[lug] dot-Net & Java (was: Opinions on E*Trade dumping Sun for Linux?)

[Bryan Field-Elliot]

Looks like I stirred up something here! 


On Fri, 2002-02-08 at 09:24, rm at fabula.de wrote:

    True, but the CLI specs are only a small part of the "plot". 
    And, given the fact that probably the majority of .Net programmers will
    be MS followers, where would forking away from Microsoft leave Mono? In
    the proprietary niche section. The main, if not only, reason for Java and
    .Net _is_ the unified code base you gain (even if it's only on paper. My
    scheme programs run on _far_ more platforms then my java code). 

---

A forking away from Microsoft would leave Mono just fine, according to
Miguel de Icaza -- he's already gotten what he wants out of .Net, which
is a language-independent way of building tightly bound components (in a
way which presumably is cleaner and easier than CORBA which is the land
where he and GNOME had been living).


On Fri, 2002-02-08 at 09:24, rm at fabula.de wrote:

    I wouldn't call 'we still compile under windows' well off ground ;-)
    My fear is that all this tied important mind resources - and that's some-
    thing the free software comunity doesn't have in abundance. If MS fails
    in a product that might be o.k. for them. Spending two years on a product
    that's doomed because of copyright/patent issues is a major showstopper.

---

Splitting hairs -- my point being, Mono is clearly past the
proof-of-concept point. I don't think Miguel de Icaza is some kind of
deity, but for crying out loud, he's been at the center of two versions
of GNOME, and deeply involved (not sure how much) in Evolution -- two
projects which are FAR larger and more complicated than anything I've
ever done. He has a depth of real-world experience which frankly I'd be
foolish not to pay some attention to. Therefore his arguments in favor
of the CLI are compelling to me, and is why I've stopped in front of the
window to peer inside, so to speak (though haven't gone shopping yet).



On Fri, 2002-02-08 at 09:24, rm at fabula.de wrote:

    What's _so_ exiting about it. I saw a comparison with Java and the technology
    didn't look that much more advanced. I didn't even understand most of the
    Java bytecode hype - Lisp had it, Pascal had it, Scheme has it. If you want
    to see network transparent code done right, have a look at Kali Scheme ;-)
    I run code on a Intel Linux, mk68 Linux and a Mac PPC, all in the same
    (virtual) address/naming space an can even send closures from one box to
    the other ...
    
---

Well, I'm not claiming that either Sun or Microsoft is terribly
innovative -- they just happened to have the resources to put some
useful tools out there. Whether they have some comp-sci geniuses on
board or whether this is repackaging of old concepts, I don't know.

The real point is -- does .Net/CLI one-up Java in any useful and
interesting way? And at first glance (and in theory, not necessarily in
practice), it appears they have.

On Fri, 2002-02-08 at 09:04, Riggs, Rob wrote:

    Actually, that's exactly Microsoft's motive. They want to distract
    the developers. They want your mind share (or, more importantly,
    they don't want Sun to have it), and they want to knock Sun off
    balance. They (Sun) don't have the resources to follow Microsoft's
    every lead, even if (in this instance) it promises a cross-platform
    product. However, Microsoft does have the resources to hedge its
    bets by continuing to develop .NET and Java. Trust me, Microsoft is
    not in it to make the developer's life easy. They are only in it for
    market share -- your needs are always secondary.
    
    It does not matter that the .NET platform is submitted to a
    standards body. Or that others can fork the development. Microsoft's
    implementation will always be the de facto standard, even when they
    add proprietary extensions. You get Microsoft to agree to be
    contractually bound by to the spec and you may have a chance.
    Microsoft may promise this, but try to get them to guarantee it. It
    won't happen. That's dirty trick #2 (after FUD) in their play book.
    Yes, they even use E&E against their own standards!
    
    
---

Well as I mentioned -- I'm interested in tools which help me do my job
better, and also, tools which increase the breadth and quality of
open-source tools and libraries out there which I can build and draw
from. I see a lot of duplication of effort across languages like Python
and Java, and I also sometimes yearn for things outside my box (e.g.
wishing I could use Zope, but from a Java/JSP/Servlet perspective).
Reading about .Net/CLI has got my wheels spinning about those things
maybe becoming possible.

As for Microsoft's goal of knocking Sun off balance -- certainly I won't
disagree, any more than Sun's original intent for Java was to knock
Microsoft of balance. I think the latter has historically successful,
but that window is now closing.

In both cases, however, it appears that the absence of platform lockin
casts doubt on how much benefit it's really giving the respective
companies in the first place. Not a penny has flowed to Sun as a result
of all my work in Java (and all my clients where my software has been
deployed). In every case I recommend Linux, and to use MS or Solaris
instead has always been discouraged by me. So I don't really shed any
tears over one company or the either losing mindshare -- as long as the
tools don't lock you in, I could care less how their bottom lines are
doing.

So the issue really is, does .Net lock you in to Microsoft (or is there
the credible threat of such), in a way which clearly didn't happen with
Java (and don't think that Sun didn't care to try)? If the answer is
yes, then to hell with it. I just haven't seen anything yet to really
support this.


Bryan