Kent Loobey wrote:
> So the question is would you rather use C# and .NET to do basically the
> same things that you can do with the Java stuff. Of course this has the
> added benefit (?) of having Bill's stamp of approval...
Java itself isn't exactly open source. Sun fubarred itself into the
ground on that one.
On the other hand, 100% Pure Java is a pretty good thing, and
Microsoft have stated that C#/.NET are not going to be anything like
"write once, run anywhere". They're relying on the innate tendency
for separate development projects to diverge to make non-Windows .NET
completely noninteroperable. They aren't defining interoperability
tests or certification processes or anything else. (Yes, they've
asked ECMA to rubberstamp it, but that's not the same as making it
interoparable.)
If I were the Linux Product Manager of the Open Source World, I'd just
ignore .NET, except to make a lot of noise when the inevitable
security advisories come out.
--
K<bob>
[EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.jogger-egg.com/
