“The open-source effort to create a freely available version of Microsoft’s .Net development environment is set to take a leap forward Wednesday, when developers from the effort known as the Mono Project detail its latest accomplishments at a conference dedicated to open-source software.” Read the report About the O’Reilly open source conference at InfoWorld.
O’Reilly: Open-source .Net Inches Closer to Fruition
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
give miguel a break…how come WINE is a good project but Mono is bad?
how come Samba is a good project but Mono is bad?
how about all the ASP interoperability offerings?
how about Java? why are you all buddy buddy with Java but wanna assassinate Miguel for developing Mono?
personally I think Mono fills a very important niche in the open source world…just b/c it’s a copy of a microsoft technology doesn’t necessarily make it bad…if you hate .NET be fair…hate WINE and Samba too
-bytes256
Good post Bytes256.
We also discussed about the “I don’t like Miguel and Mono” on the previous Mono story (http://www.osnews.com/comment.php?news_id=1374), so if more stupid comments come up again, they will all be moded down.
I know I’ll get flamed for this, but oh well.
From a technical standpoint, and I use .NET almost every day at work, I don’t find anything of great interest or importance in .NET to me personally. C# is a nice language, but .NET doesn’t really offer me anything that I can’t already do (neither does C# for that matter). Technically, .NET is nothing special and not that bad either.
From a political standpoint, however, I despise .NET and am appalled at the open source communities embrace of it. Why? Let me explain.
I worked for Microsoft about 3 or 4 years ago; at the time that Microsoft lost their court battle against Sun. Prior to the courts ruling, Microsoft’s Visual Studio team was really pushing J++ (Java) as the key technology in their development suite. One internal presentation I saw claimed that Java was the cornerstone of VS’s future success. Not VB, not VC++, but Java.
Once they lost the lawsuit, however, they hired the main developer of Delphi from Borland to write C# for them. The purpose behind .NET and C# is to harm Sun. It is revenge for not letting Microsoft own Java and pervert it so it would only run on Windows; or rather people would develop Windows specific Java apps using MS’s dev tools, which wouldn’t run anywhere else.
Now, back to the open source community. In my opinion, by supporting .NET to the detriment of Java, the open source community is shooting themselves in the foot. They are helping Microsoft spread their “technology” to the detriment of a company that at least to some degree has benefitted the open source arena moreso than Microsoft. They are giving Microsoft more power.
Once Microsoft has successfully killed Java and injured Sun, which is what they are after, do you really think Linux won’t be next? Also, do you think that Microsoft really wants .NET to run equally well on Linux, Mac or BSD as it does under Windows. I can guarantee they don’t. They proved that when they tried to hijack Java several years ago. Had they been interested in working well with everyone else, Sun would never have had to sue them. Microsoft has already shown its intentions, the open source community just isn’t looking.
Having worked there, I can tell you that Microsoft has just as much hatred towards Linux as they do Sun. Linux will be the target at some point, and then the open source community will scream.
Personally, I think they should start screaming now. .NET can’t succeed unless it is adopted across a variety of platforms. If everyone else uses other technologies, which offer the same benefits, instead of .NET, then .NET will be just like COM, ActiveX, etc. A non-issue. Just another Microsoft specific technology; which is what it will end up being anyway. Microsoft never plays well with others. Their goal is total domination. How many times must we learn this lesson? How many times must we take part in it.
Microsoft has called Open Source communism. I think that Microsoft is disturbingly fascist. They believe that the technology world should be led by their centralized autocratic dictatorship, in Microsoft controlled economic and social regimentation, and in forcible suppression of all opposition.
I am appalled that anyone would support this fascist behavior.
Microsoft can’t “harm” linux…they can make windows more compelling…but they can never harm linux b/c the source is there and the source will always be there.
Linux is not like commercial entities like Sun…they can’t undercut the price unless they start paying people to use their products.
They can embrace, extend, extinguish to their heart’s content but we’ll extend right along with them.
It’s far more dangerous to just ignore .NET just in case it catches on. If it doesn’t catch on…well no big deal Miguel and Co. just wasted their time…however if it does catch on…and it probably will…then we’ll have a viable and extremely popular (because it’ll be FREE) alternative…where’s the harm in that? And if they change the rules…we’ll change along with them!
-Bytes256
Why would anyone be surprised that Microsoft hates Linux? Linux poses a threat to their hegemony. Increases in the number of Linux users- both on the desktop and on servers- generally means that less people are buying their products. From what I’ve read, Office is Microsoft’s real cash-cow, not Windows. However, considering that no MS applications, including Office, are available for Linux, it undermines their bottom line. While I am happy to say I don’t have any MS products on my iBook running Linux, I think they deserve to hate Linux as much as they would any competitor.
.NET is different than COM, ActiveX, etc. The beauty of it is that it won’t just be another MS specific technology. Mono and dotGNU are proof otf thos. What more do you need? Are you scared MS will embrace-and-extent, and make Mono and dotGNU irrelevant? As far as I’m concerned, as a person who doesn’t need MS interop past being able to convert Excel docs into CSV using the Spreadsheet perl module, Mono, dotGNU, and any other Free/OS .NET-a-likes are still relevant. They still provide the same benefits as using MS’s .NET.
I think people are very irrationally scared of .NET. Even people that should know what it means, or can mean, for developers. C# isn’t special. But .NET isn’t about C#. It may be for some people, but .NET is a lot more than that, and it still exists as something of potential worth without any MS backing. Mono and dotGNU already have specs for what they want to create, they have a clear idea of what they need to design and code- and that’s why we (well, I at least) love open source. MS could change the specifications to .NET, the CLR, C#, in a way that Mono or dotGNU couldn’t implement, but it’s a non-issue. Mono and dotGNU, as they implement it, will still be worth something to developers.
Frankly, I’m amazed no one ever created anything like it before. If the CLR was more generalized, and not just targeted toward the kids of OO languages we have today, it could be very close to a holy grail for development. And this is coming from a person who doesn’t use Microsoft products on his computer.
Why should anyone start screaming about .NET? It is being adopted across a variety of platforms. Via Mono, which works on Linux, Mac OS X, Windows, and maybe other eventually. What is the problem? There’s nothing wrong with simply admitting that your fear is irrational, and stems for a distaste with anything to do with MS. That’s OK, a lot of people are just like that. However, for pragmatic folks like me, there is at least the potential for something very cool in the Free/OS versions of .NET.
Bytes256 has it on the knob. I’d love to know about how Camel thinks that MS will hurt Linux. By making Windows worth using, or perhaps a better solution to certain problem areas? It may turn some people away from Linux, but at least a few of them would make that switch out of practicality. Not everyone will choose a solution based solely on ideals, RMS-style.
The great thing about Free and OSS is that MS can’t hurt it. I can continue to run Linux on my iBook until the think falls apart. Even if Linus dies, the rest of the world gets nuked, I can exist happily in my underground bunker, hacking away!
Perhaps MS will poison the kernel code, by submitting evil patches! OOOH!
Bytes256 has it on the knob. I’d love to know about how Camel thinks that MS will hurt Linux. By making Windows worth using, or perhaps a better solution to certain problem areas? It may turn some people away from Linux, but at least a few of them would make that switch out of practicality. Not everyone will choose a solution based solely on ideals, RMS-style.
The great thing about Free and OSS is that MS can’t hurt it. I can continue to run Linux on my iBook until the think falls apart. Even if Linus dies, the rest of the world gets nuked, I can exist happily in my underground bunker, hacking away!
Perhaps MS will poison the kernel code, by submitting evil patches! OOOH!
about the double post!
… but I’ll say it again. I have mixed feelings about Mono.
I don’t have a problem with .NET from a technological standpoint – I think it is one of the few technologies MS has done a good job on. (I doing designer for a fairly large .NET project at work.) I think it would be benificial to have an open-source .NET implmentation. But…
I still think MS will pull the rug out from under them when they get close to success. It will probably take the form of a patent, with “RAND” licensing, a license that prohibits GNU projects, or something so clever I haven’t thought of it yet.
I would love to be wrong. MS even highlighted the Mono project in a recent e-newsletter. But I doubt I am. Especially considering the recent Samba, Palladium, and WS-I happenings.
even a patent or a license or some other legal obstacle can’t really stop open source projects…ever heard of DeCSS? very illegal…still around…just gotta find a server somewhere outside legal jurisdiction to host the code…that’s one of the beautiful things about open source projects…they’re almost impossible to kill, even when targeted by companies as powerful as microsoft…they may be able to stop Ximian from doing work on Mono but they’ll never stop the COMMUNITY from doing work on Mono and they definitely can’t roll back the stuff that’s already out there.
-bytes256
Take a look at the history of Samba. Microsoft began openly supporting it when it started but have since made life very tough for the team by changing things and adding incompatiblies. The samba team has had to reverse engineer some things because Microsoft won’t support their effort any more. I worry that the same thing could happen with Mono.
I have to totally agree with Camel here.
You are correct that a patent or license can’t prevent the community from developing a project. But it can stop companies from being able to use it – in the US, at least.
Don’t get me wrong. I’m not afraid of anything. If the computing world starts to turn sour, I’ll go do something else. It’s not my life.
The point of my post is that Microsoft is hellbent on domination, or as you call it, perserving their hegemony. It’s the same thing. They way they try to accomplish this is very fascist in nature. Why support it? It’s like supporting the likes of Hitler in case he “catches on”.
I think people are very irrationally scared of .NET. Even people that should know what it means, or can mean, for developers. C# isn’t special. But .NET isn’t about C#.
I disagree with you here. I think .NET isn’t that special and that C# is special in that it is a pretty decent replacement for VB. We have already been graced with technologies that rival .NET, which are available today.
…potential worth without any MS backing.
When the value is more than just potential, perhaps I will evaluate it’s merits again.
MS could change the specifications to .NET, the CLR, C#, in a way that Mono or dotGNU couldn’t implement, but it’s a non-issue. Mono and dotGNU, as they implement it, will still be worth something to developers.
What will it be worth? The whole point behind it is cross-platformedness. If Microsoft makes it MS specific, which you know they will, it has just lost all value it could have had has it not? Native code runs faster that interpreted code and porting from one unix system to another is pretty trivial.
Frankly, I’m amazed no one ever created anything like it before.
They have. Ideas such as this have been around for a long time.
Why should anyone start screaming about .NET? It is being adopted across a variety of platforms. Via Mono, which works on Linux, Mac OS X, Windows, and maybe other eventually. What is the problem?
Because .NET is being used as a club to injure another company. It’s like when the government takes away the rights of a group of citizen that you don’t belong to. It is wrong to stand by at watch it happen since your rights could be next. What will you do when it is you who is being attacked and infringed upon? What will you do when your company is in MS’s targets?
If the open source community wants to invent their own cross-platform development technology, fine. I just think it is a mistake to jump in bed with Microsoft. I think their historical performance justifies my feeling this way.
Microsoft can’t “harm” linux…
They most certainly can. They can attack Mono through patents and such so that no legitimate company can use Linux to do .NET things. They can, and have, altered their communication standards so that Samba won’t work correctly anymore (Samba compensated). They are pushing for a new protocol to replace HTTP protocols, which I doubt they will share with Linux. They are lobbying to make open source software illegal in certain realms and have many campaigns against Linux. They give away millions of dollars of software to companies and countries who would otherwise learn Linux and extend its use and as a result its popularity. There are a good number of things they can and have and probably will continue to try to do.
No, they can’t put Linux out of business per se, but they can make it worthless to many people by ceasing all communications with it. They can, and do, deter its acceptance through FUD campaigns and dumping free software everywhere Linux is being considered. Writing drivers is hard enough as it is. I’m sure that many of the companies that do not share their specs with Linux driver writers do so at least in part because of the negative publicity MS is always throwing around. Believe me, if there is a way to kill Linux, MS will find it or die trying.
I don’t know what your definition of “harm” is, but to me the above mentioned items should be considered “harm”.
Microsoft are not Nazis and Bill Gates is not Hitler…
but anyhow…Sun is not likely to be wiped out because Open Source supports Mono…guess what…we support Java too…ever hear of GCJ? Kaffe? JBoss?
in fact i am willing to bet that open source will continue to support Java better than .NET for the next decade…the investment of time, money, and effort is already there and even Microsoft can’t take that away…
seriously…who does the Mono project hurt anyhow?
let Miguel do his own thing…that’s really what open source is all about
-bytes 256
Microsoft are not Nazis and Bill Gates is not Hitler…
I didn’t say either thing. I said there business practices were disturbingly fascist.
I don’t see how you can compare Java and .NET. Java was a cool, albeit not perfect, technology created by Sun to fill a need. They did it quite well. .NET on the other hand is designed to kill Java, harm Sun, take more money from you as the consumer by turning Windows software into a commodity like you phone or electricity, etc. None of these things are good, all are designed with the goal of total domination, and I can’t tolerate them.
Anyway, I have said all I care to on the matter. A response to your current post can be found in my previous posts. My posts are part fact, part opinion and part conjecture. If you don’t like them that’s okay. We’ll wait a few years and see if any of my conjecture is correct.
Please …. .Net being designed to hurt Sun??
Put down the crack. Maybe you can say that C# is designed for this purpose, but not .NET in general and C# is a *VERY* small part of .NET.
On another note …
It is funny when OSS supporters call Microsoft some kind of evil empire (or facist in this case). In fact, if you want to make those comparisons, Microsoft is a very capitalistic business and GNU is communist. (Funny how it is called REDhat, hehe)
> >Please …. .Net being designed to hurt Sun??
>
>Put down the crack. Maybe you can say that C# is designed >for this purpose, but not .NET in general and C# is a >*VERY* small part of .NET.
Sigh C# is designed to kill the Java Language
.NET is designed to kill the java platform (J2EE et al)
Have no doubt Microsoft is after Sun.
Microsoft is not after Sun. It is more like the other way around. Remember who the frontrunner here is. If .NET and C# were designed to kill the java platform, than what is Sun ONE designed to do? Who is copying who…
Besides, I don’t care what spurred the creation of .NET. C# is a vast improvement over Java in just many areas (except being cross-platform). I’m not saying I dislike Java, because I do not. But you have to give credit where credit is due.
-G
Of course MS is after SUN they are competitors so they will compete, there’s nothing wrong with it this is a capitalistic economy.
Micro$ofties make me sick. I can’t believe they are actually buying the FUD from M$. Linux communistic? Be serious. Which OS provides as much freedom as Linux? Don’t like KDE? Use Gnome. Don’t like Mozilla? Use Konquerer! Don’t like AbiWord? Use OpenOffice. etc. etc. I think M$ restricts our freedom a lot more than Linux does. So who are the communists then? And who would fullfill the role of dictator in the Linux community? I fully agree with Camel though. M$ is a lot like fascism. If any term applies to Linux, it would be ‘anarchy,’ not ‘communism.’
“C# is a vast improvement over Java in just many areas (except being cross-platform).”
Well, there are couple of improvements in C#, which are not important. Many additions over Java are considered to be harmful by many people, I am one of them. In short, there was a shift from C to C++ and C++ to Java, because each language introduced new paradigm. I do not see anything brilliant in C#.
All the C# implementations on Linux will help MS more than they will help Linux.
I CHOOSE to NOT help MS in ANY way, so I will never, ever use Mono, or any other .NET implementation. I am using Java for my open source projects and Java works very well. Why should I use .NET? To help power crazed Miguel and Fachist Billy? No thanks.
Cheers.
*cracks up laughing*
go home for the night and the iq level of this thread drops like the stock market *sigh*
How does Mono help MS? People need to look at what Mono really is…another MS interoperability package…like it or hate it, a high degree of MS compatibility is very important if Linux will take off in the business world…every single day more companies adopt .NET and until Mono matures, that’s another company that will probably rule out Linux as a viable platform.
How is Mono really any different than WINE? or than Samba? are these viewed as evil technologies?
oh and Miguel’s power crazed, but Linus and RMS aren’t are they? you people are very unfair to Miguel and it just disgusts me…he’s done some very good work for the open source community and he dare’s to take on projects that are essential even if they aren’t considered “cool” by the open source-as-religion rank and file
-bytes256
To bytes256: I don’t think that I am unfair to Miguel. I really think that he is power-crazed. It is my idea, and I believe it, and I have a right to say it. I am sorry but, if you are disgusted with my “being unfair”, it is your own business. I will not change my ideas not to disgust you. Do you suggest that I should value Miguel’s current actions in the light of his past actions by giving examples of his being “cool” in the past? What a stupid and illogical idea that is. Maybe you should go and check your own iq level before throwing stones to others.
.NET is not another MS interoperability package. Do you put Samba and Wine in the same category with .NET? What is the relation? Are Wine and Samba MS technologies? Are they helping the empire to spread its borders?
.NET of course helps Microsoft, by
1. Some other platform, even Linux, is embracing their “wonderful” technology. This is a very good marketing bullet for the Empire, especially for dumb decision makers in high positions. So, .NET is gaining popularity. Do you think that Billy wouldn’t smash Mono under his feet if it wasn’t helping MS marketing engine?
2. It directly affects Java on Linux. Java is one of the most powerful guns against MS. MS did everything it could to smash Java, legally and illegally. Now, Miguel is helping it.
3. MS Shanigans are spreading the word “.NET is cross platform”, showing Mono(polist wannabe) project as an example. Although it is not 100 percent compatible, and will never be.
In short, from the point of view of Billy, it could not be better: Your enemy is helping you to spread your new technology and smashing your most important other enemy.
Nice.
Mono will of course help Linux, but it will help MS much more. I hate MS more than I love Linux. Sorry. I will never use it.
Mono is IDENTICAL in purpose to WINE and Samba…let me spell this out…Mono implements its own free version of .NET (MS Technology) that is completely independent of MS…no support, backing, or authorization from MS…WINE implements its own free version of the Windows API (also MS Technology)…Samba implements its own version of SMB (Windows Networking Protocol) which is also a Windows technology…guess what…these projects don’t help MS to spread…they take some of Microsoft’s lunch…Mono can and will do the same…
Think about this…Small Startup Company X wants to make web services…the options are-
-Sun J2EE (Sun ONE) – VERY Expensive
-Microsoft .NET – Not as expensive
-Mono – FREE
hmmm…now let’s assume that Mono has acheived pretty close to .NET compatibility…which one would you pick?
it’s really like deciding whether to go MS Windows 2000 Advanced Server for file serving or use Red Hat Linux and Samba for the same job…MS if you need 100% guaranteed compatibility, ease of use, tech support, etc. or Linux if you need low costs
i know you hate microsoft…i don’t like them much either…but ya gotta call a spade a spade
-bytes256
Actually, you might be right bytes256. Mono can really can hurt MS in its own game. I think I have exagerated a bit.
Well, I am happy with Java though.
But, also consider that there are awful lots of open/closed Web Services implementations based on Java, other than Sun’s, which are cross platform compatible: Check out
http://www.javaskyline.com/webservices
you might be surprised to see something like 50 bullets.
Go ahead, check it. It is really interesting list.
Cheers.
thanks CroanoN…i never realized there were so many!
now hopefully Sun doesn’t pull a Netscape and get arrogant (Sun, be arrogant? no way…) and say “we’ve got a huge lead MS will never catch up”
fortunately, i think Sun is taking .NET pretty seriously
let’s hope so…CHOICE RULES!
-bytes256
Please …. .Net being designed to hurt Sun??
Put down the crack. Maybe you can say that C# is designed for this purpose, but not .NET in general and C# is a *VERY* small part of .NET.
Were you there? Did you participate in design meetings? Did you participate in the discussions on L10N and I18N issues? Did you work on the design of VisualStudio 7? Did you attend the Friday Windows 2000 Team parties where we wrote nuggets of “wisdom” on the cafeteria walls of building 26 with Sharpie pens demeaning Linux, Sun and every other MS enemy you can think of and spelling out our eventuall victory over all of them?
I was.
Perhaps you should put down your crack and listen to someone who was actually there.
Most (not all) of the people who in this thread criticize Mono seem to completely ignore DotGNU. It could be argued that that is because the story was about Mono, but I think it is a little unfair. Mono and DotGNU do not have exactly the same goals, but they overlap in that they both want to implement the .Net specs.
Is this because DotGNU is currently much less prominent (and does not have a frontman like De Icaza that can be attacked personally)? Or is this because Ximian is a company, whereas no one dares to criticize anything GNU does?
Mono isn’t just like Samba. Mono and dotGNU, unlike Samba, have a use without Microsoft. One of their chief goals at this point is interoperability with Microsoft. But that goal isn’t so important that they would keep that above all else. Let’s say that MS evilly changed the specification, added hidden behavior, embrace-and-extend- or whatever. Let’s imagine that for some reason the Mono team could implement these changes. Guess what? Mono is still useful! Mono still gives us the technical benefits of .NET. As a programmer and scientist, that’s what I’m interested in. As Miguel has said many times, Mono’s purpose is chiefly to decrease development time, make it easier to write better code, and make for better reuse. Is that so bad?
Samba on the otherhand exists to interop with Windows shares. I suppose you could have an exclusively SMB Linux network, but why in the hell would you do that? You most likely wouldn’t, and Samba wouldn’t be useful in that situation. However, Mono would be. I have Mono installed on my iBook, and I’ve no MS .exes to run, and I don’t plan on running any. However, the .NET development system interests me.
Camel:
As to your anti-Sun and -Linux rallies, what would you expect? I’m not sure what is so sick about it. If you’re a Linux user, I could see how you could be a little uncomfortable, rather like being the agnostic in a bunch of brainlessly singing christians. What kind of attitude would you expect MS to have for it’s competitors? Maybe you’ve been at MS too long (I hear they work you like a horse), but go read Slashdot, or any number of random sites with somewhat of a Linux bent. It’s full of rabid anti-MS stuff. I don’t think that’s bad either.
Sun would be in MS position if they had the chance, if anyone doubts that, they’re seriously delusional.
Name some other system that does what .NET does, Camel- you said that ther ehave been many before it. I’m not talking about having other languages compile to Java bytecode, that doesn’t count. Nor am I talking about the idea of a VM. I’m talking about transparent interop between languages. I’m talking about being able to use C++ libraries directly from Smalltalk, subclassing C# classes from within Perl, and *vise versa*.