Miguel gave a long response to his Mono/.NET stuff that is at:
http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gnome-hackers/2002-February/msg00031.html
After reading that I stumbled on this "The Hacks of our lives" humorous
post (e.g. "The Days of our lives") that I found to be hilarious
(if a bit crude):
On Sat, 2 Feb 2002, Paul Iadonisi wrote:
> His view was that the only real viable competition the free software world
> has against .NET was to fully and wholeheartedly embrace J2EE.
Here I will echo Michael Costolo: Who says we need to compete against
.NET? Computers are not a zero-sum game.
On Sat, 2 Feb 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> All of this being said (.net, mono, etc.) , I've always been amazed that
> Linux heads aren't rabid supporters of Sun, Java and EJB. It may not be
> free, but it is open and above board.
I don't know about others, but *this* Linux head doesn't trus
On Sat, Feb 02, 2002 at 01:22:23PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> All of this being said (.net, mono, etc.) , I've always been amazed
> that Linux heads aren't rabid supporters of Sun, Java and EJB. It may
> not be free, but it is open and above board.
Ganesh Prasad actually wrote a well
All of this being said (.net, mono, etc.) , I've always been amazed
that Linux heads aren't rabid supporters of Sun, Java and EJB. It may
not be free, but it is open and above board.
ccb
*
To unsubscribe from this list, send mail
On Sat, 2 Feb 2002, Michael Costolo wrote:
> I've read so many articles on what linux needs in order to "dethrone"
> Microsoft. They all basically say the same thing and it seems that more
> and more developers are listening, but I don't know why.
You have to understand something: In the past
On Saturday 02 February 2002 01:45 pm, Greg Kettmann wrote:
A second point, against Mono and Wine. It's very difficult to win when
you're always chasing or lagging. That is if you are adhering exactly to
Microsoft then they control things. New somethings, like XP, will come out
which will
On Sat, 2 Feb 2002, Greg Kettmann wrote:
> That said, I'm hoping Mono will set it's own "open" standards, as
> mentioned in this post, and deny M$ the "embrace and extend" capability.
While Miguel does mention that as a possibility, I suspect Microsoft will
ensure their own implementation of .N
This has been an interesting thread. Quite frankly I've never understood just
what the heck .NET is but I assumed it was because I'm not a programmer. Thanks
for this helpful thread.
As a former OS/2 bigot/evangelist (no comments please :-) ) I'm very familiar
with competing with M$. Despite n
> Correct me if I'm wrong, as I'm no programmer, but I was under the
> impression that the whole .NET thing was not Microsoft's invention anyway,
> but simply a re-implementation of Sun's Java/Beans model that Microsoft
> undertook when they realized what a stupid waste of time COM was...
Um, .
On Fri, 1 Feb 2002, Rich C wrote:
> Correct me if I'm wrong, as I'm no programmer, but I was under the
> impression that the whole .NET thing was not Microsoft's invention anyway,
> but simply a re-implementation of Sun's Java/Beans model that Microsoft
> undertook when they realized what a stupid
On 1 Feb 2002, CmdrRoot wrote:
> In response to the idea about .NET GNOME I just saw this
> (http://slashdot.org/articles/02/02/01/1844210.shtml) on slashdot and
> followed up to this (http://theregister.co.uk/content/4/23919.html)
> article at the register. It somewhat details the purpose of Mono
On Fri, 1 Feb 2002, Jack Hodgson wrote:
> How is
>
> $ grep -ir microsoft * | wc -l
>
> different from
>
> $ grep -irc microsoft *
Ah. Well, the former spawns a second process, and is thus much less
efficient than your version. Other than that, I think they are about the
same. ;-)
As f
On Fri, 2002-02-01 at 19:18, Jack Hodgson wrote:
> Ben Scott wrote:
> How is
>
> $ grep -ir microsoft * | wc -l
>
> different from
>
> $ grep -irc microsoft *
>
> Enquiring minds want to know.
Good catch. It isn't. With Linux/Unix, frequently (always?) there's
more than one way to skin a ca
Hey: no need to "concede." I honestly think Miguel *does* bear watching
-- he strikes me as a bit of a loose cannon. But the real point I was
trying to make (and one that Ben first mentioned, and you further point
out) is that one should listen to what Miguel has to say for himself --
and The Re
Ben Scott wrote:
>$ cd /usr/src/linux
>$ grep -ir microsoft * | wc -l
>166
You will all recall that I'm a relative new linux/unix user. And I've
been having "fun with grep". My question is:
How is
$ grep -ir microsoft * | wc -l
different from
$ grep -irc microsoft *
Enquiring minds want to
> A large part of the thread was dealing with this exact same story.
Then I apologise for resending an already spoken message, I must be missing mail
because after examination of my incoming messages alot of stuff doesn't make sense.
>Read what Miguel *SAID* (the Register probably won't stoop t
Correct me if I'm wrong, as I'm no programmer, but I was under the
impression that the whole .NET thing was not Microsoft's invention anyway,
but simply a re-implementation of Sun's Java/Beans model that Microsoft
undertook when they realized what a stupid waste of time COM was...
Rich Cloutier
P
On Fri, 2002-02-01 at 17:08, CmdrRoot wrote:
> In response to the idea about .NET GNOME I just saw this
> (http://slashdot.org/articles/02/02/01/1844210.shtml) on slashdot and
> followed up to this (http://theregister.co.uk/content/4/23919.html)
> article at the register. It somewhat details the p
In response to the idea about .NET GNOME I just saw this
(http://slashdot.org/articles/02/02/01/1844210.shtml) on slashdot and
followed up to this (http://theregister.co.uk/content/4/23919.html)
article at the register. It somewhat details the purpose of Mono and
what I shall now refer to as Migue
> > Here's the link: http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/23919.html
>
> You need to be more careful of how you read. At no point does Miguel say
> that. Those are The Register's words.
I have to agree 100% with Ben, here: The Register, bless their little
Linux-loving souls, are a bit on t
On Fri, 1 Feb 2002, Paul Iadonisi wrote:
>> He may be a little too impressed with them, but I'm strongly getting the
>> impression that you yourself are having a knee-jerk reaction to the M-word.
>
> I'll be the first to admit that I do have a knee-jerk reaction to anything
> Microsoft. And, fra
On Fri, Feb 01, 2002 at 03:15:21PM -0500, Benjamin Scott wrote:
> On Fri, 1 Feb 2002, Paul Iadonisi wrote:
[snip]
> He may be a little too impressed with them, but I'm strongly getting the
> impression that you yourself are having a knee-jerk reaction to the M-word.
I'll be the first to adm
On Fri, 1 Feb 2002, Paul Iadonisi wrote:
>> Last I knew (and I'm no .NET expert here) was they were working on
>> implementing the C# language and virtual machine.
>
> I'm no expert either, but I'm having trouble *finding* some good laymen
> information on it.
C# does have a formal language de
On Fri, 1 Feb 2002, Paul Iadonisi wrote:
> Hey, does anybody know if anybody has any plans to fork Gnome to avoid the
> death march towards M$ (the whole Mono / .NET thingie)? Or if not fork
> it, to at least push the development away from the .NET platform? I have
> been a diehard Gnome user fo
On Fri, Feb 01, 2002 at 02:52:36PM -0500, Rich Payne wrote:
> On Fri, 1 Feb 2002, Paul Iadonisi wrote:
[snip]
> U...I think you might want to take a closer look at what he's doing
> and what's going on. The code is all written from scratch and my
> understanding is that while making the two
On Fri, 1 Feb 2002, Paul Iadonisi wrote:
> Hey, does anybody know if anybody has any plans to fork Gnome to avoid
> the death march towards M$ (the whole Mono / .NET thingie)? Or if not fork
> it, to at least push the development away from the .NET platform? I have been
> a diehard Gnome user
Hey, does anybody know if anybody has any plans to fork Gnome to avoid
the death march towards M$ (the whole Mono / .NET thingie)? Or if not fork
it, to at least push the development away from the .NET platform? I have been
a diehard Gnome user for some time, but if I am going to be tied someh
28 matches
Mail list logo
