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 450832
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[6]: rms was right- as usual
by lemur2 on Tue 23rd Nov 2010 00:25 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: rms was right- as usual"
lemur2
Member since:
2007-02-17

HAHAH. Yeah, because you can't re-implement libraries. Only official AT&T Unix has libc!


Well, this point is the very crux of the debate, isn't it?

Certainly Microsoft's PR and legal department would want you to believe that you can't re-implement libraries replicating Microsoft proprietary technologies without a paid-for license from Microsoft.

Who am I to argue?

But, more to the point ... why argue? Why not simply shun Mono and use decent alternative applications that are readily available and at least as functional? Much simpler.

Reply Parent Score: 2

TheGZeus Member since:
2010-05-19

They've already re-implemented a large portion of winforms etc...
Christ...

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[8]: rms was right- as usual
by lemur2 on Tue 23rd Nov 2010 00:51 in reply to "RE[7]: rms was right- as usual"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

They've already re-implemented a large portion of winforms etc... Christ...


well, yes, exactly so. This is indeed the crux of the matter. The Mono code includes open source implementations of Microsoft proprietary technologies such as winforms. We certainly agree on that.

The bit that you may not perhaps realise is that Microsoft wants to be paid for its proprietary technologies. It has even, of late, sought license fees for implementations of its technologies that Microsoft did not write. Going after Tom TOM for an implementation of FAT is a good example. Microsoft did not write the FAT filesystem code in the Linux kernel that TomTom were using (neither did TomTom, BTW), and the Linux kernel is released under an open source license. GPLv2 actually. None of that stopped Microsoft from persuing TomTom.

Winforms in Mono is a prime candidate to become another such a target. Microsoft will ask for money from companies who use Mono (it will probably not go after Mono developers).

Far simpler, cheaper, less risky, etc, etc for companies to simply shun Mono applications.

There are plenty of alternative applications which do not use Mono. Why not simply run them, instead?

Reply Parent Score: 3