.NET for Apache

PerlGuy was so kind as to forward us the news about the joint Apache/Microsoft combined press conference scheduled from Wednesday at the OSCON Quote: "We will announce news related to the Apache web server and Microsoft's development technology, .NET. This should be one of the biggest announcements of the conference..."

The email he recieved: Covalent Technologies will be holding a press conference at the O'Reilly Conference on Wednesday at 3:15 in suite 415 (during the afternoon break). We will announce news related to the Apache web server and Microsoft's development technology, .NET. This should be one of the biggest announcements of the conference and an interesting follow up to Microsoft's appearance last year at the show as well as to their general comments on open source. Executives will be on hand to answer questions or to conduct one-on-one interviews after the announcement.

Don't scream

[Uruk]

Before people get in a huff, we should mention that Apache has a history of integrating well with other technologies, those considered to be "evil" by some people, and others as well. I mean, look at Apache and Java [apache.org]. What about XML [apache.org]? Not to mention perl, PHP, TCL, and others.

Java is not a warm and fuzzy free technology. I daresay it's every bit as proprietary as .NET, just in a different way. Apache is wise to be as flexible and accomodating as possible - it's a good thing that it supports .NET, since it will most likely do it in a free way and expose more people to free software. On the other hand, it could always *not* support .NET, lose more market share to IIS, and generally piss people off who are using .NET technologies by wider corporate edict.

Cool... or Uncool?

[tcc]

Microsoft actually validating apache as a competitor big enough to not crush them (right away) by closing their .NET framework only to IIS?

Question is, is it good to see Apache embrassing a Microsoft framework so that it remains in the race of the .NET deployment... ...or is (history repeating) a "good thing" only in the short run:

"Hey! Apache runs .NET stuff, let's learn .NET. God! it's so simple and easy, and object-oriented to the bones, I'll stay on that for all of my applications"

1-2 years later Microsoft closes the .NET2 to IIS-only, and since a lot of developpers moved or learned from scratch on .NET, they will migrate on IIS to continue or update their work.

Usually, this scenario is typical of MS... so what would be different here? They have everything to gain right now to broaden their .NET framework because they NEED people to USE it and gain acceptance... once they get that, they apply.monopoly(.NET);

Function

[Anonymous Coward]

So anyone figured out what .NET does yet?

Re:Don't scream

[smaug195]

Yes, you can download free compilers, the .NET SDK is actually free, granted it's windows only... but still, it is in fact free. VS.NET is just built on top of that :).

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

A link to the article would have been nice...

[Lethyos]

But though the editors were lazy or Slashcode was buggy, I'll put in a couple of cents anyway.

First of all, this is bad. Microsoft are not adopting the "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em" ideal. Apache dominates web servers. No doubt about it. [netcraft.com] To defeat this, Microsoft are going to do what they do best: embrace, extend, erradicate.

Based on Microsoft's history, any components they write for Apache will be closed source. If it is not entirely closed, the crutial parts will be. Microsoft are not interested in opening up their IP. Consider this as one of the many possible scenarios:

Following initial proof of concept, first stage deployments and so forth, Microsoft will begin the trouble. It will strangely cease to work. Apache will be to blame and sites will like have to apply patches from Microsoft or just deal with them. At the same time, IIS will lack these problems. They will work to create inroads into the *nix space with Win.NET and IIS.

Keep Microsoft out of open source. They have no business being here. Instead, Apache people should look at either of the two .NET initiatives that are Free.

Hrm

[interiot]

• "We will, at last, know peace in our time" [google.com]

Alliances aren't always a good thing. When a stronger enemy is fighting many small opponents, if the strong guy can get a few of the small guys to take a break for a bit, that's really just a win for the bigger guy.

Now THAT would be interesting...

[sterno]

Microsoft using Apache instead of IIS. Now that's an interesting thought. Microsoft would have no issues with using Apache because it's license would allow them to lock up their changes without a problem. They write a module to let it use .net and *whamo* they look like open source advocates. As long as it's the right kind of open source.

Re:Don't scream

[Anonymous Coward]

Java is not a warm and fuzzy free technology. I daresay it's every bit as proprietary as .NET, just in a different way.

What a bunch of whiney bastards you people are! Waah! If it's not GPL it's evil! Companies should believe in the communism of the GPL! They should spend millions on a technology then sign off all their rights! Yeah! That's right! And they should like it!

Now... Really, how is Java as bad as .net? You can download the entire SDK's source code for free and port it to any platform you want. What more do you want? You want the language spec to be open? Well, first off it it was, you would be bitching about how Microsoft ruined Java portability right now. And anyway, I rather like Sun having control of Java. The absurd feature flamewars that go on in the open source community are something that nobody needs.

Re:Cool... or Uncool?

[ergo98]

Microsoft really is doing the exact same tactic that Sun has attempted with Java: Propagate your standard on many platforms to get wide interest and adoption, with the natural goal that people will eventually migrate to the one "preferred", "superior" platform when the barriers to switching are low enough (which with .NET web applications with text configurations would be trivially low: Move some web folders). I don't think there is any surprize that Microsoft is trying this, though you have to wonder why anyone developing for .NET wouldn't be using a Windows platform machine anyways (which is why the non-Windows platform is so marginal of importance).

On top of that, you don't need something quite so overt as a non-supported .NET version 2 to close the door: All you need is a subtle performance advantage with the preferred platform, and just a general instance of "Quirks" on the non-preferred platform (and I guarantee that mono is not 100% compatible with .NET: It'll be 99.99%, with those tiny quirks every now and then that make you go "Damnit...why am I not using the official platform?"

Re:Don't scream

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh? Is there an equivalent to the Java Community Process for .NET? Can I download compilers that target .NET (ie, the CLR) from Microsoft for free (gratis) like I can the Java SDK from Sun?

Java may be, strictly speaking, proprietary, but it is nowhere near "every bit" as such as anything from Microsoft.

Bad example; you could have done better in refuting the statement that Java is every bit as proprietary as .Net.

Its not the fact that the compilers and runtime are free (as in beer) that is important, its the fact that the process by which Java and its libraries are developed are more open (although not totally) than .Net, and in the way that not only Sun can develop these components. IBM, Oracle, etc. are involved in determining the direction of Java, and no, Sun doesn't always get their way (see the Java Spec Request for RMI security, which was vetoed by non-Sun members of the committee). Does MS have a formal, documented process whereby outside vendors, some of whom are competitors of MS, can determine the directon of .Net? How about implementations. IBM has implementations on a number of platforms, including Windows. They obtained a license from Sun to release these versions (and actually obey the license terms, unlike MS), but there are clean room versions as well, such as from GNU. If mono tries to duplicate the entire .Net platform, will they be safe from MS IP claims? I am skeptical.

Java is not written to favor any one operating system. Sun delivers versions for Windows, Linux, and Solaris (their own OS) simultaneously. Can we say the same about .Net? Will ADO.net work on Linux or Solaris at all, ever? Again I am skeptical, and I have to say, for good reason.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:Your links say the opposite. - Your way off

[the eric conspiracy]

When the same App was ported to .NET, it could perform better under a heavier load then any other database.

Well, I would say that porting applications to a different code base for benchmarking is an exercise in futility. The fact of the matter is that both architectures are amenable to considerable optimization that would not be done in this sort of study, and the 700 - 900 range in page load performance does not represent a difference that any experienced person would consider meaningful.

Re:This is great.

[JebusIsLord]

I know this was a joke, but in all fairness the CodeRed virus targetted IIS not .NET. As far as I know the only virus to target the .NET infrastructure is called "donut".

Re:.net is not evil

[Waffle Iron]

To write a document, I open up AbiWord. If I'm writing a story about the stock market, why can't I just open up my stock market program, drag a box into my document, and have live numbers for the Dow? If I'm writing a story about AMD, why can't I just open up my Slashdot program, drag a box into my document, and have a link to the story inserted into my document; and why can't the person on the other end open the document, double-click my link, and have the Slashdot story opened in place - without needing a web browser?.

Why not? Because there won't be a standard way to show banner ads and popup ads to pay for the content, and no casual user is going to pay to read slashdot articles.

Moreover, I predict that there will be a versioning nightmare. The content providers and software writers are going to have a terrible time trying to stay in sync on the data formats and protocols between the sources and clients. Slashdot changes all the time, for instance. What if you had just bought a karma monitor that had a cool numerical widget to keep tabs on your karma in real time? Now its useless, because karma isn't a number any more.

Look at a current example that is similar to "web services". It's the billing infrastructure that interfaces doctors and hospitals to insurance companies. They've been working on this system for decades, and it is still a complete piece of crap. I'd estimate that my healtchare bills get significantly screwed up in the system at least 25% of the time. How hard can this be? Apparently pretty hard. Now everybody is working feverishly to make every aspect of our lives just as buggy. In the end, a lot of this hype is going to get discredited.

Re:Don't scream

[g4dget]

Both .NET and Java are proprietary technologies: neither is standardized, and both only have proprietary implementations available for them. What is not proprietary is ECMA C#, which may turn out to be a decent language.

Now, as for "free", you cannot compare .NET with Java. Sun makes available a very high quality implementation on many platforms and provides sources for it. Microsoft makes available one implementation for Windows, and provides an unusable reference implementation under a restrictive license for others. Since you need to have an expensive Microsoft Windows license in order to run their .NET implementation, their "free" .NET implementation is, in fact, not free.

Conecpts behind open source and free software are permeating *every* company these days, [...] Microsoft recognizes that to be competitive in some markets (web browsers like IE, Graphic API's like DirectX, and ystem-neutral platforms like .NET), even they need to give stuff away for free.

Microsoft engages in traditional marketing techniques, nothing more. Calling that "free" or "being permeated by open source" is ridiculous. The only way that open source "permeates" Microsoft is by making them fear for their monopoly.

Addon yes. Integrated no.

[YahoKa]

If it's just an add on, who really cares?

Re:Don't scream

[Anonymous Coward]

Well even though .NET was created by MS it is on its way to becoming an ISO standard... its already ratified under ecma (http://www.dotnetexperts.com/ecma/)

so what microsoft have done is created an implementation of it for windows, for obvious reasons, and an implementation for FreeBSD...

Mono and DotGNU should be out later this year (well mono is)...

Perhaps people need something idea behind the technology before they see microsoft and start the trolling

Re:WTH?!?!?

[rodgerd]

The core Apache foundation project is Apache, which works with well, most everything. mod_dtcl, mod_perl, mod_ruby and plenty of others. Contrary to what Java weenies would like people to think, the world is not, in fact, a choice between Unix+Java and Windows+.NET.

And given the way Sun keep jerking the free software world around (Oh, look, work on Tomcat and we'll make it the reference JSP engine! Oh, now we've changed our minds!), why would Apache care about keeping Sun happy more than they care about making Apache as compatible with as many platforms and technologies as possible?

Many of the good people have been working to make Apache a first-class citizen on Windows through the 1.3.x code, and achieved that in 2.0.x. I imagine those people would be very happy to see Microsoft recognise the quality of their work. And I doubt they give a shit about Sun or Java.

Re:Don't scream

[Anonymous Coward]

C# and other key parts of .NET have been submitted to standards bodies, so yes, there is an open forum for people to have input. More, in fact, than their is for Java, which Sun have refused to submit to standards bodies.

Apparently I will have to repeat my question in a different form: Have all libraries, such as ADO.net or the forms libraries, been submitted to standard bodies? The answer is no. If strategic libraries are withheld, then there will be applications that are not portable and will only work with windows platforms, and the problem remains. By the way, did ECMA allow the C# and CLR standards to be changed, or did they just rubber-stamp them? Did they require that MS give up IP rights to the concepts that were standardized? I believe that the answers to both of these is no. So far, it doesn't appear that anyone has been able to propose changes, throught ECMA, to C# or the CLR. How is that more open than the Java Community Process?

Don't believe that standards bodies are completely just and evenhanded; they can be very political and alliances can be used to form voting blocks. This is a reason that Sun has given for withdrawing from the ECMA process, because they could see a pro-MS block aligning against them, and because they would not be allowed to submit Java without change, and without relinquishing IP rights, althought these considerations were given to MS. How is that fair?

HELLO!?

[Ignominious Cow Herd]

The story said nothing about Microsoft being involved. It said "Microsoft's Technology, .NET". I seriously (and I realize several posts here weren't) doubt M$ is anywhere near this thing.

Re:Biggest announcement? Ha!

[jsse]

Besides, I think a lot of people has mixed the concept of Web Services(WS) with .NET. WS is a interoperability framework, while .NET aims to cover all aspect of computing, while remains to use a single protocol for communication.

People jokingly said, in this regard, .NET is attempting to 'dominate the world'. However, this is pretty much the only way of doing things if MS wanted to do what they planned.

It might be too complicated and confusing to explain without an example: suppose we'd like to implement Remote Procedure Call over the Web, with WS both ends must have SOAP-rpc defined and implemented so as to call each other, but they don't need to implement WS from the same vendor(theorotically). With .NET, you must have .NET on both end.

To be honest, in term of robustness of both models(if .NET's stability doesn't count), .NET wins. For the openness, WS win, as it doesn't need to be bounded on a single vendor solution(again, theorotically).

(I know rpc is a bad example as CORBRA seems to beat them hand down and it's a proven technology...well, the other story)

Re:Sigh, More /. Conspiracy Theories

[ergo98]

A "good" business decision by Microsoft is often very bad for Microsoft's competitors. Don't get me wrong, either: I am not anti-Microsoft by any measure of the imagination (ironically I'm working on an IIS/SQL Server project in another window at this very moment, and I do almost entirely Microsoft platform consulting work), but rather I am realistic, and every single decision Microsoft makes has underlying motives. They might be aligned with other peoples, and sometimes they might be best for the computer industry as a whole, but sometimes they aren't: It's pretty naive to presume that it's "conspiracy theories" to assess why Microsoft does what they do.

You sort of contradict yourself in any case: You claim that they are "making .NET viable by supporting it on the world's most popular web browser" (presuming you mean web server), but then you berate those who think it's "some plot by Micro$oft to take over the world" : Wouldn't that be exactly why they're targeting the most popular web platform?

Re:Don't scream

[Malcontent]

There is a big difference.

No sun Exec ever called apache developers communist or un american. Sun is not actively trying to destroy open source. Sun is not lobbying congress to make open source illegal. Sun does not have calauses in their EULAS prohibiting people from developing open source products etc.

On a scale of 1 to 10 ms rates 9.9 on the old evil scale (10 being reserved for the devil) and sun ranks maybe 3 or 4.

Re:WTH?!?!?

[AJWM]

That has to be the lamest set of supposedly "anti-java" rants I've ever seen. I could probably find some random luser off the street to do better than that.

Anyway:
1) irrelevant
2) false (perhaps he's thinking of the JDK? false for that, too)
3) misguided
4) misguided and irrelevant (can't do that in C or C++ either, and what's wrong with "if .. else if .." etc?)
5) One .java file per class (not counting inner classes) is a lot??

Protect the open source

[Dexter77]

I hope you all who are in a management position realize that .NET is ONLY good choice when it's open source. We have NO reason to believe that M$ is doing this out of goodness of their heart.

Have you ever played Go, the ultimate strategy game? If you have you can probably see the similarities.

Does the devil turn good when it's threatened?

.Net with Apache

[hackus]

Wow.

Why would I want to run my infrastructure with a modified version of Apache with .Net?

Esepcially when I can build any web app with Linux, J2EE or Tomcat 4.x with zarro the nasty side effects of:

Tying my application to the PC platform and Microsoft's XP, both a combination made in hell to manage or even install. .Net is unproven, unused, and extremely expensive to develop for after you make every single one of my developers run a License for this Microsoft product, and that Microsoft product? All this while my competitiors build the same app with Java and Linux put me out of business because thier business logic can move from thier AS/400, BSD Box, Apple Macintosh or Linux DESKTOP throughout the entire enterprise with ZARRO the cost of additional licenses?

Why would I do such a silly thing and restrict myself in any of these ways in this kind of business climate, which quite frankly sucks? .Net with .Not Apache.

With a Mozilla client, a Linux, BSD, or Apple or AS/400, and a decent backend database and a Java VM I have all the tools I need to write my business logic for the 21st century. .No thanks.

Hack

Re:WTH?!?!?

[toriver]

1) Bullshit, you're focusing on desktops, which are a relatively small portion of the total number of computers out there.
2) SFW - the .Net runtime is still a much larger install (about 22 megs compared to 12-13)
3) GC isn't controversial, but very useful - I assume that's why .Net has it.
4) So you want to turn switch into syntactic sugar for if.. else if..? Sure, just stick to C# then.
5) Why is a small number of huge files more manageable than a large number of smaller files? If I am looking for the class MyClass, I'd rather find it fast in MyClass.java than having to hunt through source01.txt, source02.txt...
Plus, there is no requirement that Java source needs to reside in files at all. A compilation unit can just as well be a database record.

Covalent is not the ASF

[Anonymous Coward]

Just a note: remember, Covalent is not the ASF and vice versa. Covalent happens to be a company that builds on top of Apache to ship their own software, just like any number of other companies. But they don't represent the ASF or any ASF projects, and the ASF can't control what Covalent does with Apache code (either the webserver or any of the other excellent software there) any more than we can control other companies. (Covalent happens to be big supporters of ASF projects internally, but that's different).

So it wasn't an 'Apache/Microsoft' release, it was a 'Covalent/Microsoft' release. While it may seem like a minor nit, it's a very important one.

- Anonymous ASF committer

Re:Mono?

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually the only last possible reason to run IIS is ASP.NET. If they provide a way to run ASP.NET pages on Apache I think you would see a mass exodus from IIS. Remember that 50% of all webservers run Windows (but not necessarily IIS) so this may be Microsoft's way of keeping people on Windows while still losing some of the battle on IIS.

Ok. Info?

[noselasd]

Can someone please point me to more info?
As where it says .NET on Linux(not Mono, you Monons).
Remember that Apache also runs on Windows?
Could this just be ".NET for Apache on Windows?"

Re:A link to the article would have been nice...

[mad_cow]

First of all, this is bad. Microsoft are not adopting the "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em" ideal. Apache dominates web servers. No doubt about it. [netcraft.com] To defeat this, Microsoft are going to do what they do best: embrace, extend, erradicate.

More likely, Microsoft is just acknowledging Apache's leadership in the server arena and wants to make sure that they take advantage of it's open source nature to get in some .net support for it to help boost the success of .net in general.

Following initial proof of concept, first stage deployments and so forth, Microsoft will begin the trouble. It will strangely cease to work. Apache will be to blame and sites will like have to apply patches from Microsoft or just deal with them. At the same time, IIS will lack these problems. They will work to create inroads into the *nix space with Win.NET and IIS.

Who's to say MS will be providing the .Net functionality? Maybe they're going to provide funding and technical support to have the Apache project implement it. Accusing MS of having some devious plan to undermine Apache is a little premature.

Keep Microsoft out of open source. They have no business being here. Instead, Apache people should look at either of the two .NET initiatives that are Free.

I disagree. Get everyone, including Microsoft, into Open Source. Get the hobby programmers, the after-hours professional programmers, the big corporations. Bring them all in, get them to contribute to and use Open Source software.

Re:Don't scream

[sab39]

Sadly, Kaffe, GNU Classpath and every other Open Source Java implementation I'm aware of are all also effectively in their infancy and years away from production quality.

I'd actually say that Mono is closer to production quality than those projects, simply because it has more momentum these days. Don't get me wrong, the Free Java projects are far from dead, but Mono got working ASP.NET and ADO.NET from nothing in a matter of a couple of months, which is an astonishing rate of development.

Don't expect me to bash any of these projects (or Portable.NET which is another one that rarely gets mentioned) though - I believe that Free implementations of both Java AND .NET are valuable, if not vital, and all projects attempting to achieve that have my most enthusiastic support.

Re:What services?

[pmz]

One aspect of the vapor surrounding "web services" is that the tools and standards for them are infantile. Look at how young the XML standard is (1998), and, then, realize that all of the current web services buzzwords are younger than that. No wonder there really aren't any good tools and no one really knows what they are talking about. Most people are still trying to figure out what that HTTP thing is and why Java and JavaScript aren't the same thing.

How long did it take for the Internet to evolve before the rapid growth of the 90's made it central to so many people's work? Other technologies, slightly older than XML, still haven't reached any visionary's goals. Where are the VRML immersive environments and the Internet videophones, for example?

If web services really are what people claim, we will know it in a few years when we can't remember an Internet without them. Otherwise, they will just be another great idea that dissappears into obscurity.