Coffeehouse Thread

17 posts

Forum Read Only

This forum has been made read only by the site admins. No new threads or comments can be added.

Why no .net for linux?

Back to Forum: Coffeehouse
  • User profile image
    dcw

    OK, I posted this half-joking as a reply for what I would do if I was Bill, but seriously, why don't Microsoft release a .net runtime for linux?

    As an asp.net developer, I would *love* to be able to develop apps on a windows workstation, and then deploy to a linux (or anything) web server.

    I know a little about mono, but I am wondering why Microsoft isn't doing this. We all know the Java runtime is only popular because it runs on so many os's... why don't MS want in on this?

    Isn't the point of virtual machines and runtimes that they make the OS redundant?

  • User profile image
    rhm

    "I would *love* to be able to develop apps on a windows workstation, and then deploy to a linux (or anything) web server."

    I think Microsoft would rather you deploy them to a Windows server though.

    Microsoft has absolutely nothing to gain from a cross platform .NET runtime. Java's main pitch (some would say it's only pitch) is it's cross platform support. The point of .NET though is to make Windows development easier.

    As for making the OS redundant, you have to understand that Bill will do anything to protect Windows and before that MSDOS. Many think that Microsoft waged war on Netscape because of Marc Andreeson's comments about "the browser making the operating system irrelevant". Then there's the subject of Microsoft trying to subvert Java with Visual J++. Sun and IBM are happy to promote Java because their operating systems have little strategic importance to them whereas Microsoft is all about Windows (and Office).

  • User profile image
    Coding​Obomination

    Asking a for profit company to build and support software that will generate no revenue, directly or indirectly is asking a bit much.

    Microsoft makes it possible to create a .NET for Linux and they do not charge a licensing fee.

    This is what MONO is for.

  • User profile image
    Dr. Shim

    I've thought about this too. My reasoning is: Would any Linux developer really use .NET? Especially with the reputation it's got in the FS community, I'd say most of them would use JAVA instead.

  • User profile image
    Sven Groot

    dcw wrote:
    OK, I posted this half-joking as a reply for what I would do if I was Bill, but seriously, why don't Microsoft release a .net runtime for linux?

    Because they have nothing to gain by giving people a reason not to use Windows.

    dcw wrote:
    Isn't the point of virtual machines and runtimes that they make the OS redundant?

    No. They make the target architecture irrelevant, which may sound like the same thing, but isn't. What it means is that the applications use an abstracted virtual machine so they don't have to deal with the actual target architecture. Only whatever is concerned with running the VM-targetted code (interpreter or JIT compiler) needs to worry about that.

    And .Net does offer this advantage, just like Java. A .Net application can run just as easily under x86, x64, ia64 and various mobile platforms such as ARM (although mobile platforms are constrained by what's available in the Compact Framework, but this is not a technical issue, but a storage space issue), without making any changes to the binaries.

    And then there are the open-source initiatives such as Mono and Portable.Net, which do try to port .Net to other OSs like Linux and MacOS and whatnot, which is made possible by the ECMA standardisation of the various .Net technologies. To me this seems like a pretty decent deal for MS: they get the benefits of a cross-platform runtime engine, without actually having to spend the time and resources on writing one. Wink

  • User profile image
    wkempf

    Dr. Shim wrote:
    I've thought about this too. My reasoning is: Would any Linux developer really use .NET? Especially with the reputation it's got in the FS community, I'd say most of them would use JAVA instead.


    There is a faction of the Linux community with this attitude.  But that's not stopping Mono and Gnome.  In fact, several of the top Gnome applications (based on downloads) are .NET applications running under Mono.  There are many Linux developers clamoring to use it.

    MS won't implement this stuff anywhere but on Windows, and I don't blame them and could care less.  However, I do wish that MS would release some of the API stacks to the standards.  There's nothing intrinsically specific to the Windows OS for either ASP.NET or ADO.NET.  Releasing them, I would think, would be in MS's best interest.  WinForms is more gray.  There are Windows specific things in there, and I can see MS wanting the tie in for revenue reasons.  But I honestly believe they best serve their clients, and therefore indirectly their pocket books, by releasing this as well.  If not WinForms directly, then SOME GUI framework.

  • User profile image
    sbc

    I suppose the benefit of doing a runtime for other OS's is Microsoft could release a tool based on .NET and have it work not just on Windows. If Visual Studio could be written entirely in C#, then it could be sold and used on RedHat/SuSE Linux, Mac, Solaris etc.

    Perhaps Mainsoft could do a port of .NET for Microsoft? No need for Microsoft to write the code then.

    If the framework is as important as it is meant to be, then OS should not really matter. If Microsoft can sell tools that run on the framework, people aren't tied to Windows, and Microsoft can make money as well. Microsoft databases are the only ones I know of that only work on Windows (Oracle, PostgreSQL, DB2 all run on Linux as well).

    What they can do as well is offer better value - 'our software runs on any Microsoft Certified runtime environment (Novell Mono, IBM.NET), for optimal performance and integration with Exchange (and other corporate features) we recommend Microsoft Windows for optimal performance and TCO'.

    It is possible to make money without the user needing to run Windows, even for Microsoft. A cross-platform programming language dependent framework would be very appealing. Imagine writing a program in any language, that works on any platform (without modification). That would be perfect for all programmers. A cross between Java and .NET

  • User profile image
    Rossj

    As of today I am running Mono on my Mac Smiley  They've started making headway for S.W.F now as well, so no more GTK#.

    You can already host ASP.Net with mono and Apache, so there probably isn't much room left for Microsoft any any other platform apart from Windows Smiley

  • User profile image
    Alexm

    The core of the CLI is already available in shared source form for windows, OSX and FreeBSD. (download here: http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=3A1C93FA-7462-47D0-8E56-8DD34C6292F0&displaylang=en)

    Conversions of this exist for linux in addition to the extended MONO implementation. So I'd think taht microsoft have already done enough stuff for free already. Without a viable business strategy porting more to other platforms would just be a waste of money.

    That said it is quite possible that there could be future versions of Visual Studio that target Linux and other platforms just like it did in the past with the Macintosh. But given the limited success of other commercial paid-for products on the Linux platform that seems unlikely that we will see such a development without demand. And while there is some demand as this thread existance proves there is probably nowhere near enough to justify the expense.

  • User profile image
    cyber_rigger

    Java, one language, many platforms.

    .NET,  one platform, many languages.

  • User profile image
    Deactivated User

    Comment removed at user's request.

  • User profile image
    cheong

    Here comes an interesting but crazy idea: Why don't Microsoft produce it's own distro of Linux?

    By making it commercial package they will be generating money for it. And they can "standardize" to programming convention can make "PE" format another standard format supported other than "ELF"(doubyfully). And at the darker side they can silently absorb all the effort spent by Linux/OpenSource communities.

    Recent Achievement unlocked: Code Avenger Tier 4/6: You see dead program. A lot!
    Last modified
  • User profile image
    JChung2006

    The reason Microsoft won't produce their own distribution of Linux is because they don't like the GNU Public License.  Plus they have millions of dollars invested in the Windows (NT) platform, which has dominant market share and is a huge success.

  • User profile image
    Cybermagell​an

    Beer28 wrote:
    People don't use linux because of benchmarks. They use it because it works, and it's cheap. I didn't need a million dollar lab with 500k in employees year round and Martin Taylor to figure that out.


    And what are benchmarks really?

    Measurements of how well things work..but you got the second one right...it's cheap.

  • User profile image
    rhm

    Thread Bumping (AKA Necroposting) and now....


    ORTHOGONALIZATION!

  • User profile image
    CRPietschma​nn

    cyber_rigger wrote:
    Java, one language, many platforms.

    .NET,  one platform, many languages.



    Not entirely true...

    Should be...
    Java, one development platform, many OS platforms.
    .NET, one development platform, many MS OS platforms.

    Unless of course if you take into account Mono, then it would be:
    .NET/MONO, one development platform. many OS platforms.

  • User profile image
    Steve411

    Why the hell would they want to support development on a platform they hate?

    I hereby declare this the dumbest question EVER.
    -Steve

Conversation locked

This conversation has been locked by the site admins. No new comments can be made.