Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

MonoDevelop vs. Xamarin Studio IDEs

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

  • #41
    Originally posted by directhex View Post
    So your pissing and moaning about things in which you aren't even invested achieves what, precisely?
    Mono had the assignment policy before this. So this was obvious an untriggered bomb. No sane person sits on a bomb. mySQL, OpenOfficeorg, Qt already exploded into unpleasness. Why should anyone eat the Mono bait?

    Dont you get it? Unfair license policies is just the step before you get raped. Just say no.

    Comment


    • #42
      Originally posted by funkSTAR View Post
      Mono had the assignment policy before this.

      So this was obvious an untriggered bomb. No sane person sits on a bomb. mySQL, OpenOfficeorg, Qt already exploded into unpleasness. Why should anyone eat the Mono bait?

      Dont you get it? Unfair license policies is just the step before you get raped. Just say no.
      You don't seem to understand why people contribute towards, or use, Free Software.

      This is a reasonably common position, and depressingly common amongst the noisiest of armchair generals.

      Comment


      • #43
        Originally posted by directhex View Post
        This is a reasonably common position, and depressingly common amongst the noisiest of armchair generals.
        LOL. Ad hominem attacks get you nowhere. It is common knowledge that companies mostly try to avoid assigning copyright(money) to others. Just like many non affiliated hackers wont do it either. E.g. Redhat(biggest company), Linux(prime open source success) and Debian(prime all time community distro).

        Yeah sure. What an armchair gang ...

        Comment


        • #44
          Originally posted by funkSTAR View Post
          LOL. Ad hominem attacks get you nowhere. It is common knowledge that companies mostly try to avoid assigning copyright(money) to others. Just like many non affiliated hackers wont do it either. E.g. Redhat(biggest company), Linux(prime open source success) and Debian(prime all time community distro).

          Yeah sure. What an armchair gang ...
          Ignoring groups that require copyright assignment such as the FSF and Apache project.

          And which of us is the Debian Developer?

          Comment


          • #45
            Originally posted by directhex View Post
            Ignoring groups that require copyright assignment such as the FSF and Apache project.

            And which of us is the Debian Developer?
            You know very well that assigning to FSF serves to protect copyleft and not circumventing copyleft. And as a deb dev you also know the debate and position of the many devs who refuse to assign away their rights.

            Comment


            • #46
              Originally posted by funkSTAR View Post
              You know very well that assigning to FSF serves to protect copyleft and not circumventing copyleft.
              Copyleft is not the goal.

              Software Freedom is the goal.

              Copyleft is an effective means towards the goal, but it is not the only means, and it is not exclusive as a solution.

              And I'm fairly sure the current parade of developers abandoning their GNU projects - due to being treated shoddily by the FSF - would have things to say about losing control of their projects to hostile forces (e.g. gnutls)

              And as a deb dev you also know the debate and position of the many devs who refuse to assign away their rights.
              Nobody has to sign away their rights. Everyone makes contributions to Free Software with their eyes wide open as to the licensing and copyright requirements and implications.

              Comment


              • #47
                Originally posted by directhex View Post
                Copyleft is not the goal.

                Software Freedom is the goal.

                Copyleft is an effective means towards the goal, but it is not the only means, and it is not exclusive as a solution.

                And I'm fairly sure the current parade of developers abandoning their GNU projects - due to being treated shoddily by the FSF - would have things to say about losing control of their projects to hostile forces (e.g. gnutls)

                Nobody has to sign away their rights. Everyone makes contributions to Free Software with their eyes wide open as to the licensing and copyright requirements and implications.
                First, Im not affilated with FSF or support the assignment policy. However I do recognize the ease and power it gives FSF. This is really off topic anyway. And yeah people refusing to assign copyright to FSF is a great benchmark. People wont do it. Even when it is for a good and non commercial cause. Assignment policies suck. And a tool kit is not a place where you want things to go wrong. Porting to a fork or other toolkit is a nightmare. Right now QML is declared to be the future for desktop development while it really was meant for quick and dirty hacking on the phone form factor. It really is a crazy thing left over from the Nokia days.

                Comment


                • #48
                  Originally posted by funkSTAR View Post
                  First, Im not affilated with FSF or support the assignment policy. However I do recognize the ease and power it gives FSF. This is really off topic anyway. And yeah people refusing to assign copyright to FSF is a great benchmark. People wont do it. Even when it is for a good and non commercial cause. Assignment policies suck. And a tool kit is not a place where you want things to go wrong. Porting to a fork or other toolkit is a nightmare. Right now QML is declared to be the future for desktop development while it really was meant for quick and dirty hacking on the phone form factor. It really is a crazy thing left over from the Nokia days.
                  You aren't being very coherent with the things you say. Get your thoughts organized then try again.

                  Comment


                  • #49
                    Originally posted by funkSTAR View Post
                    LOL. You dont know what Copyleft is do you? It is not the existence of GPL. It is the absence of loopholes making the code available at non-restrictive license to others than rightful copyright holders.
                    I know what copyleft is. I did not say anything about copyleft. My reply was just to show you that your statement doesn't really stand on a solid base.

                    Comment


                    • #50
                      Originally posted by ciplogic View Post
                      So the same is with Mono. Mono is free software. The same Xobotos OS (Android Java libraries ported to C#) and all their stack. When Qt was at Nokia, all Nokia tools that were working with Qt were F/OSS?

                      I develop with MonoDevelop and I see no problem for most of my cross-platform development to use VS as main IDE and to import flawlessly to MD and to do the build, etc.

                      The worst part is that MonoDevelop is soon to be a 10 years old project and people did not care much in Linux world about it (and Mono in general), so the parent company will spend more development time to profitable tools.

                      I'm curious Digia if it will develop with the same pace still (as Nokia did) to QtCreator and their Qt stack.

                      One part which I really don't understand: why Qt is compared with Mono most of the times? I'm an ex-Qt developer and I'm an C# developer. I see weaknesses and strength of both frameworks.

                      In many ways I see MonoDevelop having an edge for quick&dirty project that will grow, compared with Qt. With C# you don't have to play with macros for QObject, slots, and such, you have a GC and some services with very few libraries, which themselves are a breeze to work with C# (I talk here about Xml+Reflection, Dependency Injection, Database connectivity, or a simple web server). So, if you have a database application or a web service, you can import it from C#/Visual studio, you recompile with Mono and you add Gtk# UI on it. This looks to me a natural path of development of Mono applications to Linux (or Mac OS X). The code in C# is in many cases smaller and more clear than the C++ equivalent and a great experience (that can be given by Visual Studio + a plugin like JustCode, Resharper or CodeRush) in writing this code.

                      Qt has other advantages, mostly: you know upfront that the application has to look the same (or very similar) in all platforms and performance is a concern. I see Qt to enrich a huge C++ codebase with a fancy UI, but if you have to start from scrach and the raw performance is not your ultimate concern, I don't see any company to pick Qt for a desktop application. Developers can create the UI with QML and QWidgets, and write in C++ all the performance sensitive code. After that you're good to go and recompile on every platform Qt is supported. Even Qt will start a bit slower to develop with, is a bit more verbose (because of C++), but at the end, it is modular, it has fairly few bugs and as C++ is the core of the language, sensitive algorithms (like for example a picture processing algorithm) can give the snappiness most users may want.
                      I did not say otherwise so I'm not sure why this is a reply to me. I'm all for using Mono and Qt. They are both technically superior to the alternatives available in the FOSS community. I also prefer the syntax of C# over verbose C++. I use C#/.Net on windows and Qt on Windows and Linux. I will use mono on both when Xwt is more thoroughly tested(I hope thy will add a Qt backend).

                      It's funny how so many in the FOSS community shun Mono, Qt and other technologies but do not have viable alternatives. If Q and Mono were to disappear today, what would we have available? GTK? EFL? Java, the million other half complete projects?

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X