VB and Linux 
Author Message
 VB and Linux

I found this interesting info on the web "www.VB2TheMax.com".
Corel is already working on the Linux version of CRL.
Cool :) hehehe

NET compilers generate platform-independent pseudo-code rather than machine code.
This pseudo-code, known as Intermediate Language (or IL), is conceptually similar
to VB's p-code, which might sound as a step backwards, until you realize that IL
code can theoretically run on different CPU and operating systems, provided that
a .NET runtime and a .NET framework is available for that platform (figure 2).
For the time being Microsoft has announced a CLR only for Windows operating
systems (CE, 9x/ME, NT/2000), but Corel is already working on the Linux version!

Regards
Max



Sun, 10 Aug 2003 23:42:12 GMT  
 VB and Linux
Here's the agreement between MS and Corel

http://www.freeedgar.com/EdgarConstruct/Data/890640/00-500007/techsup...
m



Mon, 11 Aug 2003 00:06:44 GMT  
 VB and Linux

Quote:
>I found this interesting info on the web "www.VB2TheMax.com".
>Corel is already working on the Linux version of CRL.
>Cool :) hehehe

I'd take this with all the salt in the Dead Sea. With all due respect,
I don't think the author of said article has any authority to make
such a claim -- is there any backup from a MS or Corel source?

http://www.vb2themax.com/HtmlDoc.asp?Table=Articles&ID=340&Page=2



Mon, 11 Aug 2003 00:33:22 GMT  
 VB and Linux
    Read sections 3.1 where it gives binds Corel to port .NET to Linux when
MS tells them to so.  Notice, This section expires in 3 years.

    Read 3.5 where MS points out that it has already paid Corel, and Corel
cannot ask for additional money to port the project.

    This means that MS can tell Corel to port .NET within the next 3 years
and is not obligated to give them an extra dime to port .NET.  If Microsoft
decides NOT to tell Corel to port .NET, then they lose this opportunity.

    If I was Microsoft, I'd make sure I get .NET finalized ASAP and get my
moneys worth from Corel.  Whether I release that .NET for Linux or not is
another question.

Steve

http://www.freeedgar.com/EdgarConstruct/Data/890640/00-500007/techsup...
m

3. Option for Linux Port.

3.1 Grant of Option to Port. Corel hereby grants Microsoft an option for
Corel to Port some portion or all of the .NET Framework from the Windows
Platform to the Linux Platform (the "Port Project"). This option shall be
exercisable for a period of three (3) years from the Effective Date. If
Microsoft elects to exercise the option, it shall do so by sending a written
notice (the "Option Notice") to Corel at the address listed below in Section
15.1.

    So, If MS want to port .NET to Linux, they can tell Corel, "Port .NET to
Linux", however they only have a window of three years they can say, "Port
.NET to Linux"

3.2 Conditional License to .NET Framework. In the event that Microsoft, in
its sole discretion, elects to exercise the option described in Section 3.1,
Microsoft shall promptly deliver to Corel one or more copies of the portion
of the .NET Framework that Microsoft wishes Corel to Port to the Linux
Platform in source code form. Upon delivery, Microsoft shall be deemed to
have granted Corel a non-transferable, non-assignable, personal and limited
license to copy, modify and use the portion of the .NET Framework delivered
by Microsoft at Corel's principal place of business in Ottawa, Canada for
the sole purpose of conducting and completing the Port Project and for no
other purpose whatsoever.

3.3 Commitment to Allocate Resources and to Meet Project Goals and
Deadlines. Upon receipt of the Option Notice, Corel agrees to work with
Microsoft in good faith on the Port Project. Corel agrees to assign the
equivalent of at least twenty (20) full-time developers and at least ten
(10) full-time testers to the Port Project who are reasonably experienced
and skilled in projects similar to the Port Project and to keep them
assigned to the Port Project during the full duration of such project. Corel
shall ensure that such developers and testers shall make themselves
reasonably available to Microsoft employees for consultation from time to
time during the Port Project. Corel agrees to adhere to any reasonable
programming rules and conventions that Microsoft may require for the Port
Project. Corel also agrees to provide weekly written status reports on the
Port Project to Microsoft, which shall include one or more copies of the
latest builds (in source and object code form), bug status reports, and a
project status overview.

Corel shall deliver milestone releases of the Port Deliverables to Microsoft
in source code form at regular intervals during the Port Project and no less
often than as follows:

Date Deliverable to Microsoft

(a) Sixty (60) days after receipt of Option Notice: Project plan and
specifications

(b) To be determined by the Parties: Alpha Port

(c) To be determined by the Parties: First Beta Port

(d) To be determined by the Parties: Second Beta Port

(e) Twelve (12) months after receipt of Option Notice: Final Port
Deliverables.

3.4 Acceptance Criteria. Corel agrees to make commercially reasonable
efforts to promptly resolve any and all programming errors,
incompatibilities and other problems in the Port Deliverables reasonably
identified by Microsoft as part of its review and testing process throughout
the Port Project. The Port Project will be completed after Corel delivers
the final Port Deliverables to Microsoft and Microsoft delivers a written
acceptance notice to Corel, which shall not be unreasonably withheld.

3.5 No Additional Payments Except as Mutually Agreed. The parties understand
and agree that the consideration that Corel has received as part of this
Agreement and the Purchase Agreement have fully compensated Corel for the
costs and expenses associated with the Port Project and that Microsoft shall
not have an obligation to pay Corel any amount of money whatsoever for the
costs and expenses associated with such project. Notwithstanding the
foregoing, Microsoft agrees to pay reasonable costs and fees to the extent
that Microsoft requests and Corel provides development and/or test resources
over and above those described in Section 3.3, provided that Microsoft has
first approved any such costs and expenses in writing.

3.6 Port Deliverables Owned by Microsoft. The Port Deliverables have been
specially ordered and commissioned by Microsoft. Corel agrees that the Port
Deliverables are a "work made for hire" for copyright purposes, with all
copyrights in the Port Deliverables owned by Microsoft.  To the extent that
the Port Deliverables do not qualify as a work made for hire under
applicable law, and to the extent that the Port Deliverables include
material subject to copyright, patent, trade secret, or other proprietary
right protection, Corel hereby assigns to Microsoft all right, title and
interest in and to the Port Deliverables; including but not limited to, all
rights in and to any inventions and designs embodied in the Port
Deliverables or developed during the course of Corel's creation of the Port
Deliverables.

3.7 Conditional License of Port Deliverables to Corel. Upon Microsoft's
final acceptance of the Port Deliverables pursuant to Section 3.4 of this
Agreement, Microsoft shall be deemed to have granted Corel a non-exclusive,
perpetual, worldwide, personal, non-transferable, non-assignable license to
(a) internally copy and use the Port Deliverables in source and object code
form, and (b) license and distribute the Port Deliverables in object code
form only as part of Products at any time after the first date that
Microsoft commercially releases a product that includes the Port
Deliverables, provided that Corel pays any applicable royalties or fees to
Microsoft as described in Section 3.8. This license does not permit Corel to
distribute the Port Deliverables on a standalone basis.

3.8 Royalties and Accounting. Microsoft may elect, in its sole discretion,
to charge a royalty or other fee to Persons who wish to distribute copies of
the Port Deliverables and/or derivative works thereof for the Linux
Platform. Microsoft agrees that it will not charge Corel more than any other
Person for such rights. Corel is obligated to request information about any
applicable royalties and/or fees prior to the time that it distributes any
Products that include copies of the Port Deliverables and/or derivative
works thereof. Corel agrees to provide Microsoft with a full and complete
accounting for all applicable royalties and/or fees on not less than a
quarterly basis. Corel shall comply with the provisions governing taxes set
forth in the VBA Agreement in connection with its obligations under this
Section. Corel also agrees that Microsoft may request an independent
accounting of royalties and/or fees paid by pursuant to this Section and the
rules governing an audit set forth in the VBA Agreement on ten (10) days'
advance written notice to Corel.



Mon, 11 Aug 2003 03:14:32 GMT  
 VB and Linux
I've been told that Corel has had some financial problems lately and Bill
bought part of Corel...

Hans


Quote:
> >I found this interesting info on the web "www.VB2TheMax.com".
> >Corel is already working on the Linux version of CRL.
> >Cool :) hehehe

> I'd take this with all the salt in the Dead Sea. With all due respect,
> I don't think the author of said article has any authority to make
> such a claim -- is there any backup from a MS or Corel source?

> http://www.vb2themax.com/HtmlDoc.asp?Table=Articles&ID=340&Page=2



Mon, 11 Aug 2003 05:40:20 GMT  
 VB and Linux
Whether this happens or not, I don't know.  What I do know is that (Feb 28)
www.slashdot.org ran a post, ... to make a long story short, the $100
million or so that MS invested into Corel, was retracted.  In other words,
MS cashed in their stock in Corel (read: withdrew their stock).  This is a
good indication that it won't be happening anytime soon.  For now, we can
bet MS will be the only one providing a CLR.

_Shawn


Quote:
> I've been told that Corel has had some financial problems lately and Bill
> bought part of Corel...

> Hans



> > >I found this interesting info on the web "www.VB2TheMax.com".
> > >Corel is already working on the Linux version of CRL.
> > >Cool :) hehehe

> > I'd take this with all the salt in the Dead Sea. With all due respect,
> > I don't think the author of said article has any authority to make
> > such a claim -- is there any backup from a MS or Corel source?

> > http://www.vb2themax.com/HtmlDoc.asp?Table=Articles&ID=340&Page=2



Tue, 19 Aug 2003 00:20:20 GMT  
 VB and Linux
    I read an article posted by an alleged Corel employee who stated
that MS didn't cash in thier stock, but made it available for public
purchase.  IE, Corel still has the money in the bank.  I would also
assume that the contract between them is still very valid, which clearly
states that MS can demand Corel to port .NET to Linux within 3 years of
the $100 million investment.

    I wonder who else is working on a ported CLR?

Steve

Quote:

> Whether this happens or not, I don't know.  What I do know is that (Feb
28)
> www.slashdot.org ran a post, ... to make a long story short, the $100
> million or so that MS invested into Corel, was retracted.  In other words,
> MS cashed in their stock in Corel (read: withdrew their stock).  This is a
> good indication that it won't be happening anytime soon.  For now, we can
> bet MS will be the only one providing a CLR.

> _Shawn



> > I've been told that Corel has had some financial problems lately and
Bill
> > bought part of Corel...

> > Hans



> > > >I found this interesting info on the web "www.VB2TheMax.com".
> > > >Corel is already working on the Linux version of CRL.
> > > >Cool :) hehehe

> > > I'd take this with all the salt in the Dead Sea. With all due respect,
> > > I don't think the author of said article has any authority to make
> > > such a claim -- is there any backup from a MS or Corel source?

> > > http://www.vb2themax.com/HtmlDoc.asp?Table=Articles&ID=340&Page=2



Tue, 19 Aug 2003 00:38:50 GMT  
 VB and Linux
It is my reading that MS was selling it's Corel stock on the market. A
divestiture for anti-trust purposes. Nothing I've seen releases Corel from
the contract. Nothing changes for Corel except that MS won't be holding a
large share position.


Tue, 19 Aug 2003 03:06:15 GMT  
 VB and Linux
On Thu, 1 Mar 2001 11:38:50 -0500, "Stephen Goguen"

Quote:

>    I wonder who else is working on a ported CLR?

Well, naturally I am, of course. The problem I have is that the cat
keeps snoozing on the typewriter, so I'm not making quite the progress
I'd hoped for....

MM



Tue, 19 Aug 2003 05:52:25 GMT  
 VB and Linux

Quote:
> Whether this happens or not, I don't know.  What I do know is that (Feb
28)
> www.slashdot.org ran a post, ... to make a long story short, the $100
> million or so that MS invested into Corel, was retracted.  In other words,
> MS cashed in their stock in Corel (read: withdrew their stock).  This is a
> good indication that it won't be happening anytime soon.  For now, we can
> bet MS will be the only one providing a CLR.

Think about it from a business case viewpoint.  2 years ago the hype from
the ABMC (Anything But Microsoft Community) was all over Java taking over
the world, and it fizzled.  It is still highly popular on UNIX boxes,
because it elevates programming productivity in the UNIX environment to
about where VB3 was.  Java found its niche in the middle tier, but proved to
be dog slow, and even slower when using JSP.  Development time was still 2
to 3 times that of VB.  Anyone making an objective cost-benefit analysis
would have seen that Java/UNIX solutions are more costly and take longer to
get to production than the same project in VB/WinNT.  And that is with
VB/WinNT projects that scale as well, and are as reliable., as the Java/UNIX
projects.  Sun promised open standards, but no standards committee in the US
or Europe would accept Sun's proposal.  So Java remains a proprietary
language, and not an open standard, just like VB.

Then, it was CORBA that would destroy COM.  CORBA proved to be slow, and
being only a standard and not a product, failed to deal a deathblow to COM.
Add to that one of CORBA's founders, Roger Sessions, advocating the merits
of COM over CORBA.  Various implementations of CORBA often to not
interoperate well, leaving CORBA running out of steam, and remaining a UNIX
clone of COM.  Again, an objective cost-benefit analysis of CORBA a year or
so ago would have shown that it is less desirable than the COM/Windows
alternative, slower, and less stable.

Now the ABMC hype is on Linux.  We hear how it will run Windows off the
Internet and take over corporate America.  Now really.  Here you have an OS
that is still the 20 year old UNIX OS.  What runs on Linux in one place may
not necessarily run on Linux in another place on the same machine, since who
knows who has tweaked the open source code and recompiled it.  Add to that
that Linux is still playing catch-up to Windows in terms of scalability and
reliability when it is running real world apps.  Linux has little formal
support for the corporate user.  Administration of corporate wide Linux
machines is much more expensive than Win2K machines.  While Linux (as with
all UNIX variants) is faster than Win2K when running just the bare OS, when
you add multiple processes, Win2K quickly becomes the performance leader.  I
believe that most corporate interest in Linux is due to the zealousness of
its ABMC IT staff. When the numbers catch up to the managers who are
responsible for productivity, you will see Linux shelved.

So, given the poor cost-benefit profile of the various UNIX technologies
(Java, CORBA, Linux, and a couple I left out - Oracle and Apache) - why
would MS or a third-party want to spend $$$$ trying to port .NET to Linux?
The market simply isn't there.  The folks that use Linux are largely ABMC
types, so why would they ditch their Java tools for .NET?  For years now,
the Win32 API and VB5 and 6 run times have been available from 3rd parties
(including COM/DCOM) for most all versions of UNIX, and it didn't catch on
much.  Why would .NET catch one, especially with Sun touting their "someday
to be released" competition to .NET?

MS would do better porting .NET to Macs than UNIX, although I guess with the
OS X it is UNIX now. :)

Just one man's opinion.  But I can guarantee you, given any real-world
project, that the total life cycle cost of hardware, development,
deployment, operations, training, and maintenance would run 1/3 to 1/2 that
of a UNIX solution, and be completed (dev, QA, and Production) in 1/2 the
time.

Jeff Jones



Mon, 25 Aug 2003 08:39:18 GMT  
 
 [ 10 post ] 

 Relevant Pages 

1. Is there VB for Linux?

2. Free VB for Linux

3. VB 4 Linux

4. VB on linux

5. VB and Linux

6. Nice article on 'VB for Linux'

7. More VB for Linux screenshots

8. Advice Wanted on VB with Linux DB Server

9. VB for Linux

10. vb client - linux C server

11. VB for Linux? where to get?

12. Linux new langauge : Was ANNOUNCE Linux BASIC

 

 
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software