Slashdot Mirror

I fear the day when Microsoft will come and snatch this out from under the Mono team,

There is nothing to "snatch": these are applications implemented in a non-Microsoft toolkit using an open language standard.

I don't see how writing Gnome applications in C# benefits Microsoft any more than writing Gnome applications in C++ or Python.

I just went to Mono Project. They call it a ".NET" implementation. I further understand why they like to make the distinction between the ".NET Framework" as being specifically the C# and CLR pieces vs ".NET" that Microsoft refers to, but I'm afraid this is a very poor decision. Here's why.

".NET" is Microsoft's brand. They use it to refer to many many different pieces of their technology that use the CLR/C# runtime. This includes such nebulous things as "Sign In.NET", the button that people use to login to MSN and Hotmail. What on earth does that have to do with Mono????? How is that related??

Furthermore, all of the tools that *include* many, many technologies that do not fit under the ".NET" umbrella (if strictly defined as the C#/CLR pieces) sport the brand. Even VisualStudio.NET is not completely a ".NET" thing.

So, my very firm advice and solemn plea is for Mono completely to drop *ALL REFERENCES* to ".NET". It is doing them no good whatsoever and just confusing people. It is not clear at all what ".NET" really is, and I'm afraid the Mono team have been roped into Microsoft's marketing machine, not realizing what's being done to them. In addition, I think that ".NET Framework" is equally muddled and confusing. I would recommend that they refer to Mono only as an implementation of the C# and CLR specifications as outlined by the EMCA standards body, with a link to those specific standards.

Otherwise, they are showing a complete ignorance of basic marketing. They are simply reinforcing Microsoft's brand in a very significant way, not just implementing their technologies. This may not be so bad, but one thing that Open Source/Free Software *really* *really* *really* desperately needs to get better at is marketing, if it ever hopes to get beyond an also-ran technology implementor of other peoples' technology. Take a small lesson from Firefox. If Microsoft released a XUL clone, integrate it with some parts of XAML, and changed the name of Internet Explorer 7 to "InternetExplorer.WEB", I would sincerely hope that Mozilla would not start calling Firefox an "Open Source implementation of the .WEB Framework by Microsoft".

Some of the known limitations of Cassini:
1) Only one ASP.NET application per port.
2) No support HTTPS
3) No support of authentication (NTLM, digest)
4) Only localhost requests

It's #4 that is the show-stopper since the original post implies (or at least I inferred from it) that content is to be served to more than just localhost requests.

If you are leaning toward a Mono implemetation, there is the aforementioned mod_mono as well as XSP -- more info here.

Thanks for the heads-up.

Maybe you can put these guys right too?

From the licensing FAQ section of Mono's own website:

"Question 131: Could patents be used to completely disable Mono (either submarine patents filed now, or changes made by Microsoft specifically to create patent problems)?

First some background information.

The .NET Framework is divided in two parts: the ECMA/ISO covered technologies and the other technologies developed on top of it like ADO.NET, ASP.NET and Windows.Forms.

Mono implements the ECMA/ISO covered parts, as well as being a project that aims to implement the higher level blocks like ASP.NET, ADO.NET and Windows.Forms.

The Mono project has gone beyond both of those components and has developed and integrated third party class libraries, the most important being: Debugging APIs, integration with the Gnome platform (Accessibility, Pango rendering, Gdk/Gtk, Glade, GnomeUI), Mozilla, OpenGL, extensive database support (Microsoft only supports a couple of providers out of the box, while Mono has support for 11 different providers), our POSIX integration libraries and finally the embedded API (used to add scripting to applications and host the CLI, or for example as an embedded runtime in Apache).

The core of the .NET Framework, and what has been patented by Microsoft falls under the ECMA/ISO submission. Jim Miller at Microsoft has made a statement on the patents covering ISO/ECMA, (he is one of the inventors listed in the patent): here.

Basically a grant is given to anyone who want to implement those components for free and for any purpose.

The controversial elements are the ASP.NET, ADO.NET and Windows.Forms subsets. Those are convenient for people who need full compatibility with the Windows platform, but are not required for the open source Mono platform, nor integration with today's Mono's rich support of Linux.

The Mono strategy for dealing with these technologies is as follows: (1) work around the patent by using a different implementation technique that retains the API, but changes the mechanism; if that is not possible, we would (2) remove the pieces of code that were covered by those patents, and also (3) find prior art that would render the patent useless.

Not providing a patented capability would weaken the interoperability, but it would still provide the free software / open source software community with good development tools, which is the primary reason for developing Mono.

The patents do not apply in countries where software patents are not allowed.

For Linux server and desktop development, we only need the ECMA components, and things that we have developed (like Gtk#) or Apache integration.

Question 132: Is Mono only an implementation of the .NET Framework?

Mono implements both the .NET Framework, as well as plenty of class libraries that are either UNIX specific, Gnome specific, or that are not part of the .NET Framework but people find useful.
Credits"

Additionally, I don't see any objections to Java being used in the Linux world. And yet:

- Both are backed by software giants
- Both companies have traditionally been fiercely proprietary
- Both of them offer a new language/platform.
- While C# is now an ECMA standard, Java is still architected by Sun's engineers (even though Sun can claim that they have a "community" process
for extending the language/specs)
- Both have patents of various aspects of the implementation.
- Both have proprietary implementations in the market.
- Both have evangelists eager to win converts to the new platform.
- Both the corporations are profit driven.

So why is Java okay?

The core of the .NET Framework, and what has been patented by Microsoft falls under the ECMA/ISO submission. Jim Miller at Microsoft has made a statement on the patents covering ISO/ECMA, (he is one of the inventors listed in the patent): here.

Basically a grant is given to anyone who want to implement those components for free and for any purpose.

If you want to accept such grants without a signed document saying that you are allowed, for all the life of the patents, to use such patents without any kind of compensation, in money, cross licensing, no agression treaties or such other conditions, then it's up to you. Saying the risk is not there is not right, until the patent holders provide such documents.

Later in that question they talk about ASP.NET (non ECMA) and other things, which are also patented, but they'll try to avoid the patented methods. The ECMA parts are still patented and required for MONO, and all they can show is an afirmation in a mail list, that says "royalty free and otherwise RAND". RAND can be .25 cents per program copy.

"The C# Compiler is released under the terms of the GNU General Public License (GPL). The runtime libraries are under the GNU Library GPL 2.0 (LGPL 2.0). And the class libraries are released under the terms of the MIT X11 license.".

On Linux, you can use the Apache module mod_mono .

It is available on the Mono project's download page.

It allows Apache to serve ASP.NET pages by proxying the requests to a slightly modified version of our XSP called mod-mono-server that is installed along with XSP.

It doesn't work on the Windows version of Apache yet, but work is in progress to make that work, too.

On Linux, you can use the Apache module mod_mono .

It is available on the Mono project's download page.

It allows Apache to serve ASP.NET pages by proxying the requests to a slightly modified version of our XSP called mod-mono-server that is installed along with XSP.

It doesn't work on the Windows version of Apache yet, but work is in progress to make that work, too.

Except that Mono has been trying for 3 years to embrace Dotnet 1.0 without getting there, and for Dotnet 2.0 "only a subset of the total framework will be available".

Looking at the pace of change and who's in the driving seat, I don't think it's MS on the receiving end here.

Maybe no-one is making that point because they know there _is_ more than one CLR... (1, 2).

Isn't Mono v2 supposted to support WinForms?

There are two ways Microsoft can stop this. First off, Microsoft can pull the old "embrace and extend": make WinForms 2 and convince app developers to release WinForms 2 apps before Mono v2 can upgrade its WinForms reimplementation to match WinForms 2. This technique of continuously extending the Win32 API is what had held Wine back.

Worse, Microsoft might sue Novell, the corporate maintainer of Mono, for patent infringement and get an injunction against distribution of Mono v2. Novell is headquartered in the United States, a country whose courts recognize patents on an ordinary computer running a novel algorithm. Though Microsoft has permissively licensed the patents on the parts of the .NET framework standardized by ECMA, WinForms isn't among those parts.

As for VC++, you can't run Microsoft's IDE, nor do you actually need to, but you can run managed C++ (.Net) under Mono on OSX.

As you may know, Novell has been sponsoring the Mono project to port .NET over to *NIX. Maybe if they port this app for use with, they can kill 2 birds with one stone.

More info on the Mono project here:
Mono

If Beagle is already written in Mono/GTK#, shouldn't it already be able to run on Windows, as The Mono Site indicates?

The .NET framework has a free implementation. The Java platform has a free implementation in the combination of GCJ, Kaffe, and GNU Classpath. Which is more complete in practice?

In the default .NET installation, yes - it favors IE. But to make the blanket statement that all of the built in controls won't work properly in other browsers is nothing but FUD.

To complain that Microsoft made a new development framework defaulted for their browser, but at the same time included a vast amount of flexibility to modify it as you see fit is also nonsensical.

There are plenty of tutorials and samples for configuring the .NET engine to render the same in all modern browsers, and it's hardly as difficult as you make it out to be. I agree -- if you can't figure out how to include a BrowserCaps block in machine. or web.config to change the rendering mode, ASP.NET is probably not for you. Personally, I've had very little difficulty writing apps that work identically in all of the major modern browsers.

The only included controls that I have experienced trouble with are the built-in validation controls - though I admitedly avoid most of the built in ones. There are much improved alternatives to the built in validation controls -- a few of which are completely free and/or open source. You can of course, easily write your own as well.

As far as the other controls go, there are equally as many alternatives that are cross-browser compatible with little or no effort. A few minutes in ASP.NET's Control Gallery will get you started. And again, you can always write your own.

I'm no Microsoft Apologist(R) for sure (owning 5 Macs to my two PCs and lots of Apple stock), but to say that ASP.NET is crap because it doesn't work right in non-IE browsers is ridiculous. In my opinion, ASP.NET is one of the few things that Microsoft has got mostly right.

In regards to portability, look towards Mono.

That doesn't mean there isn't room for improvement (it's still officially at version 1.1 after all). I would love to see out of the box browser compatiblity and VisualStudio.NETs HTML handling is atrocious -- constantly mangling my hand-formatted code when switching into design mode. I anxiously await a production release of v2.0 where it is rumored that these items, among others, have been addressed :)

... which is a redirect to http://www.mono-project.com/about/index.html.

As a .Net developer myself, I endorse it over J2EE. Compatibility and ease of maintenance are the main benefits. The ./ community can't diss .net, just look at the Mono http://www.mono-project.com/about/index.html project. C# has actually gained pretty good legs as a language standard. It even has ECMA http://www.ecma-international.org/publications/sta ndards/Ecma-334.htm certification, which DOES mean something.

Upfront statement:
I'm a Student Ambassador to Microsoft, I've been promoting .NET on campus, and am currently not paid for this position. So, in a nutshell, I basically promote the technology because I really like it. However, I think Java's pretty cool too.
My thoughts are that yes, it will definitely work in .NET - I've seen even some grad students putting together a pretty awesome application in C# .NET for a programming competition that was aimed at the health care industry and had great acceptance with the hospital. The development time is quicker (especially in VS.NET), there are definitely security/cryptographic libraries implemented, and there is a huge open-source community built around .NET programming.

Also, the .NET framework has been ported in a large part to *nix with the Mono project and has been used quite successfully in Munich which has recently ported to Linux by a company called Volcker.

I've developed GUI applications in both Java and .NET and .NET was much faster and much cleaner as well. Plus, you can inherit from old C++ classes and leverage existing code/libraries in your new application.

But still .NET is the speed of Java

If this is another "Java is slow" flame, then you may be behind the times. Before, the Java virtual machine was a pure interpreter; now, it recompiles inner loops, bringing sustained execution speed close to that of native code. In practice, the Java virtual machine seems slow only because the operating system is typically not set to start it at boot time. Slow speed of HelloWorld.class includes loading and unloading the JVM. If, on the other hand, you set the JVM to start when you log in and tell apps to use an existing JVM, you'll get more perceived performance. Undoubtedly, Microsoft will start the .NET CLR when you log in to Longhorn.

with the Platform Independence of Coding in VB.

Apps written using the Gtk# assembly, which wraps Gtk+ and Glib, will run on *n?x and Windows operating systems. Apps written using those parts of System.Windows.Forms that Mono has reimplemented will also run on *n?x and Windows operating systems.

Why should I install more badly designed MS software then I have too?

You don't.

First of all, the .NET framework is not badly designed. It's one of the best-designed products Microsoft ever came up with. The reason Microsoft released so much crap over the years, is probably because all their best programmers were working on .NET.

Secondly, their exist free (as in free software) alternatives. Mono is the best-known one, an other is DotGNU Portable.NET. But they're not 100 % complete yet, so I don't know if this Paint.NET will work.

Oops, forgot to post some more information.
According to http://www.mono-project.com/about/mono-roadmap.htm l

Other components like Windows.Forms, Directory.Services, Enterprise Services and JScript are being developed but are not as mature as the other components but are under development by various people.

There is not one supplier. http://www.mono-project.com/ and http://www.dotgnu.org/.

But if you don't want to use .NET,Mono, or dotGNU then fine. But don't think you can influence anybody else to not use them.

I developed a .Net application without cross platform in mind at all, and immediately it ran under DotGNU's Portable.NET. and microsoft has expressed an interest in alternative implementations of .NET. according to the Mono faq at http://www.mono-project.com/about/faq.html#msft

I see a small army of monkeys approaching... Hey, wait, they're chanting something! What is it...

(Mono! Mono! Mono!)

Gecko# (gecko-sharp) is part of the mono (http://www.mono-project.com/) project to implement C# and the .NET CIL.

Mayne the example I have for ActiveX was a bit misleading - I was trying to get across that what is needed is a platform independant way of embedding the browser. Gecko# is a binding for C# (using GTK# - the GTK bindings for C#). In theory it should work on any platform that MS .NET / Mono supports (i.e. Windows/Intel for MS .NET, a whole bunch more for Mono).

This then takes people away from being worried about which OS your developing for and just worrying about the application your developing.

If there is a well documented, straight forward method for embedding a browser and you have a choice between a non-portable MS IE browser and a portable Gecko browser - which one are you going to pick. I'm well aware that it will depend somewhat on the application, but a lot of people will pick the portable way. Especially if the market their aiming for is even flirting with Linux/MacOS.

...version of this?"

Hopefully not too long...

My bet, though, is that Microsoft are going to take back the lead. They are used to being laughed at, and when they have a product that lags sufficiently behind in public opinion, they usually make it a priority to take back the lead.

What people *should* be thinking of is what Microsoft will do to lock in customers and how this threat can be met.

in a wider perspective; is Miguel the piper leading all the children of the open source into the river? will Microsoft unleash IP-litigation on a scale never seen before? will it be at all possible to tell the users that Microsoft's wet dreat is to forever in the darkness bind them...to their products.

Now the virtual machine and its tools etc still come from one provider...

Now the Virtual Machine and its tools etc still come from one provider?

And also, don't forget about this one...

You're totally right, that Miguel fellow should just try to come with his own VM implementation - hah, like that's going to happen! What a leech!

Free C# compilator? Right here: .NET Framework SDK

Or here: Mono project

Free IDE? Here: Sharp Develop

Or, if you want to test .NET 2.0, go here:
.NET Framework 2.0 SDK

As you see, you don't have to pay anything to try C#; since you say you're convinced, go for it!

• Aclerex, Transgaming corporate wing
• Codeweavers, CrossOver producer
• Mono project

Questions?

Mono implements the ECMA/ISO covered parts, as well as being a project that aims to implement the higher level blocks like ASP.NET, ADO.NET and Windows.Forms

If you have questions about Mono, read the project launch statement or visit the list of Frequently Asked Questions.

There's an RSS feed for the newest news, updates, etc. on Mono, too.

If you have questions about Mono, read the project launch statement or visit the list of Frequently Asked Questions.

There's an RSS feed for the newest news, updates, etc. on Mono, too.

If you have questions about Mono, read the project launch statement or visit the list of Frequently Asked Questions.

There's an RSS feed for the newest news, updates, etc. on Mono, too.

vb.net support is planned. check it

If you look down at the "20 Sep 2004" entry on the above link you will find a nice new gtk# installer for integrating gtk# gui apps into MS Visual Studio .Net 2003.

You can find more about Mono's ADO.net and ASP.Net here and here respectively.

If you look down at the "20 Sep 2004" entry on the above link you will find a nice new gtk# installer for integrating gtk# gui apps into MS Visual Studio .Net 2003.

You can find more about Mono's ADO.net and ASP.Net here and here respectively.

If you look down at the "20 Sep 2004" entry on the above link you will find a nice new gtk# installer for integrating gtk# gui apps into MS Visual Studio .Net 2003.

You can find more about Mono's ADO.net and ASP.Net here and here respectively.

I think what makes Novell a real serious competitor to M$ might be more probably Mono (http://www.mono-project.com/about/index.html) as an alternative to Microsoft .Net than SUSE as alternative to Windows.

I'd like to see more heavy-hitter funding and support for tools for writing cross-platform applications like the mono project (http://www.mono-project.com/) and wxWidgets (http://www.wxwindows.org/.

We have learnt that Sun is seriously considering Open Sourcing Java. And the excellant Mono project will wrest control back from M$. Have faith, AC-of-bot, the collective will prevail.

Looks like it will run under Mono, since Mono has the required library, ADO.NET: "ORM.NET takes advantage of one of the key features of Microsoft's ActiveX Data Objects .NET (ADO.NET)--its data sets. In ADO.NET, he said, data sets can be used to hold hierarchical data tables, such as a customer, the customer's orders and fulfilled orders. What ORM.NET does is abstract out the data layer, generate a SQL statement, and commit all changes back to the database with a single call, he said."

1. elastiC
2. Lua
3. Python
4. Perl
5. ... any more? ...

Sorry, Mono C# uses Boehm-GC :(

open4free © ;)

What must be really annoying, is that .NET has borrowed so many classes from Java so they should call it J--.

Well I don't think Microsoft has ever denied it --- but they do what they do. They hired the then head of Borland's Delphi devision, and molded Delphi, C++, and Java. And I think it put together an excellent language, platform independence

http://www.mono-project.com/downloads/

Mono 1.0.1 has been released and fixes a number of bugs.

Apparently, Jonathon doesn't know about the Mono Project, since moving a .NET application to another platform wouldn't require a rewrite.

Why in God's name would you need Desktop support for high-end networking?

I have one you can't do in Windows. MySQL doesn't support OpenSSL in the Windows world, but it is as easy as 'USE="ssl mysql" emerge mysql openssl' on a Gentoo system. ;)

But what really did it for me was the .NET architecture. Microsoft's C# and .NET, combined with Visual Studio are by far the best programming environment I've ever used.

No argument there. I have high hopes for Mono though.

Dan