Re: Cross-compile to Linux
From: Adrian Gallero (agallero_at_netscape.net)
Date: 02/10/04
- Next message: Atmapuri: "Re: Delphi.NET - my 2p worth"
- Previous message: Rudy Velthuis (TeamB): "Re: anti-spam ideas for mailing programs"
- In reply to: Alessandro Federici: "Re: Cross-compile to Linux"
- Next in thread: Alessandro Federici: "Re: Cross-compile to Linux"
- Reply: Alessandro Federici: "Re: Cross-compile to Linux"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: 10 Feb 2004 04:59:53 -0800
Alessandro Federici wrote:
> Or could have done that for a long time just using Java for that
> matter ;-)) The world is full of choices ;-)
or c++, or php, or perl, or phyton, or... yes, I agree with you on this
and like the world this way ;-)
...but I was pointing more than to the idea I see on this newsgroup,
that one of the advantages of .net over win32 is crossplatform. Again
IMHO, .net has a lot of advantages over win32, but the crossplatform
thing isn't one of them. If your post wasn't one of those, I apologize
;-)).
>
> > In fact, I think that if you want a crossplatform app right now, a
> > win32 app is a better choice than a .net one. It will run on linux
> > much better than a Mono app, hey, even office runs under wine and I
> > don't think you can get a very complex winform app running on mono
> > right now.
>
> If you like that and you find it working well, then there's nothing
> wrong with it.
> It's just another option. For those that would like to use the Java
> APIs, Java is a better option and for those who like .Net APIs, Mono
> might be the best instead.
>
Well, I personally don't dislike the wine approach, but this is not the
general feeling I see. Do you remember people complaining because Kylix
IDE depended on winelib?
I see 3 things why people dislike running an app not designed for their
system:
1) The port is never 100% perfect, so why not use the original
(windows on this case) to begin?. Java might be different because it is
done everywhere by sun, but even there, it was a very difficult thing
to get going. Many years the java motto I heard among friends using it,
was "write once, debug everywhere"
2) The only real way to get an app that behaves as people expects on
other platform, it to write its GUI again. That is, you can have a
"File->Open" on windows and it sounds ok, but if you go to another
place where the standard way is "Tools->Open file" then your app seems
alien. And what about the fonts? Remember issues on kylix because fonts
where not resized due to the winelib thing? And if you wanted apps that
look and feel like windows, why are not you using windows again? I
think this is why JAVA failed on desktop too.
3) If you buy an app designed for windows and you run it on linux,
you know it has not been tested on linux as extensive as an app
designed on linux. I have nice memories on this, regarding systems
developed on Solaris and ported to AIX ;-)
> > To me, mono is equivalent somehow to wine, that is, something that
> > allows you to run an app designed for windows on linux.
>
> To me it isn't <G>
We disagree here then :-) Well I am not sure I disagree, if someone
proves me that this is not the same, I am ready to believe it. I WANT
to believe it :-)) But I see the 3 issues on using wine not addressed
by mono.
Regards,
Adrian.
- Next message: Atmapuri: "Re: Delphi.NET - my 2p worth"
- Previous message: Rudy Velthuis (TeamB): "Re: anti-spam ideas for mailing programs"
- In reply to: Alessandro Federici: "Re: Cross-compile to Linux"
- Next in thread: Alessandro Federici: "Re: Cross-compile to Linux"
- Reply: Alessandro Federici: "Re: Cross-compile to Linux"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|