On Sun, 26 Mar 2006, "Andrew Jorgensen" wrote:
On 3/26/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Probably the biggest is that it's a GUI app, as opposed to Unison's
command-line interface. That's just a matter of taste.
That's funny because you're point a) about what Unison lacks sounded a
lot like UI. I have to agree though that if iFolder can't just run in
the background without a GUI for a head then it's not worth much in
your situation.
I don't know if iFolder can run headless (easily), it very well could. And
UI does not necessarily mean GUI--a command-line way of doing (a) would be
much nicer (in my opinion, of course) than a GUI way of the same.
Besides. C# has everything you always loved about Java and none of
the stuff you always hated. (I know, that's an exageration).
I'm actually grateful for the competition--I think that Java has improved
immensely since (and at least partly because of) C#. There are some things
I think Java can do to still improve, but none of them require major
overhauls of the language.
I'm kind of hoping Java will die off in the Desktop world. I'm fine
with it being used in the multi-tier enterprise application world, it
does great there.
That's funny--I actually see Java as only now becoming really viable in
the Desktop world. I'm curious as to why you see Mono/GTK# as being more
viable on the desktop than, say, Java/GTK. (I personally think that Swing
is actually a solid contender, especially if it's integrated with the
system the way Apple's managed to, for instance--a Java/Swing app can be
made to look nearly indistinguishable from a native app on OS X. And
maybe SWT will even be usable in a few years' time!)
Most of the problems I see with Java (both Java on the web as well as Java
on the desktop) are more with how people use the language than with any
shortcomings in the language itself. But again, we've already had our
language flamewar for the month ...
Not at all likely that there will be legal problems:
http://gregdek.livejournal.com/4008.html
I'm not so concerned with the thought that there will be legal problems so
much as the thought that people might think there will be legal problems.
I mean, SCO was able to do a tiny bit of damage with a very small amount
of funds and absolutely no case--imagine what Microsoft could do given the
chance 10 years down the road.
But I'm not even really worried about /that/ so much as I'm concerned
about the fact that Microsoft controls the language specification and can
steer the platform any direction it likes. Sure, it's possible to fork if
they did something like that, but then why have Mono in the first place
instead of extending Java or creating a new system from scratch? By the
time we get to the point where we realize it's requisite to fork, it might
be terribly inconvenient to do so. But this issue has been hashed out
again and again by people smarter than I, so I don't really have anything
else to say on that.
Gosh, me too. I probably shouldn't even send this... oh well "too late."
Well, we can promise to have a good-natured discussion and simply ignore
anyone who attempts to steer this into a rant, eh? :-)
~ Ross
/*
PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net
Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug
Don't fear the penguin.
*/
