Slashdot Mirror
Mono Blocked from MS Conference
Anonymous Coward writes to tell us that Microsoft has apparently blocked the Mono 'Birds-of-a-Feather' meeting from being held at their Professional Developers Conference for the second year in a row. Miguel de Icaza discusses the circumstances in his blog. From the blog: 'It is their conference, and they have every right to control what they will allow to be shown there, but they actively have misrepresented things.' Not terribly surprising but infuriating nonetheless.
Sounds like left hand doesn't know what the right is doing.. Today's early "Race to Linux" thread about porting .Net linked to this article, which explicitly mentions mono as being an allowable language. This just seems odd to me, expecially because its also sponsored by the very same Microsoft Professional Developers Conversation..
Film at 11...
Come on now, is anyone surprised by churlish behavior by MS towards the Mono developers? Does "Samba" ring a bell?
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Wake up with fleas
Microsoft is behaving exactly the same way they've always behaved.
Look, Miguel, it's pretty simple. You go play in the sandbox with a reknown bully, you eat sand. Most people figure this out before their sixth birthday. You want to do this mono thing, fine, but you _are_ going to get screwed every time you venture into Microsoft's playground and you aren't going to get a lick of sympathy from the rest of the world when it happens.
c.
Log in or piss off.
The Roman empire, as others, was built by dominating all possible enemies, or politically playing them off against each other. This works okay for a while, but eventually it always seems to lead to the empire's undoing.
The Roman Catholic church, following the fall of the Roman empire, in turn conquered much of the world by assimilation and adaptation.
Perhaps MS will take this lesson from history one day before it is too late?
Support NYCountryLawyer RIAA vs People
I wouldn't expect Microsoft to have a .NET Birds of a Feather group at a Linux conference. It probably wouldn't go over well with the attendees, I can just imagine everyone attending the MS BOF pointing out how what MS hasn't done for Linux. Furthermore, the sponsors may have political issues with them having a slot in the conference.
It seems very silly to hold them to a double standard. Microsoft is under no obligation to cater to Novell and their associates. Just as you would not expect groups associated with Linux to be under any obligation to cater for Microsoft.
/^([Ss]ame [Bb]at (time, |channel.)){2}$/
Here you hear once more that developers who buy into .NET are not interested in developing or targeting other platforms other than Windows. Those who would want to have Linux then rather use PHP, Perl, etc. That is so crazy and ignorant that it doesn't make any sense! Or maybe, the people expressing those opinions are not "Real Software Engineers" -- or good business people for that matter.
.NET 2003 quite regularly. In fact, now that I have discovered the beauty of VMWare, it will be that much more comfortable to create projects in Visual Studio that are resting on a VMWare shared folder and use them instantly in the Linux host.
.NET 2003 with the intention to deploy and run in Windows boxes whose only .NET Framework runtime is the Mono for Windows SDK.
.NET developer that only wants to use .NET in Windows would be as silly as a PC user back in 1987 who only wanted to use IBM hardware.
.NET will be much bigger -- and better for everyone -- than Microsoft .NET alone.
.NET developer at the PDC or elsewhere that would not grin once he/she sees their application running on Linux or Mac OS X?
It is NOT an all or nothing proposition. You can develop in Visual Studio and very well target Linux, Mac OS X and anything else that runs Mono. As much as I use the totally cool MonoDevelop (a.k.a Bad Ass IDE of the future), I still use Visual Studio
But make no mistake, that is just one of those rich kids whim of mine. I have, for the past two years, used a Windows box that has mapped drives to my Samba enabled Linux boxes to achieved the same effect.
One must also keep in mind the great utility of Mono's Windows incarnation. Thanks to my add-in (sorry for the shameless plug) you can use Visual Studio and test in Mono without having a Linux or Mac OS box anywhere in sight. In some cases, I very purposefully create Mono applications using handy dandy Visual Studio
In the early 1980's IBM put out the specifications for the PC and regardless of what were their intentions back then, the world of IT has become what it is today because of all of the innovations that we later had by contributors like Compaq, Dell, HP, Apple, Toshiba and many others.
Today, being a
I say we have an extremely similar situation with the original submission from Microsoft to the ECMA of the C# language and the CLI specification. Now, in 2005, you have a great group of contributors that include Novell, Microsoft, IBM, HP and many others.
But perhaps the most striking difference from my IBM PC analogy is the role of the individual contributor. You see, I want to suggest that Open Source
No really, from a business perspective, you would have to be brain damaged to create an application or system of any sort and not hope that it can run in as many platforms (meaning customers that are willing to pay) as possible!
So you mean to tell me that there is some
For GOD sake, GET A CLUE!!!!
As the years have gone by, I keep waiting for it to "become" Java, but all we've got to show for it is an architecture with the speed of Java (slow) and the portability of a native Win32 exe (not portable at all).
And the security of ActiveX.....
Actually, it is not too unportable via Mono, but I worry about a non-sandboxed security model based on digital signatures.
LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
You hit the nail on the head. Mono is the only choice for a serious C# application. Unfortunately, the rest of the industry figured this out years ago and wrote all their code in java, which runs on all the platforms you mentioned and has nothing to do with microsoft. Why you wouldn't use an existing and mature cross platform language that is non-microsoft is beyond me.
mp3's are only for those with bad memories
It's obvious that Mono will NEVER be able to run every .NET application. As soon as Microsoft starts seeing Mono as a thread, something will happen.
BTW, where's the big wave of .NET applications?
If you can read this, thank an english teacher.
Woah. Talk about delusional.
.NET development. Sure, Microsoft are the only ones that can do anything about the runtime but there are literally thousands of vendors of .NET components (most of whom only support .NET on windows).
For high-end computing - Mono runs on Sparc, S390, and Power support, Mono's really the only choice for high-end computing platforms.
Except that there's no proof that mono itself will scale on those platforms and P4 and AMD64 aren't exactly lightweights these days.
For embedded designs - Mono runs on ARM with MIPS soon to come, which makes Mono really the only choice for embedded platforms.
Well the compact framework runs on those processors too as does Portable.NET/DOTGNU.
For businesses - Many companies are able to provide support for the Mono engine, only one is able to support microsoft's implementaion. Any rational business will not allow any product that's sole-sourced from a single vendor, whether it's screws, bolts, gasoline, or software engines. With Microsoft's implemention your business is left at the whims of a single vendor who can pull the rug out from you whenever they feel like (remember Visual Basic 6, and the contempt MSFT showed business relying on that platform).
YOu gotta be kidding me. In reality, there more many more companies supporting
Basically, for any serious C# application, Mono is the only choice.
That's really delusional you know. Most C# applications being written today are on ASP.NET and SWF apps written for windows (many are internal custom applications).
Mono's VM, although continuously improving is not as stable as Microsoft's and their class library isn't either complete or, again, as stable as Microsft's. There is also no decent IDE for mono (monodevelop is so far away from being able to compete with visual studio or borland's offering that it's not funny).
It's disingenious of Icaza to cry himself a river when he knows very well how things work. He's no stranger to Microsoft satellite orgs like INETA, and I expect he hasn't forgotten Novell pays his salary.
I'm not trying to prove Icaza 'deserved it', this whole deal still sucks. I'm making the point that he should have seen this coming and should have cleared it with someone other than some teenager at INETA. He knows enough people at Microsoft to do that. A simple email to friggin' Robert Scoble would have sufficed.
Web2.0: I love when people Flickr my cuil and digg my boingboing until my google is reddit and I start to yahoo
Eh, yes.
2 579&threshold=-1&commentsort=0&tid=109&mode=thread &cid=13588090
http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=16
(I didn't feel like typing a long answer to you as well and this one works just fine)
bottom line, you are wrong and are part of the problem.
Microsoft's dominance in the corporate workstation market is largely due to superior development tools (compared to other rivals) for line of business tools.
.NET and Windows.Forms.
.Net's goal.
.NET. Unlike Windows.Forms though Avalon will not be part of the .NET standard (it will be under the Microsft namespace) and will be very dependent on Vista technology. Developers will flock to this to make their applications "Vista-friendly" and kill cross platform interop with Windows.Forms.
.Net to be this dangerous to them. But it is extremely dangerous.
.Net to kill Java and Software Assurance to lock people into subscription contracts, but people forgot about Linux....
For other tools (large scale/higher performance, nice-looking apps), MFC/VC++ is still the way to go.
Native calling is pretty easy to do in >NET and many developers use Win32 calls to gain missing (perhaps purposely) in
Sure but how many line of business apps need this? How many benefit from this? This was not
Avalon is going to be Vista's killer API and it will be exposed through
Line of business tools again?
The point though is that Mono makes it much easier to move from a Microsoft-centered shop to a Linux-centered shop. Even with Avalon, this is still a reality. Now with Avalon, I still think that you are going to see quick Linux compatibility develop, and so Microsoft will have a number of problems keeping developers there.
You have another issue. How many companies are still running Windows 2000 primarily? How fast will Vista be adopted?
I don't think that they ever intended to allow
The original strategy was to go with
LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
That is some strange history writing...
Karma: Excellent (My Karma? I wish...:-( )
What the hell are you talking about? If your applications really need that strict version numbering, you must be doing something really wrong. I have been a Java developer for 8 years and I know this for a fact.
...because Mono exists, I tell them: "Yeah right, and Windows is cross-platform because WINE exists"
Swing may be slow and crappy, java is definately not. The compromise in speed that you make in a large Java application compared to a large C++ program is negligable for most application development, and of course development in a modern OO language is much easier. Plus the tools for java such as IntelliJ and Eclipse are still a year or two ahead of microsofts intellistudio and about 5 or 6 years ahead of open source development tools.
.NET platform.
Java on desktop linux will die unless a good open implementation becomes popular like harmony/GCJ etc. Java is of course firmly entrenched in many banks and large development companies because its the only modern development platform suitable for large scale cost efficient development that isn't tied to Microsoft. It's also become increasingly popular to write large multiplayer online game backends in Java.
To make out that being a modern OO language is a disadvantage is laughable. It's a bit like saying "I'm still going to use my horse'n'cart because cars are just fad and soon we'll all be flying planes." Sure, the java platforms isn't suitable for people who haven't learnt modern development practices of for hacking togethor small or temporary scripts, but that's not it's core market.
I wouldn't declare Java dead yet, given the only viable alternatively currently is the
The entire Mono project is based on the false assumption that Microsoft will bestow its blessings on those who clone .Net (and its tools). Given Microsoft's predatory and paranoid history, I can't imagine why Miguel persists in his Quixotic quest.
All about me
This happened with the whole BitMover/BitKeeper(TM:) debacle, and it seems that nobody had learned from it.