Why O'Reilly and .NET?
by Dale Dougherty05/31/2001
At O'Reilly, because we are closely identified with open source, I expect that the opening of our .NET DevCenter on O'Reilly Network will raise some eyebrows. I know that it has raised some questions internally. Why are we spending resources explaining Microsoft technology? Certainly, one of the objections is that .NET is from Microsoft and anything from Microsoft is dangerous. Another is that there's little substance to .NET and this new, ill-defined and unproven thing gets far more attention than it deserves. Why .NET?
Let me address the issue through a digression. One of my favorite TV shows was James Burke's Connections. Burke made the point over and over again that inventions were often the result of making connections between several separate developments. Sometimes you see these connections. Or, to paraphrase the frightened boy in the movie, The Sixth Sense, "You see things." Look at what's going on in the open source community and the diversity of projects that became possible through network-enabled collaboration. Look at Microsoft's .NET as a response to how the Internet (and its billions of connected devices) undermines their desktop dominance and erodes the control they had over services and interfaces. You might have this feeling that something new is emerging. Tim O'Reilly has begun calling it "The Internet Operating System," where the services normally provided by an operating system are distributed on the Net. He sees connections among such disparate developments as P2P, web services, .NET, JXTA and open source. It's a new way of thinking about all the components of our computing platform, one that connects all our devices and applications through consistent interfaces.
We are excited because the .NET framework reflects the idea that the next generation development platform is the Internet, not Microsoft's desktop, not Oracle's database server, and not Sun's Java language. We don't necessarily think that Microsoft's .NET has all the answers, but we'd love to see the open source community engage with .NET and formulate its own response.
O'Reilly has already published a book (C# Essentials) on .NET and we have several more books in the works. I asked John Osborne, Executive Editor at O'Reilly, why .NET is important topic for O'Reilly.
.NET is Microsoft on the Internet, a distributed operating system that, in effect, provides a platform for building applications that run across the web. Because Microsoft so thoroughly dominates the desktop and browser markets and occupies such a central position in the software industry, any move it makes to rationalize development of web enabled applications is worth watching, and inevitably, many developers and corporations will be attracted to its approach.
|
|
But O'Reilly's interest in publishing books on .NET for developers goes beyond simple business imperatives. First, the .NET platform and its growing array of tools promises to radically simplify development of web-enabled applications, such as web services, in ways that Visual Studio did for desktop applications. The open source community has been playing catch-up in this arena for years and no real alternatives exist. Second, the applications that .NET developers build will be part of the ecology of the web and will communicate and co-exist with similar applications on other platforms. Developers of such services on other platforms will need to communicate with .NET implementations, and vice versa, and who better than O'Reilly to bridge the gap?
Finally, the architecture of .NET does not rule out open source implementations and in fact serves as model, albeit a proprietary one, for how to build more open alternatives. We want to publish information that helps such projects come into being, and to help them spread the word to developers once they do. I think that our job is to be both a "skeptical" publisher and an "open" publisher of .NET information, a source of honest, practical information about what works and what doesn't, and a publisher for those in pursuit of a peaceful and profitable coexistence.
To be clear, .NET is many things, some of which are hard to figure out. There's the .NET framework that is a development and runtime environment, which includes its own Foundation Class Libraries (FCL.NET) and C#. This evolving framework will integrate and employ already existing Window programming technologies including Visual Basic (VB.NET), Active Server Pages (ASP.NET) and ActiveX Data Objects (ADO.NET). There's also the Web services components such as Hailstorm, which includes Passport as the central authentication server. Microsoft's attempt to control or own our identity on the Net is very disturbing.
Our .NET DevCenter will largely focus on the .NET development platform. Tim O'Reilly and I were most surprised at a recent Open Source meeting by remarks from Miguel de Icaza (of Gnome and Ximian) who said that .NET's development environment was terrific -- state of the art. He liked C# and has begun working in this environment. He believes there is growing interest in the open source community "embracing and extending" .NET rather than competing with it. In short, the IDE, C#, the common runtime library, and the interfaces are well thought out and very useful. It's the best of breed. Enjoy the .NET DevCenter as an additional resource for your endeavors.
Today on the .NET DevCenter, you'll find the following features:
Conversational C# for Java Programmers, Part 1
Raffi Krikorian kicks off the first of a five-part series on C# for Java as well as .NET developers.
Hailstorm: Open Web Services Controlled by Microsoft
To an astonishing degree, Microsoft's Hailstorm relies on open standards like SOAP, Kerberos, and XML. But with typical audacity, MS also plans to centralize control of the system at critical junctures.
Brewing a HailStorm
Rael Dornfest has been digesting Microsoft's HailStorm announcement. Is it Microsoft's most ambitious land grab ever, or a shocking move toward open standards?
JVM to .NET: I'm Not Dead Yet!
Although Microsoft is loath to admit it, .NET is really their answer to Sun. However, the Java language, the Java Virtual Machine, and CORBA are still a threat.
In the coming weeks, we will be publishing feature articles and tutorials on C#, ASP.NET, VB.NET, Web Forms, .NET Web Services, Open Source .NET and much more as well as interviews with some of the best and brightest involved with .NET, including Miguel de Icaza who is attempting to extend and define the boundaries of this important plaform.
Dale Dougherty is the editor and publisher of MAKE, and general manager of the Maker Media division of O'Reilly Media, Inc.
Return to the .NET DevCenter.
Showing messages 1 through 46 of 46.
-
asp.net a microsoft monoply
2006-10-30 07:56:05 bobrogan [View]
-
.NET Framework
2003-07-30 17:44:47 anonymous2 [View]
Microsoft's .NET Framework is niffty and all that but as usual they are not the first to come up with a tool like this.
Check out www.versata.com for an example of a company which has an excellent development product for application development, either internet based or client/server based.
Don't know if they will be able to stay in business though.
-
If I must...
2003-07-08 12:17:29 anonymous2 [View]
I recently took a job as a .Net developer because I need income. All of my previous experience is in PHP/MySQL and Java, but I need to feed my family.
In order to learn and use the .Net platform effectively, I need some resources. I'm glad to know the dollars my employer spends on resources will go to O'Reilly. I trust O'Reilly publications.
I will continue to support O'Reilly with the knowledge that they will continue support the open source projects on which I love and labor in my free time.
-
Just another twist of Ms
2002-12-26 20:14:00 anonymous2 [View]
Ok , you may say i've never tried .Net nor have i ever written a line of code with C#...So what???
The problem is beyond this...Is platform X better than platform Y is no big deal here...
Let me explain, If one stares at Ms moves over the last decade, or even from it first started, one can simply wonder IS IT A GOOD THING TO GIVE AWAY THE INTERNET TO MS???
Here is the big question? Because wanted or not Adopting the .Net platform is nomore no less than that...
How can we accept this, with all the pain and frustration we had so far from Ms...That one prefers ms platform is one thing, that the whole world swallows ms bitter pill is another, and here
there is no flame
-
Not just Haters...
2002-11-29 23:02:56 anonymous2 [View]
Let's make it clear i don't worship MS nor am I a total hater, but when it comes to just say the truth about how MS is pushing everyone to get chained to their Net crap and see the threat it is to everyone freedom of choice then this must be said...If warnings and being watchdogs behind the butt of Gates Evil is being Flamers, so be it...This is wartime and survival matter, not just opinion on a harmless MS moves...I got the point about it, and being an MS Programmer for more then 20 years then i'm to know how difficult it is to switch from fellowing crowd...It can be done, and it is not a matter of being openminded or such...We say it loud Java is not perfect but C# is even worse. And I say it without hate...Please advise...;-)
-
.net
2002-11-29 16:53:04 anonymous2 [View]
No thanks; still stickin' with java which is multi platform and proven... Dot Net stuff is just another twist for MS to maintain it monopoly and make it hard to get rid of it...
So please no more big lies...
-
RE: NET Stuff
2002-10-30 11:03:22 anonymous2 [View]
Actually you CAN write VB.NET (or C#) programs using Notepad. My question for you is "WHY WOULD YOU WANT TO?"
-
.net stuff
2002-03-07 23:23:52 dave123 [View]
as a developer we don't want to pay for sofware's
right?
can you write java on notepad?
sure can..
can you write VB on notepad?
no way.! have to pay for that.
same thing.
you have to pay in order to use .net.
you can use tomcat +J2EE +linux which is free
-
.net stuff
2005-07-14 07:02:20 naeemtyab [View]
Editor not only formats the code for us for increased readibility but also provides code hints which helps to code faster and reduces manual consulting.
Naeem Tyab -
.net stuff
2003-08-05 00:44:17 anonymous2 [View]
I am sure u are not going to work for free even if java or linux and tomcat are free..there is no harm in making money..If MS is doing it what is wrong? As for proprietory ownership and all..i love to own my house..i cant make it open source and allow anyone to live in it..how much will u enjoy your code being tampered by some other developer? not much huh? -
.net stuff
2003-06-05 19:19:17 cardinals2003 [View]
>can you write VB on notepad?
>no way.! have to pay for that.
Wrong. You CAN program VB or C-Sharp on notepad. And the software SDK is a free download from Microsoft. The SDK includes a command line compiler, as well as everything else needed to build complete .NET apps. Visual Studio .NET is not free, but it certainly isn't necessary for building apps.
-
.NET != NULL
2001-12-10 11:46:50 chaimnus [View]
I think .NET is a very important technology. I have been working with .NET for the past year and half, and all I can say is I'm impressed.
I also have SUN's JDK installed on my machine - there is no comparison! .NET outdoes the JDK in performance and design.
Microsoft has responded to developers, and they deserve respect for that. As for SUN, the are even worse that Microsoft. Java is as much a propietary platform as is Microsoft's Windows.
-
Constructive Dialog
2001-07-18 09:35:07 jeffds [View]
Why is it that most of you posters have a problem with good constructive dialog? My guess is that you are really not very mature. Try getting away from your computers a bit more often. Try talking to someone with different views than your own. But STOP wasting time FLAMING everyone who is not like you. As a programmer who has made his living in the Microsoft/Intel world for nearly 20 years, I can say that I do not agree with everything MS does and that recently I have been investigating Open Source alternatives. There, is that so hard. A simple statement of fact, not Flame. I have been working with C# and .NET for that past month and it is slick. It certainly offers the company I work for some great opportunities. Anyway, thanks O'Reilly for being open-minded. And remember FLAMERS, go outside tonight and get some air...
-
Sunshine Soldiers
2001-06-06 07:04:29 mpnugent [View]
I'm disappointed, but not with O'Reilly.
I hate M$ more than any person I know, and I hate their practices even more than I hate their crippled software. After 3 years of M$-- before which I ran GEM and CP/M-- I banned Gates from my home in Apr 1992. I purchased Coherent, then discovered Yggdrasil. Years later, I divorced a girlfriend because she believed I should permit an M$ laptop into my home.
Having described myself, I will direct my disappointment at most of the responses to O'Reilly's .NET statement.
O'Reilly has dedicated a great deal to the Open Source movement. They have advanced the movement more than most of us. I admit that O'Reilly is a corporation, and I confess general trepidation towards corporations and their far-reaching agendas, but O'Reilly's rationale seems justifiable. Isn't Open Source about sharing ideas? Making use of what we know?
Knowledge is power, and O'Reilly empowers us. I don't suggest we follow any entity blindly, even Raymond, RMS, or Torvalds, but we should take what they're offering and use it to advance the movement.
Simply being on a bandwagon does not imply we're helping that wagon move. O'Reilly helps it move. -
Sunshine Soldiers
2001-06-06 12:38:16 avengingangel [View]
This is one thing that I find very compelling and curious in the anti-gates world. How many of you who flame and flame at the thought of gates still own an M$ peripheral or dual boot with window$ so you can play Diablo2? I'll admit it. I own a copy of 98 and a copy of 2000pro. 98 is horrible but not nearly the memory and processor hog that 2000 is, while 2000 runs relatively well, aside from thrashing like hell.
The main reason that I've left the M$ bridge intact behind me is because my wife refuses to learn how cool (and insanely powerful) alternative OSes can be. Myself, I'm increasing my learning curve so I can host a local website and small lan effectively. In doing so I'm having trouble finding replacements for all my M$ crud but I'm trying very hard to do so in order to be consistent in my M$ bashing to my friends. To put a point behind my ramblings, I was wondering how many of you are diehard anti-M$ers yet still, albeit begrudgingly, dual boot a PC with some ver of win? Since this seems to be the point of these flames, do any of you have any honest and well thought out criticisms of O'Reilly's decision to report on .NET...in other words, do any more of you have direct responses to the article above? Remember, I'm asking for well-formulated responses and not mere juvenile anti-M$ flaming, if you have a brain, display it. If not, butt out. -
Sunshine Soldiers
2001-06-06 14:42:57 juantay [View]
C# and .NET are just a copy of Java and the Java Platform made proprietary so that Microsoft can make alot of money off of other companies.
O'Reilly IS serious when it says that they are catering to .NET. Which means they have Sold Out.
The Microsoft Empire will disappear in the natural course of the Internet's future.
What more is there to understand?
Juantay -
Sunshine Soldiers
2001-07-18 09:42:02 jeffds [View]
Can you honestly say C# and .NET are just copies of Java and the Java Platform? Have you loaded the .NET beta? Have you written any C# code (and I don't mean Hello World apps)? Do you have any interest in a meaningful contribution to this thread? I doubt it.
-
to describe in one word
2001-06-05 21:58:15 glenarvan [View]
disappointing... -
to describe in one word
2001-06-05 22:24:57 glenarvan [View]
...what people write here...
or was it o'reilly's intention to publish books only for os-community?
In my eyes - and I'm really convinced of os - it's nice to know how the competition's (here especially MS) products work. MS does it the same way, doesn't it? ;>>
-
Microsoft isn't Devil, but that doesn't mean it isn't evil.
2001-06-05 00:20:14 murmeli [View]
I personally don't blame Oreilly for publishing books about .Net, because I think customers have the responsibility to choose what they want to support. If nobody want's books about .Net there wouldn't be any market for it. Instead I recomend to sit down for a minute before choosing .net for your technology.
Think history and specially policy of Microsoft. Before Windows 95 there was a tight match between Word Perfect and Microsoft's word processing tools. When win 95 came, also existing Word Perfect became more unstable and Office 95 was released. After that Microsoft have dominated windows word processing tools. Microsoft want's to be leading company in computer technology, but it surely doesn't want to defend it't market share with fair play. One of the main strategies is to break standards and make their own technology to replace the standard. Good example is C#, which syntax and features are pure copy from Java. From the very begining of Java Microsoft's purpose was to make java void, or make it windows specific. Another good example how MS have chained many companies to develope windows only software is Visual Basic. All this aplies to .Net. MS tries to sink java with it, and also make companies more addicted to windows. How many of you think MS will port .Net to *NIX, Mac Beos... systems. We are tolerating all this and even giving our support to Microsoft when we are using their technologies like Visual Basic and .Net.
-
.NET DevCenter Editor reply
2001-06-04 15:10:49 | [View]
Why cover Microsoft's development platform?
First, O'Reilly & Associates has a strong Microsoft books program, covering everything from client operating systems like Windows 98 and ME, to their server platforms, to a new series that will look at the same .NET topics that we'll be covering, including VB and C#.
Second, I see .NET as an important third platform for Net-centric development. I'm the editor for ONJava.com, covering that development platform. We also cover the Open Source development platform, with Linux and BSD at its core and technologies like Apache, MySQL, and PHP (the LAMP platform), as well as PostgreSQL, Python and Perl. We're watching .NET to see if it truly evolves as the third important platform for primarily server-side application and Web services development for the network including the Internet.
Third, Web services developers are interested in .NET because they increasingly have to work in large heterogeneous environments, where they have to know all three development platforms in terms of interoperability, in addition to the apparent innate curiosity about C#
Therefore, we launched this DevCenter with the intention to cover .NET for, of course, the Windows developer, as well as the open source LAMP, Java and XML developers who need to learn Web services and the programming languages and tools at the heart of .NET.
Hope you enjoy this center and please let me know if it's helpful as well as what else you'd like to see.
-
Um...what are you guys like 15?
2001-06-04 14:35:45 avengingangel [View]
Everybody needs that point in their life where they rebel against everything they see as being large and in charge, be it parents, religion, "the Man", even a rinky-dink software developer. At times those in the deepest throes of rebellion and hormones begin to see links where there are, probably, not.
Now, don't misunderstand me. It isn't the fault of these children that they're ticked off at the world. They need somebody to be upset with. Unfortunately, in the age of communication and (not so unfortunately) in a communication-medium dominated by the precepts of free-speech and tolerance, some of us who expect intelligent debate are forced to put up with these juvenile temper tantrums.
So lets "dumb it down" just a bit. No offence...
O'Reilly is a great publishing house with a strong online presence. They produce books about Information Technologies, both informative, and highly technical. Their online persona provides breaking news, opinions, and howtos about these technologies and, just a bit, discussion of some of the sociological aspects of these technologies.
Microsoft is a large software house that produces the dominant desktop Operating System (in several different flavors, some notoriously unreliable, some not too terrible). They also produce some other stuff(again, some of it unreliable, some of it not too terrible).
On the side, O'Reilly has become one of the dominant champions of the open-source movement. They produce and stand foursquare behind many works on open-source. At the root, however, they are still an entity that reports and explains Information Technology.
Microsoft has come to be seen as the primary enemy of open-source and its philosophy. They use almost exclusively closed-source software with proprietary interfaces and control, unfortunately, the platform that controls America's desktop computers and, to a much smaller extent, America's servers. Obviously, they have difficulty sharing. They do also produce a few interesting things on the side.
One thing that the kids in this playpen need to keep clear is that there isn't a devil, nor is there a god in this world of OSes, online games, hardware and software development, firewalls, kernels, software licenses, and freedom. There are highly questionable business policies, and draconian attempts at quelling healthy competition. Last time I checked, O'Reilly's focus was not Business Theory 101, or even Antitrust Law, but instead is Technology. They may be champions of Open-Source, but they're still reporters of technological innovation, first and foremost. -
Um...what are you guys like 15?
2001-07-23 13:41:27 jonogden [View]
I'm not really sure you dumbed it down enough for the kids. The posts I've read so far suggest that while their logic -- a subject that can be learned -- isn't bad, their rationality - which is inherent in the mind - is sadly lacking.
Unless you share their a priori's (Microsoft=Hell and Gates=antichrist; earning money=evil and stealing intellectual property=good)you can't communicate with them.
-
Hard To Imagine A Day When Passport Account Is Necessary
2001-06-04 10:32:43 generaluse [View]
The last person commenting said:
"Throwing a tantrum and throwing toys
from the pram isn't going to help when
you need a Microsoft Passport account
to buy stuff from your favourite site."
Looking at it from a practical standpoint I hardly can see the day when a Passport account will become important. There might be a few merchants that use it but they will find out they are losing the business of persons wary of creating such an account. A lot of people out there a concerned about their privacy and once the rumors start going around that MS is using Passport to invade their privacy and control the world and so on...Passport won't stand a chance. Imagine how paranoid some people already about about simple web cookies. Haha. They even sell cookie-cleaning privacy software to the masses.
There is a certain "coolness" factor to things in this world and right now .Net and Passport are hot news items because they are new but looking down the road 10 years they could quite possibly be looked upon as being "cool" as Microsoft's Clippy and Bob, WFC, J++. Gee, now those were so cool! LOL.
Honestly, we're having to move all our office computers over to Linux just to get away from this endless cycle of foolishness. MS already perfected their desktop years ago and since has been screwing it up with special menu effects and other time-wasting drool. They lack innovation and their's really nothing truly new in .Net or anything else they are suggesting they lots of others have not thought of implementing. -
Hard To Imagine A Day When Passport Account Is Necessary
2001-06-04 14:51:32 jregel [View]
I wish I shared your optimism. Remember that most users are not like us - they are happy to have MSN as their start page etc. Consider how many people use Hotmail despite the known security problems. The geeks and techies won't like Hailstorm (the .NET vision that extends Passport to become the central authentication server on the net), and we won't support it (or will we? How many people here are using IE because it makes surfing easier?). But I'm afraid that we are a tiny minority. There are millions of users who will blindly lap up the ease of use that Microsoft promise.
I hope that the other big companies like Sun and IBM kick up a stink about it, and maybe get the DOJ involved - I know that a lot of Americans are against government intervention, but when you have a US company that is out of control, you need to do something to reign it in.
The Open Source community need to make some response to the .NET platform. I've spent a fair amount of time recently looking into .NET and there are several Open Source projects that go some way to providing alternatives, but they all lack the sense of "vision" and integration.
Microsoft have realised that they cannot compete with Linux et al in the long term, and have instead decided to move the goal posts completely. The "war" is moving from the desktop onto the net. At the moment, Microsoft are trying to create a proprietary internet, masked behind the guise of open standards, while a close examination reveals that they intend to be the gatekeepers of all the critical points. Hailstorm is the first indicator of this strategy. We *NEED* a response. -
Hard To Imagine A Day When Passport Account Is Necessary
2002-03-08 00:01:06 dave123 [View]
all the technologies should be free.
don't be a MS slave
-
Hard To Imagine A Day When Passport Account Is Necessary
2002-03-07 23:34:41 dave123 [View]
all the technologies should be free.
don't be a MS slave
-
Good Move!
2001-06-04 09:06:55 jregel [View]
I'm amazed at the emotional trolling in response to a well written piece. I'm a strong Open Source advocate, but I fail to see why O'Reilly producing material on .NET can be seen as "selling out".
The .NET platform is technically interesting and does pose a big threat to the Open Source community. Our response should be to get informed, and then do something about it. Saying that "Microsoft Sux" and then accusing O'Reilly's of "betraying" us is an immature response.
So, I say "thanks" to O'Reilly's for giving us the information that we need. Unlike some sources, we can be assured that the .NET coverage will be more than just a rehashing of Microsoft press releases.
The .NET vision is all encompassing, and if it becomes a de facto standard, it will make life very difficult for Open Source projects. Some things like Hailstorm are downright scary. We need to get our collective heads out of the sand and start thinking about providing an alternative.
Throwing a tantrum and throwing toys from the pram isn't going to help when you need a Microsoft Passport account to buy stuff from your favourite site. -
Good Move!
2001-06-04 10:39:42 Dale Dougherty |
[View]
Thanks for your message. You expressed our goals in addressing .NET even better perhaps than I did. -
Good Move!
2001-06-04 15:37:41 juantay [View]
Dale,
What you're forgetting is this:
Let me see if I can explain. Microsoft is about Marketing. This is basically all they know how to do. They don't need to worry about Innovation in the true meaning of the term. They just need to find ways to tie everything to their stuff.
The Open Community seeks Innovation.
You have the Yin and the Yang going on here. Except the Yang (or is it the Yin?) is not "Playing well with Others". And this "not playing well with others" in terms of the Yin is what drives them.
Microsoft Developers are very different from say Java Developers. Microsoft people believe programming is about Business. Java people about Innovation and the art itself.
What you have on the O'Reilly portal from the 'Business' perspective is praising Microsoft. What you have from the technical perspective is not as if you think the technical perspective, the logical perspective is the most important thing. But it's not the most important thing to Microsoft Developers, the most important thing for them is the 'Business' or 'Marketing' perspective. The most important part to Companies is the 'Business' or 'Marketing' perspective.
In other words, what it ends up being is that you'll just wind up promoting Microsoft because of the different 'species' that's being dealt with IHMO.
That's all I Have to Say.
Bill Gates is licking his chops at O'Reilly..
Juantay
-
Good Move!
2003-06-06 08:46:43 anonymous2 [View]
It's time to grow up kids. I personally Like .net after hating MS for years I think they are taking a step in the right direction. Besides I don't think that any of you would mind bein Billy Boy Gates. I know I wouldn't.
-
.NET = M$ MONOPOLY all the WAY
2001-06-03 21:04:56 windozeanti [View]
MS .NET SUX!!! MS .NET is the way for them to conquer the whole Internet. When this happens, say bye bye to open
standards, bye bye to UNIX, GNU/Linux, Mac OS and other operating platform. When everybody use .NET, there will be no
more freedom, say Hi to all the Microsoft 's SLAVE! You will not have any other alternatives. MS products and services
is the only products and sevices you should use, this is a one way ticket to MS HELL.
-
What about SunONE
2001-06-02 08:40:39 juantay [View]
"First, the .NET platform and its growing array of tools promises to radically simplify development of web-enabled applications, such as web services, in ways that Visual Studio did for desktop applications. The open source community has been playing catch-up in this arena for years and no real alternatives exist."
Geee, I wonder why real alternatives do not exist. I WONDER Why?? Maybe because while people are busy at work with new ideas there is always someone over their heads ready to trip them up?
Now in this quote you seem to be saying that no alternatives Will exist outside of .NET. Don't you think this is a bit untrue since SunONE is Way ahead of .NET?
Are you going to have SunONE in here with a folder as well or are you only going to have .NET?
Juantay
-
When is the O'Reilly .NET book going to be released ?
2001-06-02 04:45:34 toboy [View]
I wonder when O'Reilly will release the .NET book.
Wonder what animal it will have in front of it ....
I suggest a big bad 800lb GORILLA or better still and more a DINOSAUR ! - believe it or not, thats where M$oft is headed...
-
So long O'Reilly !! We've come to the end of our Rainbow--
2001-06-02 04:36:46 toboy [View]
What a shame a company I loved, the source of open technologies as they proudly crowed, cooker of great great books that made tech make sense.
So what now, the economic downturn must be hitting really hard and so what does TIMOTHY O'Reilly do - MMM he thinks, I need more revenue, I'll sleep with the devil if I have to get it.
Well thank God for the internet, I made up my mind to ditch Tim's crap in seconds, as luck will have it Sun announced this http://sunsource.net/ - an open source repository within my finger tips , so tell me, who needs Timmy the SUCKER !
-
Onward to the past
2001-06-02 03:40:31 sjatkins [View]
Anyone who has worked with ADO, ASP and the rest of MS alphabet soup knows there are one or two good ideas there floating among a lot of bloated, proprietary krap. As long as it is proprietary ti cannot be the backbone of everything. COM, the hard of MS component-ware is highly proprietary. It's few Unix ports are ill performing and massively over-priced.
I will believe MS is serious with .NET when they add Open Source for all the infrastructure, really good COBRA bridges and good Java interoperability. Until then it is another great Lie by the Great Satan of Software.
-
.NET and O'Reilly
2001-06-02 03:31:17 sjatkins [View]
I think you are a bunch of damned traitors. .NET is a good idea in the sense of creating a common backbone virtual machine that allows plugging in components. It is very, very bad if that backbone is not fully Open Source. It is worse if it is in the hands of Microsoft. Microsoft never has been and is not interested in enabling software generally. O'Reilly should know this. I can only see this as a selling out. It looks like O'Reilly cares more for profits than for standing up for what is best for the world of computing.
-
What a big lie !
2001-06-01 15:52:51 juantay [View]
"I've trusted O'Reily for so long - but now that I know what the power of the mighty D$$ can do - I'll have to look elsewhere - SourceForge.net anyone !"
I'll be checking out the site. I now trust IBM now more than I do O'Reilly..
Juantay
-
What a big lie !
2001-06-01 17:25:24 Dale Dougherty |
[View]
I'm curious, why do you trust IBM more than O'Reilly? -
Re: What a big lie !
2001-06-01 20:50:52 juantay [View]
As I see it, the synergy between Sun and IBM, employees going from Sun to IBM etc., I'm guessing was created by Sun to create a cooperative atmosphere between the two companies and in the end as I see it, it worked.
Now both are great supporters of Open Source. Sun Micro is inventing and then giving away
things like crazy it seems and when you ask yourself why, the answer is most assuredly,
at least in part, to DEFEAT Microsoft.
We are in a WAR! Do you know what it is to for a big company to give things away feverishly
and not even say WHY they are giving things away? IBM appears to me to support all of this and it's as if they are competing with Sun in a friendly manner.
Now could Sun create such a loving cooperation with Microsoft??, that is for people from Microsoft to go over to Sun and vice versa. no Way! It would never work because Microsoft is too
far gone in their mentality.
Now then, O'Reilly wants to create this same kind of communication channel to Microsoft.
O'Reilly wants to work with (and work on) Microsoft so to speak. But what they don't realize
is how strong Microsoft actually is, what an incredibly smooth talker Bill Gates is e.g., and
that they can really have no influence. The only way to defeat Microsoft is to surround them by
creating Innovation in many different places. Then Complexity will soon tire them.
Now I'm not a Microsoft Hater. I believe that Microsoft is excellent in many areas of
Business. But it's their tactics. C# should not even exist because it's purely an attack on
the momentum of Java. This is not true cooperation in the industry. This is not playing
well with others! C#'s innards were constructed to compete with Java so it would be completely heretical for a Java Developer to embrace C#. He would be betraying openness and cooperation and innovation, this special vision, this dream in the industry in a very direct way. Yet O'Reilly
does a piece on the creme de la creme of taboo's for Java Developers??
As I said before, this is a WAR. The 'Open Community' really has no choice but
to be part of it. Now the O'Reilly Network advertises itself as one of these 'Open Communities' that look toward the future. Yet they invite the sworn enemy of open source??
Not even IBM would do such a thing.
Juantay
-
Re: What a big lie !
2001-12-10 08:39:46 james_jarvis [View]
'This is not true cooperation in the industry. This is not playing well with others!'
why has Sun not submitted Java to the ISO then ? -
Re: What a big lie !
2003-06-06 08:54:01 anonymous2 [View]
Why did Sun not want to work with Microsoft on .net?
-
Are they going to play well with others?
2001-06-01 15:28:25 juantay [View]
I don't like the idea of O'Reilly giving them a folder because they are still a threat even though I don't think they can compete when it comes to 'Smart' web services. Giving them a folder of itself gives them a certain prestige. They should be shunned by the Open Community, isolated, because their non-openness activities are so very Great. Who cares if C# has a thousand bells and whistles. It's what they intend to do with it that counts.
O'Reilly! you're cavorting too closely with the main threat to innovation. In 2002 we may see the Microsoft Logo under your name.
Juantay
-
What a big lie !
2001-06-01 02:11:45 toboy [View]
"First, the .NET platform and its growing array of tools promises to radically simplify development of web-enabled applications, such as web services, in ways that Visual Studio did for desktop applications. The open source community has been playing catch-up in this arena for years and no real alternatives exist. "
if this came from any other source, I wont complain much and will put it down to ignorance - but O'Reily ? something fishy is going on here.
So JBuilder, Forte, VisualAge, NetBeans (best IDE I've ever used and ytes that includes V Studio), IBM WSDK (first full web services SDK) are not "real alternatives" , come on O'Reily, you guys are unto something - at least you have to know that the likes of myself who have grown up swearing by many great O'Reily books should be smart enough to know what a bare faced lie is.
I've trusted O'Reily for so long - but now that I know what the power of the mighty D$$ can do - I'll have to look elsewhere - SourceForge.net anyone ! -
What a big lie !
2001-06-02 03:36:03 sjatkins [View]
What Visual Studio did for desktop applications??? It enabled barely literate programmers to create nice guis using Visual Basic that could not be scaled at all except by the MS MTS framework. It gave us Visual C++ that killed most significant sized C++ projects due to the sheer bulk and braindead wastage of its compiler, linker and IDE tool environment. It finally gave us COM in a more straightforward form as COM++, until you look under the covers.
If we have nothing in OS to compete with this krap then it is high time to write some, not sing the praises of M$.
-
O'Reilly is just hedging its bet and should say so !
2001-06-01 01:33:48 toboy [View]
..you should be bold enough to say that you're just hedging your bets should .NET succeed, instead of crowing about how .NET could help the OSS community (what a load of pooo). Be brave. Oreilly you're not resistant to the power of the mighty $$$. And what makes you think you're Open source info king ?, the web does a better job of informing the OSS community than O'Reilly ever can. Microsoft is wrong by thinking that by bribing you, your influence will win over the OSS community to .NYET BLAH !.
I'm off to theserverside.com , they know more about Java than you /**SUCKERS**/ ever will !
Its fine that microsoft has developed a compiler platform system to that accepts multiple input languages, but to meld this into an esoteric use(abuse) of browser HTML language processing as abhorent. The bottom line is that asp.net depends on bastardizing browser HTML DOM object internal presentation to accept this new back-door macrosoft language that browsers must most annoint as the new internet dynamic standard to subvert HTML object controls.
Why not use Java-script routines as the stardard means instead of a new internal Microsoft proprietary browser language to effect HTML object inner logic expansion operations?