Wine-Mono: Marrying Mono With WINE

[directhex]

The patent-encumbered re-implementation of Microsoft's .NET runtime? Indeed I have.
Ever hear of MSJVM?

The software which tried to correct Java's two worst design errors, and earned Microsoft a lawsuit from Oracle for daring to implement a non-approved Java? Yes, I have.

[droidhacker]

The software which tried to correct Java's two worst design errors, and earned Microsoft a lawsuit from Oracle for daring to implement a non-approved Java? Yes, I have.

Sun, not Oracle. Back then, Sun was the GOOD GUYS. The weird part of this litigation was that they didnt sue MS for implementing JVM, they sued MS for ***INCOMPLETE IMPLEMENTATION*** of JVM. When MS goes to sue people/companies, they don't sue for incomplete implementation, they sue for *ATTEMPTED* implementation.

[russofris]

I see Mono (.NET) the exact same way as JRE (Java).

You are correct.

From a technical perspective, they are pretty much the same. Any differences can be dismissed as trivial for many categories of applications. I'd guess that I could write a page or two giving the pros and cons of either. At the moment, I'm content to stick with my 4-year-old conclusion that .NET is feature rich and easier to develop for (if you're a windows shop), and that java is more mature and has some top-notch libraries for the implementation of business rules.

From a legal perspective, they are different. Java is still encumbered, though to a lesser degree than .NET. This are some of the reasons why I do not use either of these runtimes on new development projects. I do maintain a huge legacy java codebase that I inherited though, and worked at MS for a number of years using .NET.

Understand that I'm trying to help you. I'm trying to impart wisdom, gained through experience, and not some red-versus-blue bullshit. If you're developing in .NET, you need to stop, wash the stink off, and find another runtime that suits your needs.

Would it help if I conceded that .NET is technically superior to all other runtime-based offerings in existence, and maintain that you still shouldn't use it due to it's legal encumbrances?

F

[Teho]

I'm not even going to bother wasting my time reading your spew.

I'm "really" interested to know what part of what I wrote doesn't make sense to you...

[DanL]

Just for you. And I threw in some color too!

Thank you?

[smitty3268]

Java is still encumbered, though to a lesser degree than .NET.

....

Would it help if I conceded that .NET is technically superior to all other runtime-based offerings in existence, and maintain that you still shouldn't use it due to it's legal encumbrances?

Here's the bit I don't understand. There is currently an ACTIVE lawsuit going after Google for using Java. MS has never sued anyone over .NET.

So why does everyone persist in saying that .NET has more legal encumbrances?

I understand that MS is the boogie man, but Sun is actually worse.

[russofris]

The software which tried to correct Java's two worst design errors, and earned Microsoft a lawsuit from Oracle for daring to implement a non-approved Java? Yes, I have.

Though it was Sun that sued (An unimportant detail given the current context of this thread, and likely the result of your hands typing faster than the minds ability to compose itself), I am certain that the lightbulb above your head will soon become illuminated.

Sun suing MS for a reimplementation of their runtime is exactly the reason that we shouldn't use .NET. MONO could stop existing today. There could be an injunction against Ubuntu preventing distribution today. My whiz-bang cross platform application that took a year to develop might stop being cross-platform today. The manufacturer of the devices that my customers use might need to start paying MS royalties today.

I'm not arguing that you should use java or any other VM. I'm arguing that you shouldn't use .NET.

F

[directhex]

Sun, not Oracle. Back then, Sun was the GOOD GUYS. The weird part of this litigation was that they didnt sue MS for implementing JVM, they sued MS for ***INCOMPLETE IMPLEMENTATION*** of JVM.

Nope. The issue was extensions.

They added two things which made Sun (yeah, fine, you're right on that point) sad. Ask any Java developer how they feel about JNI, and if you're lucky, you'll escape before they claw your eyes out. Microsoft implemented an easy alternative called J/Direct, which only worked on Microsoft Java. Developers loved it, Sun did not since it was incompatible. And, similarly, how do you feel about Swing as a GUI toolkit? Hint: it's dreadful. Microsoft implemented a wrapper around their GDI+ toolkit, which made Sun sad, since it was incompatible.

When MS goes to sue people/companies, they don't sue for incomplete implementation, they sue for *ATTEMPTED* implementation.

Microsoft have a whole bunch of specifications which come with a legally binding pledge not to sue anyone making an implementation for any possible infringement of any possible patents. It's the same kind of pledge which Oracle gives, not to sue anyone implementing ODF. Included amongst those specs is ECMA 334 (ISO/IEC 23270) and ECMA 335 (ISO/IEC 23271), which define the C# language and .NET runtime design and internals. And those are published with ISO/ECMA, much like ECMA 332 (AKA ISO/IEC 16262, AKA Javascript) in order to encourage alternative implementations without fear. Meanwhile, Sun has jealously guarded its specification, and is suing Google over the idea that the API is secret.

Everyone has a mental image of Sun as good guys, but on this topic, things have only ever gone in one direction.

[russofris]

Here's the bit I don't understand. There is currently an ACTIVE lawsuit going after Google for using Java. MS has never sued anyone over .NET.

So why does everyone persist in saying that .NET has more legal encumbrances?

I understand that MS is the boogie man, but Sun is actually worse.

Once upon a time, Sun was saying that they would unencumbered Java. Everyone was happy. They never did. The Oracle bought Sun and attempted to monetize their assets. We were all hoodwinked. We (including myself to a tremendous extent) were wrong. Not only were thousands of java apps and libraries written and diminished by this turn of events, (and here comes the real kick in the pants) viable alternatives to java were not developed as actively as they would have been had we known the truth.

As I stated in a different reply somewhere: I'm not really arguing that you should use java or any other VM. I'm arguing that you shouldn't use .NET.

F

[droidhacker]

Here's the bit I don't understand. There is currently an ACTIVE lawsuit going after Google for using Java. MS has never sued anyone over .NET.

So why does everyone persist in saying that .NET has more legal encumbrances?

I understand that MS is the boogie man, but Sun is actually worse.

Sun is dead. They were the GOOD GUYS.
ORACLE is the flip side of the MS coin.

MS's policy on violent attacks goes like this;
1) Wait for your competitor to get big enough that you can gain something by suing them.
2) Scare them into dealing with you on their terms (as they did with Novell).
3) If they don't deal with you on their terms, sue them (as they did with HTC).
4) If all else fails, throw a chair and vow homicide (as they did with Google)