MonoDevelop vs. Xamarin Studio IDEs

[Luke_Wolf]

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.

[Luke_Wolf]

Qt.

Not QT.

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

[brosis]

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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?

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.

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.

What does this even mean? Is it meant to be English?

No yodish zentalk, too much truth for you to process.

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.

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.

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.

[Del_]

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.

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.

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.

[directhex]

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.

[brosis]

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

[ciplogic]

(...)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)!

[brosis]

Again, is this rambling incoherent mess meant to be English?

Fix your parser.

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

Your fantasy universe has broken parser, fix your problems first.

Every word you write is fantasy.

How come you can't counterargument it? Ah, thats because you fit your own definition.

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.

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".

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

Sorry, I am no pro-microsoft spider.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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?

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?

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.

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.

[brosis]

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.

[directhex]

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.

Yes, I remember SCO. You?

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.