Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

MonoDevelop vs. Xamarin Studio IDEs

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Originally posted by directhex View Post
    They use GNOME libraries like Gtk+, and they use GNOME infrastructure like Bugzilla. However, they are no more "part of GNOME" than kupfer or gwget.
    Ok, this makes things to look little better, but their software is advertised at the gnome site.

    Assuming you mean "spit",
    That's right.

    1. Fuck you for having the gall to tell other developers what environments they are and are nor permitted to use. I might think Erlang is a moronic choice of framework to write software, but that doesn't give me the right to tell anyone that they're not allowed to use it
    2. It's not proprietary. You're just not smart enough to comprehend that. And if you're talking about tangential relationship via standards bodies, there's very little on your system that *can't* have the same charge levied at it. You use TCP/IP, right?
    I'd would rather say: fuck all of the developers who try to smuggle m$ patents and tech into the Linux world. When comes to developers I'm not saying they're not allowed to use some crap from proprietary company, but I'm saying I boycott them and their projects. It doesn't matter if something is Open Source while it supports proprietary and anti Linux companies.

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by Pawlerson View Post
      Ok, this makes things to look little better, but their software is advertised at the gnome site.



      That's right.



      I'd would rather say: fuck all of the developers who try to smuggle m$ patents and tech into the Linux world. When comes to developers I'm not saying they're not allowed to use some crap from proprietary company, but I'm saying I boycott them and their projects. It doesn't matter if something is Open Source while it supports proprietary and anti Linux companies.
      GTK+ supports MS Windows, CUPS, WebKit, Firefox supports Apple's OS X and Windows, do you boycott those also?

      What about Samba? It also reimplements MS APIs. How do you treat that?

      I'm sure if you go through all software packages on your systems, you will find support for proprietary systems. What will you do then? Strip your system essentially making it unusable?

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by Pawlerson View Post
        (...)I'd would rather say: fuck all of the developers who try to smuggle m$ patents and tech into the Linux world. When comes to developers I'm not saying they're not allowed to use some crap from proprietary company, but I'm saying I boycott them and their projects. It doesn't matter if something is Open Source while it supports proprietary and anti Linux companies.
        Are you disagreeing with Google too? They have a lot of proprietary stuff. Also Facebook, Intel, NVidia and Apple. Imagine that Apple patented just 5 years ago "multi-touch" and they attacked HTC for "gestures" patents.

        Or you like that Facebook gave to (some) HipHop, Intel gave good upstream video drivers and Apple gave LLVM. I don't have anything in defense of NVidia, so I can say just: attack NVidia, it is all about proprietary blobs.

        What about Xamarin/ex-Novell: they gave tools that some users and developers use. The relation with of Mono with Microsoft as is the relation of C or C++ and At&t. You have to be capable to understand the difference between a specification/language and an implementation.

        If you're not capable, this represents your level of logic: f this, f that, but when is about anything constructive... you're nowhere to be found

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by ciplogic View Post
          don't have anything in defense of NVidia, so I can say just: attack NVidia, it is all about proprietary blobs.
          Only the desktop GPU drivers are blobs. And their blobs are both remarkably stable AND mostly feature (with the exception of Optimus) + performance par with the Windows blobs, so they're off the hook where I'm concerned.

          They have also been contributing to the Tegra open drivers.

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by jayrulez View Post
            GTK+ supports MS Windows, CUPS, WebKit, Firefox supports Apple's OS X and Windows, do you boycott those also?

            What about Samba? It also reimplements MS APIs. How do you treat that?

            I'm sure if you go through all software packages on your systems, you will find support for proprietary systems. What will you do then? Strip your system essentially making it unusable?
            Do you base your desktop environment on Samba? Does Samba serve MS or rather Linux? Do most of the proprietary packages found in your Linux distribution support some anti Linux companies or just help Linux running some devices? Samba, Firefox, gtk+ don't come from MS or Apple, so I recommend you to stop making yourself a fool. Such strawman examples don't work on me.
            Last edited by Pawlerson; 02-22-2013, 11:51 AM.

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by ciplogic View Post
              Are you disagreeing with Google too? They have a lot of proprietary stuff. Also Facebook, Intel, NVidia and Apple. Imagine that Apple patented just 5 years ago "multi-touch" and they attacked HTC for "gestures" patents.

              Or you like that Facebook gave to (some) HipHop, Intel gave good upstream video drivers and Apple gave LLVM. I don't have anything in defense of NVidia, so I can say just: attack NVidia, it is all about proprietary blobs.

              What about Xamarin/ex-Novell: they gave tools that some users and developers use. The relation with of Mono with Microsoft as is the relation of C or C++ and At&t. You have to be capable to understand the difference between a specification/language and an implementation.

              If you're not capable, this represents your level of logic: f this, f that, but when is about anything constructive... you're nowhere to be found
              There's no logic in your comments. Google and facebook are Linux friendly companies while apple and ms are anti Linux ones. I have no reasons to attack Nvidia which supports Linux with their great drivers. It's such simple and I feel depressed when reading such bullshit. Oh, and one more thing: as far as I know neither facebook or nvidia are Linux competitors on desktop market. Apple didn't gave llvm, they found it will be better to them to use some open source license. They try to compete against GCC which comes with far better license, so this example is totally idiotic.
              Last edited by Pawlerson; 02-22-2013, 11:47 AM.

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by Pawlerson View Post
                There's no logic in your comments. Google and facebook are Linux friendly companies while apple and ms are anti Linux ones. I have no reasons to attack Nvidia which supports Linux with their great drivers. It's such simple and I feel depressed when reading such bullshit. Oh, and one more thing: as far as I know neither facebook or nvidia are Linux competitors on desktop market. Apple didn't gave llvm, they found it will be better to them to use some open source license. They try to compete against GCC which comes with far better license, so this example is totally idiotic.
                If you print on Linux you're using CUPS, an Apple project.

                Or look at Webkit, whose biggest contributors are Apple and Google. Is that project good or evil? Why? Why not?

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by directhex View Post
                  If you print on Linux you're using CUPS, an Apple project.

                  Or look at Webkit, whose biggest contributors are Apple and Google. Is that project good or evil? Why? Why not?
                  And what's your point? Do apple or google get my money when I use cups or webkit that originally comes from KDE? Can they use patents against me? Furthermore, as far as I remember CUPS wasn't created by crapple, but this doesn't matter.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by Pawlerson View Post
                    And what's your point? Do apple or google get my money when I use cups or webkit that originally comes from KDE?
                    Does Xamarin get money from you writing a Gtk# app on Linux?

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by directhex View Post
                      Does Xamarin get money from you writing a Gtk# app on Linux?
                      Just wait, I'll bet his answer will be something along the lines of "DOESN'T MATTER THEY SUPPORT MICROSOFT AND THEY MUST DIE."

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Originally posted by Pawlerson View Post
                        There's no logic in your comments. Google and facebook are Linux friendly companies while apple and ms are anti Linux ones. I have no reasons to attack Nvidia which supports Linux with their great drivers. It's such simple and I feel depressed when reading such bullshit. Oh, and one more thing: as far as I know neither facebook or nvidia are Linux competitors on desktop market. Apple didn't gave llvm, they found it will be better to them to use some open source license. They try to compete against GCC which comes with far better license, so this example is totally idiotic.
                        I think you cut and paste and take any conclusion anyway.

                        So Apple and MS are bad because they don't support Linux, so you have to embrace Novell and Xamarin as they supported Linux Desktop properly for a long long time (and they still do). Did I miss a meeting when I can see Novell Windows, instead of Novell Suse Linux.

                        For a refresh: LLVM is mainly an Apple sponsored project. Still LLVM seems a good addition for Linux (and C based languages), and an open spec like C# doesn't seem to be good even is made to work great on Linux (like Mono does).

                        Did I miss a meeting, do you think that aliens build the pyramids and also that Miguel wanted to make Linux a Microsoft project?

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Originally posted by Pawlerson View Post
                          And what's your point? Do apple or google get my money when I use cups or webkit that originally comes from KDE? Can they use patents against me? (...).
                          In fact they can! Patents are regardless of where the spec comes from! You can take GCC and you can make a GIMPLE (the internal language of GCC) to run on OpenCL, and yes, your implementation can be patent encumbered. A clean room implementation like Mono for example does not have issues with MS patents, but JavaScriptCore or WebKit can use some Apple patents (for example to work with automatic layout based on colons that are closer to the view of the phone). I hope you understand this.

                          If Apple enforces these patents, you will not have a good browser experience on the future KDE Phone project (if it will ever exist). If you will use Mono, you may use the native browser on the phone and you will not have any issue as the issue does not lie in Mono's implementation.(Linux friendly Google may pay to Apple some money for this layouting in WebKit).
                          Last edited by ciplogic; 02-22-2013, 12:16 PM.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Originally posted by Pawlerson View Post
                            Do you base your desktop environment on Samba? Does Samba serve MS or rather Linux?
                            First, we would need a clear definition of "anti Linux companies".


                            Originally posted by Pawlerson View Post
                            Do you base your desktop environment on Samba? Does Samba serve MS or rather Linux?
                            Does MONO serve MS or rather Linux?

                            Originally posted by Pawlerson View Post
                            Do most of the proprietary packages found in your Linux distribution support some anti Linux companies or just help Linux running some devices?
                            Using Samba proliferates the use of MS APIs as much as Mono does.

                            Originally posted by Pawlerson View Post
                            Samba, Firefox, gtk+ don't come from MS or Apple, so I recommend you to stop making yourself a fool. Such strawman examples don't work on me.
                            Mono does not come from MS or Apple either.

                            Your statements are neither consistent nor coherent.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Originally posted by directhex View Post
                              If you print on Linux you're using CUPS, an Apple project.

                              Or look at Webkit, whose biggest contributors are Apple and Google. Is that project good or evil? Why? Why not?
                              Last time I checked the history Apple needed to be forced to release webkit. The only reason was that webkit was a (hostile) khtml fork, and hence licensed under GPL. Since then it seems Apple has been on a crusade to destroy everything GPL. Re-implementing Samba, drawing deverlopers away from GCC, banning GPL software from all IOS devices. The Apple we see to day was built on the very same GPL software they now try to ruin. It makes me incredibly sad to see the VLC project go through the tedious work of relicensing just to get into the app store.

                              To make things worse, I see supporters of open software misguided into thinking no-license is the way forward, totally misguided on the legal implications of throwing code over the fence without a license. Microsoft seems to have succeeded with their mixed source campaign, designed to confuse the open community into a non-productive chaos.

                              No I am not particularly fond of the business model behind Qt, but there is a safety net, and we need somebody to fund the development. We need to keep a close eye on Digia, but there is no need to crucify them. They have done a very good job of accommodating so far.

                              With regards to Mono, I may be mistaken, but it seems to me that the Android and IOS SDKs are only available through commercial licenses. These are todays two most important platforms for which Digia has made no attempt closing down the code. Instead Digia puts all their weight into getting a professional open stack for us covering all relevant platforms. Qt charts is basically the only problematic spot, and it is for historic reasons. Moreover, from my understanding Xamarin will not provide IDE at all for Android or IOS on linux. To me this is a clear sign that Xamarin is now a destructive force for linux.
                              Last edited by Del_; 02-22-2013, 01:27 PM.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Originally posted by Del_ View Post
                                (...)
                                With regards to Mono, I may be mistaken, but it seems to me that the Android and IOS SDKs are only available through commercial licenses. These are todays two most important platforms for which Digia has made no attempt closing down the code. Instead Digia puts all their weight into getting a professional open stack for us covering all relevant platforms. Qt charts is basically the only problematic spot, and it is for historic reasons. Moreover, from my understanding Xamarin will not provide IDE at all for Android or IOS on linux. To me this is a clear sign that Xamarin is now a destructive force for linux.
                                In fact Mono's code (runtime and classes) is opensource. Mono was ported to Android by community (before it was MonoDroid then Mono for Android). What Xamarin gives to you is certainly a full package (that costs time to QA, integrate, etc.) and yes, I am sure that some parts are closed source. It was and is still the same in Qt.

                                As you seem to understand that most companies give a mixed source (some OSS some commercial), what Linux benefit are the bits that get accessible into Linux. Based on this logic, Xamarin (or Novell before) contributed millions of line of code more than NVidia and if you use Banshee music player you will benefit directly from them.

                                The new IDE from Xamarin is built on top of MonoDevelop, so the main thing to do in MonoDevelop is to be fixed. It will fix also the Xamarin's IDE, and that's really fine, I think. When Linux or GCC is improved, both free (as source and freedoms) and commercial software runs better in Linux.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X