[ale] Seth Nickell - Design Fu : mono

[Greg]

Actually, C# was, I firmly believe, invented to lure developers back into
the MS fold and to "webify" MS to make it more marketable.  When ASP came
out, it lost ground after a while to a more "higher level" or "real"
language for web development, i.e. Java.  Back a while, the most sought
after or popular developers were Cobol (financial folks need 'em), VB
programmers, and the rest of them.  As more and more web folks and later VB
programmers went to Java, MS sought to get them back.  The first attempt was
J++  - Java that was optimized for MS - and thus the Sun/MS lawsuit.  MS did
2 other Java wanna-be technologies later, one lasting only a few months even
before being "hushed up and never spoken again", to lure folks to MS away
from Java with a "Java-like" technology.  C# is the culmination of that
effort to be more "Java-like" and also to make web development more like a
stateful programming language.  Bill & co. have even gone to various
standards bodies to see about making C# a web standard .... errrrr ah hem
..., make web standards like C# - but without letting anyone else play in
the C# sandbox.  MS talked when C# came out of porting it to other
architectures and OS's, but that was several years ago and nothing has been
done in actuality (thus a possible reason for byte-code).  The same stuff
can be done in VB.NET.  See - two languages that do the same thing.  C# for
non-MS folks and VB.NET for MS folks.  Everyone happy now ??? :-)

Considering that Longhorn will change it, learning C# will only last until
MS can suck the bone marrow out of the developers and then something else
will come along.  A different language syntax, different classes, different
certifications, new and shiny IT bling-bling for the phb's to talk about,
blah blah blah.  MS once took care of it's developers and now are seen as
just another revenue stream once MS got their hooks into everything &
everyone (a common MS tactic).

Compare this to stuff that has evolved, but remained essentially the same
for many years (c, Perl, Unix, etc).

C# - just a Java wanna-be that is rooted in MS marketing nazi tactics to
make money and nothing else.

Mono - a waste of time and a streak of insanity in it's developers heads.  I
mean, why waste time with inferior technologies and MS's web stuff in
particular.


... and no, I am not bitter ...


Greg



> -----Original Message-----
> From: ale-bounces at ale.org [mailto:ale-bounces at ale.org]On Behalf Of
> Christopher Fowler
> Sent: Saturday, May 22, 2004 12:19 PM
> To: Atlanta Linux Enthusiasts
> Subject: Re: [ale] Seth Nickell - Design Fu : mono
>
>
> On Sat, 2004-05-22 at 12:04, Geoffrey wrote:
> > Christopher Fowler wrote:
> > > My only thing about C# is that it is too much like Java. Java can be
> > > considered IMHO as prior art.
> >
> > So where is Sun on this?  You'd think they'd jump on that one, since
> > Java is not open source.
> >
>
> I've done Java and tried C# and honestly I can not tell much of a
> difference.  One nice thing about C# is that you can interface with all
> the Windows API's. I'm sure such a facility could easily be created in
> Java as well.  C# does not aim to be portable so I do not understand the
> need for byte-code class files.  Compile the source straight to metal
> and forget about the other stuff.  The only benefit of the byte-code
> would be for the transmission and dealing with objects as data.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ale mailing list
> Ale at ale.org
> http://www.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
>