copared to what? is there any non .net version to compare it?
And, well, a SML compiled binary is never executed. It is re-compiled by the MSIL compiler TO A NATIVE BINARY just before it is runned. so at this point they are equaly fast, but the fact that a .net binary is compiled in the computer where it is executed, enables the inclussion of some CPU speciffic optimizations that are not possible in a statically compiled traditional binary, unless there are some checks made before (and increasing the size of the final executable). That makes the binarys of .net runnable from a MacOsX or Linux system also, without having to create a final static executable.
A JIT (just in time) is a debuger,not a kind of compiled binary
And, well, a SML compiled binary is never executed. It is re-compiled by the MSIL compiler TO A NATIVE BINARY just before it is runned. so at this point they are equaly fast, but the fact that a .net binary is compiled in the computer where it is executed, enables the inclussion of some CPU speciffic optimizations that are not possible in a statically compiled traditional binary, unless there are some checks made before (and increasing the size of the final executable). That makes the binarys of .net runnable from a MacOsX or Linux system also, without having to create a final static executable.
A JIT (just in time) is a debuger,not a kind of compiled binary
This is true to an extent. The difference with run time compiling is there simply isn't enough time to use a lot of optimisations that you can afford with pre-compiled code.
It's also debatable exactly how much benefit can be gained from enabling certain CPU options. Specifically, many pre-compiled programs already include support for MMX, SSE, SSE2, etc. when available but only for parts that can actually benefit from it. Good code for these units generally needs to be specifically targetted to them to, which I doubt the JIT compiler can do.
Not to say MS's JIT compiler isn't good, it is pretty good, but for things like games where performance is critical I would much rather the code was pre-compiled.
If Mono has suddenly become fully compatible with .NET 1.1, I'm not aware of it. Yes Mono supports quite a bit of the 1.1 Framework, but by the same token quite a bit more is missing (or was last I heard.) I wouldn't put my faith in Mono providing full cross-platform support ever, because they simply won't be able to keep up with MS. WINE has the same problem.