So are we ever gonna see .NET framework 2.0 on Mac or Linux?

[Rob R. Ainscough]

Or for that matter any version of .NET framework?

What I find ironic is the push for "portabilit y and flexibility" yet I don't
actually see it in the real world. Is anyone (not just Microsoft) actually
working on a .NET framework for anything other than Windows platforms? If
so, where can I get it and/or when will it be available?

Rob.

[Marina Levit [MVP]]

There is the Mono project: http://www.mono-project.com/Main_Page

I don't know about the Mac, I haven't heard about it. In general though, if
it hasn't been done, it's because there isn't a real industry need for it.
It means not enough people are asking for it or care about it. That's supply
and demand.

"Rob R. Ainscough" <ro*****@pacbel l.net> wrote in message
news:%2******** ********@tk2msf tngp13.phx.gbl. ..

Or for that matter any version of .NET framework?

What I find ironic is the push for "portabilit y and flexibility" yet I
don't actually see it in the real world. Is anyone (not just Microsoft)
actually working on a .NET framework for anything other than Windows
platforms? If so, where can I get it and/or when will it be available?

Rob.

[Tim Anderson]

"Rob R. Ainscough" <ro*****@pacbel l.net> wrote in message
news:%2******** ********@tk2msf tngp13.phx.gbl. ..

Or for that matter any version of .NET framework?

What I find ironic is the push for "portabilit y and flexibility" yet I
don't actually see it in the real world. Is anyone (not just Microsoft)
actually working on a .NET framework for anything other than Windows
platforms? If so, where can I get it and/or when will it be available?

Where have you been :-)

http://www.itwriting.com/wpfe.php

http://www.mono-project.com

Tim

[Jon Skeet [C# MVP]]

Marina Levit [MVP] <so*****@nospam .com> wrote:

There is the Mono project: http://www.mono-project.com/Main_Page

I don't know about the Mac, I haven't heard about it. In general though, if
it hasn't been done, it's because there isn't a real industry need for it.
It means not enough people are asking for it or care about it. That's supply
and demand.

No, it means that it's not in Microsoft's interests to provide it, and
no-one else has the right to provide a port of .NET itself - only parts
of it that aren't covered by patents etc (like the Mono project).

--
Jon Skeet - <sk***@pobox.co m>
http://www.pobox.com/~skeet Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/jon.skeet
If replying to the group, please do not mail me too

[Marina Levit [MVP]]

Well, it's both. Even the parts that aren't covered aren't necessarily
being ported to Mac. And even if it was all available, I'm still not
convinced it would happen. I think if there was enough demand for it, there
would be sufficient pressure on MS to do it, despite it not serving its
interests directly. Because at that point, it would be so important to have
support on other platforms, that people would leave MS technologies if .NET
was not supported on other platforms - and it would start being in MS's
interests to support it just to keep these people from abandoning MS
technologies.

"Jon Skeet [C# MVP]" <sk***@pobox.co m> wrote in message
news:MP******** *************** *@msnews.micros oft.com...

Marina Levit [MVP] <so*****@nospam .com> wrote:

There is the Mono project: http://www.mono-project.com/Main_Page

I don't know about the Mac, I haven't heard about it. In general though,
if
it hasn't been done, it's because there isn't a real industry need for
it.
It means not enough people are asking for it or care about it. That's
supply
and demand.

No, it means that it's not in Microsoft's interests to provide it, and
no-one else has the right to provide a port of .NET itself - only parts
of it that aren't covered by patents etc (like the Mono project).

--
Jon Skeet - <sk***@pobox.co m>
http://www.pobox.com/~skeet Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/jon.skeet
If replying to the group, please do not mail me too

[Jon Skeet [C# MVP]]

Marina Levit [MVP] <so*****@nospam .com> wrote:

Well, it's both. Even the parts that aren't covered aren't necessarily
being ported to Mac.
Well, Mono runs on Mac OS X.
And even if it was all available, I'm still not
convinced it would happen. I think if there was enough demand for it, there
would be sufficient pressure on MS to do it, despite it not serving its
interests directly. Because at that point, it would be so important to have
support on other platforms, that people would leave MS technologies if .NET
was not supported on other platforms - and it would start being in MS's
interests to support it just to keep these people from abandoning MS
technologies.

MS has to balance developer mindshare with platform marketshare. If,
for instance, they cared about beating Java more than they cared about
Windows dominance, I'm sure they would port .NET to other platforms.
However, as .NET is doing quite well against Java already, it isn't in
their interests to help people use .NET on Linux.

--
Jon Skeet - <sk***@pobox.co m>
http://www.pobox.com/~skeet Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/jon.skeet
If replying to the group, please do not mail me too

[Marina Levit [MVP]]

"Jon Skeet [C# MVP]" <sk***@pobox.co m> wrote in message
news:MP******** *************** *@msnews.micros oft.com...

Marina Levit [MVP] <so*****@nospam .com> wrote:

Well, it's both. Even the parts that aren't covered aren't necessarily
being ported to Mac.
Well, Mono runs on Mac OS X.

And even if it was all available, I'm still not
convinced it would happen. I think if there was enough demand for it,
there
would be sufficient pressure on MS to do it, despite it not serving its
interests directly. Because at that point, it would be so important to
have
support on other platforms, that people would leave MS technologies if
.NET
was not supported on other platforms - and it would start being in MS's
interests to support it just to keep these people from abandoning MS
technologies.

MS has to balance developer mindshare with platform marketshare. If,
for instance, they cared about beating Java more than they cared about
Windows dominance, I'm sure they would port .NET to other platforms.
However, as .NET is doing quite well against Java already, it isn't in
their interests to help people use .NET on Linux.

Right, I think that's what I was saying. That if there was a financial
incentive for them to port it because they were losing business otherwise -
they would. But there aren't enough people who care about it, so they don't.

I didn't realize Mono runs on Mac, so that's good for whoever is interested
in support .NET on Mac.


--
Jon Skeet - <sk***@pobox.co m>
http://www.pobox.com/~skeet Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/jon.skeet
If replying to the group, please do not mail me too

[Rob R. Ainscough]

So the big hoopla of portability is really just smoke and mirrors? Sorta,
yeah you can do it if ya want -- good luck?

Considering www.msn.com is primarily all Java based it seems sorta humorous
that MS are taking this approach to .NET portability. I mean ya think they
might take an interest cause I'm pretty sure the MS Office dev team don't
have a lot on their hands ;)

Mono is an open source project being headed by Novell? And it doesn't
appear to have even scratched the surface as far as .NET 2.0 feature set?

WPFE -- is there an actual product, it looks like someone's blog?

I'm sure a lot of people have put in hard work on these projects, but they
don't appear to be ready for prime time. Without real MS backing, I don't
see how any of these will succeed to a level that is useful for professional
level work?

Rob.

"Jon Skeet [C# MVP]" <sk***@pobox.co m> wrote in message
news:MP******** *************** *@msnews.micros oft.com...

Marina Levit [MVP] <so*****@nospam .com> wrote:

Well, it's both. Even the parts that aren't covered aren't necessarily
being ported to Mac.

Well, Mono runs on Mac OS X.

And even if it was all available, I'm still not
convinced it would happen. I think if there was enough demand for it,
there
would be sufficient pressure on MS to do it, despite it not serving its
interests directly. Because at that point, it would be so important to
have
support on other platforms, that people would leave MS technologies if
.NET
was not supported on other platforms - and it would start being in MS's
interests to support it just to keep these people from abandoning MS
technologies.

MS has to balance developer mindshare with platform marketshare. If,
for instance, they cared about beating Java more than they cared about
Windows dominance, I'm sure they would port .NET to other platforms.
However, as .NET is doing quite well against Java already, it isn't in
their interests to help people use .NET on Linux.

--
Jon Skeet - <sk***@pobox.co m>
http://www.pobox.com/~skeet Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/jon.skeet
If replying to the group, please do not mail me too

[Cor Ligthert [MVP]]

Rob,

What I find ironic is the push for "portabilit y and flexibility" yet I
don't actually see it in the real world.

Which real world do you mean. More than 90% of all workstations are running
on Microsoft OS systems, while it is the leading one in Serversystems?

Are you living in cyberspace?

Cor

[Huihong]

It's actually possible to run the same Microsoft .NET Framework on
Linux, I haven't tried it to Mac yet. Internally, I made Microsoft .NET
Framework 1.1 to work on Linux, this is different from the MONO
project, it uses the same .NET Framework binaries with our internally
implemented lower level layer stufff. I may release it to the public,
but may take a few months at least.

Huihong
RemoteSoft, Inc.