Slashdot Mirror


De Icaza Pleads For Mono/.Net Cooperation

suka writes "In a recent interview with the online edition of an Austrian newspaper, Mono project-lead Miguel de Icaza pleads for cooperation between Mono and Microsoft's .Net: 'I think that the deal should include a technical Mono/.NET collaboration, and even go as far as Microsoft recommending Mono for all of their developers looking at migration'. The whole interview has some other interesting bits, like de Icaza's thoughts on open sourced Java and information about upcoming versions of Mono."

9 of 262 comments (clear)

  1. .NOT NYET by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Oh just quit it, Mono has no takeup because if people wanted to use Microsoft technology they'd be buying Vista and .NET.
    If they want cross platform portability they don't rely on Microsoft for anything, rather than try .NET plus a clone.

    All Mono does is give them a veneer to claim cross platform portability without actually being cross platform portable.

  2. Like if it would ever happen by vivaoporto · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If Microsoft was interested in interoperability, they could have it, anytime. They own the platform, for goodness sake, and if they wanted other their framework to work on other O.S., they would do it themselves. Microsoft strategy is not and will never be help to other platforms to run their applications, they prefer people locked in, with no choice. What is the main excuse for Mono? "To help people that are locked in .Net applications to migrate to Linux". (btw, if those people had plans to migrate to Linux, they would not choose .Net in the first place, as the technology is widely known as MS only. It is not as if it was a market standard, it is 6 years old, tops). Microsoft, on other hand, lists .Net as an advantage over "Unix". Why would they give up that advantage? On the goodness of their hearts?

    I say it again: if MS wanted a fully functional port of the .Net framework for *nix, they would do it themselves (like the PS3 people ported linux to their console). The truth is that they don't want.

  3. Mod parent up! by khasim · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Not to mention that ALL the source code for Linux is Freely available online. If there's any "interoperability" issues, Microsoft has access to ALL the Windows code and ALL the Linux code.

    They only reason there are "interoperability" issues today is because Microsoft wants there to be.

  4. Re:Good Luck by LWATCDR · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I hate to say it but I always felt Mono was a mistake. The problem with .NET is that it really is a Windows only system. When you try to point that out people say not it isn't you can use Mono. A convent lie that lets .NET compete with Java right up to the point where you have tens of thousands of lines of code and you want to migrate to a different platform. Then the Microsoft sales rep can say, "You know Mono really has fallen behind .NET. You can port your applications if you want but it would just be cheaper to stick with Windows. Once you add in the cost of porting all that code your Total Cost of Ownership will be much less with Windows. Oh and would you like some more copies of Office and another Exchange server to got with that?"

    Mono is multi-platform .NET is not.

    --
    See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
  5. Re:Good Luck by SoCalChris · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Considering that section 3.d.iii of their MSDN code license (Covers the code samples on the MSDN site) specifically disallows you from using any of their code on non-windows platforms, I'd say their position on cross platform compatibility is crystal clear.

    MSDN Code License

  6. Miguel needs a reality check by overshoot · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Microsoft didn't get where they are today by enabling their customers to leave.

    Miguel's role in the world is to make it possible for Linux developers to get locked into Microsoft technologies, In due time Microsoft can harvest them in any number of ways. If he thinks otherwise, he needs to reconsider his choices in recreational chemistry.

    --
    Lacking <sarcasm> tags, /. substitutes moderation as "Troll."
  7. Re:Instead of catch up by tkinnun0 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Once upon a time, Microsoft tried to create an incompatible Java.

    Now, Open Source Aficionados are creating an incompatible .NET.

    Ah, the bitter sweet irony.

  8. Why Mono and DotNet should synch by Orion+Blastar · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This gives a great opportunity to allow Visual Studio developers to port code to Linux, Mac OSX, *BSD Unix, etc by having Dotnet and Mono synch up to be 100% compatible in the code and CIL, CLR used.

    It also would allow Microsoft to more easily port Visual Studio to Linux, Mac OSX, *BSD Unix, and other platforms that Microsoft claims is too hard to port Visual Studio over to. After that is done, Microsoft can port their application software to those platforms more easily rather than rewriting code for a separate Windows and Mac version of MS-Office, etc. Then it would be one code base, and recompiled for each platform using Dotnet/Mono libraries. If Mono is finally 100% compatible with Dotnet, then the CIL and CLR code will run under Mono as well as it does under Dotnet on Windows. Since Mono exists for multiple operating systems, all that is needed is to compile the code for that OS and it makes cross-compiling easy and less costly.

    Think of all the money in R&D that Microsoft would save, if it partners up with Novell and Mono just on the R&R of OSX applications that Microsoft writes if the same code can be used for Windows and OSX with just being recompiled.

    --
    Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
  9. Forget dot net / mono, use Java by d3xt3r · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Seriously, now that Java will be GPL'd, why exactly do we need Mono?

    .Net only exists because M$ failed to embrace and extend Java. Why does the OSS community need a knock-off of a language that only exists because M$ couldn't control Java?