Paolo Falcone wrote: > Michael P. Soulier wrote: > > > Sun, Sun, Sun... you'd think they'd wisen up by now. Especially > with > > C# and .NET looming on the horizon. > > As far as I believe, it would be C# and .NET that would have a tough > time dealing with Sun's Java. Sun's ONE has started way too long ago, > and their "networked world" has started ever since they released > Java and ported their JVM to a slew of different architectures. A lot > of programmers already go for Java. It's portability won over > many (I'm really subjective on this, so please forgive me for this > plug. btw, I don't use java, but it's well known to be very popular > especially to those who design networked apps/solutions) > > C# and .NET would not be portable to non-M$-certified architecture > or systems (at least that's what they implied when I asked them > during the local microsoft convention where they released XP RC1.) >
At the recent SEAQ Conference on the Gold Coast here in Queensland I had the opportunity to talk to Prof John Gough (Inventer of Modula 2) , who designed the Object Pascal port for dotNET, and was a core consultant on Project 7 (which was the R&D behind dotNET). Interestingly enough the CLR (Common Language Runtime) and the OP compiler can be built in a Java VM. He was telling us that he was getting mail from Mac users about how they liked the new language and runtime. He never wrote a port to Mac. These users simply built an OP compiler in a JVM, then built the CLR with the OP, then rebuilt OP in the CLR with the Java-Built OP. Or so I understood what he was saying. We were drinking together and I was getting a bit blurry. You can definately build the OP compiler in a JVM though. It also came up that there is NO security model in dotNET, in fact it supports a "mixed code" environment where a C# (or dot COBOL or Object Pascal ) 'binary' can run in the CLR, and download and execute native code executables without ANY verification or sandboxing. My impression was that Prof Gough treated it all as an interesting academic exercise, and issues such as security models etc were not part of the scope that interested him. This is perhaps the best opportunity for Linux based viruses if and when the whole dotGNU/mono thing takes off. I hope that they at least don't allow unverified mixed model execution, although this may prevent M$ certification. Also those of you who will be developing for dotNET might want to inform your boss that M$ will be tracking who is running and accessing what service from which companies. Makes it very easy to see who they want to target for their usual nasty games. They'll also be charging YOU 2 cents or so for every user who uses Hailstorm to access YOUR service. Needless to say, our company has decided that dotNET is not a space we want to operate in in the forseeable future. John Foster Golden Orb Technologies Pty Ltd http://www.golden-orb.com
