2 ms·

That seems the general skeptic's analysis - and it has some validity - but let me point out a few things that make Dart seem a bit more open: - It compiles to

That seems the general skeptic's analysis - and it has some validity - but let me point out a few things that make Dart seem a bit more open: - It compiles to JS (you mentioned this) - It is standardized by ECMA - The entire platform (VM, compiler, libraries, IDE, etc) is open source I guess how you feel about Dart may depend on how you feel about Google and big corporations more generally. Just because a big company that has a lot of mindshare/marketshare creates a great platform, does that necessarily mean we should be afraid of it? Maybe, but if you're frustrated by JavaScript, it's certainly worth a look.

pavlov 12y ago
Except for the JS transpiler, Microsoft Silverlight could make similar claims: the CLI runtime is standardized by ECMA, and the entire source code for the .NET Framework is available. (Granted, not the Visual Studio IDE.) For these kinds of platforms, post facto standardization efforts and code releases are part of marketing, IMHO. Dart remains a Google-lead project tied to Google's goals rather than an actual open platform.
- WoodenChair 12y ago
  > Dart remains a Google-lead project tied to Google's goals rather than an actual open platform. Right, I agree with you. I guess you didn't read my whole post. To quote myself from just above: "I guess how you feel about Dart may depend on how you feel about Google and big corporations more generally. Just because a big company that has a lot of mindshare/marketshare creates a great platform, does that necessarily mean we should be afraid of it? Maybe, but if you're frustrated by JavaScript, it's certainly worth a look."
- mythz 12y ago
  > the entire source code for the .NET Framework is available. Which means nothing as no-one else is legally allowed to use it. It's only "Source Open" (not "Open Source") so no-one is legally allowed to adopt, adapt, enhance, etc as can be done with true Open Source projects.
- haberman 12y ago
  > Granted, not the Visual Studio IDE And also not the actual Silverlight part: http://davidburela.wordpress.com/2013/11/22/is-it-time-to-open-source-silverlight/ http://davidburela.wordpress.com/2013/11/22/is-it-time-to-op...

pavlov 12y ago

Except for the JS transpiler, Microsoft Silverlight could make similar claims: the CLI runtime is standardized by ECMA, and the entire source code for the .NET Framework is available. (Granted, not the Visual Studio IDE.) For these kinds of platforms, post facto standardization efforts and code releases are part of marketing, IMHO. Dart remains a Google-lead project tied to Google's goals rather than an actual open platform.

WoodenChair 12y ago
> Dart remains a Google-lead project tied to Google's goals rather than an actual open platform. Right, I agree with you. I guess you didn't read my whole post. To quote myself from just above: "I guess how you feel about Dart may depend on how you feel about Google and big corporations more generally. Just because a big company that has a lot of mindshare/marketshare creates a great platform, does that necessarily mean we should be afraid of it? Maybe, but if you're frustrated by JavaScript, it's certainly worth a look."
mythz 12y ago
> the entire source code for the .NET Framework is available. Which means nothing as no-one else is legally allowed to use it. It's only "Source Open" (not "Open Source") so no-one is legally allowed to adopt, adapt, enhance, etc as can be done with true Open Source projects.
haberman 12y ago
> Granted, not the Visual Studio IDE And also not the actual Silverlight part: http://davidburela.wordpress.com/2013/11/22/is-it-time-to-open-source-silverlight/ http://davidburela.wordpress.com/2013/11/22/is-it-time-to-op...