Re: cross-platform programs
- From: "Kevin Spencer" <kevin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 17:37:06 -0400
> That's not true. There are *loads* of languages targetting the JVM.
> Here's a list, which is probably not exhaustive:
I stand corrected. That's what I get for not paying attention to Java for
several years.
> Sun support JREs on multiple
> platforms, and have licensed the technology to IBM and others for other
> JREs to exist.
> The same is *not* to of MS, as far as I can tell. Yes, there's the Mono
> project, but there's been no guarantee (as far as I've seen) that MS
> won't sue companies who distribute Mono as part of their solution,
> based on intellectual property infringements.
I doubt that the Mono project is working without Microsoft's knowledge and
consent. However, it would appear that Microsoft doesn't want anyone
indiscriminately to write a .Netimplementation for any OS. I doubt that Sun
does either. It wouldn't be logical to do so.
--
Kevin Spencer
Microsoft MVP
..Net Developer
Ambiguity has a certain quality to it.
"Jon Skeet [C# MVP]" <skeet@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:MPG.1db9ee908644e75d98c8f2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Kevin Spencer <kevin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Is Java platform independent? .Net is built along the same lines. It is
>> compiled into byte code that is compiled at run-time to native machine
>> code
>> by a virtual machine on the host. Now, both of these technologies require
>> something on the host, and that is the virtual machine to do the run-time
>> compilation.
>
> There's a big difference, however: Sun support JREs on multiple
> platforms, and have licensed the technology to IBM and others for other
> JREs to exist.
>
> The same is *not* to of MS, as far as I can tell. Yes, there's the Mono
> project, but there's been no guarantee (as far as I've seen) that MS
> won't sue companies who distribute Mono as part of their solution,
> based on intellectual property infringements.
>
> In addition, there are plenty of bits of .NET which aren't in the
> specification for the base libraries. While Mono has ported many of
> these bits, there are certainly bits missing. With Java, you're much
> more likely to get things working on other platforms, IMO. Furthermore,
> new features are likely to arrive on at least Windows, Linux and
> Solaris at the same time.
>
> All of this makes .NET an unappealing option for companies wishing to
> release software on multiple platforms, unfortunately. MS is basically
> in a difficult situation - do they want to beat Java, or do they want
> to beat Linux? Supporting CLI platforms on Linux helps to beat Java,
> but damages their efforts against Linux.
>
>> It's a common misunderstanding among people just getting acquainted with
>> the
>> .Net platform to mix up platform-independence with language-neutrality.
>> These are 2 separate concepts. Both .Net and Java are
>> platform-independent.
>> However, you can only write Java apps in one language - Java.
>
> That's not true. There are *loads* of languages targetting the JVM.
> Here's a list, which is probably not exhaustive:
>
> http://www.robert-tolksdorf.de/vmlanguages.html
>
> --
> Jon Skeet - <skeet@xxxxxxxxx>
> http://www.pobox.com/~skeet Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/jon.skeet
> If replying to the group, please do not mail me too
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: cross-platform programs
- From: Jon Skeet [C# MVP]
- Re: cross-platform programs
- References:
- cross-platform programs
- From: John Salerno
- Re: cross-platform programs
- From: Kevin Spencer
- cross-platform programs
- Prev by Date: PInvoke problem with int by reference
- Next by Date: Re: cross-platform programs
- Previous by thread: Re: cross-platform programs
- Next by thread: Re: cross-platform programs
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
