Quote:> Jim, can I trouble you to elaborate on why .net is a better platform
> developing what I understand to be just a GUI desktop? I'm not
> just noticed that nobody is really talking technical, and you have
> expressed an opinion, so I hope you will elaborate.
I'll take a stab at this.
Like all technology, I don't think .NET is a "better" anything unless it
fits your specific needs more closely than anything else. Having said
that, from GNOME's perspective I can see why it's so attractive. They
spent a lot of time developing Bonobo, and frankly, it's a lot of work.
If they can drop that work and let MS do the design for them, they can
concentrate on implementation of that design instead. Further, since
the .NET framework is far more extensive than Bonobo, it's a much bigger
Traditionally, Open Source developers have been much better at imitating
someone elses design than designing something themselves from the ground
up. Such projects usually take years and often die before they reach
maturity or spend an eternity going nowhere (For example, look at HURD
which was (and probably still will someday) to be a revolutionary new
kernel compared to Linux which was a reimplmentation of other existing
Quote:> From what I understand, Gnome is first a library. Then, though it is
> technically not part of Gnome, there is the companion Sawfish window
> manager. Finally, and here is where I am haziest, there is "what you
> the wallpaper, menus, icons, and so forth.
GNOME is an environment. It's the whole package. That package includes
the library, the icons, the window manager, the API's, etc..). Miguel
is just suggesting doing away with one of the most resource intensive
parts of developing GNOME.
Quote:> Getting back to the original question, I find myself asking, what is
> than C?
C has nothing to do with it. You can write .NET applications in C if
you want (well, C++ and if someone bothered you could create a C only
version as well). .NET is language neutral, which is why there are
already over a dozen .NET languages.