The Fine Print: The following comments
are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )
|
Re: ActiveX vs (GNU Mono and DotGNU)
by reprazent on Tuesday 10/Jul/2001, @21:28
|
Hey smart guy: ActiveX and .NET have nothing to do with each other. 'Kay, buh-bye now.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: ActiveX vs (GNU Mono and DotGNU)
by XFly on Wednesday 11/Jul/2001, @08:40
|
Don't think so and see the future.
PERHAPS in 2005 there will have just some .NET programs, so be carefull insulting things which may save you from Micro$oft softs!!!
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: ActiveX vs (GNU Mono and DotGNU)
by GuyWhoActuallyCodesWithDotNet on Wednesday 11/Jul/2001, @13:34
|
I would like to point out a couple of things:
1) I love Linux - I am not here to bash it.
2) KDE may deliver ActiveX support today, but Microsoft delivered it years ago.
3) .Net, as you may or may not know, is in beta right now, and the framework, from what I can tell, is really quite stable. There isn't much to complain about. The Visual Studio IDE is still a little problematic, but I have been using it at work without much difficulty.
Anyway, it seems strange to me that a Linux guy would talk smack about beta software. That's pretty far along in the development stage considering the usual "something-0.0.0.0.0.1-pre-pre-alpha.tar.gz" that we're used to seeing.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: ActiveX vs (GNU Mono and DotGNU)
by n on Wednesday 11/Jul/2001, @16:57
|
Look at the subject line.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
|
Re: ActiveX vs (GNU Mono and DotGNU)
by RevAaron on Wednesday 11/Jul/2001, @17:09
|
ActiveX and .NET are two very different things. There isn't some race between KDE's ActiveX support and GNU Mono. AFAIK, KDE has *no* support for anything resembling .NET, and there are not plans for it. This would put KDE behind GNOME in that sense.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: ActiveX vs (GNU Mono and DotGNU)
by Timothy R. Butler on Thursday 12/Jul/2001, @01:05
|
Actually, AFAIK, Mono isn't just a UI, but a CLI Runtime Environment and C# compiler. Thus, both GNOME and KDE can take advantage of Mono.
As far as the ActiveX vs. Mono comparison goes, I think the poster was pointing out the KDE people just finished a major MS compatiblity project while the Mono people are saying they might be part way there [on an MS compatiblity project] by the end of the year.
-Tim
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
|
That's because...
by ac on Friday 13/Jul/2001, @09:33
|
...ActiveX support for Konqueror has never been mentioned before.
I'm sure they were already working on it a few weeks ago.
If they announced that they are working on this a few weeks ago, you wouldn't say this.
And this is based on Wine's existing work, which is a lot less work than Mono.
BTW, there's already code available for Mono.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: ActiveX vs (GNU Mono and DotGNU)
by JMoon5FTM on Thursday 05/Feb/2004, @12:29
|
ActiveX and .NET are very different things, so the comparison isn't all that accurate...
...however, for those who seem to think Gnome is "ahead" and don't see how amazing this announcement is, I feel the need to point out that:
1) .NET was designed to be more platform-independent. ActiveX is based on low-level MS API calls, many of which are un-documented or poorly documented. So, the ActiveX stuff is harder to implement.
2) .NET is extremely new and has very few uses in current Windows versions. ActiveX is everywhere, and every time a Linux product expands support for ActiveX, it is taking a major step in compatability, far more than any .NET project will offer.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
The Fine Print: The previous
comments are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )
|
![[KDE Dot News]](http://www.kde.org/dot/Images/kdedotnews.gif)
