AmigaDE for Pegasos PPC website

[Hammer]

The bottom line is we do not know if AmigaDE is worth the license fee that we will pay to integrate it into a product offering we make.

Could you port the open sourced MONO (DOTNET) framework instead for MorphOS?  

[Hammer]

bbrv wrote:
Hi Hammer, tell us how.  That is one of the reasons for having this discussion here to bring out not only the ideas, but the specifics.  It is an international brainstorming session that if done successfully can yield enough information to create a Marketing Requirements Document that in turn can be sourced to a technology team and a level of risk vs. reward can be assessed.  Will it make business sense?  Let's figure it out right here, right now.

R&B  :-)

By leveraging dotNET(via open source MONO) ecosystem; MorphOS can assimilate the future (and/or current) dotNET developments, applications and games.  

PS; MONO is supported by Novell…

Reference;
http://www.go-mono.com/screenshots.html
http://www.go-mono.com/faq.html#compatibility
http://www.vertigosoftware.com/Quake2.htm
http://www.ikvm.net/
**JAVA VM for dotNET. This in turn runs IBM's Open Source IDE i.e. Eclipse.

[Hammer]

Rodney wrote:

Waccoon wrote:
I don't see any benefit to anybody since DE has not really been demonstrated.  Most people are at a loss as to what DE really is and is supposed to do.  Being dead quiet for nearly four years after "buying" the Amiga name tends to do that.  Personally, I feel Amiga has been dead for two years and won't release anything.  If that's not true, they sure haven't been trying hard to convince us otherwise.

Why use DE and Ami2D when you can use PTL natively on practically any OS?

Well its not big atm, but remember Amiga Incs long term plan is to get AmigaOS running through the DE, which is a grand idea. Much like the .net strategy without all the webservices crap.

That web services crap is for MIS (Managed Information Systems) i.e. related to eBusiness based solutions. Secondly, dotNET framework  compatible MONO is open sourced.

[Hammer]

AmigaMac wrote:
I read most of the MONO/dotNET posts, so here is my 2 cents;

It could go in its own direction, but that would be counter-productive unless its adoption starts to rival that of the Microsoft original.

The Ximian connection comes from the fact that they were instrumental in starting the MONO project, long before Novell entered they picture.

Toying with MONO (or dotGNU as it will be known) is playing a very dangerous game.  Microsoft has shown time and time again that they don't mind breaking compatibility with sidekick standards (DOS, J++, .doc, etc...), and this will certainly be the case with MONO.

The idea behind such technologies is to make them hardware agnostic.

It would be in the best interest to stick with Java for web services since Sun Microsystems doesn't mind others to join in on the effort.  Why mess with something that will always be one step behind the mothership?

It wouldn’t stop open source camp from having dotNET compatible ecosystem in open source OSes e.g. Linux.

SUN’s JAVA technology usually supports a single programming language i.e. JAVA. While MONO/dotNET supports multiple programming languages.   It gives the application programmers the freedom to chose their favourite programming language without being tied down to just JAVA.

[Hammer]

Indeed, looking to adopt MONO would be a far more adventurous move. The only drawback I see with MONO is that it is basically an open-source "copy" of .NET, which mean the direction is dictated by Microsoft.

Linux X86 <> Linux PPC <> Linux (what ever the next CPU of the day) re-compiling applications would be less of an issue with MONO/dotGNU/dotNET ecosystem.

Note that it doesn’t stop the open source groups to borrow some concepts from MS’s dotNET framework. The compatibility (to a certain degree) with MS’s dotNET is just the added bonus.  

[Hammer]

Unfortunately that wont be the saving grace if incompatibilities arise via web services on the internet. This will become issue as it already has been an issue with IE versus Netscape... get my drift?

Netscape/AOL $crewed up with their version 6 and paid for it. Web services is one area of the whole MONO/dotNET package.

That's not the angle I'm hitting at and yeah I know about the multiple language support, which is a great concept on its own. But with Microsoft wanting to leverage its monopoly with Windows and finally overtake the web with dotNET, this multiple language support might be an oversight as far as the other guys are concerned. My thoughts on Java are really with the idea that Sun is willing to let others adopt that strategy into their own, and that's a better approach then trying to get dotGNU to mimic dotNET without error.

No one can stop the open source/Linux groups in borrowing the concepts from MS’s dotNET and create their own application and development ecosystem for Linux/GNU. The compatibility with MS’s dotNET is just the added bonus.

With dotNET ecosystem, it enables MS to deploy a single application title to be targeted for multiple HW platforms in transparently form.

This can be applied for Linux as well i.e. it reduces the user’s intervention in re-compiling applications between Linux X86 and Linux PPC (or what ever the CPU that is in vouge at that time).

MONO's deveopment is inline with Crossover-Office*, Trans-gamming* and WINE/WINEX* open source (mainly from the Linux camp) initiative.