Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 30th Mar 2009 18:43 UTC, submitted by elsewhere
Talk, Rumors, X Versus Y Any discussion about GNOME vs. KDE is sure to end in tears. It's basically impossible to discuss which of these two Free desktop environments is better than the other, mostly because they cater to different types of people, with different needs and expectatotions. As such, Bruce Byfield decided to look at the two platforms from a different perspective: if we consider their developmental processes, which of the two is most likely to be more successful in the coming years?
Thread beginning with comment 355940
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: There is no argument
by abraxas on Tue 31st Mar 2009 02:46 UTC in reply to "RE: There is no argument"
abraxas
Member since:
2005-07-07

"There's nothing at all to argue about. Install GnomeDo on any desktop environment and you never need anything else. GnomeDo ftw

I think GnomeDo is one of the strongest reasons not to use Gnome. It's based on Mono. What's the point in running .NET stuff on Linux? If you want to run .NET stuff better use Windows.
Why go for the surrogate (Mono) when you can use the real thing (.NET)?
"

Mono is not .NET. I am sick and tired of hearing this BS line. Mono is C# and the CLR with its own libraries. .NET compatibility is included but nobody develops .NET applications on Linux. They develop Mono applications. Mono hatred is based on ignorance and nothing else. GnomeDO, Banshee, Beagle, F-Spot, and other first class Mono applications share only the C# language and the CLR with Microsoft's product and they are both ECMA standards. Class libraries are entirely different and they are the bulk of what makes up Mono.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[3]: There is no argument
by segedunum on Tue 31st Mar 2009 13:51 in reply to "RE[2]: There is no argument"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

Mono is not .NET. I am sick and tired of hearing this BS line. Mono is C# and the CLR with its own libraries.

You cannot separate the two, which is what Mono's weak FAQ attempts to do. You can create your own libraries within Microsoft's implementations, but that doesn't stop you needing the pre-requisites - a .Net environment to run them in.

From another standpoint as far as Microsoft is concerned, and with everything I have ever seen filed by them over .Net, you are deemed to be covered if you are running within a compatible CLR as per the ECMA specifications - regardless of what libraries you use. That means Mono. In addition, the ECMA does not stop them ever filing something over those specifications in the future, which is why the ECMA specifies you need to license them under RAND terms for as long as they are ECMA standards.

Now, the obvious question is: How long will that RAND license last? That's the problem. It certainly isn't forever I can tell you that, and nothing makes it so.

Think the ECMA provides protection for you? Think again. That's what a lot of people have difficulty with, and it's an issue that has never been addressed. For open source projects they just can't live with that kind of uncertainty.

Class libraries are entirely different and they are the bulk of what makes up Mono.

No, they are not, so please stop regurgitating the Mono FAQ. It is wrong. It really doesn't matter what libraries you use, you can be covered with one brush by using the CLR, CLS and anything covered by the ECMA because that's what you need for those class libraries to be worth anything. They are very much a part of the .Net environment.

Reply Parent Score: 7

RE[4]: There is no argument
by Hiev on Tue 31st Mar 2009 15:06 in reply to "RE[3]: There is no argument"
Hiev Member since:
2005-09-27

Wow, your post is so inaccurate, I wouldn't know where to start.

But hey, anything to promote a political cause, right?

Edited 2009-03-31 15:12 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[4]: There is no argument
by abraxas on Tue 31st Mar 2009 18:44 in reply to "RE[3]: There is no argument"
abraxas Member since:
2005-07-07

You cannot separate the two, which is what Mono's weak FAQ attempts to do. You can create your own libraries within Microsoft's implementations, but that doesn't stop you needing the pre-requisites - a .Net environment to run them in.


This is entirely incorrect. You don't need a .NET environment to run Mono. I think you are confusing terminologies. .NET is an implementation of the C# language/CLR with class libraries meant specifically for Windows. Mono is an implementation of the C# language/CLR with TOTALLY DIFFERENT class libraries other than the few bits that have been standardized. Yes Mono also ships .NET compatible libraries but this isn't the basis for any GNOME applications.

Think the ECMA provides protection for you? Think again. That's what a lot of people have difficulty with, and it's an issue that has never been addressed. For open source projects they just can't live with that kind of uncertainty.


Why single out Mono then? Javascript is an ECMA standard. There is nothing preventing ANYONE from claiming a patent in Javascript yet I haven't heard a single person make any noise about that or any other ECMA standarized language. You're tying to pretend this is about ECMA standards when it's really about your hatred of Microsoft. Why else single out Mono?

No, they are not, so please stop regurgitating the Mono FAQ. It is wrong. It really doesn't matter what libraries you use, you can be covered with one brush by using the CLR, CLS and anything covered by the ECMA because that's what you need for those class libraries to be worth anything. They are very much a part of the .Net environment.


Do you even know what .NET consists of? A majority of it cannot even be included in Mono because it is Windows specific in so many areas. I wish you would stop your blatant misrepresentation of Mono when it is obvious you haven't even glanced at the .NET class libraries. If your worry is that Microsoft will call out patent claims then you might as well hide under a rock because anyone can get hit with software patent claims at any time, it isn't a Mono specific threat.

Reply Parent Score: 4