Mono Developers Go Bye-Bye From Attachmate

[BlackStar]

Thank you for accusing me of this "common fallacy". Thank you too for misrepresenting my words again.

What made you assume I "think the Mono developers would be interested in working on Python, Lua or Angelscript"? Frankly, I don't give a flying fuck what they're interested in, I've never made any assumptions as to their interests.

Sorry, but I don't believe I did. You said that Mono is a waste of effort that would be better spent in other projects:

And then I'd have to say that the effort would have been better spent speeding up Python or improving the tooling on Lua/Angelscript, to use your examples.

I'm saying that things don't work that way in the real world.

[Caesar Tjalbo]

Sorry, but I don't believe I did.

Oh. Ok. My apologies.
Out of curiosity: who were you writing to when you replied

This is a common fallacy: why do you think...

You said that Mono is a waste of effort that would be better spent in other projects

Those are two of my opinions indeed.

I'm saying that things don't work that way in the real world.

Such is life, eh? We'll find out what the real world implications are from Attachmate's reorganisation.

[kraftman]

It's already there. You don't need to use any non-ECMA namespaces - unless you choose to.



Hypocrite.

Flash competes with HTML5, Canvas, SVG and ECMAscript.



Misguided hypocrite.

Now get rid of your patented MP3s, DVDs and all MPEG and H264 files.

It seems you're the one of hypocrites here who don't know what other people are talking about. Did I say I prefer flash over HTML5, Canvas, SVG? Just think before you write another dumb response. Oh, are you saying all the things you mentioned are toolkits or languages?

[kraftman]

What is bad to support MS tech if this tech is open source and standard ?
Ms is a company again. As others it is here to make money.

It's bad when it competes with Linux friendly techs.

Who is true enemy of open source ?

Those who compete with Linux on the market - Apple, MS, Oracle etc. There are some more of course.

Android do mainly good thing to linux ? You sure? Google just use open source project to make money.

What's wrong with it? I prefer them making money on Linux rather than BSD, Windows...

Most technologies behind the seach engine is based on open source.

So, it's great!

Android is open source but does it get any % of market sell to Open source organisation no...

I don't know, but Google makes good thing to Linux kernel.

There are GSOC and that s all ... but not as much dev as red hat or any other oo company... They just love open source because it is free and compatible with their business plan. If an open source search engine take a big part of market, they will change their behaviour...

And then they'll become what MS is now.

So the word is not black or white... it is grey.

I know, but Blackstar isn't aware of this thus he's saying if some toolkit or language is Open Source it's automatically good.

MS is not the evil and google is not angel. All companies just make money.

MS makes money in cost of Linux and it's Linux competitor, so it's logical Linux community shouldn't support its competitors. We're not BSD.

Linux is an open source copy of unix tech
all OS with windows are mostly copy from Mac.

While Linux follows some Unix way it's not a copy of Mac. The same about Windows. Mac is just too shitty. There are few good things in it, but not many.

Company does not matter because project is open source.

Not true. Companies does matter the most.

What happend if MS buy Red Hat, novell or ibm which are main contributor to linux kernel... Nothing because it is open source. So it is the same for mono...

Nope, if something like this will happen community won't be able to give you so high quality product without support of some companies. Mono tries to catch up with .Net, but it's always behind it, so its main reason to exist - be compatible with .Net is unlikely going to materialize.

[ciplogic]

Nope, if something like this will happen community won't be able to give you so high quality product without support of some companies. Mono tries to catch up with .Net, but it's always behind it, so its main reason to exist - be compatible with .Net is unlikely going to materialize.

I love how a troll say with biased, unstained opinions everything it states.
As far as I know without making stuff up, I can say a lot of areas where Mono is ahead of .Net. To take things in perspective: LLVM + Clang are in a lot of areas weaker than GCC but there are combinations that work better.
To state some areas where Mono is more advanced:
- it have a better code generator based on LLVM (in scientific computations) and a lot of optional ways to build and deploy your application (like --full-aot or MONO_AOT_CACHE)
- it is multiplatform (it supports more platforms than Sun's Java as of today, and certainly work on two major phone platforms, and if you think that Android is Java, Java works just on one)
- it is OSS/Free software. Excluding your brain creation gets, yet you have to come with something else than blunt speculations to build up your case. Are you not tired just to lie and spread fear around?
- it is embeddable with your codebase: Second Life use it
- it have Compiler as a service, which will be adopted in C# 5/.Net 5
- MoonLight can work with Andoid if you take up to date Git sources and some wizardry
- If you would be an Ubuntu 11.04 user, but for at least 4 years of Ubuntu you would likely use a Mono based application (not necessary you, but those users that use defaults). All built up with an OSS stack

It is a shame that if I would say that because the Apple did not opensource all it's OpenSource stack based on WebKit as ITunes, Safari, your iPhone/Android Phone, we should dismiss WebKit as it is a treat as a mega-corporation as Apple is sneaking in every OSS project.
And yes, WebKit patent war is much more dangerous than a Mono one for OpenSource: imagine, your Android phone, your KDE browser, your Google Chrome, will all be blocked.
Yet this is life, and we have ti live with people slow on thinking as kraftman, which still live in year 2000 mentality.

[kraftman]

I love how a troll say with biased, unstained opinions everything it states.

I love when troll says others are trolling.

As far as I know without making stuff up, I can say a lot of areas where Mono is ahead of .Net. To take things in perspective: LLVM + Clang are in a lot of areas weaker than GCC but there are combinations that work better.
To state some areas where Mono is more advanced:
- it have a better code generator based on LLVM (in scientific computations) and a lot of optional ways to build and deploy your application (like --full-aot or MONO_AOT_CACHE)
- it is multiplatform (it supports more platforms than Sun's Java as of today, and certainly work on two major phone platforms, and if you think that Android is Java, Java works just on one)
- it is OSS/Free software. Excluding your brain creation gets, yet you have to come with something else than blunt speculations to build up your case. Are you not tired just to lie and spread fear around?
- it is embeddable with your codebase: Second Life use it
- it have Compiler as a service, which will be adopted in C# 5/.Net 5
- MoonLight can work with Andoid if you take up to date Git sources and some wizardry
- If you would be an Ubuntu 11.04 user, but for at least 4 years of Ubuntu you would likely use a Mono based application (not necessary you, but those users that use defaults). All built up with an OSS stack

It's funny you're calling me a troll while your responses are unrelated to what I was talking about (the same about Blackstar btw). I was talking about compatibility, so why are you talking about such unrelated crap? Maybe it's you who's too slow minded to realize what I was talking about? Are you claiming mono is 100% compatible with the latest .Net? The first thing I do when I install Ubuntu is to remove all the bloat called mono. I replace it with Qt.

It is a shame that if I would say that because the Apple did not opensource all it's OpenSource stack based on WebKit as ITunes, Safari, your iPhone/Android Phone, we should dismiss WebKit as it is a treat as a mega-corporation as Apple is sneaking in every OSS project.
And yes, WebKit patent war is much more dangerous than a Mono one for OpenSource: imagine, your Android phone, your KDE browser, your Google Chrome, will all be blocked.
Yet this is life, and we have ti live with people slow on thinking as kraftman, which still live in year 2000 mentality.

It's amazing how some people make totally stupid examples. WebKit has derived from khtml, so it's rather KDE tech sneaking to Apple. What patents in webkit should I worry? Maybe they should worry, because of khtml? It seems you're the one of two slow thinking people here. You're blaming others, but it's not us who's defending a DEAD crap. While it's dead it seems the most people don't consider it as something good. I assume you I live in the current year and it seems the next year will be a year without mono. Life's good!

[ciplogic]

I love when troll says others are trolling.

I was talking about compatibility, so why are you talking about such unrelated crap? Maybe it's you who's too slow minded to realize what I was talking about? Are you claiming mono is 100% compatible with the latest .Net? (...)

It's amazing how some people make totally stupid examples. WebKit has derived from khtml, so it's rather KDE tech sneaking to Apple. What patents in webkit should I worry?

You were talking about compatibility? So why your phrase can be interpreted in that many ways? Is Qt better than MFC? Qt is not a MFC replacement, a Gtk one, a Windows.Forms one or a Swing one... Qt is crap...
Is that similar with your comment.
Mono strides to not be compatible with .Net but with ECMA specs. Mono is as .Net (ECMA compatible) as Linux is Unix, yet both are POSIX compatible.
About Webkit was a more realistic down to earth thing as people that use it like Chrome cannot get back to use KHtms over the night, as Qt, to not say a line about KdeLibs are not working with Android, are just a custom port for Windows which will blow download budget of Google Chrome out of the water, Gnome's help is based on WebKit too, so they cannot replace it with KHtml. I'm puzzled how you did not find this as being more dangerous for your future.
I am curious how you can backup your statement that Mono intends to be a .Net compatible clone, when in fact have its own development. Mono.Simd for example, Mono.Cecil, IKVM (a Java virutal machine) is a part of its distribution, the same about Boo language. I do not know a C++.Net cloning even C++.Net is alive from 2002, so a cloning solution may be done to date, at least in primitive form.
In fact MonoDevelop, which is also endorsed by Mono project, and have a download link on the main page, promotes and have one of the best support for Vala language, a C#-like yet certainly not a .Net based language.
So your view of Mono as a toy that tries to compile your Windows.Forms or right now WPF applications and fails miserably, so it cannot replace .Net is a narrow view, which no Mono informed developer/user endorse. I cannot think that Banshee creator would start with a Visual Studio WinForms player and after that port all to Gtk# just for fun. Or similarly the FSpot one, and so on. The opposite was true: those people used from scratch Mono with their OSS couterparts: GtK#, the specifications which are open, Mono runtime (which till you don't provide proof, are less patent free than hinting of Pango/QFont algorithms used by Qt Library, cause FreeType - the source of those libraries - was attacked once by Apple's patents).
In the rest, which is your application you contributed on, in the last 10 years? May you give just a bug report, or a translation from English to Spanish or some icons that you contribute to any OSS project? I never contributed to Mono but I did contribute to FreePascal/Lazarus, I put bug reports in MonoDevelop, Ubuntu, and I work as full time developer in an F/OSS project in real life.

[ciplogic]

It's amazing how some people make totally stupid examples. WebKit has derived from khtml, so it's rather KDE tech sneaking to Apple. What patents in webkit should I worry? Maybe they should worry, because of khtml? It seems you're the one of two slow thinking people here. You're blaming others, but it's not us who's defending a DEAD crap.

FYI I will explain how a patent war happen and to know why you should worry on them.
For this I will need to make an illustration, and thi is that supposedly I will become smart enough to make a change and to define an algorithm that will move time sensitive computations on GPU if a custom preprocessor and some directives are made. This supposedly will speedup the computations in JavaScript by 10 times, if they match the pre-processor pattern matching and will speedup the layouting of widgets by roughly 3 times. So I will patent that.
As patent this will expire supposedly in 5 years and I will promote it as a WebKit Accelerator Plugin and I will make a special contract with Apple to use it as a part of Safari.
Supposedly Google will byte, the same will happen with upstream WebKit project. After 3.5 years finish, and almost every browser on planet will use that modified WebKit I will ask royalities for all companies that use it.
Why this analogy: a patent owner should not be necessarily Apple, but can be sneaked by Apple in WebKit. Another part, is not at all necessarily that Apple to attack Khtml or whatever non-sense. Patents in WebKit may be owned by Adobe, Quark, Microsoft, Oracle, or a small company. If any of those companies will attack the patent legitimacy of a part of WebKit, the impact is much wider than a Mono successful patent.
Also, patent breakage will make a company to pay money or to rewrite the impacted area, or both. As Mono goes, excluding the patent is not too broad, so a lot of other implementations will be affected (including .Net, Java, LLVM, or JavaScript's JIT of today), or if is to narrow, will simply disable a capability of Mono that in OSS context will mean just nothing (if you are afraid that when Mono will run everything from Microsoft, even is not the case, Mono will get sued to remove some specifics and will render it incompatible).
At the end, a lot of patents can be avoided by hundred of ways, the easiest that comes in mind is simply to replace the Mono's Mini (the Virtual Machine name) with LLVM's VMKit or Portable.Net (if are only implementation specifics). If are specification specifics, as Oracle attacked Google lately on Android's Java resemblance, Mono will simply have to switch the bytecode (MSIL) to not be according to specs.
Comparing with font hinting or with WebKit's layouting, the impact is much wider.
Even Mono will die, probably some tooling will switch from Mono to .Net, or be rewritten to language X. If WebKit will die, your smartphone if is not running a limited version of .Net (Windows Phone 7) will die. Even is Nokia (as Symbian), any Android or iPhone. With it will also be blocked your Qt (Qt for some time is having QtWebKit package that is used by virtually any Qt desktop application today), GtkWebKit, Google Chrome, Safari browsers. Your options as user will be much narrow, you will have to switch to IE, Opera, Mozilla Firefox.
So that was the full point explained and I hope it shed some light.
I also hope that Phoronix will get updates as just US's Mono team will be dismissed (not all team), so a lot of development will be still happening: the Jit Mono's main contributor I think is from Hungary, some development happen in Brasil, Argentina, Spain, Mexico (Hola Miguel), and so on.

[V!NCENT]

@BlackStar,
Mono to. Net is what Gnome is to Windows; a horrible story of catching up. Novell did the right thing and you know it.

It's sad that Gnome was all into it, that's why you fear the real man's Kdevelop IDE, Qt libs and the real programming language being C++.

You know it be true. Say it. Admit it.

[ciplogic]

@BlackStar,
Mono to. Net is what Gnome is to Windows; a horrible story of catching up. Novell did the right thing and you know it.

It's sad that Gnome was all into it, that's why you fear the real man's Kdevelop IDE, Qt libs and the real programming language being C++.

You know it be true. Say it. Admit it.

This is obvious... where you get your opinions from? And which Gnome? And to catch up at which level?
If you talk about Gnome1, about experiencence and a COM-based technology, I would agree with you that resemble to one level Windows 98 experience and libBonobo was a somewhat distant ressemblance with COM and COM+. If you talk even as orientation of Apply/OK/Cancel buttons, they also look like Windows.
Going forward to Gnome2: Gtk2 have more abstractions like a true Model-View-Controller implementation used in a lot of places, libBonobo was reduced to dissapearance, and the libHal based to intrinsics of DCOP KDE implementation.
About look&feel? I think OS X is a better matchup.
What about Gnome 3? Probably is too early to say true directions: look&feel - still OS X/iOS, minimalistic buttons - still OS X. GObjectIntrospection looks as any reflection API, probably a hook from Java world. Programming with Vala is way off either Win32's API, MFC, Windows.Forms but luckily seems very close to GtkMM or Mono + Gtk# implementations.
But your analogy stands ground. Mono have similar origins (Miguel), which stars of from a Microsoft technology, but is divergent in many points. Also, as said by myself two posts earlier, Mono is not on catchup, but on entering in new markets and to catchup from other fronts, as multiplatform (including iOS and Android), embedding, alternate support for Silverlight thought Mono.
So as value of truth what you said is true: Gnome probably resembled with Windows initially but it grows as a different beast, the same about Mono with .Net.
But comparing as face value, Qt looks and behaves very much as Delphi/CodeGear/Embarcadero Delphi/C++ Builder. And the experience of KDE applications is very Windows like. And true programmers that use it, will be overwhelmed by similarities.
At the end: why to be so afraid of Qt in 1997? Was just a proprietary toolkit with a GPL only license that you can create almost everything excluding something to sell? Gtk+ even as crappy as it was, catched up in many ways, excluding programming paradigm. Thanks to Vala is not true anymore. To not say about look&feel: is Windows: your Dolphin and your Konquerror were better matches to Nautilus as Windows Explorer copies. To not say that to look for any settings you go to Tools->Options instead Edit->Preferences as in Gnome HIG. Too Windows like, isn't it?
At the end analogies between Gnome and Windows seem pointless, as a Gnome user I feel offended. I am just appalled how KSC look Windows like but I do no fuss. Plasmoids to recreate the desktop anyone? That look as copycats for gadgets/widgets? Look for a Gnome 3 like solution for the same nonsense. Or maybe you found them in Unity... I doubt it!