Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 22nd Nov 2010 19:53 UTC
Novell and Ximian We were well aware that Novell had put itself on the market, coyly winking at passers-by, displaying its... Assets. VMware was a contender, but things have played out entirely different: Novell has been bought by Attachmate Corp., with a Microsoft-led consortium buying unspecified intellectual property from Novell.
Thread beginning with comment 450825
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: PJ
by TheGZeus on Mon 22nd Nov 2010 23:56 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: PJ"
TheGZeus
Member since:
2010-05-19

Of those programs, only one of those doesn't have a >= GTK equivalent: GNOME Do.

Probably wouldn't take a year to re-implement it in some other language. Crap, write a mono program that translates to some other language, and use that as a stop-gap.
That's just the worst-case scenario: A patent lawsuit happens, MS wins, and there's no more FOSS C#.
Whoopdie-shit.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[4]: PJ
by lemur2 on Tue 23rd Nov 2010 00:18 in reply to "RE[3]: PJ"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

Of those programs, only one of those doesn't have a >= GTK equivalent: GNOME Do. Probably wouldn't take a year to re-implement it in some other language. Crap, write a mono program that translates to some other language, and use that as a stop-gap. That's just the worst-case scenario: A patent lawsuit happens, MS wins, and there's no more FOSS C#. Whoopdie-shit.


Agreed, mostly.

The Mono applications in GNOME that I know about which are frequently distributed are these:
FSpot, Banshee, Tomboy Notes, GNOME Do and Pinta


In order, comparable FOSS alternatives which do not depend on Mono would be:
digikam, Amarok, Basket Notes, krunner and Krita.

Personally, I prefer the second set anyway.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[4]: PJ
by TheGZeus on Tue 23rd Nov 2010 15:24 in reply to "RE[3]: PJ"
TheGZeus Member since:
2010-05-19

I like that this got voted down, probably because I said that there are alternatives.
That wasn't always the case, and... it's true.
I'm just relaying information, so you don't freak out should MS destroy Mono.

You're welcome.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: PJ
by lemur2 on Tue 23rd Nov 2010 22:03 in reply to "RE[4]: PJ"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

I like that this got voted down, probably because I said that there are alternatives. That wasn't always the case, and... it's true. I'm just relaying information, so you don't freak out should MS destroy Mono. You're welcome.


You possibly got voted down because you claimed (and still claim) that "it wasn't always the case" that there are FOSS alternatives to Mono applications on Linux.

Actually, it is always the case. There are no Mono applications for Linux for which there are no good alternatives which don't use Mono.

Every single Mono application for Linux has an at-least-as-good not-Mono alternative.

Linux users simply do not need to run Mono.

Since they don't need to run Mono, and since they cannot get a license to run Mono legally anyway (unless they run SLED), then why on earth SHOULD Linux users run Mono? There is no possible sane justification.

Edited 2010-11-23 22:05 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2