Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 13th Dec 2010 19:27 UTC, submitted by lemur2
Mono Project For the most time, I've been firmly in the largest camp when it comes to the Mono debate - the 'I don't care'-camp. With patent lawsuits being hotter than Lady Gaga right now, that changed. For good reason, so it seems; while firmly in the 'ZOMG-MICROSOFT-IS-T3H-EVILL!1!!ONE!'-camp, investigated the five most popular Mono applications, and the conclusion is clear: all of them implement a lot of namespaces which are not covered by Microsoft's community promise thing.
Permalink for comment 453471
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Poty
by dylansmrjones on Tue 14th Dec 2010 12:59 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Poty"
Member since:

First, there is a legal binding patent grant from Sun/Oracle:

This does not protect you at all as a developer using Java. It only protects you if you are implementing a functionality/interface-perfect clone of the JVM. It is unrelated to the languages in question and is of no use as an ordinary developer. Oracle has not promised not to sue users of Oracle JDK or OpenJDK. They have only promised not to sue implementors of Oracle SDK to the extent the implementation is fully correct.

As such you are no more safe using Java, Scala (on top of a JVM, similar to the status of C# in .NET/mono), python, ruby, perl, Open Object REXX and Commodore BASIC.

For what it's worth you are just as safe with mono as you are with gtkmm, QT or BeOS-api (Haiku and to some extent also Syllable). C++ or C are no safer in this regard. Languages are irrelevant. The promises are merely in regard to implementations of specific VMs and their associated Class Hierachies.

Some might say you are safer with mono and JVM-clones than with C and C++ frameworks because neither Microsoft nor Oracle have promised not to sue users of such frameworks ;) Considering the behaviour of Oracle their promise not to sue is worthless. Just look at Google.

Reply Parent Score: 3