OSNews

your celebratory cookie is in the mail.

Well, technically speaking, the only real purpose of winforms is the sake of compatibility more than anything else. Mind you, one should, if they are going to write software, use the native widget for the said platform; Cocoa# for Mac, GTK# for *NIX and Winforms for Windows.

Why is GTK the native for Linux? Especially with KDE4 I notice a lot of people using KDE now.

It's not. Linux doesn't have a 'native' toolkit, which is one of its problems.

I'll say the same thing with different emphasis. Linux doesn't have "a" native toolkit; it has several.

'll say the same thing with different emphasis. Linux doesn't have a native tool"kit"; Lots of tools, never seen a kit.


/strange joke, even I don't fully grasp.

http://zwabel.wordpress.com/2009/03/30/pushing-immature-technology-...

Much people aren't happy with it.

So you moderate down a person comment because you disagree with them - yeah, real mature.

The point I was getting at is that the idea of a multiplatform toolkit is a load of bollocks because no matter how good one makes the toolkit - it will always appear out of place, especially on a Mac.

But hey, you found it easier to moderate me down and flame my post rather than taking an effort to understand what I was talking about.

In the context of Mono, GTK is as close to native as you'll get on *nix. There is also qt bindings for mono, but it isn't as far along or as well supported as GTK.

I downloaded on my OpenSus11.1 It is fast, stable and monodevelop feels more responsive than my beloved netbeans. I believe that GTK# provides crossplatform GUI opportunities.

What do you mean? I have installed monodevelop on a mac a few months ago...

Seriously, this is getting old.

Most Mono applications make use of the ECMA portion of C# and then Glade# or Gtk#. They have done really well to steer clear of any of the patent encumbered Winforms (and WPF) libraries. If MS decided to sue Novell and require them to remove Winforms, none of the major applications will break since they do not use those libraries.

So is Mono's FAQ.


I wish people would stop posting this from the FAQs, because it is well wide of the mark and doesn't answer the most crucial question that open source projects need answered, and Gnome needs answered if it is to use Mono more fully at any time because Gnome needs something like it.

There is nothing that stops Microsoft from encumbering the CLR or anything submitted to the ECMA and there is nothing to stop the RAND license that they have to be offered under from being revoked. They just won't be ECMA specs any more, that's all.

The notion that there are some ring-fenced 'safe' and potentially 'non-safe' parts of Mono is bogus and potentially dangerous because no one cares about what your namespaces or libraries are called. I can tell you Microsoft doesn't.


They will not sue anyone, or throw their weight around, over people implementing Winforms or people having ADO.Net namespaces I can tell you that. It just wouldn't make any sense and wouldn't be successful. They will do it in a more far reaching way on the basis of anything that runs within a compatible CLR, as documented at the ECMA.

Exactly, Microsoft sued TomTom over Linux. So when everyone quits using Linux due to fear of being sued, Mono will be irrelevant anyways.

You mean Thom's articles should go directly to page 2? Come on, that's blasphemy!!