Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why Mono Is Desirable For Linux

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

  • #61
    Originally posted by droidhacker View Post
    Wow, total pile of crap.
    Mono is terrible. Not primarily because of legal threats. Because it has a highly destructive side-effect.
    When a software developer wants to be LAZY, they simply do not implement a non-windoze version. They say instead "we only support gaybuttfu*kingbalmer, if you wanna get with a girl, you can always try wine or mono, otherwise bend over and take it." Now if you happen to be gay and like taking it up the arse, power to you, this solution may satisfy you. For everyone else though, it means that software just doesn't work the way that satisfies you, and software developers are in no way motivated to actually support your preferred paltform.
    Gay slurs? That's a fascinating insight into what kind of person you are.

    And it's the choice of developers as to which OSes they want to support. Some developers use C and support multiple platforms. Some use C++. Some use Java. Some use C#. It's their choice what to use, and their choice as to what to support, not yours.

    The ideal solution to this problem, is the use of cross-platform development tools. This makes support of all the different platforms... as easy as supporting ONLY ONE.

    EVERY SINGLE ARGUMENT I've ever seen in support of MONO has boiled down to either LAZYNESS or IGNORANCE. Mono solves NEITHER.

    The ONLY thing that solves BOTH is FORCING software developers to actually support more than balmer.
    So using cross-platform tools is the best option, and using cross-platform .NET is lazy and ignorant. Your cognitive dissonance can't track arguments between more than one line?

    Oh, and I argue with list of points made at top of article;
    - Oracle was attacking Android's Java for copyright issues (no patents, sic!)
    **** THEY LOST!!!!!
    Wrong. Oracle sued over seven patents in addition to the copyright claims:
    • 6,125,447 - Protection Domains To Provide Security In A Computer System
    • 6,192,476 - Controlling Access To A Resource
    • 5,966,702 - Method And Apparatus For Preprocessing And Packaging Class Files
    • 7,426,720 - System And Method For Dynamic Preloading Of Classes Through Memory Space Cloning Of A Master Runtime System Process
    • RE38,104 - Method And Apparatus For Resolving Data References In Generate Code
    • 6,910,205 - Interpreting Functions Utilizing A Hybrid Of Virtual And Native Machine Instructions
    • 6,061,520 - Method And System for Performing Static Initialization

    They did, however, lose.


    - Apple attacked Android too, an open platform

    No, Apple attacked SAMSUNG over features/characteristics added BY SAMSUNG, in particular, "rectangle with rounded corners" -- does not apply to Android, only Samsung.
    Correct. Mostly. There are a small number of patents Apple sued Samsung over which are part of the base Android OS. These can be quickly worked around.

    - Microsoft attacked TomTom for using extFat format in their GPS devices
    Serves tomtom right for being retarded.
    Wrong. FAT32 extended file name support. They were sued for supporting and using filenames longer than the old 8.3 format (i.e. FILENAME.FOO). This layer is commonly referred to as "VFAT", and is patented by Microsoft.

    Notably, FAT32 is the mandatory filesystem used on Secure Digital High Capacity memory cards. If TomTom had stuck to 8.3 filenames on their SD cards, they wouldn't have been at risk under this specific set of patents.

    ExtFat doesn't exist. If you mean exFAT, then no, that wasn't the filesystem causing issues (although that filesystem is patented).

    Yes, this point actually DOES support "MONO SUCKS"
    Except it doesn't. It's unrelated.

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by mateli View Post
      Nope. These thing are not all the same thing. COM is an object sharing model, OLE is a COM application for sharing more specific object. DCOM is a network-transparent proxy for COM. ActiveX is a specification for sharing graphical components over OLE.

      .NET does not even officially support COM/OLE/ActiveX.... so no.

      .NET assemblies is intended to REPLACE COM/OLE/ActiveX because those are generally a bloody mess that only Don Box fully understand.

      Yes there are a lot of windows and office components that still are stuck in COM but all new development are focused on .NET assemblies.

      Personally I think it was wrong of Microsoft to make WinRT native. They should have reused .NET Micro Framework and make something entirely based on .NET.

      Of course moving all code to .NET means killing Windows, which becomes a problem for redmond...
      Comme ci, comme ca.

      It's layers on top of layers, with some features added at each layer.

      When I say .NET is a wrapper, I mean MS has not re-written Windows or it's major apps AFAICT to replace the COM/DCOM/ActiveX heritage - mostly MS has obscured that heritage with .NET.

      I did not mean to imply that .NET is a species of ActiveX.

      If you write a native C+ app on Windows all that COM/DCOM/ActiveX stuff is still there to be used.

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by mateli View Post
        Personally I think it was wrong of Microsoft to make WinRT native. They should have reused .NET Micro Framework and make something entirely based on .NET.
        Micro's got too much missing, IMHO

        But it *is* Free Software, so that's good.

        Of course moving all code to .NET means killing Windows, which becomes a problem for redmond...
        WP7?

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by hoohoo View Post
          <pedant>
          .NET runs C & C++ code that has been compiled to .NET bytecode.
          </pedant>
          Isn't that GREAT! Using a VM to run a language that was designed to run on bare metal! All the limitations without that pesky performance! Why not just COMPILE IT TO BARE METAL and get the actual performance? The VM buys you NOTHING.

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by nadro View Post
            The best choice for a games is C++. Maybe for a small project C# or JAVA are ok, but for more advanced games these langueages are useless. These langs has got too big overhead and this is a waste of memory and CPU (eg worse hit in a cache). It's better do do more advanced physic, AI or sound and other CPU resources give to a graphic driver than waste a lot of resources for a language.
            I do not agree at all. When a C++ coder tries to write C++ code in Java I see all of the problems you describe. I do not see those problems among Java coders that know what they are doing.

            Java loads it entire run-time environment which for SMALL games may be a problem. For more advanced games and application that actually need most of the run-time it is not a problem. Also project Jigsaw (Java 8) will eliminate this.

            Many of the classes in the Java Framework is enterprise grade which means they are failsafe, which means more code and more CPU usage than something that does not care about such thing. There are also many C++ libraries that have this "problem".

            Fortunately game engines for Java do not use the enterprise grade classes but use silent-fail code instead. Not that great if you are dealing with business logic but it makes code faster.

            Your points could have been valued but so far C++ developers have FAILED in proving any of it. Once you guys throw us code that supposedly can not be as fast in Java - Java developers have produced optimized code that are as fast or faster than C++ code.

            Comment


            • #66
              General comments...


              From directhex' post above, patents Oracle sued over, but not directed at directhex:

              6,125,447 - Protection Domains To Provide Security In A Computer System

              Didn't mainframes do this decades ago?

              6,192,476 - Controlling Access To A Resource

              Isn't this in large part the justification for operating yststems in the first place?

              5,966,702 - Method And Apparatus For Preprocessing And Packaging Class Files

              No idea what it means.

              7,426,720 - System And Method For Dynamic Preloading Of Classes Through Memory Space Cloning Of A Master Runtime System Process

              I bet it uses fork() and exec()!

              RE38,104 - Method And Apparatus For Resolving Data References In Generate Code

              I think this is colloquially called a linker.

              6,910,205 - Interpreting Functions Utilizing A Hybrid Of Virtual And Native Machine Instructions

              OMG, mixing instruction sets!

              6,061,520 - Method And System for Performing Static Initialization

              Another such system?


              ---


              Finally, I am getting the giggles because I am participating in a nascent flame war, mostly concerned with Windows APIs and Microsoft strategy, on a BBS that is part of a Linux-specific website!

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by frantaylor View Post
                Isn't that GREAT! Using a VM to run a language that was designed to run on bare metal! All the limitations without that pesky performance! Why not just COMPILE IT TO BARE METAL and get the actual performance? The VM buys you NOTHING.
                LOL! Doubtless someone will make just such a system, to optimize the CPU intensive parts of a C# program.

                Java supports same idea I think?

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by hoohoo View Post
                  General comments...


                  From directhex' post above, patents Oracle sued over, but not directed at directhex:

                  6,125,447 - Protection Domains To Provide Security In A Computer System

                  Didn't mainframes do this decades ago?

                  6,192,476 - Controlling Access To A Resource

                  Isn't this in large part the justification for operating yststems in the first place?

                  5,966,702 - Method And Apparatus For Preprocessing And Packaging Class Files

                  No idea what it means.

                  7,426,720 - System And Method For Dynamic Preloading Of Classes Through Memory Space Cloning Of A Master Runtime System Process

                  I bet it uses fork() and exec()!

                  RE38,104 - Method And Apparatus For Resolving Data References In Generate Code

                  I think this is colloquially called a linker.

                  6,910,205 - Interpreting Functions Utilizing A Hybrid Of Virtual And Native Machine Instructions

                  OMG, mixing instruction sets!

                  6,061,520 - Method And System for Performing Static Initialization

                  Another such system?
                  Patents are bullshit. Most of your observations are correct.

                  Finally, I am getting the giggles because I am participating in a nascent flame war, mostly concerned with Windows APIs and Microsoft strategy, on a BBS that is part of a Linux-specific website!
                  Nothing gets Linux forums fired up like the opportunity to shout about how TOTALLY PURE THEY ARE AND THEY'LL NEVER TOUCH EVIL POISON FROM MICRO$HAFT LIKE MONO AND .NET AND SSL AND OH FUCK

                  Whether they understand what they're arguing or not.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by mateli View Post
                    I do not agree at all. When a C++ coder tries to write C++ code in Java I see all of the problems you describe. I do not see those problems among Java coders that know what they are doing.
                    I see you are writing in a dialect of English that features the STRAWMAN construct!

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by hoohoo View Post
                      General comments...


                      From directhex' post above, patents Oracle sued over, but not directed at directhex:

                      6,125,447 - Protection Domains To Provide Security In A Computer System

                      Didn't mainframes do this decades ago?

                      6,192,476 - Controlling Access To A Resource

                      Isn't this in large part the justification for operating yststems in the first place?

                      5,966,702 - Method And Apparatus For Preprocessing And Packaging Class Files

                      No idea what it means.

                      7,426,720 - System And Method For Dynamic Preloading Of Classes Through Memory Space Cloning Of A Master Runtime System Process

                      I bet it uses fork() and exec()!

                      RE38,104 - Method And Apparatus For Resolving Data References In Generate Code

                      I think this is colloquially called a linker.

                      6,910,205 - Interpreting Functions Utilizing A Hybrid Of Virtual And Native Machine Instructions

                      OMG, mixing instruction sets!

                      6,061,520 - Method And System for Performing Static Initialization

                      Another such system?


                      ---


                      Finally, I am getting the giggles because I am participating in a nascent flame war, mostly concerned with Windows APIs and Microsoft strategy, on a BBS that is part of a Linux-specific website!
                      Are you asserting that Oracle has used these patents to sue other people, or might it be the case that Oracle is accumulating a war chest for defense? They lost their last attempt to enforce their IP, and even had to pay court costs, so their "scare factor" is gone. Oracle is not going to repeat THAT debacle.

                      Lots of companies have lots of patents on lots of stuff. It's whom they choose to sue that's interesting.

                      RedHat holds the rights to a whole bunch of software patents, they aren't using them to sue anyone. They use them to discourage other people from suing them.

                      On the other hand, Microsoft has sued people for patents that they won't even tell us about. We don't even know when we are infringing, because they won't tell you, EVEN AFTER THEY FILE SUIT AGAINST YOU.
                      Last edited by frantaylor; 09-14-2012, 03:29 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Originally posted by frantaylor View Post
                        WHERE are the Microsoft applications written in it?

                        WHY haven't they ported Word or Excel or IE or any other of their flagship programs?

                        Microsoft is CONSTANTLY pushing out patches to fix security issues in 20-year old C++ code.

                        You would THINK they would EAT THEIR OWN DOG FOOD and move to a more secure platform.

                        They fact that the HAVE NOT, is why you should RUN AWAY from the latest Microsoft programming "fad"

                        They sold "Active X" and "Silverlight" and "Visual Basic" as "solid professional application development environments, worthy of your development efforts" and then turned around and DEPRECATED THEM. They will DO THE SAME with C# and LEAVE YOU HIGH AND DRY.

                        If Microsoft doesn't trust C# with their PROFITABLE PRODUCTS then why should you? THEY know that C# is an another "fad"
                        Actually many of the new software / platforms coming out are .NET based...
                        Like the others said, re-writing everything from scratch is not happening overnight...
                        That and also, for certain things, lower level languages are still the way to go (I'm thinking of Windows* here, Office probably could switch, but that would take years and years...).
                        I guess you are just an angry developer falling out of his tree ha?

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Originally posted by russofris View Post
                          I believe that the majority of the resistance to C# adoption has little to do with the language, and much to do with MS. I like C# as much as I like Java. It makes writing middleware logic a breeze to the point where I can write and navigate code as I think. I feel that java is more desirable for non-gui applications and .Net is more desirable for GUI applications. I would love to see the stability of the mono runtime improve a bit, as I have had a couple bad experiences in the enterprise.

                          The entire patent argument may be moot, but is part of a larger fear. The fear is that somehow MS will find a way to screw us. They have done so in the past, they will do so in the future. I cannot help but feel a hefty amount of paranoia every time I see C# running on linux. Its uncomfortable and I don't like it.

                          I hope the author is right. I hope mono does great things for the linux desktop. I hope MS doesn't pull another SCO or some new trick.

                          F
                          As I said in another mono-related thread, I could very well see them using mono as a proxy for something else. Like they're using their "patent licensing agreements" with Android phone manufacturers, in order to put a price sticker on Linux.
                          Their culture is still very much based on complete control of the IT industry. They could at best tolerate Linux as long as it remains a minority player on their cash-cow markets, while still managing to make a buck out of it.
                          Not trustworthy at all. For a change to happen, there would be a need for major layouts of top-execs in redmond, to be replaced by people who understand that a company should compete solely on the grounds of products' merits (which pretty much bars hiring people from apple, intel and nvidia).

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Originally posted by frantaylor View Post
                            Are you asserting that Oracle has used these patents to sue other people, or might it be the case that Oracle is accumulating a war chest for defense?
                            These are the specific patents used by Oracle in their filings for Oracle America, Inc. vs. Google, Inc.

                            Here's the court filing: http://ciaran.compsoc.com/35811761-O...fringement.pdf

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Originally posted by geearf View Post
                              Actually many of the new software / platforms coming out are .NET based...
                              Like the others said, re-writing everything from scratch is not happening overnight...
                              That and also, for certain things, lower level languages are still the way to go (I'm thinking of Windows* here, Office probably could switch, but that would take years and years...).
                              I guess you are just an angry developer falling out of his tree ha?
                              "OVERNIGHT"

                              Somewhere above I read that C# was introduced in 2002!

                              Since when is 10 years "overnight" It did not take Microsoft 10 years to write Word or Excel.

                              And I thought these new development environments were supposed to make development EASIER and FASTER. You say it takes LONGER now???

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Originally posted by PsynoKhi0 View Post
                                For a change to happen, there would be a need for major layouts of top-execs in redmond, to be replaced by people who understand that a company should compete solely on the grounds of products' merits (which pretty much bars hiring people from apple, intel and nvidia).
                                On a per-department basis, this is the approach being taken.

                                For example, Hyper-V cannot compete with VMware unless it runs Linux - and runs it at least as well. Which is why Microsoft have been shipping kernel modules under a Free license. They're trying to win by offering a better product, and "can virtualize Linux fully out of the box" is a better product than "can virtualize Linux fully if you install some third party kernel modules ('Vmware Tools') which may or may not build on your kernel"

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X