Re: Ada & .Net (Rotor)

["Marin David Condic" <dont.bother.mcondic.auntie.spam@[acm.org>]

"Pascal Obry" <p.obry@wanadoo.fr> wrote in message
news:ur8lnd5o4.fsf@wanadoo.fr...
> work with. Of course it is always a bit tricky to build Open Source
softwares
> on this platform (it is quite easier to use the Microsoft Compiler and
> environment), but with a bit of effort it is possible to build a lot of
the
> nice tools we have on Unix (thanks to Cygwin).
>
In what way is it tricky to build Open Source software on Windows? Can you
not build Open Source software using a Microsoft compiler? Maybe you can't
give away their part of the software but it would seem that anything you
build is yours.

Or do you mean that much Open Source software is developed for various
flavors of Unix and hence doesn't always translate well to Windows?

Just trying to understand where you're going with this. Lots of us use Ada
on PC's with Windows and I don't think that precludes development of Open
Source (depending on your definition of "Open Source" too...)


> I also agree with Jurgen that the underlying framework has changed a
> lot... but if the .NET was the answer, what was the question ? A market
> share, the fight with SUN and Java... what's the real value for the
> enterprises ?
>
Keep in mind that Microsoft is in business to make money for the
stockholders and not necessarily to further computer technology. They can,
and have, sold/attempted to sell things that move the market to further
dependence on Microsoft. (Not unlike a drug dealer giving away free samples
to get you hooked.) Not all of those things are good for the end users and
sometimes they have been rejected by the market. Maybe .NET fits into that
category - it has yet to be seen. Maybe its a Solution in search of a
Problem?

MDC
--
Marin David Condic
Senior Software Engineer
Pace Micro Technology Americas    www.pacemicro.com
Enabling the digital revolution
e-Mail:    marin.condic@pacemicro.com