servers. And this list is long, very long.
.NET has also a large set of nice things, though calling .NET
'superior' is IMHO pretty silly. One only has to look at the
long list of libraries available for java like Spring, Hibernate etc. to see
where .NET has somet catching up to do (it will get
there, I'm confident of that, it just isn't 'superior')
> I do not WANT to be a Mono advocate here. But, I will not let
> FUD get dumped around without response.
Me neither.
> This notion that its dotNet vs. Mono is silly to me. Mono
> ENHANCES dotNet.
in what way? If you look at .NET2, what would be the reason to switch
to linux + mono to abandone win2k3 + .net 2.? IMHO
none, or it should be an OS-related issue, but that's not something mono
enforces.
> Mono is a testament to MS's wise decision to create open
> standards for their development platform.
Most parts which are interesting in .NET aren't part of that standard.
> If there is ANY "versus", I only see dotNet/Mono vs. Java...
> But, again, read for yourselves. Just don't buy into the FUD here.
You too.
FB
===================================
This list is hosted by DevelopMentor® http://www.develop.com
View archives and manage your subscription(s) at http://discuss.develop.com
