Re: Black Plague + Eu concerns
Robert Craig wrote:
>
> Al Getz wrote:
> > In the down time, i've been thinking about Pete Lomax's solution to
> > 'allocate_string' and memory management using Euphoria, but now im
> > reading about something that sounds rather alarming here on the forum...
> > That is, MS's new "Vista" (previously "Longhorn"). This sounds like
> > something that could take our code we now have (in Euphoria) and turn
> > it into a pile of useless garbage. On the other hand, if this was
> > treated just like a new 'Platform' perhaps Rob could come up with
> > a new Euphoria for that platform too? Did anyone ask him yet?
> >
> > I know it might take a while for MS's new takeover, but i find they
> > are relentless when it comes to marketing and this new system is
> > a big trick to grab and keep more of the market as usual. I dont think
> > it can be stopped, and Linux dev is too slow to keep up, but if Rob
> > can begin to support the new 'platform' perhaps this would help?
> > So i repeat: did anyone ask Rob about support for Vista yet?
>
> Don't worry. As long as there's a C/C++ for Longhorn/Vista,
> there will be a Euphoria too.
>
Correct, Microsoft still supports their MFC (Microsoft Foundation Class) library
with their Visual C++ compiler. Visual C++ is now a hybrid Native and MSIL
compiler. Its 2005 version will support the current ISO C++ and CLR .NET v2.0
specification.
Win32 and COM development will still be 100% supported, even emulated DOS will
be available. However, if you wanted to make use of WinFX with Euphoria, one of
three things must happen first:
1) Euphoria for Windows to become a object-oriented .NET enabled language, with
a seperate byte code compiler to produce MSIL, it would have to be completely
compliant with the latest CLR specification.
2) A .NET bridge for Euphoria, that would wrap the .NET runtime into C++
compiled DLLs, then an additional Euphoria wrappers for those DLLs.
3) An Euphoria to MSIL translator, that would effectively convert normal
Euphoria code to Microsoft IL, to be executed by their JIT compiler.
The first option is the recommended, but any of these would be very complex &
difficult/daunting task, especially since Euphoria is not even an object-oriented
language, were as .NET is an advanced fully object-oriented platform like Java.
All these options would require the .NET framework redistributable runtime too.
> Judging by all previous Microsoft Windows upgrades,
> I think you can assume:
>
> - it will be delivered late
>
Winter 2006, maybe delayed a couple of months further. Beta 1 is out now.
That will be 5 years after the release of Windows XP in 2001. Normally a new
Microsoft OS comes out every 2 to 3 years. WinFS (next generation Windows file
system), MSH (Microsoft Command Shell), along with any major fixes and
improvements will all be available in a future service pack for Windows Vista.
> - it will prove to be more "hype" than substance
>
> - it will be a smaller improvement than people were led
> to believe
>
Windows Vista is promised to be a change as big as Windows 95 was to 3.1,
perhaps even bigger. Beta 1 already proves that for the most part, even though
many key features are missing, and is full of bugs. Microsoft wants a OS that is
comparable but different than Apple's MacOS X Tiger, which I believe is currently
the ultimate operating system.
Visit these sites for in depth information on Windows Vista:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Longhorn
http://www.webopedia.com/TERM/W/Windows_Vista.html
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsvista/basics/default.mspx
> - there will be fear that existing code won't work,
> but those fears will prove to be unfounded. After
> a quarter century, most DOS programs run fine on XP.
> I think the WIN32 API will be safe for at least that long.
>
I think Microsoft assumes that by 2008, virtually all new development on Windows
Vista will be with WinFX. Plus much more development with the .NET framework on
Windows 2000 and XP. WinFX will be the new native platform for developing rich
client + server side applications and web services, and the only way to go if you
wish to take advantage of Vista and beyond. People will have a choice of many
languages to choose from, just look at these .NET enabled languages:
http://www.dotnetpowered.com/languages.aspx, and many more are to come; Euphoria
can be one of them! WinFX will also be available for download to Windows 2000,
Windows Server 2003, and Windows XP users to widen the availability to a much
larger user base.
> Also, you shouldn't assume that Microsoft is going to
> have a stranglehold on the industry forever. Look what happened
> when IBM, which dominated the PC world in the mid-80's, tried to
> get everyone to upgrade to PS/2 and OS/2. The industry and the public
> decided to keep the existing standards, and IBM was left out in the cold.
>
Computers as you know them today wont last forever, probably not even 4 decades
into this century.
Microsoft will continue to have hold on the desktop market, while Linux has hold
on the server side. However with the introduction of Windows Longhorn Server, it
is likely to see more businesses returning back to Windows. Several are already
doing this, such as Regal Entertainment Group in Los Vegas. Using a 10-year Net
Present Model, they relized that Windows Server System would significantly lower
thier Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) than using Red Hat Linux.
Realize that .NET will eventually find a place in the UNIX world too: Linux,
BSD, MacOS X. Mono is an open-source, cross-plaform implementation of the CLR
that is not affiliated with Microsoft. Currently only C# is supported, but an
Visual Basic.NET compiler is being developed and in alpha stage at the moment.
Microsoft is working on the v2.0 specification of their shared-source ECMA Common
Language Infrastructure (CLI) and the ECMA C# language specification code named:
Rotor, that is the core of the .NET framework, which is to build on Windows XP,
FreeBSD, and MacOS X. I believe Mono and dotGNU was made possible in part by
Rotor.
Visual Basic 2005 will be a big improvement, and become a more viable option
with the introduction of generics, operator overloading, XML comments, IsNot
operator, partial types, "My" namespace, "Continue" statement :P, continue & edit
debugging feature, and more. It is important to realize that VB6 and VB.NET are
two very different languages, and support for each other exists only in the
boundary of a .NET namespace: Microsoft.VisualBasic.dll.
> Regards,
> Rob Craig
> Rapid Deployment Software
> <a href="http://www.RapidEuphoria.com">http://www.RapidEuphoria.com</a>
>
Regards,
Vincent
----------------------------------------------
___ __________ ___
/__/\ /__________\ |\ _\
\::\'\ //::::::::::\\ |'|::|
\::\'\ //:::_::::_:::\\ |'|::|
\::\'\ //::/ |::| \::\\ |'|::|
\::\'\ //::/ |::| \::\\|'|::|
\::\'\__//::/ |::| \::\|'|::|
\::\','/::/ |::| \::\\|::|
\::\_/::/ |::| \::\|::|
\::,::/ |::| \:::::|
\___/ |__| \____|
.``.
',,'
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
