Re: [MLUG] Software development: was mono

[Shawn Parker <EMAIL:PROTECTED>]

see, though, the thing with cygwin is the same "issue" i have with
mono. why? why would i run windows and then install a psuedo linux
environment onto windows...basically grafting a os ontop of an os just
to run some random applications.

i guess i'm just a purist. run windows or run linux. no reason to run
both together. if you need windows for something, dual boot, but i
just don't understand the reasoning of running linux on windows or
windows on linux. note: i'm not talking about vnc or remote access to
other systems.

it's like damn small linux. cool idea, but its practicality completely
escapes me. i get running it on usb sticks as a bootable device, or a
live cd, but the little windows bat file that launches the os inside a
window on windows...come on?

anyway...that is off topic of this thread.

i see the advantage of portability for mono. it just seems to me that
.net developers are unlikely to switch to writing apps in mono for
linux/windows when they can just write .net for windows.

i think mono is great for writing cross-platform apps for linux
developers. a good example is since i've never developed a .net app, i
might really like mono...and consequently start using it for
production. but, i find that easier because i'm not a .net developer
already.

which is why i see it as a competitor more than a partner framework.
what it does definitely do, is give clients more options. hire an
expensive .net developer and possibly get locked into hardware
requirements, closed source, etc...or hire a linux geek who uses
mono...get the exact same app, relatively speaking, and probably get
all the source code and an app that can run on pretty much any system.

that is what i like about the project.

On 11/8/05, Mike Miller <EMAIL:PROTECTED> wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Nov 2005, Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote:
>
> > I have never used .NET and don't really know what it is about.
> >
> > But I have done software development in C.  I have been rather surprized
> > to find the Linux/Unix development process much easier than the
> > Microsoft development process.
> >
> > The Microsoft approach is a rather expensive product called Visual
> > Studio. Probably most of my problems are unfamiliarity with the product,
> > but I have yet to even figure out how to even start writing a program.
> >
> > The Linux/Unix approach is to use csh or bash along with an editor, my
> > favorite is nedit, and a hand built Makefile to put it all together.  I
> > just find this so much easier.  But again it is probably familiarity.
>
>
> It's probably not quite what you would most like to do, but instead of
> developing for Windows, you can develop for Cygwin.  Windows users can
> then download and install Cygwin (very easy) and run your program.  For
> you, the work is just about the same as developing for Linux or FreeBSD.
> If you can get something to run under Linux, I'll bet you can get it to
> run under Cygwin.  Read more here:
>
> http://www.cygwin.com/
>
> I liked it so much that I installed *everything*.  That takes up some disk
> space (maybe 2 GB for the works) but these days disk space is pretty
> cheap.
>
> Mike
>
> _______________________________________________
> members mailing list
> EMAIL:PROTECTED
> http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/members
>


--

- slp

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