[duckfighter]

I want to buy my first mac - a PowerBook 12" ( pc-notebooks sux !)

Everything i need to know, if i can work with .NET on a mac .. I heard about a project called mono mono - that should work as the .NET framework on linux - but does - or will it work on MacOSX - anyone tried it ?

And what about developer tools ?

Or.. are there alternatives ? ( don't say PHP)

If i cant work with .NET on a mac, i will probarly not switch at this point

/duckfigher:

[int69h]

You can get C# and the .NET foundation straight from MS.

The Shared Source CLI 1.0 Release, aka Rotor

[Mithras]

Looking to Microsoft for the viability of competitor to Microsoft is not likely to turn out well. It's not likely to be the most richly rewarding experience; after all, if you *really* want to write .NET code, you should be running Windows. And if you *really* want to be using a Mac, you should be writing native Mac code.

That said...

You can compile a simple "Hello, World" .NET app using the Rotor CLI implementation. But Microsoft hasn't given any indication that it intends to release the .NET Framework on any platform but Windows.

Some work has been done to bring Mono to Mac OS X, but OS X is not a main target platform, and the work isn't done.


If you really like the Apple hardware, you can always run Linux on it.

[duckfighter]

Originally posted by int69h:
You can get C# and the .NET foundation straight from MS.

The Shared Source CLI 1.0 Release, aka Rotor

Thanks for the link !

Mithras :

The problem is that i will use .Net mostly for web-development - and as i see, there is no alternative to asp.net ( should have said that before )

[duckfighter]

oh god dammit, i want a powerbook

I'll give it a try - it must be possible to do it, working up against a win2k server using LAN or something..

Maybe the mono-project will be succesfull

[smeger]

You could always write your code on a Mac and compile on a Windows box. The mac plays nicely with Windows Networking, and you can use SSH and/or VNC to control the windows machine. BBEdit is a programmers-dream text editor that includes built-in FTP.

Subtle Plug: There are some nice VNC clients for OS X.

[NeXTLoop]

Don't forget Virtual PC. It's not a perfect solution, but if you really want a PowerBook and need to program using .Net, then it may be a viable alternative. The best of both worlds.

[duckfighter]

thanks for the tips ! I guess it is not going to be a too big issue

Then i just have to wait, until the 12"PB arrive in Denmark and

[Arkham_c]

Mono is fine and should compile for the Mac, but it's in very early release and is not "done" yet.

Truthfully, there's nothing in .NET that you can't do in java/jsp/servlets. Java works with more containers, more databases, and more third party tools and code.

There's a lot of good open source java stuff too. With nifty Jakarta tools like Velocity templates and Struts MCV frameworks, java is the way to go for web services. Also, when you are done, your apps will run on Windows, but also on Macs and Suns.

Go with java.

[macNullString]

I'm soon to be a Mac user. I've been a hardcore PC user for 7 years, but this Mac OS X has attracted me a lot, so I just ordered an eMac yesterday.

I'm excited about the CLI implementation on Mac OS X. I don't think Microsoft would ever release VS .NET for Mac OS X, BUT it is certainly attractive that you may be able to run your C# code on Mac OS X.

Has anyone even tried to run Hello World app using mono compiler?

[yeslekmc]

Unfortunately, you'll be severely disappointed by the development tools available with Mac OS X if you're used to using Visual Studio.NET and especially the C# language. I've used both platforms (and various IDE's) for over a dozen years now. Microsoft puts out the best development tools (for a price). Apple needs to do a heck of a lot more with PB and IB before it even comes close to the robustness of Visual Studio.NET. This is a constant irk to me, as I truly love Mac OS X and it has so much potential. But the lack of world-class quality development tools is a detriment to developers and is holding back this platform.

Once again, Apple has delivered the best OS on the planet, but they keep failing to realize that it doesn�t matter. Without top-rate development tools, they will consistently FAIL to attract the masses of developers. PB is not much more than a turbo-charged text editor with a GUI front-end slapped on top of GCC. Sure it can help you organize your files and quickly let you jump from source to source, but that�s about as far as it goes. Heck, IB isn�t even integrated with PB. I would have thought for sure that by now Apple would have integrated the two environments into a single development tool. For those of you who are used to world-class tools you know exactly what I mean. And just because you like Apple products and OS X doesn�t mean you have to blindly defend the poor development offerings that are available for your beloved platform of choice.

For Apple to truly start to regain market share and make serious inroads into the corporate marketplace they need to start to deliver top-notch tools for mainstream developers. Developers shouldn�t have to make do with tools that are two or three generations behind what is available in the Windows world. The easier you make it on developers to write programs the more they will be attracted to the platform. No one enjoys spending an inordinate amount of time writing code. Once again, those who *truly* make a living programming in both environments will know exactly what I mean.

I suppose people reading this post will fall into one of two camps:

1) Those who sadly agree with me but don�t want to say anything about it because others think it is an act of blasphemously to say anything bad about Apple

2) Those who will just flame me because they have never experienced the ease of development that comes with top-rate, integrated development tools.

[smeger]

Originally posted by yeslekmc:
Unfortunately, you'll be severely disappointed by the development tools available with Mac OS X if you're used to using Visual Studio.NET and especially the C# language.

I've seen this opinion posted a few times, and although it's probably correct, I'd like to state that I've done a few years of development using Visual C++ on Windows and I greatly prefer Apple's free development tools.

However, all of the development I did on Windows was for CLI scientific apps, so I wasn't exposed to the full power of the Visual environment.

Still, I really really seriously not-kidding-around hated using the Visual IDE, and find Apple's Project Builder to be a hell of a lot nicer. Clearly, this is subjective.

[int69h]

3) Those of us who will disagree with you because you're wrong.

You'll get not argument from me regarding Apple's classic MacOS dev tools.

Care to share any examples of what makes VS a "world-class quality development" and what makes PB and IB the piles of crap you imply they are?

From a technical standpoint, there's nothing particularly compelling about OS X. There are far better microkernels than Mach. BSD is 30 year old technology.

Mac OS X's strength IS its dev tools and frameworks. There are parts that could be better. The interface to GDB comes to mind. However, the same case can be made for VS. SoftICE is far better than the integrated debugger. Emacs, VIM, and a thousand other editors are better than the integrated editor.

But the lack of world-class quality development tools is a detriment to developers and is holding back this platform.

Talented developers don't require tools to do their jobs for them. The only ones being held back are the typical drag, click, generate class of VB programmers.

VS.NET is a great tool; however, it's not the panacea of software development. Overall, it's probably a better tool than PB/IB, but for $1,079 for the entry-level product it damn well better be.

[yeslekmc]

Originally posted by smeger:
I've seen this opinion posted a few times, and although it's probably correct, I'd like to state that I've done a few years of development using Visual C++ on Windows and I greatly prefer Apple's free development tools.

However, all of the development I did on Windows was for CLI scientific apps, so I wasn't exposed to the full power of the Visual environment.

Still, I really really seriously not-kidding-around hated using the Visual IDE, and find Apple's Project Builder to be a hell of a lot nicer. Clearly, this is subjective.

Visual C++ 5.0/6.0 was a LAST GENERATION tool. It was quite similar to using the old Think C/C++ IDE (back in Mac OS 6.x, 7.x, etc...). You had to define a lot of CONSTANTS and ID's for all of your objects, dialog boxes, etc... Sure you had a visual IDE for designing the interface (just like you used to do with RESEDIT back in the classic Mac OS days) but it still wasn't that integrated. And yes, I'll agree Visual C++ 5.0/6.0 wasn't all that of an appealing environment to develop in. It was very cryptic and inconsistent with its implementation of just about everything from one feature to the next.

Today Visual Studio.NET has taken the integration to a whole new level. Everything works together (well, except for a bug or two) seamlessly. Your properties palette also contains all of the events of an object as well as properties. You can easily add events to code by simply double-clicking on an event. All of the overhead code is generated for you and properly. You can still do everything manually if you like, and there are instances in which you want to. But everything just works. Programming applications is QUICK and PAINLESS for experienced developers. The other flagship feature is CODE-COMPLETION that truly works. Even your custom objects in your program are instantly recognized too. And then there's XML documentation. After you get used to using this you'll wonder how you ever got along without it. Just imagine creating a shared library that already has ALL of its public methods and properties documented as you use the object in code. As you type each object up pops a non-obtrusive list for you that shows all of the properties, methods and events of the object. You can even have the list code complete for you. This dramatically cuts down on typing and spelling errors. Not to mention as you use a method, after each parameter it highlights what the parameter's data type is and what should come next. This (and more and more) is all missing from PB.

In Visual Studio.NET the visual interface is completely integrated with the source code. Think REALBasic on super-steroids here. You can easily design your interface just as you would in IB. But when you go to code you don�t have to manually create outlets and actions. You just select the object and double-click the event you wish to implement. All of the supporting event code is generated for you. All you have to do is type the code that needs to be implemented. Don�t tell me you can do the same thing in IB. It is much much simpler and you wouldn�t argue about it if you�ve done any serious development with C# and Visual Studio.NET. There is simply no comparison.

This thread was started by someone who is an experienced .NET developer looking to move to the Mac. I'm just pointing out the reality of the situation. Mac OS X is a beautiful OS that has tons of potential. But the tools just aren't there for the person who wants to be truly productive at a speed and rate they are used to when using VS.NET.

[yeslekmc]

Originally posted by int69h:
Care to share any examples of what makes VS a "world-class quality development" and what makes PB and IB the piles of crap you imply they are?

See my above post for examples of VS.NET...

And I never said that PB and IB are piles of crap. I just said that were a couple of generations OLD. These tools are behind the times and not up to par with what Apple is capable of creating.

Originally posted by int69h:
From a technical standpoint, there's nothing particularly compelling about OS X. There are far better microkernels than Mach. BSD is 30 year old technology.

Aqua and Quartz Extreme are NOT 30 year old technology. Apple has finally brought UNIX to the desktop in a user-friendly client-side implementation. (Now if they could just pull a rabbit out of the hat and start running it on FASTER processors --just like OpenStep used too!)

Originally posted by int69h:
Mac OS X's strength IS its dev tools and frameworks. There are parts that could be better.

Frameworks YES. Dev Tools NO. Apple needs to write a VS.NET-class IDE that will let you truly tap the power of the Cocoa and Foundation frameworks with ease. That means truly integrating PB and IB into a single IDE. At the moment PB and IB is not much different than using BBEdit and ResEdit of yesterdays. Sure IB is a huge step up from ResEdit as far as designing your interface, but it's still not that integrated with PB.

Originally posted by int69h:
The interface to GDB comes to mind. However, the same case can be made for VS. SoftICE is far better than the integrated debugger. Emacs, VIM, and a thousand other editors are better than the integrated editor.

I agree. But you haven't used the debugger in VS.NET have you? It can do everything AND more that all of those tools can. Beyond stepping-through code, and breakpoints, stack lists, and variable watchers, it even lets you open up mutliple windows that let you observe the raw contents of memory while you debug/run your program. This is yet another example of why PB is a LAST generation tool. It could be better. Apple is capable of it, just look at all of the other apps they've created as of late.

Originally posted by int69h:
Talented developers don't require tools to do their jobs for them. The only ones being held back are the typical drag, click, generate class of VB programmers.

You are partially correct here. A world-class IDE will NOT make you a first-rate talented developer. But a first-class IDE will make a talented developer EXTREMELY productive and able to do their job more quickly and effeciently than they were able to do before. A top-notch IDE doesn't teach you how to program or what to program. It just lets you get down to business all that much sooner. Time is money for professional programmers.

Originally posted by int69h:
VS.NET is a great tool; however, it's not the panacea of software development. Overall, it's probably a better tool than PB/IB, but for $1,079 for the entry-level product it damn well better be.

PB and IB do beat VS.NET in price. But then again, you get what you pay for. Tens upon thousands of developers (and probably more?) pay good money for VS.NET for a reason. If Apple tried to charge for PB and IB very few would pay for it unless it was very cheap OR they had no other choices. What Apple should be doing is creating their own $999 (like Final-Cut Pro, etc...) development suite for Mac OS X that caters to professional developers. People to whom time is money. The more you can do with the least effort the more you can deliver and be compensated for.

[int69h]

Aqua and Quartz Extreme are NOT 30 year old technology.

The definition of Operating System is so malleable. While I don't consider the windowing system to be part of the operating system, Quartz Extreme is indeed impressive. Quartz itself is just the logical evolution of Display Postscript, a technology that NeXT and Sun were shipping roughly 15 years ago. Aqua? Blitting pixmaps, or in this case PDFs, for graphical components is nothing new.

(Now if they could just pull a rabbit out of the hat and start running it on FASTER processors --just like OpenStep used too!)

The hat is IBM, and the rabbit is the Power4. The current lack of a competitive CPU is Motorolas fault, not Apple's. Motorola acted in bad faith in regards to their agreement with Apple.

Why should the onus of creating develper tools be on Apple? I'm all for better tools. As soon as someone provides them, I'll be ready for better tools again.

you get what you pay for

Indeed you do. If PB/IB don't meet yours needs, write a new development environment. If it's superior to Apple's I would be happy to consider purchasing it.

I'm assuming you develop software for a living. Have you ever considered a career in marketing?

[smeger]

Okay, yeslekmc, your description of VS.net does make it sounds like a more productive coding environment - specifically, the code completion, auto-documenting, and function prototype helping stuff.

The only place where I'd disagree with you is with regards to gdb. I personally prefer gdb's simple text-based interface. Basically, the only reason I use PB for debugging is so that I can see a code listing while I'm in the gdb console. But, again, this is a subjective opinion and many others may agree with your preference.

Well, actually, I guess I'd also disagree with your statement that a Switcher would be "severely disappointed" with the free development tools on OS X. I'll give you that the .Net IDE sounds superior, but this in no way implies that OS X's suck.

Anyway, thanks for the description/clarification!

[Gul Banana]

I think I agree with yeslekmc, sort of. I like Project Builder and Interface Builder a lot, but agree that VS.NET is a better IDE.. however, there's no way in hell I could afford to pay thousands of dollars for an IDE any time soon. For those who can afford it, yes, it would be good if Apple made a more 'pro' version.