Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Microsoft Open Sources .NET Micro Framework

Posted by timothy on from the what's-your-angle-college-boy dept.

An anonymous reader writes "Back in July, Microsoft announced it was making .NET available under its Community Promise, which in theory allowed free software developers to use the technology without fear of patent lawsuits. Not surprisingly, many free software geeks were unconvinced by the promise (after all, what's a promise compared to an actual open licence?), but now Microsoft has taken things to the next level by releasing the .NET Micro Framework under the Apache 2.0 licence. Yes, you read that correctly: a sizeable chunk of .NET is about to go open source."

57 of 320 comments (clear)

  1. My first question would be... by Q-Hack! · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Just what is Microsoft's angle? Surely they are gaining some advantage here.

    --
    Some days I get the sinking feeling Orwell was an optimist.
    1. Re:My first question would be... by CannonballHead · · Score: 5, Insightful

      More people using .NET would be a gain, wouldn't it?

    2. Re:My first question would be... by Sinryc · · Score: 2, Insightful

      OR maybe they just think that this will be the best thing for the framework. Maybe they feel that if they get more people using it, it will only strengthen their hold on the market, while making the open source crowd happy.

      --
      Yay, I have a sig.
    3. Re:My first question would be... by badboy_tw2002 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Haven't people been yelling about for years how you can make money with open source? Maybe someone at MS believed them. Despite the general feeling that MS is "out to get you", a company is made up of people, and is not a big bad menace who does evil for evils sake. MS as a corporate entity has exactly one goal (the same as any other company) - make money for its investors. If they can make more money with open source then why is it a surprise they would pursue that avenue?

    4. Re:My first question would be... by RightSaidFred99 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Wow, you mean a multinational corporation with a fiduciary duty to return shareholder value thinks there might be some "angle" in this? Slashdot seriously needs a -1 (Durr) mod.

    5. Re:My first question would be... by Lord+Pillage · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The ability to sell support services.

      --
      try { Signature mysig = new CleverAttempt(); } catch(NonCleverSignatureException e) { postanyway(); }
    6. Re:My first question would be... by CannonballHead · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm not a .NET developer... but I seem to remember having to run .NET applications with the .NET framework on my local machine?

      I'm not sure how much Microsoft gains by keeping .NET closed-source. Perhaps that's a good question, too: why not open source it. I don't think you have to pay anything to do .NET development, do you? So may as well get any free improvements from the open source community. ;)

    7. Re:My first question would be... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Sorry, .NET Compact Framework is for devices running CE. .NET micro is different, its a version of .NET that runs directly on the the hardware (no CE at all), a lot like running embedded C on a microcontroller. Says it right in TFA.

    8. Re:My first question would be... by NervousNerd · · Score: 4, Informative

      Not quite. Visual Studio Express is free for commercial usage.

    9. Re:My first question would be... by ChatHuant · · Score: 3, Informative

      .NET micro is mostly for embedded devices running WinCE.

      Nope, you're wrong. You're thinking of the .Net Compact Framework. Basically there are three .NET implementations available from MS (ignoring Rotor for the time being). The Windows one (known as "the .Net Framework") is the largest, with lots of libraries and capabilities. The Compact Framework targets Win CE level devices (fewer resources, lower capabilities), and takes about 12 Mbytes. The .NET Micro Framework targets even smaller devices; it has a subset of the .NET classes, and can fit in 300 kBytes or less. The .NET Micro Framework doesn't need an OS to run (but it can run on an OS). That's the thing that was running in the (now defunct) SPOT watches and MSN Direct traffic dongles. Those were tiny devices which couldn't have run Win CE.

    10. Re:My first question would be... by tonyreadsnews · · Score: 2, Informative

      No, you don't. You can do development in any text editor and compile with mono.
      also, there are free (as in beer) licences of VS express.

    11. Re:My first question would be... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      No, it's slightly different crap now.

    12. Re:My first question would be... by spectre_240sx · · Score: 2, Informative

      Sybase? I think you mean MSSQL. Also, the Eclipse IDE actually has some capability for .NET development now. This can easily be used with open version control solutions. It may not be good for developers who are doing large projects, but for anyone developing plug-ins for office apps or something similar it's not too bad.

    13. Re:My first question would be... by omar.sahal · · Score: 4, Informative

      a company is made up of people

      and it is also a company, a hierarchal organization were those lower down have to do what those higher up tell them to do. Those higher up have a pattern of behavior that justifies many of the fears on Slashdot. Groklaw is full of evidence, much of which was gained through court systems from around the world.
      So to quote Wikipedia

      The base technologies submitted to the ECMA, and therefore also the Unix/GNOME-specific parts, may be non-problematic. The concerns primarily relate to technologies developed by Microsoft on top of the .NET Framework, such as ASP.NET, ADO.NET and Windows Forms (see Non standardized namespaces)

      So whats changed

    14. Re:My first question would be... by elashish14 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Not only that, maybe MS believes that they can use this route to make better software too. If the OSS community can respond and show MS how much there is to benefit from opening one of their projects, maybe they'll be more responsive with other projects too.

      The OSS community should see this as an opportunity to give something back to MS for good reason. They would be less likely to stab the OSS community in the back with patent suits and the like if we can engender a true, two-way relationship. Maybe with some dialogue, we can start moving toward working in harmony instead of against each other.

      --
      I have left slashdot and am now on Soylent News. FUCK YOU DICE.
    15. Re:My first question would be... by pthreadunixman · · Score: 2, Funny

      You're right. It's made up of stock holders that only care about their near-term return on investment; hence, evil.

    16. Re:My first question would be... by Xabraxas · · Score: 3, Informative

      I have nothing against mono, I just can't afford to work in what amounts to a 4 year old version of the framework.

      Bogus. Mono is very current with .NET and has even beaten MS to the punch on some features. The major missing features compared to .NET are the MS specific libraries and proper current Silverlight support. So unless you're developing Silverlight apps or Windows specific software (which would obviate the choice to use Mono anyway) I doubt you have even tried Mono.

      --
      Time makes more converts than reason
    17. Re:My first question would be... by digitig · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The best IDE for .NET development is still Visual Studio by a long shot, and licenses for it aren't cheap.

      True -- they're free. Well, not all versions, but you can get a long way with the free versions.

      --
      Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
    18. Re:My first question would be... by Rycross · · Score: 5, Insightful

      VS(.NET)

      Visual Studio 2008 Express is free.

      Windows

      Yes, unless you use Mono.

      SourceSafe, Windows Server, Sybase SQL

      No, no, and no. You have no idea what you're talking about.

    19. Re:My first question would be... by rliden · · Score: 3, Informative

      There is Sharp Develop[www.icsharpcode.net]. An open source IDE for .NET. It supports C#, VB, Boo, and F#.

      --
      Don't think of it as a flame, more like an argument that does 3d6 fire damage.
    20. Re:My first question would be... by HeronBlademaster · · Score: 4, Informative

      You don't need SourceSafe at all to do any sort of .NET development. Subversion, git, CVS, etc. all work fine for .NET development.

      SourceSafe would be better off forgotten entirely.

    21. Re:My first question would be... by CastrTroy · · Score: 2, Interesting

      MS Messenger is pretty good, don't get me wrong. However it does have some downsides. Like how long did it take them to get offline messaging. ICQ had it back in the 90's, and MSN only managed to get this feature in 2006. Which has been a while, but why they couldn't get it out the door earlier is beyond me. And, also, the MSN client is built for 13 year old girls. Great for sending little IMs to your friends, complete with plenty of emoticons, and even attrocities such as winks and nudges, but fails in any kind of professional environment. Why is there a maximum message length. Why is it so short. Why isn't there integrated spell checking. Why are all the ads at the bottom such tripe. You would think that sometool with as large of a user base as MSN Messenger could get some high quality ads for real products that real people would buy. But apparently that's too much. I couple probably go on for paragraphs. But I will stop. Basically, it could be about 100 times better if they had a client that wasn't aimed at 13 year old girls.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    22. Re:My first question would be... by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 2, Funny

      To do .NET development well, you'll need to get licenses for VS(.NET),

      Wrong.

      Windows,

      Wrong.

      SourceSafe,

      Wrong.

      Windows Server,

      Wrong.

      Sybase SQL,

      Not just wrong, but mystifying! Sybase? Not... MS SQL Express? That would have made sense.

      Anyway, congratulations! You're five-for-five. You've succeeded in crafting a perfectly factless post.

      --
      Comment of the year
    23. Re:My first question would be... by dissy · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Perhaps that's a good question, too: why not open source it.

      I can give one example.

      Where I work, our ERP software is primarily coded in .NET, and needs 3.5.

      It is the only reason to stick with Windows on each and every workstation there.
      Every so often I check up on the status of Wine and .NET, only to see 2.x is only partially supported with no plans on supporting 3.

      If this lets me run our ERP client under Linux, be it Wine or Mono or whatever wrapper is needed, that will be a good number of workstation licenses that will fall out of the upgrade cycle.

      It will also let us deploy more ERP dedicated terminals on slightly older hardware that XP doesn't treat too well, and 2k is too painful to run on (Plus we only have so many licenses for 2k that aren't OEM)

      This could very well lead to a measured loss of sales. I am sure I am not the only one in that type of situation, even if it is not very common.

      Still, I am not complaining!

    24. Re:My first question would be... by aztracker1 · · Score: 2, Informative

      See MoMA, there are a number of 3/3.5 features. If you aren't using WPF/Silverlight there's a pretty good chance your ERP solution could be easily migrated.

      --
      Michael J. Ryan - tracker1.info
    25. Re:My first question would be... by EvanED · · Score: 3, Informative

      Lots of people have corrected you, but I'm going to correct you in a different manner: not only is SourceSafe not required, but MS has basically been trying to phase it out in favor of Team Foundation Server (part of VS Enterprise I think) for a while now.

      MS knows SourceSafe is crap; it's one of the few products that no one dogfoods internally.

    26. Re:My first question would be... by XcepticZP · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Command-line interfaces are a thing of the past.

      People should use what they are most productive in. If they feel they are most productive in a command-line, then so be it. I have no problem with that, and neither should anyone else. I've seen some amazingly fast, productive people that pretty much never use a mouse. The rest are just "posh" about their supposed "l33t" command-line skills, and pretend everything but their holy command-line is an abomination that deserves to be castrated and fed to pigs.

      But come on, you can't go around bashing every thing because "it doesn't have a command-line version". Oh boo hoo. Grow up! Your parents should have taught you a long time ago that the world doesn't revolve around you. And the sooner you start learning that, the sooner you'll stop getting fisted.

      -XcepticZP

    27. Re:My first question would be... by bernywork · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Windows Mobile.

      This is their smallest subset of .NET. They are already pretty much giving the code away to developers for Windows Mobile, now they are having their arses handed to them by Android and it's only looking worse. They keep going at this rate and they are going to be irrelevant. That's not what they want. So therefore they open source .NET in the hope that they can get some more traction in the market.

      --
      Curiosity was framed; ignorance killed the cat. -- Author unknown
    28. Re:My first question would be... by tgd · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What is their angle?

      They're a company of 40,000+ engineers, a substantial portion of which are not total douchebags, unlike how people on Slashdot seem to imagine them.

      Lots of them use open source, lots of them like the idea of open source but, like many on here, have to juggle the realities of a paycheck with their own feelings on the matter.

      When you're a company the size of Microsoft, even if you have an internal upswelling of support for open sourcing things, you have to fight both the business people and the lawyers. Its easier to turn a dingy than an oil supertanker, and they're not in a position (like many companies *coughSun*) that open source things in a very two-faced way, on one side claiming they follow The Faith and on the other, really just running a hail mary play in the hope that it'll shore up dwindling relevance.

      I'd argue Microsoft opening up things like this is much better for Open Source, as a concept, because they're doing it because they *can*, not because they have to.

      There's a reason the .NET team has been so helpful with things like Mono and Moonlight -- when the claws of the business side start to let go, its what the engineers want to be doing.

    29. Re:My first question would be... by BitZtream · · Score: 2

      If those are the only things you think Mono is missing, you don't know much about the differences between Mono and the MS compilers and frame works.

      First major problem in Mono: Non defragmenting garbage collector.

      You can't consider Mono a replacement when it leaves out a major reason to use the .NET framework. It will work OK for small, short lived ( as in short runtime ) apps, but when you start talking about services that run for long periods of time or ASP.NET applications, Mono sucks. Yes, it will 'work' when you are playing with it but you can't use it in production.

      So great, you've done all the nifty toy features of the .NET framework, you've even come up with some toy features before MS. Unfortunately, MS still has the only sane runtime to use in a production environment.

      Dear Mono/Novell devs,

      Please stop worrying about toys like Visual Studio integration/emulation for publishing apps to web servers and fix the underlying framework to perform like the rock its built to run on (UNIX). I want to use Mono on FreeBSD so I can avoid dealing with Windows and all its pitfalls as a server, but until I can leave my web server running for more than 24 hours without requiring a restart due to memory fragmentation I'm stuck running Windows. I can't resolve the issue in my code since I'm not responsible for memory management nor can I be, I'm not supposed to be by design. You probably don't realize this running the short little unit tests, but I do. I use the .NET framework so I don't have to worry about my allocation/deallocation order. If I wanted to do that, i'd just use C and stop dicking around with the entire thing. There is more to a garbage collector in .NET than just freeing memory when its not used.

      I can dig in and attempt to fix the framework myself, but the time and cost involved makes it more effort than its worth. I'll be your biggest fan and shout your name at every .NET developer I know until they submit and use Mono when you've completed this task, but until then, you're a second class citizen from a third world country.

      Note: This is but ONE of the show stoppers out there for long running production class applications using Mono, its just the most painful to me at the moment, but these problems have to be fixed or your just going to promote more people using MS software. They'll start off on Mono with its nice price tag, then when they get to the point where it doesn't provide the level of performance and reliability thats required, they'll end up dropping the money to MS anyway so all you end up doing is helping MS along the way. They have to deal with less from newbie devs and still get the same end result, money for the product.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    30. Re:My first question would be... by BitZtream · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Actually SourceSafe is dead, has been for a few years, and its my understanding that MS never actually used it for their own code.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
  2. I think I'm ill by cptnapalm · · Score: 4, Funny

    I must have the swine flu. Maybe I'm having a psychotic episode. Did I wind up in a holodeck? Or the Twilight Zone? It must be one of these things because I keep having these senseless hallucinations where MicroSoft acts like a decent company.

    1. Re:I think I'm ill by loconet · · Score: 2, Funny

      I must have the swine flu

      Yes, with pigs flying and all .. that shot isn't looking *that* bad now.

      --
      [alk]
    2. Re:I think I'm ill by CannonballHead · · Score: 5, Funny

      I think you might have Mono.

    3. Re:I think I'm ill by netdur · · Score: 2, Interesting

      maybe mono showed them what can be done with open source .net? because I have read more success stories about mono than .net

      --
      "Steve Jobs invented the world" -- Bill W. GATES
  3. Marketshare in Mobile Market by Ohio+Calvinist · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Microsoft knows that mobile development is booming right now and their best chance to get into the market is on very accessible powerful development tools rather than the Windows OS which is quickly losing market share. If Microsoft can have mobile developers coding in .NET, having them be familiar with Windows development is trival (since the Framework obstruficates most of the OS API.)

    If the Framework gets ported to non-MS platforms, having those developers develop on Visual Studio, on Windows, in Windows eco-systems is additional trivial.

    I am absolutely certain that iPhone development is causing iPhone developers to learn and be comfortable with XCode on Mac machines while at the same time creating more skilled Objective-C coders that will be more proficent in writing normal OS X applications.

    --
    Forgive my spelling from time to time. I'm often posting during short breaks.
  4. Awesome! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    I can't express how excited I am to see how this will be turned against Microsoft.

  5. OMG it is Meta EEE! by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 5, Funny

    Not satisfied with killing software competitors by the Embrace, Extend and Extinguish methodology, now they are doing it to licenses. Pretty soon Apache license will be incompatible with everything non Microsoft, inlcuding Apache Web Server. Run, Run away when you still can!

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
  6. There is a problem by Groo+Wanderer · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I was initially impressed by the MS 'open' pledges, until I talked to several coder friends. Their take, paraphrased, was that it was window dressing with a lot of traps. Basically, they 'opened' the wrapper, just like they did with their Office formats.

    The problem, as it was explained to me, is that if you want to do anything useful, you have to call a bunch of things that are not opened, will not be opened, and MS can still sue your *ss off for using. One person asked how useful it is to 'open' the hypothetical call, Play_video_with_MS_proprietary_closed_codec? I mean, you can copy the functionality, but your software is only cross-platform to the extent that MS proprietary and closed codecs and other things are 'open'.

    This is nothing more than a stealth PR attempt, they will use it to say, "We opened everything up, and see, Linux still sux0rz because it can't play movies, sound, DRM, or anything else useful. We opened everything up, but the Linux model is broken, and their lazy codes won't do the right thing. If you want real XYZ, you need Windows".

    It is nothing more than opening the most useless bits, and using it as a PR hammer. Yay progress?

                      -Charlie

    1. Re:There is a problem by RAMMS+EIN · · Score: 3, Interesting

      ``This is nothing more than a stealth PR attempt, they will use it to say, "We opened everything up, and see ..."''

      Or maybe it's just fear of more lawsuits from the EU.

      However, the result is that .NET Micro Framework is now open source. That's a Good Thing.

      --
      Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
  7. Yeah, sure by Shadowhawk · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Wake me up when they open source the main .NET framework. They put this out there because no one is using it.

    --
    My mind works like lightning. One brilliant flash and it is gone.
    1. Re:Yeah, sure by ChatHuant · · Score: 3, Interesting

      This. The Micro Framework is for resource-constrained embedded devices... which are just about the last place you'd want to run bytecode anyway, as far as I can see. We've got tons of embedded stuff where I work, but I fail to see how controllers for mechanical bits and pieces are going to benefit from having the CLR, object classes, GUIs, etc. made available to them.

       
      I think they're targetting the same area as some embedded Java implementations, like MicroJava. You're getting a nice programming environment (you can use Visual Studio to write C# software for your embedded app), you're getting automatic memory management and it'll offer a migration path for people familiar with larger platforms. While it's not going to be as efficient as hand-tightened C and/or assembly code, it should allow faster development for embedded applications.

      Yes, I know they're hoping to scoop the mobile market, but which part of it - the non-smartphone (dumbphone) market?

      Not sure they're interested only (or even mainly) in the mobile market; the .NET MF can run on much lower performance processors than the ones used in phones, even feature phones (i.e., not smartphones). From what I've seen most phones use ARM 9 level CPUs, or even ARM + DSP combos, like the TI's OMAP (please feel free to correct me, phones aren't an area I have much interest in). That's overkill for the .NET MF which can happily run on ARM7 level CPUs.

  8. As Admiral Ackbar warned by h4rr4r · · Score: 3, Informative

    It's A Trap!

    1. Re:As Admiral Ackbar warned by MozeeToby · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I know you're joking and I don't mean to direct this at you necissarily but I think it should be said.

      Many companies suck. They abuse their positions and take advantage of their customers, they manipulate the writing and interpretation of laws to suit their ends, they sue innocent people in an effort to scare people into respecting their intangible rights. Slashdot, correctly, berates them when there is news about this kind of thing. We help spread knowledge of their actions and provide sometimes insightful analysis which in turn, I hope, gets passed on to others outside the slashdot crowd.

      However, when one of these companies does something right, instead of saying "Good first step, you've got a long way to go but this helps ever so slightly" we berate them just as much as if we found out their datacenters were powered by burning babies. It's not helpful and it's not really fair. You can't punish good behavior just as much as bad and expect to have any effects, it doesn't work on dogs and I doubt it works on corporations.

      So, let me (karma be damned) be the first to say: This is a small step in the right direction Microsoft. You have a long way to go, but this, ever so slightly, helps.

  9. Re:Mono? by LWATCDR · · Score: 4, Informative

    Nope this framework is for mobile devices and the 360.
    Microsoft is really dieing in the mobile space right now. WinMo 6.5 Still doesn't have native support capacitive touch screens and the Mobile world is on fire with Android and of course the iPhone.
    HTC, LG, and Samsung are all developing or have released Android phones.
    Palm and Motorola are now dropping WinMo and going with WebOS and Android.
    This is one space where Microsoft is at best an also ran and really is dropping in the race for mind share.

    --
    See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
  10. 2012 Ads? Hell Freezing? by superflit · · Score: 2, Funny

    Maybe it is a promo for the 2012.

    Or

    then the maya calendar has Its reason to end on 2012....
    Hell is Freezing somewhere...

  11. Your tongues can't repel flavor of that magnitude! by Tetsujin · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Ugh, I guess we'll have to eat this boring oatmeal...

    It's A Trap!

    --
    Bow-ties are cool.
  12. Why not give them some cred for trying? by drdrgivemethenews · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You don't train a misbehaving dog to be well-mannered by whacking it one every time it wags its tail.

  13. Re:Open Sourcing Platform Lock-In Is Meaningless by RAMMS+EIN · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Making it open source allows you to use it, distribute it, and modify it. Even if nobody ports it to your favorite platform, it's still a win for the users. No longer do you have to depend on Microsoft for bugfixes. No longer do you have to hope that, one day, they will implement the feature you're waiting for. Microsoft is no longer the only party allowed to improve the platform or tailor it to your needs. Once it's open source, everyone is allowed to do so.

    So while you are right that making the software open source doesn't magically make it portable, it is far from meaningless.

    --
    Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
  14. Still behind the curve. by tthomas48 · · Score: 2, Informative

    This is all about trying to gain mobile market share, but realistically all they're doing is highlighting the headache. Thanks, but I don't want to build an app in Objective C, Java, and .Net and get them certified by Google, and Microsoft, and Apple. What a headache. As usual Microsoft is arriving at the point when the whole idea of writing custom apps per phone is starting to jump the shark.

    If they would release an easy to use IE mobile virtual images like they've done for all the current IE desktop applications they might actually have something like a leg up on their competition (I know they have some emulator inside Visual Studio, but that's not the same).

    Google has a cross-platform emulator, but neither Apple nor Microsoft do. This could easily be another situation like Firefox where developers design webapps for Android and make them work passably on the other browsers.

  15. Re:No you're not! by NoYob · · Score: 2, Funny

    Yahoo! Is! that! you!?

    I didn't sound like Bill Shatner, did I?

    Buy my euphoria has died down. Some guys with Think Geek! T-Shirts came by and beat the shit out of me.

    --
    It's NOT me! It's the meds! I'm on 1000mg of Fukitol.
  16. XCode has more than you think by SuperKendall · · Score: 2, Interesting

    XCode is actually a pretty good tool, and while the multiple floating windows of IB can be hard to deal with I find that approach to GUI design to be way, way better than code-behind stuff UI tools normally spit out.

    If you take the time to learn how to use XCode you'll find it does a lot more than you are thinking it does.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  17. Re:Open Sourcing Platform Lock-In Is Meaningless by RAMMS+EIN · · Score: 2, Informative

    Hahaha, nice one.

    In case you're not getting the joke: The very definition of open-source states that modification and distribution must be allowed.

    So yes. If it is open source, you _are_ allowed to distribute and modify, exactly as I stated.

    Also, Free software and open source software are _not_ different things (and neither does the article referenced by the parent claim they are). The difference is not in the software, but in the philosophy: open source is the apolitical term, whereas Free software is the term preferred by those who wish all software to be Free software.

    ``Just because someone allows you to use the source of a program doesn't mean you can legally do anything you want with it.''

    That is correct, but just being allowed to use the source in some way does not make the software open source, in the same way that not being charged for the software doesn't make it Free software. Some of Microsoft's earlier "shared source" initiatives can serve as an example of this: you get to see the source code, but you are not allowed to modify and distribute it - therefore, it is not open source.

    ``Just want you all to know the difference so you're not confused in the future.''

    I hope that my post has managed to clear up some confusion. And please, don't go off misrepresenting open source anymore.

    --
    Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
  18. Re:Mono? by talcite · · Score: 3, Informative

    You completely forgot the current leader in phone OSes, Symbian. It doesn't get many press releases, but it's got more market share than the iphone, Android, WinMo, AND Blackberry combined. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smartphone#Operating_systems

  19. Dominating? by pavon · · Score: 2, Informative

    They may have overtaken Palm by a large margin, but they never even caught up with RIM let alone "dominated" the market as a whole which included other players like Nokia and Samsung as well.

  20. Re:Mono and P/Invoke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Don't forget that quite a few .NET apps also use P/Invoke to take advantage of the Win32 API. Also, Mono is not bug for bug compatible so any apps that rely on bugs in .NET probably won't work right either.

  21. Re:Mono? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 2, Informative

    WinCE never had more than a 20% share of the Smartphone market. It had a slightly bigger share in the USA than worldwide, but not by much.

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News