Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 6th Oct 2008 10:37 UTC, submitted by John Mills
Mono Project The Mono project has released Mono 2.0. As most of you will know, Mono is an open-source implementation of Microsoft's .NET framework for Linux, Mac OS X, Windows, and other operating systems. The 2.0 release comes packed with new features, the main ones being the compiler upgrade to C# 3.0 with support for LINQ, as well as the inclusion of ADO.NET 2.0, ASP.NET 2.0 and System.Windows.Forms 2.0. The release notes detail all the changes and new features.
Thread beginning with comment 332733
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Let's clear up a few things...
by lemur2 on Tue 7th Oct 2008 02:11 UTC in reply to "Let's clear up a few things..."
lemur2
Member since:
2007-02-17

Two things... 1) Mono IS NOT PART OF GNOME... Gnome has Mono bindings available and there are several non-essential applications that take advantage of this fact. There is NOTHING saying that you must have these applications available to use Gnome. 2) Mono implements all of the bits of .Net and C# that are specified by open standards, but does also implement extra pieces outside of the standard that increase compatibility with applications written for the Windows platform. These non-standard pieces are NOT required to use Mono or the C# language. Just because some pieces of the software that are questionably legal does not mean that you have to throw the whole thing out. There have also been several comments mentioning the uselessness of ASP.NET capabilities. This is absurd. Like it or not, there are _many_ ASP.NET applications out there and any opportunities to move these applications to platforms other than Windows should be welcomed.


Lets clear up something important.

Gnome, Mono, ASP, C#, CLI ... it may indeed be possible to carefully use all of this without actually infringing on any of Microsoft's claimed patents.

But they are all intrically linked with stuff where a claim of patent infringement from Microsoft is quite feasible. This gives Microsoft a perfect opportunity for spreading its patent FUD.

So use Java, KDE, Python, Ruby, etc, etc. Use the Eclipse framework. Use any one of the many available better choices.

Doing this removes the very possibility of Microsoft FUD.

That alone is far more beneficial than any possible benefit that can come from using Mono.

Reply Parent Score: 1

supercompman Member since:
2008-09-14

A properly packaged distro, even if it comes with Mono and dependent applications, just uninstall the packages... it's not going to break Gnome... ever. The Gnome team has time and time again made this perfectly clear. No core Gnome component uses Mono. Mono is supported as a development platform if a developer so chooses. There may be some questions about the legality of SOME pieces of Mono, but there are NO questions about the legal status of the Gnome code. There is also no question about the legal status of the C# language. There is no rational reason to stop using either one. How can Microsoft spread patent FUD about either one of these technologies? C# is a good language. Java is a good language. Writing a compiler or runtime engine for either of these languages is most certainly legal. The only things that might not be legal (and I strongly emphasize might) are some of the libraries that Mono provides... if you wonder about the legal status of the winforms, don't use them; it's as simple as that. There are lots of applications out there that are questionably legal... Sco was claiming that the Linux kernel contained such questionable code, does that mean no one should use Linux, even though Sco never had a leg to stand on in the court room? What makes anyone think that by not using these technologies, you'll be any safer from patent questions/legal actions? At any point ANY technology, far more core to the open source software and free software movements (or outside of software entirely even) could come into question.

Reply Parent Score: 2

lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

A properly packaged distro, even if it comes with Mono and dependent applications, just uninstall the packages... it's not going to break Gnome... ever. The Gnome team has time and time again made this perfectly clear. No core Gnome component uses Mono. Mono is supported as a development platform if a developer so chooses. There may be some questions about the legality of SOME pieces of Mono, but there are NO questions about the legal status of the Gnome code. There is also no question about the legal status of the C# language. There is no rational reason to stop using either one. How can Microsoft spread patent FUD about either one of these technologies? C# is a good language. Java is a good language. Writing a compiler or runtime engine for either of these languages is most certainly legal. The only things that might not be legal (and I strongly emphasize might) are some of the libraries that Mono provides... if you wonder about the legal status of the winforms, don't use them; it's as simple as that. There are lots of applications out there that are questionably legal... Sco was claiming that the Linux kernel contained such questionable code, does that mean no one should use Linux, even though Sco never had a leg to stand on in the court room? What makes anyone think that by not using these technologies, you'll be any safer from patent questions/legal actions? At any point ANY technology, far more core to the open source software and free software movements (or outside of software entirely even) could come into question.


It is all aquestion of credibility. Credibility in the mind of a potential new user of Linux.

Said potential new Linux user looks at a Gnome-based distribution, and notes the presence of F-Spot, Banshee, Beagle and Tomboy notes, and the corresponding Mono libraries in support ... and (knowing that .NET is a Microsoft patent encumbered development framework), would think ... "hmmmmm, there could be something to Microsoft's bluster about Linux users needing to have a license from MS after all".

Said potential new Linux user looks at a KDE-based distribution, and notes the complete absence of anything resembling Microsoft technology, and would conclude "hmmmmm, there clearly isn't anything at all to Microsoft's bluster about Linux users needing to have a license from MS after all".

It doesn't help that you can remove software ... the suspect software was still included in the distribution, and hence the distribution can still be threatened to be required to have a recall.

When patents are involved, the technology just has to look similar. It doesn't have to be a copy of the source code for there to be a potential patent infringement.

SCO had no patents, and hence no patent claim against Linux. SCO alleged that its UNIX source code had been copied into the Linux kernel.

That was clearly a bogus claim from the get go. Why on earth would a free software Linux kernel developer plagiarise copyrighted UNIX code in plain sight of the whole world?

SCO tried early on to present some disguised examples of copied code. The disguise was in the form of a font substitution. Someone recognised the font, and before the day was out had restored the correct original font, recognised the code, and pointed out that that was BSD code that was never used in any Linux kernel anyway.

SCO's copyright-based threats against Linux were simply not at all credible.

A patent-based threat is an entirely different kettle of fish.

Edited 2008-10-07 04:59 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 0

Wrawrat Member since:
2005-06-30

Doesn't make much sense because there is nothing preventing them from making patent infringement claims on all those better choices you are promoting. Why, that's exactly what MSFT is doing with the Linux kernel: it doesn't use their technology, yet they are spreading FUD quite happily.

As your other argument on "new Linux users", it's pretty ludicrous because most users couldn't give a flying duck about software patents or even Mono/.NET as long as it works.

If you believe you're cool 'cause you don't use any Microsoft technology, that's okay. There's nothing wrong with this, but it would be much more productive for all of us if we stayed on topic (e.g. on Mono) rather than blathering on MSFT or fighting FUD with even more FUD.

Reply Parent Score: 3