Re: Comparison of Java, C# for development on Windows and future for them

In article <Ze5Y9.12695$LA4.655734_at_news1.west.cox.net>, ingo- immigration_at_kkeane.com says...
> On Thu, 23 Jan 2003 15:02:16 +0000, Michael Kale wrote:
>
> > <snip>
> >
> >> get mor bang for the buck with .NET and C#. You will, of course, limit
> >> yourself and your company to Windows. But that may be OK.
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> > To everyone talking about c# being windows only, have you checked out
> > mono lately?
> >
> > http://www.go-mono.org/
> >
> > It's some pretty cool stuff!
> >
> > Michael
>
> Mono is extremely controversial, and likely to fail eventually.
>
> There are two main problems with it.
>
> First, it promotes the .NET framework that is controlled by one vendor who
> doesn't exactly have a track record of cross-platform compatibility. In
> other words, it is controversial because it does the wrong thing.
>
> Second, there are patent and copyright issues in .NET and C# that would
> allow Microsoft to pretty much at any time they like stop the work dead in
> its tracks (there are similar issues surrounding Samba, btw).
>
> So, despite mono, it is still safe to say that C# and .NET are still
> Microsoft-only technologies that may be available on other platforms - but
> I wouldn't trust it with anything that a business depends on unless I also
> wanted to commit to Windows.

I've given some thought to C# and one area where I could see C# being a success if standardized is for embedded programming (which is what I work in). One can argue it, but Java is kind of heavyweight for embedded systems. That is in addition to the opposition it faces from many people's impressions of Java.

C and C++ has many warts that are solved by C# and Java. For many embedded things .NOT would not be an issue as embedded systems don't use big heavyweight libraries.

So while I would like to see the embedded world move to Java, I would settle on C#. Right now where I work I can't even get them to use C++ even as just a better C.

-- 
Dale King