Additionally, since the whole spec is not open MS can change it at any time
and you have to bend over and take it. They have done that before and they
will do it again.
Jim
--
Replace part of the email address: kennedy-down_with_spammers_at_attbi.com
with family. Remove the negative part, keep the minus sign. You can figure
it out.
"Ingo Pakleppa" <ingo-immigration_at_kkeane.com> wrote in message
news:Ze5Y9.12695$LA4.655734_at_news1.west.cox.net...
> 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.
Received on Fri Jan 24 2003 - 06:40:28 CST
