Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 13th Dec 2010 19:27 UTC, submitted by lemur2
For the most time, I've been firmly in the largest camp when it comes to the Mono debate - the 'I don't care'-camp. With patent lawsuits being hotter than Lady Gaga right now, that changed. For good reason, so it seems; while firmly in the 'ZOMG-MICROSOFT-IS-T3H-EVILL!1!!ONE!'-camp, The-Source.com investigated the five most popular Mono applications, and the conclusion is clear: all of them implement a lot of namespaces which are not covered by Microsoft's community promise thing.
Thread beginning with comment 453472
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Mono is safe to use.
by michi on Tue 14th Dec 2010 14:02
in reply to "RE[2]: Mono is safe to use."
Member since:2006-02-04
That promise is worthless. It protects nobody but the implementors of a fully correct implementation. The ordinary developer cannot use that promise to anything. Besides that the promise is a swizz cheese - just look at Google and tell me: What worth does that promise have? Nada, I tell you. Nada.
I totally disagree with you. The Java patent grant protects the OpenJDK which is under GPL + classpath exception. That means that there is an open-source implementation of Java that cannot be sued by Oracle because of patent infringement.
The same is not true for Mono: there is nothing stopping Microsoft or Oracle from suing Mono because of patent infringements. Microsoft could even sue them for implementing core .Net classes because the community promise is not legally binding.
The only reason Oracle sues Google for Android and not Novell for Mono is that Android is successful and there is some chance to get a lot of money and Mono is not successful, so it is not worth suing them.
RE[4]: Mono is safe to use.
by the_trapper on Tue 14th Dec 2010 15:28
in reply to "RE[3]: Mono is safe to use."
Member since:2005-07-07
Microsoft could even sue them for implementing core .Net classes because the community promise is not legally binding.
The Community Promise IS legally binding. Irrevocably. Forever. Go read it.
http://www.microsoft.com/interop/cp/default.mspx
Q: Is this Community Promise legally binding on Microsoft and will it be available in the future to me and to others?
A: Yes, the CP is legally binding upon Microsoft. The CP is a unilateral promise from Microsoft and in these circumstances unilateral promises may be enforced against the party making such a promise. Because the CP states that the promise is irrevocable, it may not be withdrawn by Microsoft. The CP is, and will be, available to everyone now and in the future for the specifications to which it applies.
A: Yes, the CP is legally binding upon Microsoft. The CP is a unilateral promise from Microsoft and in these circumstances unilateral promises may be enforced against the party making such a promise. Because the CP states that the promise is irrevocable, it may not be withdrawn by Microsoft. The CP is, and will be, available to everyone now and in the future for the specifications to which it applies.
RE[4]: Mono is safe to use.
by dylansmrjones on Tue 14th Dec 2010 15:49
in reply to "RE[3]: Mono is safe to use."
Member since:2005-10-02
mono is safe.
At least according to Microsoft: “The type of action Oracle is taking against Google over Java is not going to happen,” said Tom Hanrahan of Microsoft’s Open Source Technology Centre. “If a .NET port to Android was through Mono it would fall under [the Microsoft Community Promise] Agreement”.
http://www.developerfusion.com/news/85355/microsoft-says-net-on-and...
http://www.techworld.com.au/article/358564/microsoft_won_t_stop_net...
RE[4]: Mono is safe to use.
by Slambert666 on Wed 15th Dec 2010 11:32
in reply to "RE[3]: Mono is safe to use."
Member since:2008-10-30
The only reason Oracle sues Google for Android and not Novell for Mono is that Android is successful and there is some chance to get a lot of money and Mono is not successful, so it is not worth suing them.
So, are you arguing that Java is better than C# because Java is owned by a patent troll that potentially sues everyone and that puts Mono at risk?
RE[3]: Mono is safe to use.
by JAlexoid on Tue 14th Dec 2010 14:55
in reply to "RE[2]: Mono is safe to use."
Member since:2009-05-19
That promise is worthless. It protects nobody but the implementors of a fully correct implementation. The ordinary developer cannot use that promise to anything. Besides that the promise is a swizz cheese - just look at Google and tell me: What worth does that promise have? Nada, I tell you. Nada.
Yeah... When you get OpenJDK's sources you are granted the source under GPL. From GPL Preamble I quote:
"Finally, any free program is threatened constantly by software patents. We wish to avoid the danger that redistributors of a free program will individually obtain patent licenses, in effect making the program proprietary. To prevent this, we have made it clear that any patent must be licensed for everyone's free use or not licensed at all"
Google, unfortunately, is not covered by those licenses.
Edited 2010-12-14 14:56 UTC
RE[4]: Mono is safe to use.
by ducker on Tue 14th Dec 2010 15:12
in reply to "RE[3]: Mono is safe to use."
Member since:2006-12-26
Yeah... When you get OpenJDK's sources you are granted the source under GPL. From GPL Preamble I quote:
"Finally, any free program is threatened constantly by software patents. We wish to avoid the danger that redistributors of a free program will individually obtain patent licenses, in effect making the program proprietary. To prevent this, we have made it clear that any patent must be licensed for everyone's free use or not licensed at all"
Thats fine and dandy.. but that wont stop microsoft suing for this patent http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1528745/microsoft-xml-pate... ..
Since microsoft can and will sue any java developer (even if apparently oracle wont *cough*) at any chance.. all word processors that save in xml file format on all operating systems are about to be paying royalties to microsoft. According to some people who post here anyway.
The skys falling i tell you!
Member since:
2005-10-02
That promise is worthless. It protects nobody but the implementors of a fully correct implementation. The ordinary developer cannot use that promise to anything. Besides that the promise is a swizz cheese - just look at Google and tell me: What worth does that promise have? Nada, I tell you. Nada.