16 Comments »

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

1. I liked the Mono project. Time to switch to Java? For some reason, I could not get Eclipse Visual Editor to work correctly. (Need a lot of UI programming with SWT, if switching to Java.)

   Comment by Steve Gao — November 14, 2006 #

2. This is EXACTLY what I said to several folks last night. If Solaris is released under the GPL, then ALL of Sun’s hardware goes back on the table too, simply because of the scaling that Sun offers. The hardware/software choice WILL be just that obvious.

   Comment by RaneFan — November 14, 2006 #

3. I second that! more so with FOSS developers. Why FOSS developers want to contribute to Novell/Mono now!? Too much happened over the last week…I think that Mono/Novell are going to go through an extremely rough time with the FOSS community from here on unless they can come up with some sort reverse gear!

   I thought that Mono was a bad idea in the first place. If Sun had done this earlier I think that Mono wouldn’t have even got off the ground and Novell would have probably gone with Java from the beginning. What future is there with Mono? Where is it going…The Novell/Suse developers must be going over their CVs right now!!

   It would be silly to expect the experienced developers at Novell not to be thinking of ditching Suse development and moving into other open source projects…I definitely would be…What stinks is that, speculation on my behalf, the development teams didn’t even know about the MS deal until it was announced?!? Jesus, I would feel really gutted if I worked for Novell!

   Comment by ccsaxton — November 15, 2006 #

4. Indeed. With the release of the Tao project which enabled DirectX calls to be routed through OpenGL, I was wavering (as alot of neat stuff was happening in MONO) but now, I honestly don’t know what this means as their agreement is so vague.

   And Microsoft has never once embraced anything that it didn’t intend to replace or crush. I don’t believe they have changed. Linux is a threat as is Open Source (which is why they tried to reinvent the GPL with their own license).

   Microsoft still doesn’t get OSS and has done everything it can to sidestep or kill it (SCO, Open Office Format, ‘linux is a cancer’,etc). Until they actually release something under the GPL, I will always find their motives suspect.

   But at this point in the game, they can’t. So much of their code is STILL in use in their modern releases that they feel it to be a security risk… and they are probably correct in assuming so. Still, they have minor projects that could be released.

   I dunno. I’m not planning on changing from Java anytime soon and the latest SUN move just cemented my move towards JAVA.

   PS. I am currently a LAMP developer living in Seattle right next to Microsoft so don’t think this fud; considering the job market I’m in, I have to be very careful about my moves and my career.

   Comment by Xeno — November 15, 2006 #

5. Do you actually know what patents (patent numbers please!) that Microsoft alleges Mono infringes? No? I thought not. It’s Microsoft’s brilliant FUD campaign, and you are part of it.

   Comment by Richard Jones — November 15, 2006 #

6. Richard, even if Mono only implements the ECMA-approved standard CLI specification there are still problems. Microsoft could, according to ECMA, charge royalty for anyone implementing the specification. ECMA says microsoft should “grant licences on a reasonable, non-discriminatory basis.” Nothing is directly stated regarding cost.

   And even if you get around that somehow, with the ECMA specs implemented, your are far away from having a complete .NET stack.

   Winforms, and other API:s, are not free standards. It’s Microsofts proprietary technology. Are you saying that it’s no danger in trying to reverse engineer and implement the Winforms API or the ASP.NET? You bet your company on Microsoft beeing nice? Good luck…

   Note: here is the patent application for .NET

   Comment by marvi — November 15, 2006 #

7. You say: Microsoft could, according to ECMA, charge royalty for anyone implementing the specification.

   and: Winforms, and other API:s, are not free standards. It’s Microsofts proprietary technology.

   Sorry, but under what law? Patents? Trademarks? Copyright? Which patents? What is copyrighted? Are you saying that copyright can now be applied to interfaces? Which law allowed that? Please be specific because otherwise you’re just repeating MS FUD.

   I notice you’ve rolled out the patent application which everyone talks about when they mention this. You can write any old nonsense in a patent application, and sometimes (as in this case) you can hoodwink the USPTO into granting it. That does not make the patent valid, and in this case it’s “patently obvious” (pardon the pun) that it’ll get overturned at some point. Nevertheless Microsoft themselves (and Novell) have been completely unspecific about which patents actually apply.

   Comment by Richard Jones — November 15, 2006 #

8. IANAL, but from the comments I’ve seen about the MS/Novell deal, lawyers would agree on the word “unspecific”. What’s Microsofts plan with it?

   It would be so easy for them to get away with the FUD. Just have something like the JCP and specify that Open Source implementations are welcome.

   You agree that MS is working hard to protect their IP? And that they have no intention of open sourcing .NET themselves? But you don’t see any potential problems with Microsoft IP and Mono? You would bet your company on a lawsuit with MS in a patent/copyright dispute? I wouldn’t.

   You might be right that their claims are void, but I don’t think that will stop them.

   It is FUD, but the Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt seems real to me, and not made up by Microsoft (or me).

   Comment by marvi — November 15, 2006 #

9. There is no real danger in using Mono. If there is a suit you could switch to the Windows only .Net and be done with it. This would require you to avoid gnome specific libraries but, definitely do-able.

   I hope that there is NOT going to be a big uptick in Java, Mono just feels faster. I don’t really want my Linux box to start slowing down because of Java.

   Just say no to Java!

   Comment by bill — November 15, 2006 #

10. bill, I’m not gonna comment your flame bait in the end.

    But the other things you wrote underlines my point: “If there is a suit you could switch to the Windows only .Net and be done with it.”

    I don’t want to switch OS, I want to develop for multiple platforms. Personally I switch between Mac OS X and Linux, and others in my team uses Windows. That’s what I like to continue with.

    Comment by marvi — November 15, 2006 #

11. In my mind, this is all just speculation at this point. If you want to program in Mono, there is an entire stack that you can use that allows you to do just that, and it in no way falls under the auspices of Microsoft. Wanna develop GUI applications? Fine, use GTK# and have a portable solution that in no way infringes on anything Microsoft.

    My personal experience with Mono and the many languages which run under it (another very strong selling point in my opinion) is that it is almost always easier to do what I want than if I was using Java. A few examples would include:
    1) Web services
    2) XML support (esp serialization)
    3) Plug-in component support. .Net got this right from the beginning.
    4) More tools and core libraries available right out of the box.

    With Java now being GPL-ed, Mono in no way diminishes in my mind, for via IKVM (which can now use the Java class libraries instead of Classpath’s) one can run Java under Mono. This is truly the best of both worlds, as I could have all of the Mono and Java libraries at the disposal of any application I write, whether in Java, C#, Nemerle, Smalltalk, Eiffel, etc, etc, etc, which makes the number of tools at my disposal much more vast than if I used Java alone.

    So regarding the title of this article - ‘Who would use Mono now?’ - my response has to be ‘Who wouldn’t use Mono now?’. If you put aside all the rampant speculation and FUD, what Mono provides you with is a very robust toolkit for developing any application you can imagine in just about any combination of computer languages, most of which can work seamlessly with one another. Call it what you will, but for a developer like me who values the promises of RAD, reuse, and flexibility, Mono is synonymous with Nirvana.

    Comment by steve — January 8, 2007 #

12. […] Not everyone is happy with the isolated moves towards Mono. To quote an example that we have not mentioned in the past: You can call it FUD, but for me it’s a question of investing my time and energy in technology that are and will be available on the platforms I use (Mac OS X and Linux). I don’t trust Microsoft and I don’t trust Novell anymore either. Who knows when Microsoft will bring out it’s (sic) patents and kill Mono use outside of Novell? I think .NET is good if you want to develop for Windows only. For cross platform development I would not use it - I would go for Java. […]

    Pingback by Boycott Novell » Novell Sets Focus on .NET — July 1, 2007 #

13. The problem actually is, what else is there to use?

    Personally I would favour to use a better language such as python or ruby.

    But:
    - both arent as fast as compiled code (normally)
    - no giant is behind that to support the move.

    And what do we now see? Gnome adopts Mono, but once it bitched against KDE for being slaves of Qt Trolltech… I call it sooo ironic.

    PS: If i have the option, I will always root for python and ruby.

    Comment by she — October 22, 2007 #

14. […] Who would use Mono now? […]

    Pingback by Boycott Novell » Novell’s Mono Seen as Controversial — January 30, 2008 #

15. […] (harnvi.net): Who would use Mono now? You can call it FUD, but for me it’s a question of investing my time and energy in […]

    Pingback by Boycott Novell » Mono Critique Goes a Long Way Back — November 30, 2008 #

16. […] would use Mono now? < http://labora.harnvi.net/?p=37 […]

    Pingback by Boycott Novell » IRC: #boycottnovell @ FreeNode: November 30th, 2008 — December 1, 2008 #

Leave a comment

Name (required)

Mail (will not be published) (required)

Website

XHTML: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>