heh... how about some cross-platform c? #ifdef's are nice
-------Original Message------- > From: John Hebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: long boring post: Java vs. .NET, alternatives? was RE: 'Until Sun begins locking down..' was RE: [brlug-general] Microso: Insecure by Desi gn > Sent: Aug 28 2003 13:12:37 > > Please do intrude. If we didn't want anyone to intrude, we wouldn't be > having this discussion on a public forum. :) > > Some background: > > The discussion started off because I mentioned that the fact that my company > is moving away from VB and towards Java, and that I considered it a better > direction. There are a lot of advantages, such as the fact that Java runs on > a variety of platforms: Windows, Linux, AIX, etc., and even BSD now! See > http://www.freebsd.org/java/ for more info. There are other advantages such > as a mature set of free tools for various needs: http://jakarta.apache.org, > J2EE:http://www.jboss.org, etc. And the fact that the Java VM is based on an > open, community-developed specification: http://www.jcp.org. > > So, anyone can implement a JavaVM, and at least one group has developed a > free one: http://www.kaffe.org. IBM has developed its own and rich set of > tools: http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/java/. HP has its own Java > tools and VM: http://www.hp.com/products1/unix/java/. And I could go on, but > I think I've proven my point. > > Micro$oft developed C# to compete with Java (see > http://www.google.com/search?q=c%23%20java%20comparison&sourceid=mozilla-sea > rch&start=0&start=0&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8 for many comparisons) and .NET to > compete with J2EE (ditto: > http://www.google.com/search?q=.net%20j2ee%20comparison&sourceid=mozilla-sea > rch&start=0&start=0&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8). > > Imitation may be the sincerest form of flattery, but being first out of the > gate does count in the IT industry. .NET has been touted (by Micro$oft > developers not familiar with Java) as being a quantum leap beyond previous > Micro$oft development tools, but Java has been doing the same things for > years. Granted that Micro$oft packages the whole shebang into a nice, > clickety-click set of GUI buttons that even a Micro$oft programmer (ulp! > self-incrimination!) can use, but .NET is so far behind that only mandatory > upgrades will get it any kind of market traction... er, wait, that's exactly > what Micro$oft is doing. > > Now to answer your question: > > You asked if there is an alternative. An alternative to what? An alternative > programming language? If that is your question, then the answer is C. But be > prepared for a hell of a learning curve before you can be a competent > multi-platform C programmer. I recommend Python (http://www.python.org) if > you are just starting out with OO programming. > > When I think of Java versus VB or Java versus .NET, I am thinking of not > just a programming language but a whole set of programming tools, a > community of developers, and both client and server applications. So, Java > and .NET are competing software technology "frameworks" of tools _and_ > programmer experience. > > The key to this whole debate is that the technology that is more open and > accessible will win. I think Java is more open to the developer's needs, so > I think Java will win. Mono (http://www.go-mono.com) is a noble effort, but > very few people will use it as Java is winning the war anyway. However, if > Java doesn't win, then I think (hope?) the free and open source software > community takes Mono and runs with it. > > John Hebert > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Challison > To: [email protected] > Sent: 8/27/03 7:44 PM > Subject: Re: "Until Sun begins locking down.." was RE: [brlug-general] > Microso: Insecure by Design > > Don't mean to intrude on a newly revived discussion between you both. > Just curious.....is there another option? > No VB, C#, Java............. > How about Kaffe....I hadn't heard about it. > I like Perl but its not really suitable for the same type of things. > What is a good alternative that won't bite you in the butt down the > road? > > > > > At 05:15 PM 8/27/2003 -0500, you wrote: > >Mime-Version: 1.0 > >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed > > > >Just give Sun the chance. Do you honestly think that Sun wouldn't lock > >customers into their products, services, and protocols if given the > >opportunity? It's a natural desire. Microsoft too was an underdog, > >especially in the mid-90's when NT was relatively new and just > beginning to > >push into businesses. There was a large user and system administrator > >community huddled around Windows since Microsoft was trying to market a > >product that would reduce cost, and, so they were told, headaches. > Sound > >familiar? > > > >Java is basically open with a few gotchas. So is .NET. They can both > get you. > > > >I think we have had this argument before, but about Apple. My point > then as > >now is that just because a company is an underdog when it comes to a > >particular market or issue doesn't make it benign. > > > >At 04:57 PM 8/27/2003 -0500, you wrote: > > > > >You are a funny guy. > > > > > >Sun can't afford to lock it down as long as M$ remains the 800lb > gorilla. > > >I don't see M$ losing its status any time soon. > > > > > >Besides, they would have to lock up the openly available JavaVM spec, > which > > >would pizz off just a few (most) Java developers. There's always the > > >clean-room developed Kaffe VM ... > > > > > >So, comparing VB to Java is not a good comparison at all. Sun relies > on a > > >community-developed Java spec. VB (and most M$ tools it seems) are > designed > > >by hordes of marketing monkeys: "How do we fight Java...?" "I know, > let's > > >develop an imitation called C#! Get it? C-Sharp! Like the musical > notation! > > >Isn't that cool?" > > > > > >M$ lost their geek cachet a looong time ago. > > > > > >John Hebert > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > > >From: Dustin Puryear > > >To: [email protected] > > >Sent: 8/27/03 3:58 PM > > >Subject: RE: [brlug-general] Microsoft Windows: Insecure by Design > > > > > >At 08:49 AM 8/27/2003 -0500, you wrote: > > > >really learn how server computing worked for myself, instead of > > >gleaning > > > >clues from M$ documentation. > > > > > > > >And to be perfectly honest and self-incriminating, I am sending > this > > >message > > > >from a M$ Windoze XP laptop, because my job requires it (VB > > >programming). > > > >However, my company is moving away from M$ and towards Java > (whee!). It > > > > > >Until Sun begins locking down.. > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > > >General mailing list > > >[email protected] > > >http://brlug.net/mailman/listinfo/general_brlug.net > > > > > >--- > >Dustin Puryear > >Puryear Information Technology, LLC http://www.puryear-it.com> > >Providing expertise in the management, integration, and > >security of Windows and UNIX systems, networks, and applications. > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >General mailing list > >[email protected] > >http://brlug.net/mailman/listinfo/general_brlug.net > > > _______________________________________________ > General mailing list > [email protected] > http://brlug.net/mailman/listinfo/general_brlug.net > > _______________________________________________ > General mailing list > [email protected] > http://brlug.net/mailman/listinfo/general_brlug.net -------Original Message------- -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://oxygen.nocdirect.com/pipermail/general_brlug.net/attachments/20030828/976a2397/attachment-0001.htm From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Aug 29 09:59:51 2003 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Nashid Hasan) Date: Fri Aug 29 08:59:53 2003 Subject: [brlug-general] No plans to sue Linux companies, says SCO In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "The SCO Group said today it had never planned to sue any Linux companies, had no concrete plans to sue anyone and also no current plans to take a commercial Linux customer to court." http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/08/29/1062050642514.html I think Bruse Perens' explanation on the origin of the code shown at $CO Forum made it clear as daylight that SCO does not stand a chance against its Linux allegations. SCO is finally coming to some senses. Nash
