Results 1 to 10 of 56

Thread: Mono Project Continues Making Progress

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    14,306

    Default Mono Project Continues Making Progress

    Phoronix: Mono Project Continues Making Progress

    The controversial Mono project for implementing various Microsoft frameworks as open-source on Linux and other operating systems, continues to gain new features and support. Miguel de Icaza has delivered an update on some of the recent Mono work...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTQ0MTA

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    184

    Default


  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Pennsylvania, United States
    Posts
    1,859

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alexThunder View Post
    *Hands a cookie for appropriate meme usage*

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    293

    Default

    (from the POV of someone who developed with .NET for half a decade)
    Not surprised considering they're being funded by microsoft to make a bad java clone for non-windows platforms just so microsoft can claim it's "multiplatform"
    I can safely say mono is a piece of garbage, and "write once run anywhere" will NEVER apply, you will have so many issues trying to port a .NET app to mono(entire features flat out not implemented, buggy frameworks, many libraries that are .NET only, etc)

    Miguel has no clod in the linux community anymore after all the stunts he's done, nobody really cares about mono at all -- actually, I take that back, MANY linux users flat out refuse to use mono.
    It's becoming even less relevant as microsoft is (slowly) killing off .NET because they realize the mistake it was instead of just rewriting their *awful* native API.

    I'm not sure who mono appeals to, but if you decide you want to use C#/mono maybe reconsider and give D a look instead... or just use regular Java instead of Microsoft's offbrand Java.
    Last edited by peppercats; 08-20-2013 at 09:44 PM.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    184

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by peppercats View Post
    (from the POV of someone who developed with .NET for half a decade)
    Not surprised considering they're being funded by microsoft to make a bad java clone for non-windows platforms just so microsoft can claim it's "multiplatform"
    I can safely say mono is a piece of garbage, and "write once run anywhere" will NEVER apply, you will have so many issues trying to port a .NET app to mono(entire features flat out not implemented, buggy frameworks, many libraries that are .NET only, etc).
    Just out of curiosity, did you ever try out EmguCV? Oh boy, I had such a fun with it on Linux/Mono.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Kingston, Jamaica
    Posts
    291

    Default

    It is incredible how successful Mono was able to become. They have produced an incredible framework for application development. There is an increase it its adoption by companies of various sizes. Mono has a bright future and may even become the de facto implementation of .NET as Microsoft seems to pay more attention to its Windows RT framework these days (See little innovation/improvements in the last release).

    It has provided a way out for users of frameworks that are all but abandoned by Microsoft (XNA).
    It is available and seeing increased adoption on all major platforms (despite the steep cost on some platforms). The tools (both existing and in development) are quite useful.

    The playscript implementation will be a big deal in the future.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Kingston, Jamaica
    Posts
    291

    Exclamation

    Quote Originally Posted by peppercats View Post
    (from the POV of someone who developed with .NET for half a decade)
    Not surprised considering they're being funded by microsoft to make a bad java clone for non-windows platforms just so microsoft can claim it's "multiplatform"
    I can safely say mono is a piece of garbage, and "write once run anywhere" will NEVER apply, you will have so many issues trying to port a .NET app to mono(entire features flat out not implemented, buggy frameworks, many libraries that are .NET only, etc)
    If you actually looked into Mono you would see that what they promote and advertise is code sharing among platforms rather than "write once run everywhere".


    Miguel has no clod in the linux community anymore after all the stunts he's done, nobody really cares about mono at all -- actually, I take that back, MANY linux users flat out refuse to use mono.
    Many people car about Mono. Mono is successful in spite of a certain faction of Linux users that refuse to use it. That is all political rather than practical. They can use the failure that is DotGNU that was produced by the FSF is that is their cup of tea.

    It's becoming even less relevant as microsoft is (slowly) killing off .NET because they realize the mistake it was instead of just rewriting their *awful* native API.
    It is becoming even more relevant now that Microsoft is placing less emphasis on .NET. There are many .NET programmers (The .NET developer community is huge) out there that would eventually adopt Mono if Microsoft were to drop the ball with .NET.

    I'm not sure who mono appeals to, but if you decide you want to use C#/mono maybe reconsider and give D a look instead... or just use regular Java instead of Microsoft's offbrand Java.
    D is interesting but it is lacking (libraries, frameworks, documentation) right now. I hope it will become widely adopted one day but history doesn't favour that happening.

    Java: pfft!!!



    Of course, after dismissing what I just wrote on non-technical grounds, you will try to make a case against Mono despite empirical evidence against your OPINIONS.

    Regards!

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    220

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jayrulez View Post
    If you actually looked into Mono you would see that what they promote and advertise is code sharing among platforms rather than "write once run everywhere".



    Many people car about Mono. Mono is successful in spite of a certain faction of Linux users that refuse to use it. That is all political rather than practical. They can use the failure that is DotGNU that was produced by the FSF is that is their cup of tea.


    It is becoming even more relevant now that Microsoft is placing less emphasis on .NET. There are many .NET programmers (The .NET developer community is huge) out there that would eventually adopt Mono if Microsoft were to drop the ball with .NET.



    D is interesting but it is lacking (libraries, frameworks, documentation) right now. I hope it will become widely adopted one day but history doesn't favour that happening.

    Java: pfft!!!



    Of course, after dismissing what I just wrote on non-technical grounds, you will try to make a case against Mono despite empirical evidence against your OPINIONS.

    Regards!
    I'm a Linux nut and have been since 1996. I have a number of engineering degrees and am a CTO of a software company. I've hacked in all sorts of languages to reverse engineering car ECUs. I have some street cred! The company I work for is a C#/ASP.net shop with a ton of JS for mobile applications. I've deployed our stuff to Mono in the past and it worked nicely (as a test). I've spent the last year removing our ties to MS SQL Server (WIP), and hope to eventually deploy to Mono/Apache/PostgreSQL. I really hope Mono makes it!

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,024

    Default

    Not surprised considering they're being funded by microsoft to make a bad java clone for non-windows platforms just so microsoft can claim it's "multiplatform"
    Anyone claiming that C# is a "bad" Java clone has probably not actually been using any modern incarnation of it. Clone? Sure, no argument. "Bad" clone? wat. Java has if anything been playing catch-up with C#, and rather poorly at that.

    If you're comparing C#1.2 and .NET1.1, sure, they're pretty cruddy, but those were obsolete like 8 years ago. I can have intelligible conversations with human beings younger than C#2.0.

    I can safely say mono is a piece of garbage, and "write once run anywhere" will NEVER apply, you will have so many issues trying to port a .NET app to mono(entire features flat out not implemented, buggy frameworks, many libraries that are .NET only, etc)
    Miguel and co stated from day one that Mono's purpose was not really to allow porting of Windows apps but to allow the writing of new apps with all the bells and whistles and convenience of C#/.NET. One might as well bitch about how some asshole ported C from UNIX to Windows and why anyone would even dream of using such an unportable abonination to a new platform which couldn't even run all the existing UNIX apps. If you can port some Windows apps, great, but that's a secondary benefit. The vast majority of Mono-using applications are not meant to run on a Windows desktop at all, most of them being mobile applications.

    It's becoming even less relevant as microsoft is (slowly) killing off .NET because they realize the mistake it was instead of just rewriting their *awful* native API.
    Uh, no. That is complete nonsense you either just made up or regurgitated from someone else who made it up.

    WinRT does not obsolete .NET. It sits below .NET because it's a low-level systems library, the same way that glibc sits below Qt5.

    I'm not sure who mono appeals to, but if you decide you want to use C#/mono maybe reconsider and give D a look instead... or just use regular Java instead of Microsoft's offbrand Java.
    D has almost no ecosystem. This is what language hipsters always seem to forget. The developer world at all gives _zero craps_ about the syntactical niceties of D, Rust, Go, whatever. They care about a huge standard library. They care about deployment options being common on third-party hosting platform. They care about IntelliSense and auto-documentation and static anaysis tools in IDEs. They care about oodles and oodles of online articles, documentation, libraries (free and paid), and tools. They care about interoperability between components written by third-parties. They care about being able to start a project and having a huge base of people to hire from as they grow their team. They care about all the things that takes years and years to build up (as it did with C#, though certainly less years than usual thanks to Microsoft massive marketing arm). This is why C and C++ of all things are still the de facto standard languages for native code development despite how antiquated and at times outright horrific they can be. Let's not forget that D is almost 3 years older than C# to boot, and _still_ has gained almost no traction in the myriad of industries that C# is now a mainstay of (or really any industry at all).

    Let's break it down in a way that matters to Real People:
    Jobs you can get as a C# programmer: 8919 from just one source
    Jobs you can get as a D, Go, or Rust programmer: 0? Not even listed as options on Dice, LinkedIn, or any other site I can think to try

    Telling a programmer to pick D over C# is roughly equivalent to telling them to go die of starvation in a cave. Not very nice.

    That doesn't mean that C# is empirically better than D, no, but it is indicative.

    And honestly, D really isn't that nice if you try using it for anything larger than a small hobby or research project. A lot of the decisions going into D's design are dubious at best. Not only is it severely lacking in tools, it always will be due to its tools-hostile design. It's in many worse even worse than C/C++ and their macros when it comes to writing proper tools. Whoever came up with the string mixins of D needs to be shot in the face with a poison dart. "static if" is almost as bad. Language designers who know what they're doing write languages closer to C# which has an almost religious attention to tooling support. Or take the Clang guys at Google, who make sure they bring up tooling support issues with new proposals at the ISO C++ meetings to try to avoid any further brain-damage from the camp who doesn't get that the cutting edge is longer about the manipulation of semantically-inert text buffers. There's ease of dumping out a toy quickly and then there's ease of maintaining a real application.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    3,025

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by elanthis View Post
    Anyone claiming that C# is a "bad" Java clone has probably not actually been using any modern incarnation of it. Clone? Sure, no argument. "Bad" clone? wat. Java has if anything been playing catch-up with C#, and rather poorly at that.

    If you're comparing C#1.2 and .NET1.1, sure, they're pretty cruddy, but those were obsolete like 8 years ago. I can have intelligible conversations with human beings younger than C#2.0.
    LOL, i remember back in the day looking at J# - i think that was in .net1, although it wouldn't surprise me if there was a .net 2 version as well. It really was a clone of Java, to a degree that I'm almost surprised they weren't sued over it. No one bothered to use it over c#, though.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •