Linked by lucas_maximus on Tue 23rd Oct 2012 16:15 UTC
Mono Project Miguel de Icaza, founder of Xamarin and lead developer of the Mono open-source implementation of Microsoft's .NET platform, announced on his blog today that the third major revision of the Mono framework is now available. Mono 3.0 was released on GitHub on October 18. It adds support for some of the most recently added key features of the .NET platform, incorporates Microsoft's open-source framework for Web development, and beefs up the capabilities of Mono on Mac OS X and iOS. It also lays the groundwork for much more rapid development of features for the Mono platform going forward.
Order by: Score:
Hiev Member since:
2005-09-27

They don't charge for the Mono versiĆ³n of Android, they charge for MonoDroid, the toolkit to make Android Applications using C# and Mono.

Reply Score: 5

tidux Member since:
2011-08-13

I was talking about the one to make Android apps. Nobody takes the Dalvik-to-C# port of Android seriously.

Reply Score: 0

lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

That is what he mentioned, obviously you don't know what you are talking about.

http://xamarin.com/monoforandroid

This is mono-droid. A toolkit to build Android Applications in C# and Mono.

Xobot OS is another thing entirely (it was a way of testing their Java to C# compiler).

Also a lot of people are taking MonoDroid and MonoTouch seriously because Xamarin have been in profit only 6 months since Miguel started his company.

Edited 2012-10-23 17:08 UTC

Reply Score: 4

henderson101 Member since:
2006-05-30

The real problem is the terms Mono released the key element of the Mono subsystem under - the section that does all the VM clever stuff and the other parts that make that work when compiled. This is LGPL and they have no "static linking" clause. The native compilation and static linking really affects iOS hard though. If one wishes to create a new version, ignoring the windows dressing access to the API, one must recreate half the VM and core functionality under a "GNU" free license, or pay a lot of money to license the code under commercial terms. This move is very dickish. Other vendows put a "static link" clause in this scenario, but Novell decided to not do that. No one can take the Mono code and ceate a competing product because of this and it pretty much defeats the entire premise that Mono being "open source" implies.

One could also argue that Apple are dicks for not allowing a more open ecosystem, but I shrug really and look squarely at Miguel. If people like PhoneWax, PhoneGap and the other various vendows that have open source products that allow iOS as a target can survive, I don't understand what the big deal is for Mono. especially when the runtime is only a really very small part of the overall picture for iOS. Surely their product is worth the price for the other parts?

As for Android - weirdly the product costs the same as the iOS version. I say weirdly as the justification for the iOS cost was the licese for the runtime from Novell (possibly Xamarin now, not realy checked.) So that implies that either Mono for Android does something with the OS code that is native compilation bound, or someone is making a fast buck. Maybe someone who knows more about the product will care to comment?

Reply Score: 1

Slambert666 Member since:
2008-10-30

So you are angry at Miguel for not allowing you to embed Mono in a commercial product without paying?

The LGPL for the runtime and LGPL or BSD for most of the libraries is plenty open for most usage scenarios.

Reply Score: 5

LOL
by WorknMan on Tue 23rd Oct 2012 17:08 UTC
WorknMan
Member since:
2005-11-13

God forbid anybody ever charges money for anything. I'm sure you like working for free, after all.

Reply Score: 9

RE: LOL
by henderson101 on Tue 23rd Oct 2012 19:10 UTC in reply to "LOL"
henderson101 Member since:
2006-05-30

iOS and Android *are* cash cows. Didn't you know? ;)

Reply Score: 2

Great news
by Aeko on Tue 23rd Oct 2012 18:23 UTC
Aeko
Member since:
2007-10-20

Really. With these release Mono has caught the first class train of development environments a takes more distance to other open languages.

Reply Score: 2

Comment by marcp
by marcp on Thu 25th Oct 2012 07:10 UTC
marcp
Member since:
2007-11-23

The mono trojan infected many GNU/Linux packages. Personally I don't use them, although some of them may be appealing [like Docky]. It's beyond me - how could I ever allow anything with an 'exe' extension to run on my GNU/Linux box?

Reply Score: 1

Performance improvements?
by dorin.lazar on Fri 26th Oct 2012 03:30 UTC
dorin.lazar
Member since:
2006-12-15

I don't see any. The GC may be improved a bit, but what I wanted to see is numbers, something spectacular. Last time I ported mono on an ARM it was sluggish as hell and next to impossible to compile without some dirty tricks. Did they get rid of it?
C# is a nice language, but Mono is killed by poor performance.

Reply Score: 1

"announced on his blog"
by jsumners on Fri 26th Oct 2012 13:21 UTC
jsumners
Member since:
2005-07-06

When did de Icaza's blog become Ars Technica?

Reply Score: 1