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 356184
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: There is no argument
by lemur2 on Wed 1st Apr 2009 05:10 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: There is no argument"
lemur2
Member since:
2007-02-17

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.


A description of the difference between Mono and ECMAscript is (essentially) to be found here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECMAScript#History

JavaScript was originally developed by Brendan Eich of Netscape under the name Mocha, later LiveScript, and finally renamed to JavaScript. In December 1995, Sun Microsystems and Netscape announced JavaScript in a press release. In March 1996 Netscape Navigator 2.0 was out, featuring support for JavaScript.

Due to the wide-spread success of JavaScript as a client-side scripting language for web pages, Microsoft developed a compatible dialect of the language, naming it JScript to avoid trademark issues. JScript added new date methods to fix the non-Y2K-friendly methods in JavaScript, which were based on java.util.Date. JScript was included in Internet Explorer 3.0, released in August 1996.

Netscape submitted JavaScript to Ecma International for standardization; the work on the specification, ECMA-262, began in November 1996. The first edition of ECMA-262 was adopted by the ECMA General Assembly of June 1997.


ECMAscript is (essentailly) Netscape/Sun IP, adopted also by Microsoft.

.NET is Microsoft IP, some parts of which have been submitted by Microsoft as ECMA standards. It is vitally important to keep in mind the qualifier "parts of which".

Since Netscape donated their code to open source, I would imagine that there is some kind of accompanying pledge which prevents other parties from claiming after-the-fact patents in Javascript and other related technologies.

Edited 2009-04-01 05:13 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[6]: There is no argument
by abraxas on Sat 4th Apr 2009 17:47 in reply to "RE[5]: There is no argument"
abraxas Member since:
2005-07-07

.NET is Microsoft IP, some parts of which have been submitted by Microsoft as ECMA standards. It is vitally important to keep in mind the qualifier "parts of which".

Since Netscape donated their code to open source, I would imagine that there is some kind of accompanying pledge which prevents other parties from claiming after-the-fact patents in Javascript and other related technologies.


You assume but you don't know. In fact there is nothing preventing anyone from claiming a patent right on JS. Novell does in fact have an agreement with Microsoft to avoid lawsuits pertaining to Mono. You just made it more clear that this is about your feelings towards Microsoft and not about the ECMA's lack of protection, or any real "patent trap".

Reply Parent Score: 2