From: Adam Flinton 

John Beckett wrote:
> "Gary Britt"  wrote in message
> news::
>
>>Thanks John, I think I've got it now.  That was helpful.
>
>
> An additional point is that the .NET platform is potentially portable to
> future systems (e.g. non-Intel based, etc).

It has to be...d'you think win32 stuff will keep working post longhorn
& it's sucessors? Just to keep working from windows version to windows
version you need to build some sort of vm.



> An amazing example of this,
> and probably one unanticipated by Microsoft, is that a team is hoping to
> implement enough of .NET on Linux so that a .NET program could run on
> Windows or on Linux.
>
> I can barely recall it now, but interestingly this whole system was once
> invented by HP (I _think_ it was HP). It was an attempt to define a
> programming environment where the programmer didn't need to worry about
> the peculiarities of the architecture. ISTR it featured a CLR and JIT
> compiler.
>

IBM had their UVM some time back. Heck the Visaul Age for Java was running
a jvm within a UVM


Adam

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5