OSNews

it isn't just about the possibility of looming patent threats. though, that certainly doesn't help things.

there is a lot to be said about chasing a moving target. not to mention chasing a target controlled by a company who has a rich history of not playing fair. the mono developers pretty clearly plan on trying to match microsoft's implementation as closely as they can. (see miguel de icaza's gusto in keeping up with the evolving platform, for example).

you need to face the facts. mono is a risk. whether a legal risk, a technical risk, a political or strategic risk. or even an ideological risk, for those so inclined.

supporters are keen on saying things like "microsoft probably won't ever sue, and probably wouldn't win if they did!", or "you guys are just blind microsoft haters", or "if there's any problem in the future, we can always (fill in the blank)".

in my opinion, and the opinions of many others, there are just too many "what if"'s. there is a point at which it just isn't worth the risk anymore.

* mono is destined to follow a moving .NET-shaped target basically forever
* there are potential legal issues
* for some people, performance is an issue
* there are less controversial alternatives. both for the platform itself and the apps that have been written for it
* lot of people obviously just don't like it (that in itself is valid)
* having mono apps + dependencies in a default OS installation often takes up more space than alternatives

geez, i am so tired of arguing about this. mono does not belong in a default installation of an OS.

for those of you that argue that the end-user should just uninstall, or those that argue that it's no different if the app is installed by default or just made available... well, you're just wrong. if you want to pull in tomboy, a freaking note-taking app, then it should be up to YOU to install it, and all of its dependencies. the difference between 'installing' and 'making available to install' is huge. pretending like it makes no difference is grossly untrue.

these people who spout "screw ideology; i use what works!!!" need to realize that the FOSS ecosystem takes all kinds, and you simply can't ignore that ideology is a HUUUUUUUUGE factor for a lot of people.

It's not necessarily destined to that fate. It's entirely possible the project will take on a life of it's one once it reaches a certain state of maturity. It might take a fork to get that to happen if Miguel or Novell are stubborn, but the option is always there.



And there are potential legal issues with every software project (free or proprietary) thanks to the minefield that is software patents. We'll survive.



Well, those are just the kinds decisions that developers have to make all the time. There are always tradeoffs between speed/footprint/development effort/etc. Mono provides faster development time at the expense of footprint and performance (in theory, anyway). C provides great speed at the expense of development time. There's middle ground, too. What's new about that?



That's for sure.



I don't feel there's any one wrong or right, here. I'm sure there's people that argue say that Evolution shouldn't be in the base install. Or Epiphany, because it's based on evil-Apple's WebKit. In the end, though, it's the people driving GNOME and Debian development that are making these decisions so their opinion ends up carrying a lot of weight in this debate - no surprise there.

You're confusing facts with opinions... oh wait, you got it right a bit further down:

But let's look at your points one by one:

No it isn't. You're deliberately confusing the issue by blurring the lines between C#/cil/clr and the Microsoft-specific bits built on top of it (ASP.NET, Windows.Forms, etc)


As has been pointed out ad nauseum: there are potential legal issues in most software. At least Mono has the power of oin behind it.


I'll gladly concede that this point. Some people have performance issues with Mono and Mono-based applications.


Totally bogus points. To exclude a technology because some vocal minority objects to it is simply absurd. If you want 100% approval for every single decision you're never going to accomplish anything.


Not so. Considering that the "alternatives" have no compelling apps, including them would be a greater waste of space.


Then STOP arguing about it. It really is as simple as that. You don't like Mono? Fine; don't use it! I don't care! I for one have no strong feelings about it one way or another, but I would certainly not want to be without Tomboy and/or F-spot.

Why should I (or any other user) put up with inferior software just because you have your panties in a bunch. You're in no position to demand that.