The Mono Project has released a small bug-fix release of Mono, 0.30.1. They have also a new document that describes some common tricks to improve the performance of your Mono or .NET application. These are a summary of techniques that we employed to tune our own C# compiler.
Mono 0.30.1 released; Mono Performance Optimization
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
I’d like to see Mono and Perl/Python get together on some projects. I hope that Microsoft’s recent ownership of XML doesn’t mess up development on Mono.
C# seems like a nice enough language, but how can we be sure that M$ will never shut Mono down? I mean, they have truckloads of lawyers, so they can probably do whatever they want. And if Gnome starts using Mono everywhere, isn’t that a big risk? If I were M$ (and had a more sadistic personality ;-)), I would wait until Mono was used all over the (OSS) place and then sue.
Miguel de Icaza has been quite visible on the Perl 6 internals mailing list.
And Microsoft has only applied for patents on XML for storing word processing documents. They haven’t had those patents granted yet, and likely won’t. But it does work nicely to scare off businesses who might be open to other office suites.
I would think any implementation of the Windows.Forms API would merely be a migration tool to help port applications to GTK#. That, being based on the ECMA standardized parts of .NET wouldn’t be subject to lawsuit from Microsoft.
I also doubt Microsoft could sue Mono for providing a source-code compatible implementation of Windows.Forms for Mono. Yes, it’s something Microsoft has copyright priviledges to, but a court is likely to determine that extends only to the [i]implementation[i], and not the interface.
If I am correct Mono is/will be split in to 2. One version which does not touch any legal issues, and one version which has the rest…
And besides, Microsoft won’t sue Novell, it’s just another way of getting more programs to Windows…
< http://slashdot.org/articles/04/02/12/2349232.shtml?tid=109&tid=126… >.
We need to develop a new web based and document describing technology and put it under the GPL and use that. Why do we even have an open standards organization when these open standards can be patented. The GPL is a million times better.
Mono has come a long way. But they still use a “conservative” garbage collector, which is basically a big ugly hack. To have the same quality as the Microsoft VM, they will have to write a proper generational GC. This is quite a hard problem, but maybe someone will want to write his thesis about this.
They got a patent on embedding multiple scripts in different languages in a single XML document. So obviously this special way to embed code in XML is patented. But there are many more ways to do this that do not violate this patent. And the XML standard itself has nothing to do with this.
I agree with you.
To say that Microsoft “owns” XML because of these patent seems to me like saying they own C++ because they have patents for stuff developed on C++.
And by the way, there are hundreds of XML-related pending patents, including IBM, Oracle and pretty much all the big players.
So I’d better take it easy and don’t be so “dramatic” about every single M$ move.
Why not tighten up the defense right away. We can see how the power elites are able to breach our defense, they want to keep their wealth protected and concentrated. This path (Mono) can team up with Perl/Python and continue to do what it is doing, but a new Internet needs to be established under the GPL at the same time. Take the power back, why not fight back.
>>I’d like to see Mono and Perl/Python get together on some projects. I hope that Microsoft’s recent ownership of XML doesn’t mess up development on Mono.<<
Microsoft doesn’t own XML, you are so brain-washed that you actually think that. They patented their XML structure for their Microsoft Office.
I think nobody can deny this.
But can you blame Microsoft that they get patents if possible? They might have to defend themselves one day against IP companies such as EOLAS etc. Microsoft itself can never be a pure IP company since they actually produce stuff and are therefore too vulnerable to counter suits. I think there are plenty of areas where microsoft behaved like a criminal thug, but patent lawsuits is not one of these.
About mono: the core part of mono is safe from patent suits. For the next 5 years microsoft will not sue mono anyway since this would slow the adoption of .NET and they have bet the company on .NET. They might be greedy and criminal, but they are *not* stupid.
After that all it would take for mono to be defendable would be moderate corporate backing. Novell is quite capable of providing this.
So everybody who does not touch mono is simply too paranoid. It is not wrong to be paranoid, but being too paranoid can impede ones ability to compete.
i used my first Mono/GTK# app recently, Muine, it seems just as fast as any other GTK+ app written in C as far as i can tell.
Take your trolling to Slashdot. And please use one post for all your thoughts because I have to wait 60 seconds between reporting all your posts.
Trolling is http://slashdot.org way.
One way Microsoft could hurt Mono is to develope a different version of C#. Since Microsoft gave the specifcations of the first version to a standards body, it is kind of hard to take it back. An example of this might be Netscape creation of Javascript. Netscape gave the specifications of Javascript to a standards body. Anyone can make something from those standards. Netscape could not sue someone for using those standards.
Microsoft could change their version of C# so that older versions would not work with the new version this would make Mono’s version limited. The new version would be for Windows only and the old version would be for Windows and Mono. Microsoft would be splitting the development community. Developers would not use C# to develop Windows application because of the of the split versions. Java had this problem in the early days.
Microsoft could change C# but they would only be fracturing the development community and hurting themselves in the process.
If the patent office is making all of the decisions about the way software can be developed than that is going to be a heavy load to bear because it’s the patent office’s job to stifle competition and collect money for it.
People wonder why the GPL is necessary because it is too harsh. It means that the code has to be open and accessible. This is the reason why free software was necessary, because the industry is protecting a monopoly. If you do the work and write the code than you can get sued because some piece of your software solved a problem in a similar way to some patented software that you don’t even know about. Makes one wonder if the real reason why they make new languages every four years, is so that they avoid being sued for writing code. XML looks like it is a dead technology, owned by the patent office and Microsoft. Open standards are not so open after all, they are owned by the patent office, so why don’t we just call them patent office standards instead of open standards. I think that we need some new protocols for Internet communication and that they have to be protected by the GPL so that the only barier to the technology is that you have to write the code. You shouldn’t have to be a lawyer too. Maybe this new Internet can be started up and slowly migrated towards.
>> … We can see how the power elites are able to breach our defense, they want to keep their wealth protected and concentrated. … but a new Internet needs to be established under the GPL at the same time. Take the power back, why not fight back. <<
You know I heard a rant much like this in my history class, now who was it … oh yeah every dictator and terrorist in history. They may rise fast like Hitler did, but they fall even harder.
Don’t you think the folks at Ximian have looked at the legalaties? Don’t you think that they are smart enough to muddle through the various MS arguments? I think they have.
No. No. No. Microsoft has to preserve backward compatiblity and .NET v2.0 has been submitted to the ECMA.
what about OO.o format?
i think OO.o format use XML… so OO.o format is now illegal?
will MS send a cease and decease letter to Sun now?
A tip for you: read the news first. Understand them. Then you might not need to ask.
It’d make me really happy if someone would package up a Mac OS X binary of Mono; I’ve compiled GNU Portable.NET on OS X (and it works, which is cool), but I can’t seem to get Mono to build.
I want Mono even though I have Portable.NET working because Mono’s class library is more complete.
– chrish
“.NET v2.0 has been submitted to the ECMA. ”
>>>>>>>>>
Only a tiny fraction of it.
The new language and VM features of .NET v2.0 have been submitted to ECMA. This is the most important part.
They can keep their apis proprietary. I don’t care. They are not that good anyway, and the primary goal of mono is not to provide a complete emulation environment.
Oh and by the way: this site is called “osnews: exploring the future of computing” and not “conspiracy news: exploring why microsoft is EVIL(TM)”.
If you want a site to exchange the newest conspiracy theories such as “Microsoft has patented all of XML”, why don’t you start your own site????
The latest version compiles under OSX.
Ximiam, or I guess rather Novell, just hired a new JIT coder specifically for the powerpc. A lot of the tests are passing, but there’s still some more work to go. I think in the next couple months you’ll see some mono goodness for Mac OSX.