Re: [MLUG] mono

[Vern Green <EMAIL:PROTECTED>]

Perhaps it is for rival apps, it is clearly the framework, but the interesting thing is that it does allow .net applications to be run on Linux. Maybe that is a by-product, but no matter, it can still be useful if it works.

 

If you are correct and a natively programmed .NET application will not run on Linux, then the only real value I see here is for those application developers that know .NET to be able to write Linux apps with something they better understand.

 

Either way, I do not see a lot of use for this, like I said, most people who are developing in .NET are not likely to make a big jump to Linux.

 

On 11/8/05, Shawn Parker <EMAIL:PROTECTED> wrote:

that is true, vern.

but, i fail to see how a .net application will work in mono simply
because the frameworks are similar?

we use a state developed .net application and i am considering testing
it in a linux/mono environment. but, since it is built solely for
windows (relies on .net and other microsoft components) i doubt it
will transition successfully.

it doesn't seem like mono is there for migration, but instead there to
develop rival apps?

On 11/8/05, Shawn Parker <EMAIL:PROTECTED > wrote:
> mono allows developers to write cross-platform .net apps. i'm unsure
> of all the different languages involved in the mono framework.
>
> it is supposed to support windows.forms and the .net sdk at some point.
>
> my limited understanding is mono is simply a *nix clone of the .net
> framework. there is iteropperability between the two. but in my
> opinion it is more likely a competitor to .net.
>
> why else build a .net like framework that uses the .net sdk and can be
> developed in both windows or *.nix environments?
>
> it looks interesting. and, i'm sure it has a valid use for developing
> cross-platform open-source applications. but, it just seems to me, we
> have too many frameworks floating around.
>
> microsoft has .net. linux has mono. both systems can use ajax, ruby on
> rails, the lamp stack, mozilla, etc.
>
> since both lamp and mozilla, and their different variations, are
> openly available for windows and *nix systems already it would seem a
> more likely candidate for robust open-source, cross-platform
> development.
>
> but, everyone needs their own framework these days. novell has mono.
> mozilla has its own. microsoft has .net. and everyone else falls back
> on general lamp.
>
> of course, like i said. i have limited knowledge of .net and mono.
> this is all opinion and speculation.
>
>
>
> On 11/8/05, Mike Miller <EMAIL:PROTECTED > wrote:
> > On Tue, 8 Nov 2005, Shawn Parker wrote:
> >
> > > why not invest more heavily in the lamp (linux, apache, postgre, mysql,
> > > php, perl, python, ruby, etc) stack instead of coming up with a middle
> > > ground for .net?
> >
> > I don't know anything about it.  I'm hoping someone will fill me in.  I'm
> > getting the impression that mono is a way to allow many programs, like
> > those you just listed, to work together.  Is that not it?
> >
> > Mike
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > members mailing list
> > EMAIL:PROTECTED
> > http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/members
> >
>
>
> --
>
> - slp
>


--

- slp

_______________________________________________
members mailing list
EMAIL:PROTECTED
http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/members

-- 
Thanks
F Vernon Green 
_______________________________________________
members mailing list
EMAIL:PROTECTED
http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/members