BenoitRen Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 Mono isn't officially supported. Otherwise I agree with you, Leo Natan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leo Natan Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 (edited) If you think that GUI of OS is only small part of OS than you are right. But i think that GUI is one of the most used part of system, unless you use cmd line as i like. MS want to build system on it as much as possible and they start to do it. I am sure that they use asm and classical versions of C to make "close to hardware" systems to work, but once they created whole GUI in .net they have done step which has changed many things.No core part of windows was programmed in .net before, and i am sure that explorer.exe IS based on this platform.Also i never believed that Mono is equal to .net. Beta version of software which I test is able to work on any windows with framework 2.0 and later and DirectX installed after .net, but never on linux. Maybe mono miss managed directx code - dont know exact reason. It is strange, because the developers of this sofware are trying to make it work under linux for some time."but once they created whole GUI in .net they have done step which has changed many things" This, again!? "Whole GUI"!? Do you actually consider Minesweeper and Calculator to be the whole GUI?? Or perhaps Minesweeper and Calculator are the "core part" of Windows Vista? If you really believe that, I can see why you don't like Vista and Windows 7. "i am sure that explorer.exe IS based on this platform" = As for Mono not running your Microsoft DirectX applications on Linux, what did you expect? DirectX is software designed for Windows. If you (I mean your company, of course, you just did QA for them ) wanted portability, you should have used an open platform like OpenGL. No one will ever be able to completely create a DirectX wrapper for non-Windows operating systems, as things are just not compatible (for example, shaders). You (again, your company) use Windows-only technologies and then cry "Mono is not equal to .NET". BTW, to tell you a small secret, Managed DX is not part of .NET, it is an external wrapper for DirectX (it is done by Microsoft, but is external to .NET).Mono isn't officially supported.This is true, but by "officially" you probably mean Microsoft. The user and developer base has really grown over the last few years, and there is always someone to help on almost all issues (as well as regular .NET sources of information, because for the most part Mono is pretty complete in most areas). Edited August 31, 2009 by Leo Natan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Offler Posted September 2, 2009 Author Share Posted September 2, 2009 the betatest i do is for freeware game project, not for company and it is based on .net and surely on Managed DirectX. If people from linux can create mono i am sure they can create wrapper compatible with managed directX but as a win tester i really dont care if there is any.and again, i dont like vista for poor driver support. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leo Natan Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 (edited) If people from linux can create mono i am sure they can create wrapper compatible with managed directXYep, and I am sure "they" can make an Xbox 360 emulator that would run games at native speed. Yay! Edited September 3, 2009 by Leo Natan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BogdanV Posted September 8, 2009 Share Posted September 8, 2009 About explorer and .Net... Offler knows something. In the development of Longhorn (pre-"reset"), MS was working on a .Net Explorer (meaning the whole shell was written in .Net). Heck, it was even a inside-joke, calling Longhorn "Cairo .NET". As far as I know, .Net was used a lot (the Display cpl was .Net in one 3xxx version and in 4093, so one could expect that they wanted to remake the entire Control Panel in .Net) up until the late 4093 build version, when development was reset, so probably most of this stuff got scrapped from M9 onwards. I can't say anything regarding M9-present-day Vista as I know nothing/too little about it so my knowledge probably doesn't apply. PS: I wonder if Longhorn builds up until 4093 are considered abandonware or warez (on public channels) ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leo Natan Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 These Longhorn builds have in common with the current Vista code exactly what the Neptune and Odyssey builds had in common with Whistler/XP: Nothing! Now let me remind you what the topic is called: "Windows 98 VS Windows Vista". So let me ask you, what does Offler "know"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dencorso Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 PS: I wonder if Longhorn builds up until 4093 are considered abandonware or warez (on public channels) ? Warez. On public channels or otherwise.@Leo Natan: Stop acting provocatively! You fully know how to avoid it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BogdanV Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 (edited) I can't say anything regarding M9-present-day Vista as I know nothing/too little about it so my knowledge probably doesn't apply. Do read my post in its entirety first, thank you. As for "Offler knows something ..." I was saying that he probably had his info from the Longhorn development and not from the actual Vista; that's why I said "something..." . ON TOPIC : I don't think its really fair to compare these two OSs, or at least, it isn't fair to compare them without mentioning on what criterion you're comparing them. Edited September 9, 2009 by BogdanV Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Offler Posted September 10, 2009 Author Share Posted September 10, 2009 (edited) well, i havent explorer.exe dissasembled, but if it gives same error as .net based application?Actually after stopping Longhorn project i never heard that new build will have different philosophy when it comes to explorer...my criterions are hardware compatibility, driver quality and way how core of system handle system resources. Edited September 10, 2009 by Offler Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leo Natan Posted September 12, 2009 Share Posted September 12, 2009 my criterions are hardware compatibility, driver quality and way how core of system handle system resources.And you use Windows 98? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dencorso Posted September 12, 2009 Share Posted September 12, 2009 Enough! @Leo Natan: You're hereby suspended for 3 days, to reflect upon your ways.Thread closed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts