[Mono-list] Is Mono ready to compete with MS .NET
inrealbusiness?
Pablo Chacin
Pablo.Chacin@novell.com
Sat, 02 Oct 2004 07:56:30 -0600
This is a MIME message. If you are reading this text, you may want to
consider changing to a mail reader or gateway that understands how to
properly handle MIME multipart messages.
--=__Part5A7A489E.0__=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I'm not sure that such a developing platform should be priority for
Mono. Is there other open source initiatives like Sharp Develop or some
related to Eclipse, that could better address this issues. The main
focus for Mono must be, in my opinion, complete the implementation of
the .Net framework. Until we have Windows.Forms, no matter how good the
development tools could be, it will be of a very limited interest for
developers. I stoped using it as I found that writing console
applications with mono was of very limited value for me and my
customers.
Also, take into consideration that the main business issue around Mono
in not about taking the developers out of windows, but the users, in
special when we talk about very large companies.
Regards
Pablo
-----Original Message-----
Message: 7
Subject: RE: [Mono-list] Is Mono ready to compete with MS .NET
inrealbusiness?
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 14:11:26 -0400
From: "Max Metral" < max@artsalliancelabs.com >
To: "mono-list mailing list" < mono-list@lists.ximian.com >
To assert that VIM is good enough is exactly why "Mono" (the overall
concept) is not competitive as a *business* development platform yet.
Is it
suitable for some people and tasks? Definitely. It's also suitable for
people who want to contribute their time to improving it, who don't
want to
pay for or don't need a more full featured development environment, or
who
enjoy tweaking for educational purposes. But for business development,
sort
of by definition, it's not there.
I've been programming for 15 years, on both Unix'en and MSFT platforms
at
various times, and I know there are pluses and minuses to both; I'm not
a
MSFT blind follower. But there is no minus to having a usable debugger,
or
auto statement completion, or an integrated help system. They speed up
development time, full stop. That doesn't mean I need a class browser
or
some form building widget, although again many businesses will view
that as
part of being "competitive." As importantly, there IS an inherent
disadvantage to having to spend a huge amount of time recreating or
improving all these things. Someone has to do it, no question, and
those
people are rightfully revered and appreciated in open source efforts.
But
for most business applications, the owner of the business is not going
to
see value in the person who was supposed to be writing the
WidgetManager app
working on a new debugger for a programming language. Their time is
more
expensive than Windows + VS.Net + a new car.
So again, I love Mono, and I look for places where I can be helpful by
lending stuff I know that maybe other people might have a harder time
finding out, or where I'm particularly suited or interested in a
particular
feature. But in the end, as a guy in a small startup company, I can't
spend
the huge amount of time (and therefore money) required to build a
debugger
or get Mono fully working on OS X, even though I wish I could, and so
I
wait.
And unless the original poster is in a position to do this, I would
still
submit that the answer to his question, right now, is "no, Mono is not
competitive with MSFT in real business yet."
Heck, part of the brilliance of Mono is that it doesn't HAVE to be
competitive in all aspects yet. It embraces and extends MSFT.Net. You
want
to use VS? Sure, have a ball with all the widgets and doo-hingies.
Then
run it on MacOSX or Linux using the same binary. Finally, somebody
realized
the way to take on MSFT is to beat them at their own game.
--=__Part5A7A489E.0__=
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1"=
>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2900.2180" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY style=3D"MARGIN: 4px 4px 1px; FONT: 10pt Tahoma">
<DIV>I'm not sure that such a developing platform should be priority =
for Mono. Is there other open source initiatives like Sharp Develop or =
some related to Eclipse, that could better address this issues. The main =
focus for Mono must be, in my opinion, complete the implementation of =
the .Net framework. Until we have Windows.Forms, no matter how good the =
development tools could be, it will be of a very limited interest for =
developers. I stoped using it as I found that writing console =
applications with mono was of very limited value for me and my customers.</=
DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Also, take into consideration that the main business issue around =
Mono in not about taking the developers out of windows, but the users, in =
special when we talk about very large companies.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Regards</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Pablo</DIV>
<DIV><BR>-----Original Message-----<BR>Message: 7<BR>Subject: RE: =
[Mono-list] Is Mono ready to compete with MS .NET inrealbusiness?<BR>Date: =
Thu, 30 Sep 2004 14:11:26 -0400<BR>From: "Max Metral" <<U> <A href=3D"ma=
ilto:max@artsalliancelabs.com">max@artsalliancelabs.com</A></U> ><BR>To:=
"mono-list mailing list" <<U> <A href=3D"mailto:mono-list@lists.ximian.=
com">mono-list@lists.ximian.com</A></U> ><BR><BR>To assert that VIM is =
good enough is exactly why "Mono" (the overall<BR>concept) is not =
competitive as a *business* development platform yet. Is it<BR>suitable =
for some people and tasks? Definitely. It's also suitable for<BR>people =
who want to contribute their time to improving it, who don't want =
to<BR>pay for or don't need a more full featured development environment, =
or who<BR>enjoy tweaking for educational purposes. But for business =
development, sort<BR>of by definition, it's not there.<BR><BR>I've been =
programming for 15 years, on both Unix'en and MSFT platforms at<BR>various =
times, and I know there are pluses and minuses to both; I'm not a<BR>MSFT =
blind follower. But there is no minus to having a usable debugger, =
or<BR>auto statement completion, or an integrated help system. They speed =
up<BR>development time, full stop. That doesn't mean I need a class =
browser or<BR>some form building widget, although again many businesses =
will view that as<BR>part of being "competitive." As importantly, there IS =
an inherent<BR>disadvantage to having to spend a huge amount of time =
recreating or<BR>improving all these things. Someone has to do it, no =
question, and those<BR>people are rightfully revered and appreciated in =
open source efforts. But<BR>for most business applications, the owner of =
the business is not going to<BR>see value in the person who was supposed =
to be writing the WidgetManager app<BR>working on a new debugger for a =
programming language. Their time is more<BR>expensive than Windows + =
VS.Net + a new car.<BR><BR>So again, I love Mono, and I look for places =
where I can be helpful by<BR>lending stuff I know that maybe other people =
might have a harder time<BR>finding out, or where I'm particularly suited =
or interested in a particular<BR>feature. But in the end, as a guy in a =
small startup company, I can't spend<BR>the huge amount of time (and =
therefore money) required to build a debugger<BR>or get Mono fully working =
on OS X, even though I wish I could, and so I<BR>wait.<BR><BR>And unless =
the original poster is in a position to do this, I would still<BR>submit =
that the answer to his question, right now, is "no, Mono is not<BR>competit=
ive with MSFT in real business yet."<BR><BR>Heck, part of the brilliance =
of Mono is that it doesn't HAVE to be<BR>competitive in all aspects yet. =
It embraces and extends MSFT.Net. You want<BR>to use VS? Sure, have a ball =
with all the widgets and doo-hingies. Then<BR>run it on MacOSX or Linux =
using the same binary. Finally, somebody realized<BR>the way to take on =
MSFT is to beat them at their own game.</DIV></BODY></HTML>
--=__Part5A7A489E.0__=--