Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 4th May 2011 20:41 UTC, submitted by lemur2
SuSE, openSUSE The first major effect of Attachmate buying Novell (and thus, SUSE) has come into, uh, effect. Novell, of course, is the birth place of Mono, the open source implementation of Microsoft's .NET framework. Reports indicate Mono developers have been fired as part of the streamlining process, but according to Attachmate's CEO, they weren't fired because of Mono.
Thread beginning with comment 471923
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
pantheraleo
Member since:
2007-03-07

Didn't know Apple had backed off of that. That's good to hear at least.

Apple's fear of apps not taking advantage of native features is a non-starter.


Unfortunately, Mono is also a non-starter if they can't keep up with Microsoft and release new versions in parallel, as well as guarantee compatibility with the Microsoft implementation of .NET.

I really hope that Microsoft does hire the Mono dev team. But I doubt it will happen.

Edited 2011-05-05 20:00 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

umccullough Member since:
2006-01-26

DUnfortunately, Mono is also a non-starter if they can't keep up with Microsoft and release new versions in parallel, as well as guarantee compatibility with the Microsoft implementation of .NET.


Hardly...

Most software these days can be built to .NET Framework 2.0 compatibility. There have only been a few things added since then (and 3.0/3.5 are basically the 2.0 framework with extra assemblies).

.NET Framework 4.0 is required for some of the hot new Silverlight stuff - but unless you need that, Mono can likely still run most of the .NET software out there. Any developer who targets the 4.0 framework needlessly is probably shooting himself in the foot.

Update: Existing compatibility is key, however...

Edited 2011-05-06 00:06 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

pantheraleo Member since:
2007-03-07

Hardly... Most software these days can be built to .NET Framework 2.0 compatibility. There have only been a few things added since then (and 3.0/3.5 are basically the 2.0 framework with extra assemblies).


Sure, and some of them are major. LINQ for Entities being an example. To the best of my knowledge, Mono doesn't even have a stable implementation of LINQ for SQL yet (just a preview version), but LINQ for SQL is already deprecated in Microsoft's .NET implementation in favor of LINQ for Entities. I'm pretty sure graphing was also added in 3.5 and probably doesn't work in Mono.

Also, ASP.NET 3.5 added quite a few new advanced AJAX backed controls that presumably may or may not work on Mono.

Also, when a customer signs a million dollar contract for an application with me, any technology that does not have guaranteed compatibility is a non-starter for me. That's why all companies producing their own versions of Java have to have their Java implementation pass the extremely rigorous compatibility test suite before they are allowed to call their product Java. With Mono, however, I really have no guarantees of compatibility with .NET. And that's a non-starter on a million dollar contract.

Also, if we bring desktop apps into the equation, I wouldn't exactly consider WPF to be a minor feature.

Edited 2011-05-06 01:05 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

"DUnfortunately, Mono is also a non-starter if they can't keep up with Microsoft and release new versions in parallel, as well as guarantee compatibility with the Microsoft implementation of .NET.
Hardly... Most software these days can be built to .NET Framework 2.0 compatibility. There have only been a few things added since then (and 3.0/3.5 are basically the 2.0 framework with extra assemblies). .NET Framework 4.0 is required for some of the hot new Silverlight stuff - but unless you need that, Mono can likely still run most of the .NET software out there. Any developer who targets the 4.0 framework needlessly is probably shooting himself in the foot. Update: Existing compatibility is key, however... "

Any developer who targets .NET at all is probably shooting himself in the foot. The only platform for which .NET applications can be developed without risk is Windows. All existing Mono applications (for Linux) call components of .NET which lie outside of the ECMA parts, and therefore they lie outside of Microsoft's Community Promise (which only applies to C# and CLI, not to all of .NET).

Any developer who targets multiple platforms should avoid .NET entirely (if you must use C#, use it within the Qt framework, not Mono). Doing so is the only way to put down the footgun.

Edited 2011-05-06 01:10 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

fithisux Member since:
2006-01-22

I really hope that Microsoft does hire the Mono dev team. But I doubt it will happen.


Or kill .Net and go with mono. For me it makes sense.

Reply Parent Score: 2