Slashdot Mirror
Fedora Core 5 includes Mono
cyberjessy writes "Surprise! The Fedora Core 5 Release will include Mono in the distribution, in spite of Red Hat's opposition. In addition to the Mono runtime, it will also include Mono applications like Beagle and F-Spot. Is the Linux community finally ready to accept Mono? Mono is becoming increasing important due to Windows Vista, which has WinFX (the next .Net Framework) as its core API. This will mean that in future, all native Windows applications will easily run on Linux, with Mono. Will Mono achieve what WINE could not?"
The strategy for dealing with patents is discussed on the Wikipedia article about Mono. It is not a well thought out strategy.
It's probably good that Mono exists, it may have uses in some situations. It may help people get out of .Net related lock-in, but in general it should not be built upon.
Please help publicise swpat.org - the software patents wiki
I don't really care about windows programs running on linux, though this is of course an interesting subject.
What's more important is that the stupid infighting about what role mono could play in Gnome can now finally end.
Mono seems to offer something that many people like and can now finally simply be used to build great programs for Gnome (just like pythong, jave, etc.), without being preoccupied with Fedora and thus a large Gnome distribution not shipping mono.
Not a chance. All of the MS application base (including the new ".NET" stuff) still depends on the underlying Win32 system functions, DLLs, etc. The newer interpreted APIs are just wrappers around the older stuff.
Lacking <sarcasm> tags,
I've never done more with mono that the simple "Hello World" app. Does Mono have an equivilent (or near equivilent) of Windows Forms?
Download free e-books, lectures, and tutorials at bookgoldmine.com
The question is: Will Mono support these new features, and if so, when?
This will mean that in future, all native Windows applications will easily run on Linux, with Mono Maby, but Mono is sorta like java. the .Net Programs will be portable as long as the developers don't use Microsoft APIs like java is portable to gcj as long as you don't use the com.sun.* packages etc.
Mono is becoming increasing important due to Windows Vista
As a developer, I have great concern over how Vista will muddle the Windows landscape. Microsoft is creating a situation where developers have to build and test for way too many Windows platforms.
That is, many developers and network administrators use Windows 2000 exclusively and most other pros and home users use XP -- and my father in law still uses Windows 98. NONE of these people have any intention of upgrading to Vista. So Vista will likely only be installed on new PCs
It's getting to the point where there's just too many versions of Windows out there to support:
Win 98 SE
Win 2k Workstation and Server(s)
Win XP Home and Pro
Win Vista??
And the pointy-haired-bosses will continue to shout that *all* versions of Windows must be supported. That means more development, more testing, more installers, more deep sighs.
The "write once run anywhere" of Java is becoming more attractive all the time.
boxlight
The trouble with Java, at present, is that full implementations (complete with all the latest J2EE, Java 1.whatever-is-latest) are proprietary to Sun and other commercial vendors. You can't include a full-scale Java with a Linux distribution; the licenses won't permit it, as the implementations aren't "free" the way Linux and attendant software in a Linux distribution need to be.
The lowest common denominator takes you back to partial implementations of Java 1.2 or the like; Kaffe, Classpath, and the like, with no Swing GUI and I'm not sure if Eclipse will run well with these "partial" Java environments.
MONO avoids all that; the free implementation is reasonably full featured, seemingly moreso than the "libre software" implementations of parts of Java.
I doubt it'll actually provide all that much interoperability with Windows. But the point of it was that the Ximian folk were getting tired of fighting with writing C memory management code for dynamic applications like Evolution. If they can write "Evolution Next Generation" using MONO, and have it be smaller, more componentized, more powerful, and more robust than struggling with the C version, that could be the "killer app" that makes MONO worthwhile in its own right, ignoring Microsoft's software.
It seems to me that Beagle is one of the relevant components for MONO-based "killer apps."
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
This will mean that in future, all native Windows applications will easily run on Linux, with Mono. Will Mono achieve what WINE could not?"
Mono will certainly not ever come anywhere *close* to being able to run "all native Windows applications", there's like half a dozen independent reasons for that, ranging from your "it'd require a recompile in any case" trough unpleasant little facts like the fact that Mono is trying to chase a moving target that is willing to spend a lot of money and man-hours precicely to *avoid* that too much works with Mono.
In sum, they'll have all the problems of Wine, and then some. (the need for sourcecode f.ex)
Worse yet: the mono-developers are suggesting one migth want to develop OSS applications with a primary target being Free OSes under Mono. Doing so would be double hurtful: It'd ensure that any such application developed for Linux works perfectly under Windows (because mono is a *subset* of the MS-environment, AND because all OSS-applications come with source), but *not* the oposite.
It's a braindead waste of time. I don't see how I can put it more politely. It actively hurts the Free Software ecosystem.
Yes, as far as I know, there are no plans to clone "WinFX" at this point for Vista compatibility. Mono doesn't even have working WinForms as far as I know (after how many years?), which would provide compatibility with current Win apps.
Java provides a better level of portability than C#/CLR...I'd look there instead for a VM based runtime.
On that note, there is a Java port that runs on top of the Mono runtime and is supposedly fast. That might be worth investigating. (IronPython too if it ends up significantly faster than the regular Python interpreter.)
Galileo: "The Earth revolves around the Sun!"
Score: -1 100% Flamebait
As an example, I'm a .Net developer and I think the IDE sucks (well, 'sucks' may be a bit strong--how's deficient?). Add ReSharper to it and it becomes far more useful, but who really picks a language on the basis of the GUI's available for it, anyway? If we were doing that, I'd pick Java with IDEA any day.
No, what attracts me to .Net is the large, well documented framework API's available out of the box, the rich set of free third party libraries available (many (most?) of which have been ported from Java), the relatively clean and feature-rich primary language, and the subsequent rise in productivity it gives me and my programmers.
The IDE itself is a bit buggy and constricting for my tastes. Try, for instance, checking out changes to two project files at the same time. Visual Studio will inform you that a project has changed outside the IDE and asks if you want to reload it. How nice! Until you realize that it only reloads one of the two projects, that is. Recycle time. Or how about the shitty way it handles references to other assemblies. Rather than treating the assigned path to a referenced assembly as the gospel, it treats it as a "hint." This can cause wierd and hard to debug problems when compiling on another programmer's machine (granted the incidents of this happening are relatively rare, but I've seen it bite people 4-5 times in the last few years alone--zero would be far more acceptable).
Another annoying point is that all folder management (moves, renames, etc.) have to be done from within the IDE. This requires a lot of point and click gymnastics in certain scenarios. No fun at all. And don't even get me started about C++ support. They really punted there (in 2003, anyway--supposedly they tried making it far better in 2005, but reports from my C++ collegues indicates that they ended up breaking things like intellisense entirely).
Taft
I think this is good news. I use FC4 and include Novell's mono repos. It's the only outside repo I use, all other stuff I build/hack/package myself. This means I won't have to use any repos besides Core and Extras, which rocks. Maybe this will mean they'll also include Muine? My fave musicplayer, which happens to be a Mono app. Who cares about them windows compat features anyway? There's enough coolness in Mono on itself to warrant its inclusion into FC5. More languages, more choices. Sounds great!
WinFX is far from required for "Vista compatibility". Basically no applications will use WinFX when Vista is released, and I have to wonder how many Windows developers are actually ready to jump ship from unmanaged C++ to
As for the Windows.Forms namespace, it's well underway actually. In the November 2005 status report, word is:
This hardly sounds too unattainable to me.
And before anyone asks, no, Windows Forms 2.0 support isn't required for "Vista compatibility" either.
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
Given what Windows Presentation Framework is capable of, I suspect that a lot of people will jump on it fairly quickly. It is a huge departure from the current Win32 UI model, and that's a good thing. The adoption will likely be fastest among the small software shops and I bet we'll see a surge of absolutely nasty-looking skinned applications as any would-be graphics designer will try their hand at it.
That said, Mono in Fedora won't help. WPF is a lot more than a simple wrapper around Win32 UI, as WinForms is. A great deal of the core was written from scratch and is unmanaged code. Given the Mono people haven't even really figured out WinForms, I doubt they'll be able to get WPF anytime soon. However, given WPF abstracts completely from Win32 UI, it might be easier to port it to other platforms because of the removal from WndProc.
Very telling entry from Miguel's own blog.
What's on display here isn't even remotely close to a cooperative spirit to further a community standard. It is more of a Cold War.
ECMA? Who cares... ECMA trying to set the direction of C# and CLR is like steering a truck with a flea.
If you like virtual machines, mono is the only one that performs well and is open source and is designed to be almost programming language independent.
.Net run again? And how many are not bastard neutered languages like managed C++?
It's awfully funny how C# developers all the sudden get all teary-eyed over the ability to use any other language than C# when the topic of faster JVM's comes up...
But then someone has to go and mention that the JVM runs about 200 languages. How many does
So I guess you need to re-phrase your statement to say "if you want to have access to many langauges, and have the fastest VM you should really just drop Mono/.Net like a hot potato and stick with Java - until you decide to try a real language on for size and move to Ruby."
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
That's proof by *false* analogy buddy. Your wiki link is only helpful if you demonstrate that the analogy is false. Also, an argument by way of analogy is a fine way to make a normative argument, even if it's not a good way to construct a formal proof. This is because norms are in fact quite imprecise and depend greatly on context; a good analogy between things that are alike in meaningful ways can provide a great deal of insight into how to approach an issue.
microsoftword.mp3 - it doesn't care that they're not words...
The recent beta of IronPython exposed some bugs in our 2.x VM implemnetation, luckly they have been fixed.
Download 1.1.13 (available now).