Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 7th Jul 2009 08:51 UTC, submitted by PLan
Mono Project We've already seen some heavy discussion on Mono and C# here on OSNews the past few weeks, as it became clear the patent situation regarding the ECMA parts of Mono was anything but faith inspiring. This issue seems to be resolved now: Microsoft has made a legally binding promise not to sue anyone who uses or distributes implementations of said ECMA standards. Following this news, Mono will be split in two; the ECMA standard parts, and the rest.
Thread beginning with comment 372106
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[6]: Comment by kaiwai
by kaiwai on Tue 7th Jul 2009 15:46 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by kaiwai"
kaiwai
Member since:
2005-07-06

1) Neither Sun nor Apple ever promised not to sue for their patents. It is just the FOSS community's paranoia that is driving the distrust of MS.


You are correct about that but given that Apple hasn't said, "implement OpenStep and die" as Ballmer threatened the opensource community with such an announcement - I feel pretty safe. As for Java, they made it clear; the only request was don't call it Java - call it Chocolate Milkshake if you want but if you want to make it Java you have to pay a fee.

2)MONO is not the WINE of .net. Who cares if GTK+ sucks on windows? the goal of MONO is to replace C with C# as the preimire dev technology on GNOME.


If your goal is to make a replacement to C, only use the ECMA standardised components and create a uniquely GNOME integrated .NET like Framework - then all power to them. The problem is that there will be those who expect it to be multiplatform - something that mono needs to state, therefore, that multiplatformness is a secondary priority when compared to making Mono into *the* framework, and C# the language to use.

Its good that they've split the two but I'd like to see an explicit removal of the non-ECMA components from the mono-project altogether. Make it a pure ECMA + Open Source with a declaration they have no interest re-implementing the non-ECMA components.

Reply Parent Score: 0

RE[7]: Comment by kaiwai
by kaiwai on Wed 8th Jul 2009 03:21 in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by kaiwai"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

Nice to see this forum is filled with the usual maggots who moderate posts down they disagree with instead of entering dialogue. Every time I see my posts being marked down it tells me that I am correct and there are a pack of cowards in this site who are intellectually deficient when it comes to mounting a counter argument.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[8]: Comment by kaiwai
by ssa2204 on Wed 8th Jul 2009 06:49 in reply to "RE[7]: Comment by kaiwai"
ssa2204 Member since:
2006-04-22

Nice to see this forum is filled with the usual maggots who moderate posts down they disagree with instead of entering dialogue. Every time I see my posts being marked down it tells me that I am correct and there are a pack of cowards in this site who are intellectually deficient when it comes to mounting a counter argument.


It is amazing isn't it how political technology has become. To which 99.9% of end users ask "What the hell is wrong with these people?". What is even more shocking is the level of fanaticism displayed over something that is so inconsequential to life. 7 NATO soldiers died today in Afghanistan, and yet what is the one subject that gets people emotional: silly software rants. Not to say that people should rant and rave about the war here, but I point this out to put things in perspective. As far as I know, Mono usage has not killed anyone. If you know of Mono setting off an IED, please do post it here.

My motto, if you like it=use it. If you don't like it=use something else. You know, it really is that simple. And if for goodness sakes you are forced to use something you don't like, well then find a new career or hobby. I really think some may need to find a new hobby if it makes their lives so miserable. Enjoy what you have while you have it.

The only posts that should ever be hidden because they were so voted down are comments that are truly off topic, or so offensive as to derail the conversation. But the popularity of down voting in a discussion truly defeats the whole purpose of having a discussion form in the first place. We may all at some point in time be guilty of it, or some votes could be questionable. But maybe repeat offenders need have their right to vote removed?

Reply Parent Score: 2