Old mono rants

[mostwanted]

If it were, I would reformat and find a distro that does not use it. I haven't touched a M$ product in 8 years!

Mono is not a Microsoft product, it's an open source project primarily funded by Novell. The most useful parts of Mono (C# and the spec for the runtime) are ECMA standards which Microsoft officially has no control over; .NET is simply an implementation of said standards (even though Microsoft did invent the thing).

It's the same ordeal with JavaScript (Netscape's and now Mozilla's original implementation) and JScript (Microsoft's implementation). Both are implementations of an ECMA standard called ECMAScript.

The parts that are in the actual danger zone are the implementation of the non-ECMA parts of .NET (Windows-specific APIs like Windows Forms). Mono is basically in the same legal grey area as WINE here: it's an OSS implementation of a closed source, patented Microsoft API. The thing is, though, that those Windows-specific APIs are not used by Linux developers, but rather by Windows developers who want to easily port their applications to Linux. Removing these APIs from Mono would be no serious blow to adoption in the Linux world, it would just be a blow to attracting Windows developers.

[Sushi]

Off-topic, but... Miguel De Icaza is the #1 Microsoft-fanboy in the Linux-community. And no, it's not a case of him disliking MS less than most people do, he seems to be real fanboy.

[Marthinus]

I agree, Mono with the standard GTK# widgets is in no danger from M$. The Linux world should just stick to the ECMA .NET with added Gnome libs and it should be fine.

Dismmissing Mono because it is .NET is a mistake, and the panic relating to it is already the start of FUD but from the Linux community instead of the M$ community.

[Synikk]

I see problems ahead for Mono developers not under the protection of Novell/Microsoft, as well as distros shipping with Mono. I mean, Novell is now paying royalties to MS, as I understand it. What will this mean for other distros?

I don't have the best grasp on this situation, and I'm no patent lawyer, but the whole situation already stinks of deceit and ulterior motives. Balmer himself stated that MS was "open to talking with other distros," or something to that effect. To me, that smacks of "You either get approved by us or you get slapped with a lawsuit. Take your pick."

MS is not known for being very nice to its "partners."

[Xace123]

The thing is do we really NEED to use mono? Do we really NEED to risk it? Microsoft is not only threatening with patents but with so called "intellectual property".

What makes mono so attractive for Linux? IMHO it makes sense in a Microsoft only environment to standardize all the pieces of the system. But I just don't see the benefits developing applications in a freedom of choice environment such as Linux.

If I have the freedom I choose not to use mono nor any product related to Microsoft or its ally Novell.

[Synikk]

If I have the freedom I choose not to use mono nor any product related to Microsoft or its ally Novell.

Exactly. The problem is, Ubuntu now ships with some Mono apps by default. Tomboy and F-Spot come to mind. I don't use either of those though. The only Mono app I currently use is Muine, which I use for throwing a quick playlist together.

[Xace123]

Mono is protected by the Open Invention Network, so a patent suit would likely lead to the equivalent of a patent nuclear war - no one wants to do that. (see the discussion when Fedora started shipping mono, for example here: http://gregdek.livejournal.com/4008.html)

Thanks for the link Wolki

The thing is, as I said do we really need to get entangled in a "patent war"?

And another interesting thing is, why are patents relevant for mono? Why do I need "insurance" from the OIN? I was led to believe that as mono only is an implementation of the ECMA/ISO specification it was alright.

[mostwanted]

Off-topic, but... Miguel De Icaza is the #1 Microsoft-fanboy in the Linux-community. And no, it's not a case of him disliking MS less than most people do, he seems to be real fanboy.

Yet, he is also the founder of Gnome which was originally created as a GNU-endorsed alternative to then semi-proprietary KDE...

There's a difference between not hating someone uncontrollably and being a fanboy. Miguel likes C# and the CRL because it's good technology, not because he's a Microsoft fanboy.

[ComplexNumber]

There's a difference between not hating someone uncontrollably and being a fanboy.

its doubtful if sushi is ever likely to see the difference. in his eyes, anyone who doesn't hate something that he despises is a total fanboy. and of course, it applies to everyone else except him.

I see problems ahead for Mono developers not under the protection of Novell/Microsoft, as well as distros shipping with Mono. I mean, Novell is now paying royalties to MS, as I understand it. What will this mean for other distros?

I don't have the best grasp on this situation, and I'm no patent lawyer, but the whole situation already stinks of deceit and ulterior motives. Balmer himself stated that MS was "open to talking with other distros," or something to that effect. To me, that smacks of "You either get approved by us or you get slapped with a lawsuit. Take your pick."

MS is not known for being very nice to its "partners."

actually, MS may have an ulterior motive. before novell signed the agreement with MS, MS couldn't have sued ALL linux distros using mono because, no matter how big MS is, it would have bitten off more than it can chew. and it would be seen as the bad guys, which, considering how hated MS are already seen by the public, they wouldn't have done themselves any favours.
but now that they've signed the agreement with novell and have welcomed other distros to do the same, they can now sue without being seen as being all that bad because they can turn around and say: "we actively encouraged other distros to do the same, but they metaphorically stuck 2 fingers up at us, so its not as if we are being unfair".

[banjobacon]

Saying Mono should be removed because it is "Microsoft-related" is a poor argument. If it's true that Mono does not infringe on patents, then there is no reason to remove Mono.