Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

MonoDevelop vs. Xamarin Studio IDEs

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

  • Originally posted by Del_ View Post
    HyperV is another example of Microsoft coming late to the party. I am pretty sure their linux support is only a consequence of them trying to be relevant for virtualization. Look around you, just about any relevant tech company the last decade is built on linux. The financial sector turned their back to windows after the London Stock Exchange fiasco. Without support for linux, HyperV would be dead on arrival.
    Well actually as far as I can tell basically what's going on is Microsoft is being forced to bend under market pressures. Microsoft is beginning to realize that they're not the only shark in the sea and that they're going to have to interoperate. The signs have been there for a while, but I think things are finally beginning to come to a head which is why I can actually believe that Microsoft is going to be bringing Office to Linux. My only question is how long before they realize that they can't really afford to try to force a vertical stack any more, because they can't really rely upon being able to force Microsoft Windows any more with government and business contracts which the rest of their major products rely upon, creating an all or nothing situation. With large sections pointing towards nothing.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by asdx
      Qt.

      Not QT.
      As much as we appreciate that service, aren't you a little late on the ball this time?

      Comment


      • Originally posted by directhex View Post
        What's the obsession with file extensions? Should I freak out because .jar files are actually .zip?

        .NET assemblies are not Windows executables - they just share the file extension (as per the specification) because Windows is too stupid to easily allow another executable file format.
        For the language setting such high goals, carrying workarounds right into supposely platform-agnostic specification postulates the truth behind.
        Its not the first time they destroyed entire operating systems, because they are to stupid to exist in synergy.

        You're a sad, strange little man
        At least I am not a tiny emo-girl.
        See, I can write up fantasies too.

        Just because I repel microsoft and know most of their dirty work, I am labeled sad. That's you who should be sad, for the crap you do. GNU has managed to propel Linux through the microsoft slave layer, and people like you do everything to cover the rocket with slave wastes.

        Originally posted by directhex View Post
        That's not MSDN.
        Thats was a link to msdn db base you provided, and instead of linking to patent site you linked to internal msdn site.

        Originally posted by directhex View Post
        They've contributed towards, and implemented, everything. And say they *might* hold patents on them.
        Yes, they FUD FUD FUD, like you do. They contributed a lot of that. Even their OS runs on FUD. The only thing they possess is a patent on how to FUD.

        Originally posted by directhex View Post
        Plus your Javascript one shows a complete lack of knowledge of computing history. Look up ECMAscript, and ECMA-262.
        Please, open wikipedia on ECMAScript page and read its history.
        By the way, I am exceptionally happy, Wikipedia does not use stuff like Silverlight, because then only your OS would be able to open it.

        Originally posted by directhex View Post
        Why is it okay for you to call me a "pro-microsoft trojan and troll" and not okay for me to call you a moron? Only one of us is telling the truth.
        Because "pro-microsoft trojan" is your profession and "troll" is your style of speech, yet "moron" is swearing and hence personal attack.

        Originally posted by directhex View Post
        Right, wrong, and wrong, in that order.

        DRM is not a feature of .NET either.

        WinForms is implemented. The source is here

        Microsoft have a patent pledge in place covering Mono, and issue a patent grant for all the code they release for use with Mono (like ASP.NET MVC). There is literally no software for Linux with more patent protection from Microsoft than Mono.
        Wrong. DRM is feature of .net, otherwise netflix would run on MONO.
        Microsoft promises do not interest me, this turtle does not trust a scorpion.

        Originally posted by directhex View Post
        I thought it was a secret Microsoft plot?

        Make up your mind. Either Mono is part of Microsoft or it isn't.
        Its not secret, its just plot. Like Elop's plot to take over Nokia. Only naive believe in speeches.

        Originally posted by directhex View Post
        Liar.

        Mono has never, in its history, been able to take up that much disk space. It's something I closely monitor. A "full" Mono install is less than half the size of a "full" Java install. A minimal Mono install is a few meg, only a couple more than a minimal Python.

        And as for speed, Mono is 20-100x faster than Python, as per any benchmark.
        I have no reason to lie, in Ubuntu 11.04 mono and the gtk# garbage weighted ~300 MiB. Banshee was miles slower even than Amarok, including loading times and navigating in menus.
        And regarding 20x-100x faster, if one uses corresponding CLI backend for python as well, will the universe shatter?

        Originally posted by directhex View Post
        You're about as smart as one.
        You're also incapable of imagining a world where people disagree with you without being paid by TEH EVIL MICRO$HAFTZ. That's sad.
        Again, too much pathos. I am shit free and hence happy.

        Originally posted by directhex View Post
        Novell were paid to write an official Silverlight clone. That's it. Anything else is the product of a deranged imagination.
        Yes, Novell deal with microsoft, because they succumbed to patent trolling hurt its reputation A LOT. This is what sad part is.
        Any company that decides to cooperate with microsoft has at least 90% chance to go bankrupt. That's another "sad" fact.

        Originally posted by directhex View Post
        What does this even mean? Is it meant to be English?
        No yodish zentalk, too much truth for you to process.

        Originally posted by directhex View Post
        You can extend the .NET spec a lot without breaking compatibility. Mono has plenty of features missing from .NET - REPL, SIMD, not to mention the cross-platform aspect.
        Originally posted by directhex View Post
        Except the various patent pledges in place mean they can't.

        And if you don't trust those pledges then be careful - they're the only thing that says Microsoft won't assert their TCP/IP patents on you
        Of course you can, as long as microsoft is ok with that.
        You are writing a .net compatible, open-licensed attack vector for microsoft completely for free, hoping for promises.
        How incredibly childish is that? Do you really think these promises mean anything for a company well known to destroy companies with two digit milliard value and still getting away?
        Personally, I give a whack about MS and your FUD - I do not use any of their crap, so come sue me already or stop FUDing.

        Originally posted by Luke_Wolf View Post
        Well actually as far as I can tell basically what's going on is Microsoft is being forced to bend under market pressures. Microsoft is beginning to realize that they're not the only shark in the sea and that they're going to have to interoperate. The signs have been there for a while, but I think things are finally beginning to come to a head which is why I can actually believe that Microsoft is going to be bringing Office to Linux. My only question is how long before they realize that they can't really afford to try to force a vertical stack any more, because they can't really rely upon being able to force Microsoft Windows any more with government and business contracts which the rest of their major products rely upon, creating an all or nothing situation. With large sections pointing towards nothing.
        Kings or thieves who sat on thrones do NOT bend under pressures. This is pathetic thinking.
        Last edited by brosis; 02-25-2013, 04:55 AM.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by directhex View Post
          Very few people actually cite the original motivation for Mono. Those who do tend to get it wrong.
          Thanks for the quote. Just for the record, I believe I got it right, I just chose to sum it up with few words, like Miguel did in some interviews.
          Originally posted by Luke_Wolf View Post
          Have you ever actually programmed in Java, and then other languages? If you have then you should know exactly the crap I'm talking about. Stuff like overloading operators, default parameters, choosing to pass by reference,...
          When I referred to Google being idiots I was joking. They know exactly what they are doing, and they are very good at what they are doing. What you are listing is design choices that some like and others don't. For instance, I agree with you that operator overloading is a very nice feature, but I am not thrashing C for not having it. In fact, C has proven its worth in huge projects, so it seems the deficit if any is not as big of an issue as make it up to be. More briefly, many programming languages can be adequate for various purposes, regardless of missing certain features.
          Originally posted by Luke_Wolf View Post
          Well actually as far as I can tell basically what's going on is Microsoft is being forced to bend under market pressures. Microsoft is beginning to realize that they're not the only shark in the sea and that they're going to have to interoperate. The signs have been there for a while, but I think things are finally beginning to come to a head which is why I can actually believe that Microsoft is going to be bringing Office to Linux. My only question is how long before they realize that they can't really afford to try to force a vertical stack any more, because they can't really rely upon being able to force Microsoft Windows any more with government and business contracts which the rest of their major products rely upon, creating an all or nothing situation. With large sections pointing towards nothing.
          This is a very interesting point, and I fully agree with you. Actually, I believe chances are the Windows monopoly will fall into pieces in few years, in any case the licensing prices might have to drop to near zero (like it has on handhelds, and like it did for netbooks when linux gave them competition). Hence, I believe Microsoft will be forced to open up windows, while moving their monopoly to MS Office and various server products. Othervise they risk the MS Office monopoly falling at the same time. If it does, their server solutions will struggle too.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by brosis View Post
            For the language setting such high goals, carrying workarounds right into supposely platform-agnostic specification postulates the truth behind.
            Its not the first time they destroyed entire operating systems, because they are to stupid to exist in synergy.
            Again, is this rambling incoherent mess meant to be English?

            In what universe is it a reply to what I wrote?

            At least I am not a tiny emo-girl.
            See, I can write up fantasies too.
            Every word you write is fantasy.

            Just because I repel microsoft and know most of their dirty work, I am labeled sad. That's you who should be sad, for the crap you do. GNU has managed to propel Linux through the microsoft slave layer, and people like you do everything to cover the rocket with slave wastes.
            You're sad that you're obsessed to the degree that you elevate a boring corporation to the role of supernatural nemesis. That using software equates to having your hands covered in shit. It's weird and it's sad.

            Thats was a link to msdn db base you provided, and instead of linking to patent site you linked to internal msdn site.
            This is part of the problem. You're too blinkered by your own preconceptions that you can't tell the difference between an apple and an orange.

            Not every site on microsoft.com is MSDN. Including what I linked to.

            Yes, they FUD FUD FUD, like you do. They contributed a lot of that. Even their OS runs on FUD. The only thing they possess is a patent on how to FUD.
            Fear, Uncertainty & Doubt is all you have provided to this thread.

            You use far more FUD that Microsoft. If you believe FUD is their goal, then you're the one doing their jobs.

            Please, open wikipedia on ECMAScript page and read its history.
            By the way, I am exceptionally happy, Wikipedia does not use stuff like Silverlight, because then only your OS would be able to open it.
            Only Ubuntu would be able to open it?

            Because "pro-microsoft trojan" is your profession and "troll" is your style of speech, yet "moron" is swearing and hence personal attack.
            So by "profession" you're accusing me of being paid by Microsoft for posting on this pissant forum?

            Wrong. DRM is feature of .net, otherwise netflix would run on MONO.
            SILVERLIGHT

            Jesus tapdancing Christ are you mentally capable of telling the difference between two things?

            Silverlight is a browser plugin. Mono is not a browser plugin.

            This is why I call you a moron - because you're a moron.

            Microsoft promises do not interest me, this turtle does not trust a scorpion.
            I think you mean frog. Turtles are largely scorpionproof. The parable is the scorpion and the frog.

            Its not secret, its just plot. Like Elop's plot to take over Nokia. Only naive believe in speeches.


            I have no reason to lie, in Ubuntu 11.04 mono and the gtk# garbage weighted ~300 MiB.
            I can state, with 100% certainty, that you are a liar.

            Do I really have to spin up a 11.04 VM to prove it?

            And are you capable of understanding the proof if I do?

            11.04's Mono footprint (framework, libraries, all apps) was arounf 50 meg if memory serves.

            Banshee was miles slower even than Amarok, including loading times and navigating in menus.
            Load times, know what, I can believe that. That's what a JITter does - slower load times, in exchange for optimized execution. Menu navigation I'm rather dubious - Banshee's menus are pure Gtk+.

            And regarding 20x-100x faster, if one uses corresponding CLI backend for python as well, will the universe shatter?
            I don't have any IronPython benchmarks to hand. Just C# on Mono versus regular CPython.

            Again, too much pathos. I am shit free and hence happy.
            You're insane and obsessed. And largely wrong. But they say ignorance is bliss, so perhaps you are blissful.

            Yes, Novell deal with microsoft, because they succumbed to patent trolling hurt its reputation A LOT. This is what sad part is.
            Any company that decides to cooperate with microsoft has at least 90% chance to go bankrupt. That's another "sad" fact.
            So? Why do I care about Microsoft?

            And some idiot companies fear patent litigation (remember SCO?) - I think it's bullshit personally, and have no fear of using community distributions in business.

            No yodish zentalk, too much truth for you to process.
            It's like you throw together random words and expect people to smile and nod as long as the words include "MICRO$HAFTZ" and "EVIL!"

            Of course you can, as long as microsoft is ok with that.
            You are writing a .net compatible, open-licensed attack vector for microsoft completely for free, hoping for promises.
            How incredibly childish is that? Do you really think these promises mean anything for a company well known to destroy companies with two digit milliard value and still getting away?
            Personally, I give a whack about MS and your FUD - I do not use any of their crap, so come sue me already or stop FUDing.
            Okay, let's try again.

            I'm stating, with 100% certainty, that Mono is completely safe from attacks from Microsoft. And so are a bunch of other things which may (or may not) have Microsoft patents, which you *do* use on a daily basis, like SSL.

            Do you think both Mono and SSL are at risk, or neither? Any answer where you try to say "only Mono" needs to be backed up by evidence, since the only thing we have evidence for so far is that Mono has been around for 12 years and has only ever had its patent questions made safer, not more risky. Java has had patent lawsuits, Mono never has.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Luke_Wolf View Post
              Have you ever actually programmed in Java, and then other languages? If you have then you should know exactly the crap I'm talking about. Stuff like overloading operators, default parameters, choosing to pass by reference, etc where the Java language designers decided "We don't trust the programmers to not 'abuse' these features so we're not going to let them do it". and as I've stated before in another thread even frigging Python has the ability to overload operators and it's a mathematicians wet dream response to perl.
              Originally posted by Luke_Wolf View Post
              Java's attitude is basically "You will do as we say, how we say it, and nothing more. Now go stab yourself in the hand for five minutes". Which is exactly the kind of attitude that pisses me off at a program architect of any kind. Particularly when it results in all sorts of brain damage.
              Yes, in the past, and I never had an issue. I understand that Java is an abuse-secure language.

              Originally posted by Luke_Wolf View Post
              Actually I'm a C++/Qt/KDE fanboy thank you. C# is simply the first language beyond C++ that I'm not groaning in anguish at the crap design I have to put up with to use it. In fact in some respects I'm preferring C# to C++ but in others I prefer the C++ way of doing things, it's just how it is.

              I however HATE java with a passion, and wish it would die in a fire and that it's language designers would be disbarred from programming, because it's so painful to try to work with. It's on that same list of evil languages that are forced on programmers that COBOL is.
              Ok, thanks for clearing that up.

              Originally posted by Luke_Wolf View Post
              So bribing universities to exclusively use Java in their CSC programs is caring? Not trying to seed the workforce heavily with Java developers in order to force their shitty language on the world with underhanded tactics? Also Java is now in the hands of Oracle of all monsters...So it went from bad (Sun Microsystems) to worse (Oracle) in terms of ownership. On the bright side Oracle is now doing the right thing and slowly throttling Java to death.
              I don't understand why you call Sun monster... Their engineers surely were ill with elitism, but only in late stages.
              The first KDE experience I had, was at University at Sun Solaris workstation.
              It was that experience, which made me overcome the initial difficulties of installing Linux and broke the Microsoft infested habit "computing=microsoft", which many people still suffer.
              So, I am thankful to Sun for this.

              Originally posted by Luke_Wolf View Post
              So... You're saying Microsoft is aggressively trying to push .NET on non-MS OSes and then you agree with what I was saying that, that really isn't the case. So which is it?
              MONO is the answer.


              Originally posted by Luke_Wolf View Post
              You know I never really got this argument. The simple fact of the matter is that it's strongly against the interests of a language designer to assert patents against an implementation of a language. It's one of those things you just don't do if you're trying to build an ecosystem of developers. Now Oracle did it yes, however Oracle bought Sun Microsystems just for the purpose of suing Google, it really doesn't give a damn about the ecosystem itself. However Microsoft wants people developing with the .NET framework, now if Microsoft starts asserting patents against Mono guess what developers are not going to do? Particularly as you can see the effect it's had on the linux application ecosystem that there is that fear there. You've got to look at things from a motivation standpoint not just a what-if standpoint, otherwise you'll sound like just yet another of those crazy people running around with a tin foil hat.
              I do not understand what are you writing here.
              Oracle purchased Sun simply because it was a tasty piece of cake, and because Sun' engineers asked for it. Suing Google was an effort to cut piece of income, because Google used Java, and they lost. So this reassures that Java is reliable language for embedded secure programming.
              And microsoft does not relate here at all, you need more than tin foil to protect yourself from microsoft, go ask Gary Kildall about that.

              Originally posted by Luke_Wolf View Post
              Which is why Unity isn't a popular engine on Android , or are you referring to Ximian's making a version of Android in C#? In which case there really hasn't been enough time for Google to care as they're still dealing with the whole Oracle lawsuit thing.
              Google already won the case long ago. It was just an opportunistic effort from Oracle to cut a bit more value to Sun purchase, which failed.

              Originally posted by Luke_Wolf View Post
              Because people like you spreading the same kind of FUD you like to rail against Microsoft for.
              There is no "criticism of brosis" article on wikipedia, there is "criticism of microsoft" on wikipedia with A TRAIN FULL of proofs.
              Anyone who does not believe it is either blind, dumb or payed to play dumb.

              Originally posted by Luke_Wolf View Post
              I'm sorry what? Mono is Cross platform, and has supported OS X since OS X 10.3, which is to say for about 10 years now...
              Right now they are targeting/marketing it actively, not only one feature level. Yes, microsoft messengers trojaned in clothes with "opensource" started the death marathon.


              Originally posted by Luke_Wolf View Post
              Okay no what happened was that IBM wanted DOS, however the implementation they were going after wouldn't sell out to them so they told Microsoft to make one for them, Microsoft bought out a company and used it's product as the basis for creating MS-DOS and then over time replaced all that company's code with their own. There never was a real issue with MS-DOS in that regard.
              IBM did not want to pay original CP/M developer the fee, so they silenced him under NDA presenting it as "he was too busy flying" lie(which is proven by Kildall himself), then made Bill friend to clone CP/M 1:1 and finally prepackaged every single IBM PC with it with the clone for free, while offering original CP/M for $120. And when Kildall decided to talk, he was murdered. Contact Kildall relatives and talk to them.

              Originally posted by Luke_Wolf View Post
              In regards to microsoft pulling the wire, it's not going to happen, for the reasons I detailed above. It runs completely counter to their interests.
              They will and your reasons are fairy tale. They have established a long standing habit and your calculations failed to take that habit into account.
              Some like you believed Elop, now they dinner on streets.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by brosis View Post
                (...)Right now they are targeting/marketing it actively, not only one feature level. Yes, microsoft messengers trojaned in clothes with "opensource" started the death marathon.(...)
                So the proof of conspiracy from Microsoft is because of Mono, right, eh?

                Which patents MS enforced against Linux desktop? LibreOffice does not work because of a loading patent? Or you cannot update the browser via TCP-IP or you cannot watch Youtube in HD because Microsoft enforced as MPEG/LA its' H264 patents, and of course it blocked Wine and Samba to it's knees with legal threat.

                Sounds familiar with any history source we have right now? Why not speculating about all these projects, or maybe that ClearType anti-aliasing patents are maybe attacking FreeType's antialiasing sub-pixel hinting system.

                So if nothing of this happened (yet), why you consider that all risks are in Mono side? Why not take C++ where a head leader (Herb Sutter, who is a MS employee) of the C++ 11 standards and say that C++ is full of trojan horses, so is better to write all code in plain AT&T C style from 1970s, but still to sleep with nightmares that what if At&t will go down outside of market, to block opensource. Or use Ada or Pascal, or better, to have also optimized code, write directly in LLVM bytecodes. These seem to not be so patent encumbered (yet)!

                Comment


                • Originally posted by directhex View Post
                  Again, is this rambling incoherent mess meant to be English?
                  Fix your parser.
                  Originally posted by directhex View Post
                  In what universe is it a reply to what I wrote?
                  Your fantasy universe has broken parser, fix your problems first.

                  Originally posted by directhex View Post
                  Every word you write is fantasy.
                  How come you can't counterargument it? Ah, thats because you fit your own definition.

                  Originally posted by directhex View Post
                  You're sad that you're obsessed to the degree that you elevate a boring corporation to the role of supernatural nemesis. That using software equates to having your hands covered in shit. It's weird and it's sad.
                  I am happy, you are angry; and I crap on microsoft for their actions - that's the state of things.

                  Originally posted by directhex View Post
                  This is part of the problem. You're too blinkered by your own preconceptions that you can't tell the difference between an apple and an orange.
                  My opinion is based on raw footprints. I do not base on "opinions".

                  Originally posted by directhex View Post
                  Not every site on microsoft.com is MSDN. Including what I linked to.
                  Sorry, I am no pro-microsoft spider.

                  Originally posted by directhex View Post
                  Fear, Uncertainty & Doubt is all you have provided to this thread.
                  You use far more FUD that Microsoft. If you believe FUD is their goal, then you're the one doing their jobs.
                  The original claim in this sentence was set by you in terms, that microsoft implemented a lot which I use.
                  Which is FUD. Which I have proven. So if you mean, I FUD by claiming I am microsoft-free, then sue me for using their "inventions". Until that happens, you carry on proudly with "pro microsoft trojan FUDwriter" medal.

                  Originally posted by directhex View Post
                  Only Ubuntu would be able to open it?
                  I feel really sorry for you to be forced working on Ubuntu instead of your windows right now.
                  Oh, I do not, hahaha.

                  Originally posted by directhex View Post
                  So by "profession" you're accusing me of being paid by Microsoft for posting on this pissant forum?
                  Profession is not an accusation. Even if you start working as a prostitute, which you do, I still have no prejudgements against your profession and do not mean to offend you.
                  Besides, your argumentation *blows hard*, so you do your job very good.

                  Originally posted by directhex View Post
                  SILVERLIGHT
                  Silverlight runs on .net, as Moonlight runs on MONO.
                  .net has DRM, which Silverlight utilizes; that is why Moonlight fails to fill original goal - to be a Second Class Silverlight implementation for non-ms OSes.

                  Originally posted by directhex View Post
                  Jesus tapdancing Christ are you mentally capable of telling the difference between two things?

                  Silverlight is a browser plugin. Mono is not a browser plugin.

                  This is why I call you a moron - because you're a moron.
                  Where did I claimed that? If its hard for you to even read, but easy to swear, maybe you should partner /dev/null as a listener. He always listens every carefully.

                  Originally posted by directhex View Post
                  I think you mean frog. Turtles are largely scorpionproof. The parable is the scorpion and the frog.
                  Yep, and I am a turtle in that means. Maybe you are a frog, but thats free to use to decide. Anyways, I don't partner scorpions.

                  Originally posted by directhex View Post
                  No thanks, I consider it my responsibility to clean my street part from plague.

                  Originally posted by directhex View Post
                  I can state, with 100% certainty, that you are a liar.

                  Do I really have to spin up a 11.04 VM to prove it?

                  And are you capable of understanding the proof if I do?

                  11.04's Mono footprint (framework, libraries, all apps) was arounf 50 meg if memory serves.
                  It was preinstalled, I tried it, wiped it, forgot it. It was ~300 MiB footprint if exes and dlls for simple notetaking application and music player.
                  At least, when somebody uses WINE, he uses it as compatibility layer. As native applications exist, I do not need a preinstalled .net compatibility layer, called MONO.
                  And coding in MONO is similar crime to coding in winapi+winelib; if you fail to understand what I mean, don't bother.

                  Originally posted by directhex View Post
                  I don't have any IronPython benchmarks to hand. Just C# on Mono versus regular CPython.
                  CPython is non-optimized, its like comparing old VB to Java.

                  Originally posted by directhex View Post
                  You're insane and obsessed. And largely wrong. But they say ignorance is bliss, so perhaps you are blissful.
                  Ah, common, its getting repetitive.
                  Do you label everyone who removes MONO and boycotts MS, as "insane and obsessed" "moron"?
                  How about getting the fuckts first instead?

                  Originally posted by directhex View Post
                  So? Why do I care about Microsoft?

                  And some idiot companies fear patent litigation (remember SCO?) - I think it's bullshit personally, and have no fear of using community distributions in business.
                  Yes, I remember SCO. You?

                  Originally posted by directhex View Post
                  It's like you throw together random words and expect people to smile and nod as long as the words include "MICRO$HAFTZ" and "EVIL!"
                  Never used such words. Check your parser, its between your monitor and your chair. Maybe some fresh air will declog it,.. maybe not.

                  Originally posted by directhex View Post
                  Okay, let's try again.

                  I'm stating, with 100% certainty, that Mono is completely safe from attacks from Microsoft. And so are a bunch of other things which may (or may not) have Microsoft patents, which you *do* use on a daily basis, like SSL.

                  Do you think both Mono and SSL are at risk, or neither? Any answer where you try to say "only Mono" needs to be backed up by evidence, since the only thing we have evidence for so far is that Mono has been around for 12 years and has only ever had its patent questions made safer, not more risky. Java has had patent lawsuits, Mono never has.
                  Fine, lets try again.
                  Firstly, SSL is not patented by MS.
                  Secondly, MONO is not safe as its provided on a promise, which has limited scope.

                  That said, I throw anything microsoft into the garbage bin, it worked for me and will work for anyone, it is easy, reliable and non-revocable.
                  I don't build towns on a sleeping nuclear bomb, so I am truly happy and free.
                  Last edited by brosis; 02-25-2013, 07:04 AM.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by ciplogic View Post
                    So the proof of conspiracy from Microsoft is because of Mono, right, eh?

                    Which patents MS enforced against Linux desktop? LibreOffice does not work because of a loading patent? Or you cannot update the browser via TCP-IP or you cannot watch Youtube in HD because Microsoft enforced as MPEG/LA its' H264 patents, and of course it blocked Wine and Samba to it's knees with legal threat.

                    Sounds familiar with any history source we have right now? Why not speculating about all these projects, or maybe that ClearType anti-aliasing patents are maybe attacking FreeType's antialiasing sub-pixel hinting system.

                    So if nothing of this happened (yet), why you consider that all risks are in Mono side? Why not take C++ where a head leader (Herb Sutter, who is a MS employee) of the C++ 11 standards and say that C++ is full of trojan horses, so is better to write all code in plain AT&T C style from 1970s, but still to sleep with nightmares that what if At&t will go down outside of market, to block opensource. Or use Ada or Pascal, or better, to have also optimized code, write directly in LLVM bytecodes. These seem to not be so patent encumbered (yet)!
                    I do not use MONO.
                    I do not use save in ms doc formats.
                    TCP/IP does not belong to MS.
                    I use only *droid, free* and libre* fonts, which are patent free.
                    H264 does belong to MS either, and I do not use it as well - preferring VP8+MKV+OGG.
                    I do not use Samba, preferring NFS.
                    I prefer native applications and when I use WINE, it a compatibility talk layer between application and OS libraries, that looks like WinAPI, but it isn't.

                    If Herb Sutter would apply a patent, then C++ 11 would be endangered, yes - but its up to standardization committee to clear this up, and so far, its clean.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by brosis View Post
                      Fix your parser.
                      Stop writing incoherent bullshit?

                      Your fantasy universe has broken parser, fix your problems first.
                      Stop writing incoherent bullshit?

                      How come you can't counterargument it? Ah, thats because you fit your own definition.
                      Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them --Thomas Jefferson

                      I am happy, you are angry; and I crap on microsoft for their actions - that's the state of things.
                      I'm angry because it offends me that morons are allowed to pollute the Internet with lies.

                      My opinion is based on raw footprints. I do not base on "opinions".
                      Your opinion is based on made-up nonsense. Try injecting facts.

                      Sorry, I am no pro-microsoft spider.
                      You can't read a web page.

                      The original claim in this sentence was set by you in terms, that microsoft implemented a lot which I use.
                      Which is FUD. Which I have proven. So if you mean, I FUD by claiming I am microsoft-free, then sue me for using their "inventions". Until that happens, you carry on proudly with "pro microsoft trojan FUDwriter" medal.
                      You know patents can be bought and sold, right? Such as when Microsoft bought many of the original SSL patents from AOL/Netscape? Or OpenGL from SGI?

                      Just because you assert that you don't use any technology "implemented" by Microsoft, doesn't mean you don't use technology which may implement patents owned by Microsoft. Or by anyone else.

                      I feel really sorry for you to be forced working on Ubuntu instead of your windows right now.
                      Oh, I do not, hahaha.
                      I use Windows for games. With Steam for Linux, that requirement is waning.

                      Profession is not an accusation. Even if you start working as a prostitute, which you do, I still have no prejudgements against your profession and do not mean to offend you.
                      Besides, your argumentation *blows hard*, so you do your job very good.
                      So now I'm a prostitute? Yet I'm the one you want banned for being insulting?

                      Silverlight runs on .net, as Moonlight runs on MONO.
                      Silverlight 2.0 and higher use .NET bytecode (1.0 used Javascript) for the back-end. Moonlight 2.0 and higher was implemented using a fork of Mono.

                      .net has DRM, which Silverlight utilizes; that is why Moonlight fails to fill original goal - to be a Second Class Silverlight implementation for non-ms OSes.
                      .NET doesn't have DRM, and asserting that it does doesn't change reality.

                      Silverlight has DRM, which Moonlight never had access to. But Silverlight is a subset and superset of .NET, and the availability of something in Silverlight does not mean it is in .NET any more than I can say "C++ contains a .doc parser because LibreOffice is mostly written in C++"

                      Where did I claimed that? If its hard for you to even read, but easy to swear, maybe you should partner /dev/null as a listener. He always listens every carefully.
                      Scroll up two lines. You're too stupid to tell the difference between Moonlight and Mono; between Silverlight and .NET.

                      Yep, and I am a turtle in that means. Maybe you are a frog, but thats free to use to decide. Anyways, I don't partner scorpions.
                      I don't think you understand the fable of the scorpion and the frog. Which is a shame, because it supports your argument.

                      No thanks, I consider it my responsibility to clean my street part from plague.
                      Via FUD.

                      It was preinstalled, I tried it, wiped it, forgot it. It was ~300 MiB footprint if exes and dlls for simple notetaking application and music player.
                      Time to prove you are a liar, then. Thanks for that.

                      Pristine Ubuntu 11.04 VM. The same version with your "300MB" claim. Updated, but otherwise as shipped, including Mono by default.



                      Remove Banshee, Tomboy, gBrainy, Gtk#, and Mono, and you remove... 34 meg.



                      That is why you are not to be trusted. You cannot even bring yourself to argue based on reality. You will lie and lie and lie and lie if you think it helps your position.

                      At least, when somebody uses WINE, he uses it as compatibility layer. As native applications exist, I do not need a preinstalled .net compatibility layer, called MONO.
                      And coding in MONO is similar crime to coding in winapi+winelib; if you fail to understand what I mean, don't bother.
                      It doesn't mean that any more than coding in Java or Python means that. It's just another JITtered bytecode framework. Not special.

                      CPython is non-optimized, its like comparing old VB to Java.
                      Weren't you just claiming how much faster Python is that Mono? Are you admitting you lied?

                      Ah, common, its getting repetitive.
                      Do you label everyone who removes MONO and boycotts MS, as "insane and obsessed" "moron"?
                      How about getting the fuckts first instead?
                      No. I've had productive discussion with intelligent people whom I respect but disagree with. You are neither. I label the obsessive and insane ones as obsessive and insane. That's not all anti-Mono cultists, but many of them.

                      Remember how after SCO's patent claims, Linux was shut down overnight? SCO pulled the plug by saying "we have patents", and that means "game over, everybody stop what you're doing", right?

                      Or... did people just say "yeah, actually no, fuck off"

                      Why is it that the anti-Mono cult insists that every single piece of software ever written can have patent claims worked around, except for Mono where a patent claim means everyone in the world gets thrown into mass graves and all software gets shut down? Why the cognitive dissonance?

                      Never used such words. Check your parser, its between your monitor and your chair. Maybe some fresh air will declog it,.. maybe not.
                      It's all I can comprehend from half of what you write. "RARARGH RAGHGHGR MICRO$HAFT IS EVILZ! ONLY I AM PURE!"

                      Fine, lets try again.
                      Firstly, SSL is not patented by MS.
                      Really?

                      Secondly, MONO is not safe as its provided on a promise, which has limited scope.
                      As are lots of things, no matter how you deny it.

                      Every single thing listed on the list I previously posted (and you insisted was MSDN) is technology which Microsoft say they may hold patents to (typically via acquisition of those patents, or because the US patent system is so bad that prior art doesn't matter) - and you can use it safe thanks to the same promise they issue as for Mono. Either they're all at risk, or none of them are.

                      That said, I throw anything microsoft into the garbage bin, it worked for me and will work for anyone, it is easy, reliable and non-revocable.
                      (Except for Javascript)

                      I don't build towns on a sleeping nuclear bomb, so I am truly happy and free.
                      You drink radioactive water and say it's from the finest spring. You're incapable of acknowledging that the situation is muddier than you imagine. Your assertions do not match reality. Microsoft hold thousands of patents, including over things you use, like it or not.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by brosis View Post
                        I do not use MONO.
                        I use Mono, but you use C++.
                        Originally posted by brosis View Post
                        I do not use save in ms doc formats.
                        But your LibreOffice can break patents anyway. If you get a documentation that is saved in DocX format, do you open it? Or if you export from LibreOffice to PDF, are you aware that LO can break Adobe or Apple's patents? Do you know that Cairo, implements a drawing language that is patented (PostScript)
                        TCP/IP does not belong to MS. I use only *droid, free* and libre* fonts, which are patent free.
                        Mono does not belong to MS either. So what's your point? If you use liberation fonts, what's the point too... you seem to mix copyright with patents. Patents are implementation techniques, copyright are related with brands and such.
                        H264 does belong to MS either, and I do not use it as well - preferring VP8+MKV+OGG.
                        Do you watch youtube in HD format? If so, most likely you will have a H264 encoded video. If you get a Vimeo video or a BBC video that uses the same H264 format, and there is a piece of news you want to watch, are you skipping it because is not OGG encoded? Do you do the same with songs that someone can give it to you in .mp3 format?

                        I do not use Samba, preferring NFS.
                        I prefer native applications and when I use WINE, it a compatibility talk layer between application and OS libraries, that looks like WinAPI, but it isn't.
                        I don't use Samba, I use Dropbox, or if is to copy fast, I prefer a memory stick. But would you want that Linux to be a crippled envionment that remove all patent risks. If you use Wine, you understand that may be patent breakage. I can say for example that the RSA implementation in C#/.Net has a difference in implementation from Mono one. A big enough one for the software I'm working on to need to use Dependency Injection to workaround these implementation differences. Seems to me that Mono is not a copycat for Windows. What do you do for your HAL/GDI+/DirectX state trackers that have many patents that Wine may break them in many small and big places to make possible Wine to run some of your Windows games... are not at risk? So remove Wine from your pie.
                        If Herb Sutter would apply a patent, then C++ 11 would be endangered, yes - but its up to standardization committee to clear this up, and so far, its clean.
                        You misunderstand again what copyright and patent are. There could be some implementation specifics that from a too crazy people, can consider that Herb added them to make C++ implementors to break MS patents. And it could be (theoretically speaking) the idea that a language feature of C++ 11 can be implemented by breaking MS patents. So as it could happen. would you remove all your C++ code to sleep right at night.
                        So this is the point of bringing Herb Sutter, not the idea that he has or not patents. MS have them, IBM too, Apple, Oracle, etc. Think about SSA reprezentation in compilers: it was pionereed by IBM. SSA is an intermediary optimization technique used in Academia and in modern compilers (most post 2000 year compilers use SSA in a form or the other, in GCC parlance is GIMPLE). Would you uninstall GCC because maybe once IBM would enforce SSA patents?

                        If you don't know what I mean, read here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Static_...ssignment_form
                        According to Kenny Zadeck [1] Φ functions were originally known as phoney functions while SSA was being developed at IBM Research in the 1980s. The formal name of Φ function was only adopted when the work was first published in an academic paper.
                        Last edited by ciplogic; 02-25-2013, 08:42 AM.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by brosis View Post
                          Secondly, MONO is not safe as its provided on a promise, which has limited scope.
                          There never was a patent abuse/misuse/threat against Mono, regardless if there is a promise or not. So by your own definition Mono is safe to use:
                          Originally posted by brosis View Post
                          No. Patents are not a threat, unless they are misused.
                          You and your argumentation are largely inconsistent with yourself. Just read what you have posted in the last months and you can clearly see that. If you aren't able to see that just post here and I will show you link for link where you are contradictory to yourself.

                          You were also proven in this thread to lie to support your point of view, but you have the courage to call someone else, who comes up with facts instead, a troll. Pathetic.

                          This is why there is a "Criticism of Microsoft" page on Wikipedia, but no "Criticism of Brosis" page: Microsoft mastered the art of FUD, you are just a liar that is inconsistent with his own opinion.

                          Comment


                          • Please take a pill all of you. This area of patents and Mono is rather grey. Wikipedia sums it up nicely:
                            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mono_%2...ft.27s_patents
                            so it seems ASP.NET is both patented, not protected in any way by Microsoft, and part of Mono. Moreover, Microsoft is aggressively prosecuting any Android vendor under the sun with patents so lame it makes anybody want to cry (naming scheme in fat filesystems anyone?, yes exactly what is needed to use USB storage these days). To pretend that there are no issues is disingenuous at best. Luckily, these issues were not silenced, but brought up with force, and thanks to that we have the community promise that secures most of current Mono. Pretending that there is no issue anymore is very harmful as it prevents the necessary efforts to clear up the remaining parts. Make no mistake, todays Microsoft will sue anybody and everybody it can if linux ever threatens its monopoly on the desktop.

                            I saw H.264 mentioned too. Last time I heard both Microsoft and Apple was among the owners receiving royalties, and both were among the few fighting against royalty-free VP8 as hard as they could. This is Microsoft and Apple of today.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by brosis View Post
                              Yes, in the past, and I never had an issue. I understand that Java is an abuse-secure language.
                              Which is why Oracle bought it to sue Google.... Unless you mean abuse of programmers is secure in which case I'll agree.

                              Originally posted by brosis View Post
                              I don't understand why you call Sun monster... Their engineers surely were ill with elitism, but only in late stages.
                              Quite simply because they were.

                              How a company designs a language says a lot about them, and about their attitudes towards certain things.

                              Java was designed in the manner of a strongly overbearing parent who thinks everyone around them is a pedophile, including other children, and as a result is accosting everyone. This of course means that developers are treated like shit because they're so damn afraid of people "abusing" their language. To make matters worse they then had to go bribe schools into using it. The resulting hell of having to use the language and the politics of dealing with a sun-bribed school have caused many CSC majors to just drop out and go their own way, because they just can't put up with it. It's not like this attitude was really restricted to their language either, there's a reason a bunch of forks of openoffice were maintained before Oracle bought Sun out. And then of course there's the whole CDDL issue which was intentionally set up to be incompatible with the GNU GPL

                              Also being honest here what Sun Microsystem's software hasn't been crap and had a detrimental effect on the ecosystem as a whole? Open Office was an NIH solution that ripped the legs out from under KOffice which was and is the better solution from an architecture standpoint, however it's lacked the developers to really compete, thankfully under the Calligra brand it's finally beginning to gain momentum and compete. I'm not a database guy but I hear about MySQL being complained about all over the internet with Postgres being pushed as the alternative, complaints about MySQL not being ACID compliant and otherwise... You know my feelings on Java. I've never played around with Solaris but those I know who have regard it as being slow, though they thought it had interesting concepts, etc...

                              Originally posted by brosis View Post
                              The first KDE experience I had, was at University at Sun Solaris workstation.
                              It was that experience, which made me overcome the initial difficulties of installing Linux and broke the Microsoft infested habit "computing=microsoft", which many people still suffer.
                              So, I am thankful to Sun for this.
                              What's more annoying is the "computing = Microsoft or Apple" thing, and the whole "Microsoft is trying to compete with Apple" meme. Because ultimately Apple is not Microsoft's competitor, the various Unixes have been and are, and Linux in particular. Remember next time someone says that that Bill Gates during the anti-trust trial did not hold up a macintosh but instead a box of Red Hat Linux. If anything Microsoft has been benevolent to Apple while Apple keeps trying to claw at them and stab them in the back. But then that gets used to try to enforce a proprietary duoculture.

                              Originally posted by brosis View Post
                              MONO is the answer.
                              But you just said it wasn't .NET

                              Originally posted by brosis View Post
                              I do not understand what are you writing here.
                              Oracle purchased Sun simply because it was a tasty piece of cake, and because Sun' engineers asked for it. Suing Google was an effort to cut piece of income, because Google used Java, and they lost. So this reassures that Java is reliable language for embedded secure programming.
                              And microsoft does not relate here at all, you need more than tin foil to protect yourself from microsoft, go ask Gary Kildall about that.
                              Google already won the case long ago. It was just an opportunistic effort from Oracle to cut a bit more value to Sun purchase, which failed.
                              No, if you were paying attention during the acquisition Oracle made a point about asking whether the sun people thought that they could sue Google successfully with their IP. Also the litigation process is not yet over as they still have to go through this appeal and however many more appeals there are going to be after this. The First Act may be over but the curtain has yet to close for the night.

                              Microsoft does relate here because like was the case with Sun Microsystems it's strongly against their interests to assert patents against a language implementation, while a company like Oracle who doesn't really care about a language or it's ecosystem will feel free to assert.

                              Originally posted by brosis View Post
                              There is no "criticism of brosis" article on wikipedia, there is "criticism of microsoft" on wikipedia with A TRAIN FULL of proofs.
                              Anyone who does not believe it is either blind, dumb or payed to play dumb.
                              I don't see criticisms of random people from the internet on Wikipedia, you want those go to the Encylcopedia Dramatica or Uncyclopedia... I'm sure they'll be more than happy to create a page for them if you ask.

                              Originally posted by brosis View Post
                              They will and your reasons are fairy tale. They have established a long standing habit and your calculations failed to take that habit into account.
                              Some like you believed Elop, now they dinner on streets.
                              I have no reason to believe that Microsoft actually wanted Nokia to fail. Nokia was at the top of their game during the time period where the acquisition occurred and my assumption is basically Microsoft looked out at the phone industry said "Okay our products aren't really gaining much market share, who is popular that we can take over and utilize to push our phones? hm... How about Nokia?" Of course that hasn't worked out very well and thus Nokia is falling apart at the seams. To be perfectly honest though I see that acquisition by Microsoft as having a net good effect as it means that a software house now owns the rights to Qt again (Digia) as opposed to a phone maker who doesn't want it on competing phone platforms. Yes it's a sad thing that a bunch of software developers lost their jobs but with their skill sets I would guess that most if not all have been hired into other companies by now.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Del_ View Post
                                so it seems ASP.NET is both patented, not protected in any way by Microsoft, and part of Mono.
                                the open sourced ASP.NET is under Apache 2.0 which includes patent protection as part of the license.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X