Comments on: Mono Now Safe?

By: GNOME in .NET – Not on my desktop! « OPEN BYTES – cave quid dicis, quando, et cui.

Tue, 25 Aug 2009 23:48:31 +0000

[...] lets have a look at some other users comments from http://www.workswithu.com/2009/07/07/mono-now-safe/ in regards to MONO and its integration into a Linux distro near you! Embrace, extend, extinguish. [...]

By: Scott

Scott — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 16:27:54 +0000

The Free Software Foundation issued a statement estimating the value of the Microsoft Community Promise concerning ECMA 334 and 335 at http://www.fsf.org/news/2009-07-mscp-mono.

Their issue with the Promise is that it is too narrow and provides loopholes that allow Microsoft to sue developers and users if they really want to, and that their recent behavior demonstrates that they intend to do so.

From their statement: “If Microsoft genuinely wants to reassure free software users that it does not intend to sue them for using Mono, it should grant the public an irrevocable patent license for all of its patents that Mono actually exercises. That would neatly avoid all of the existing problems with the Community Promise: it’s broad enough in scope that we don’t have to figure out what’s covered by the specification or strictly necessary to implement it. And it would still be in force even if Microsoft sold the patents.

“This isn’t an unreasonable request, either. GPLv3 requires distributors to provide a similar license when they convey modified versions of covered software, and plenty of companies large and small have had no problem doing that. Certainly one with Microsoft’s resources should be able to manage this, too. If they’re unsure how to go about it, they should get in touch with us; we’d be happy to work with them to make sure it’s satisfactory.”

By: Scott

Scott — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 17:26:25 +0000

Don’t forget that this “announcement” comes from the blog of a low-level Microsoft employee and has yet to be confirmed by anyone at Microsoft authorized to speak for the company. Nothing has changed.

By: Zohib

Zohib — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 15:49:27 +0000

toss mono in the dumpster its probably some microsoft trick.

By: Leo

Leo — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 13:15:34 +0000

@scottFuz: agreed, 100%. Note that Novell has always been involved:

http://boycottnovell.com/

Thanks for the link to remove mono!

By: scottFuz

scottFuz — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 13:05:31 +0000

If you can’t beat ‘em, divide ‘em.
And that’s what MS has effectively done. Rather than beat Linux (and Ubuntu), Redmond has effectively fractured the Linux community over this single issue.

I don’t trust MS (my opinion only) nor their motives. I cleaned out MONO using:
http://www.learningubuntu.com/articles/how-completely-remove-mono-ubuntu

I was shocked at what else was removed:
(my logs of the event)
beagle* bless* f-spot* libart2.24-cil* libavahi1.0-cil* libflickrnet2.1.5-cil* libgalago1.0-cil* libgconf2.24-cil* libgdiplus* libglade2.0-cil* libglib2.0-cil* libgmime2.2a-cil* libgnome-keyring1.0-cil* libgnome-vfs2.24-cil* libgnome2.24-cil* libgsf0.0-cil* libgtk2.0-cil* libmono-addins-gui0.2-cil* libmono-addins0.2-cil* libmono-cairo1.0-cil* libmono-cairo2.0-cil* libmono-corlib1.0-cil* libmono-corlib2.0-cil* libmono-data-tds1.0-cil* libmono-data-tds2.0-cil* libmono-data1.0-cil* libmono-data2.0-cil* libmono-getoptions1.0-cil* libmono-getoptions2.0-cil* libmono-i18n1.0-cil* libmono-i18n2.0-cil* libmono-posix1.0-cil* libmono-posix2.0-cil* libmono-security1.0-cil* libmono-security2.0-cil* libmono-sharpzip0.84-cil* libmono-sharpzip2.84-cil* libmono-sqlite2.0-cil* libmono-system-data1.0-cil* libmono-system-data2.0-cil* libmono-system-web1.0-cil* libmono-system-web2.0-cil* libmono-system1.0-cil* libmono-system2.0-cil* libmono0* libmono1.0-cil* libmono2.0-cil* libndesk-dbus-glib1.0-cil* libndesk-dbus1.0-cil* libtaglib2.0-cil*

Granted most of these are libraries, but Beagle? Thunderbird add-ins? What other TomTom legal landmines await us in the future?

By: The Mad Hatter

The Mad Hatter — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 00:20:00 +0000

And of course, who has actually read the “Microsoft Community Promise” all the way through? I did, and I wasn’t impressed:

http://crankyoldnutcase.blogspot.com/2009/07/microsoft-community-promise-mono.html

It’s a poorly crafted, poorly worded, document that appears to have little if any real meaning. I wouldn’t depend upon it.

By: Leo

Leo — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 19:11:53 +0000

@Miguel: I didn’t know you were so fond of Microsoft, but I just don’t understand how you can really think what MS is not the same as it was in 1998. What happened on the netbook market is a little sample:

http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=20090619161307529

Just remember Asus revolutionized the Laptop market with the early Eee’s and sold millions of units running Linux. Hardly a “Linux Failure”. So, yes, life is not black and white, but no, when a monopolistic giant wants to take away my freedom, I do feel I need to stand up and react.

By: I. Giron

I. Giron — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 03:31:35 +0000

@Patrick Regan:
You’re right I didn’t make it clear. Indeed I was referring to C# and all Microsoft’s libraries behind Mono.

@Arthur:
I completely agree with you. Even if MS licensed their products under any FOSS license I doubt I could get used to their (defective by design?) low quality products.

By: arthur

arthur — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 03:16:27 +0000

Miguel d. I., you are a lost case!
I give you that mono has been good for you and your family, and at a human level it Is understandable that you try to draw as many people into the murky molasses as possible, as the number of users in the end alone, will be used for “we-were-right” arguments. All this assuming the boa constrictor in Redmond holds still and doesn’t pull a 2nd SCO on the community.

Please keep doing what you do, but don’t poison open source community with your hog-wash.
ONE MORE TIME FOR SLOW LEARNERS:
“WE DO NOT WANT ANYTHING MICROSOFT!”