Slashdot Mirror


Miguel De Icaza Forms New Mono Company: Xamarin

rubycodez writes "After being thrown out on the streets by Attachmate, the purchasers of Novell, Miguel De Icaza has formed a new company Xamarin to make .NET development tools for Android and iOS. The company will also provide commercial international Mono support. There are those who would say Mono poses a risk of drawing Microsoft patent or other IP litigation for its inclusion in some major Linux distributions, and that these recent events might be the beginning of the demise of widespread use of Mono and other .NETiness in open source software, a good thing."

13 of 286 comments (clear)

  1. The cross-platform .NET? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They failed in their first attempt at making Mono a ubiquitous development platform by keeping their mobile ports behind a paywall. Now they lost access to those proprietary parts and decided to start again, in exactly the same fashion... brilliant.

  2. Good news? by nicholas22 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This brings on the specter of legal action by Attachmate. While there has always been the thought that Mono could be sued by Microsoft, such as lawsuit would require Microsoft convincing a court that it was “just kidding” and the CLR/C# patent covenants are non-binding. Between their obligations to the ECMA standards body and the legal principal of equitable estoppel, the chance of this happening is slim to none. Attachmate is a completely different story. Even if they aren’t supporting it, they do own a product that is in direct competition with Xamarin’s future offerings. Without some sort of legal arrangement between Attachmate and Xamarin, the latter would face the daunting prospect of proving that their new development doesn’t use any the technology that the old one did. As a result of this, as well as the general uncertainty of any new product, some developers on the mono-android mailing list are stating that they are moving back to Java development for now. Source: http://www.infoq.com/news/2011/05/Mono-II

  3. There are those who would say... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...that the submitter should just state his opinion rather than hiding behind weasel words.

  4. Re:I wonder if Apple would allow it... by tepples · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Doesn't Apple have a prohibition of using a framework other than Objective C for their iOS apps?

    Apple has since rescinded this provision, apparently because it was causing Apple to lose money as games and other popular iOS apps that use internal scripting engines were getting kicked off the App Store.

  5. Surely... by Richard_at_work · · Score: 4, Insightful

    these recent events might be the beginning of the demise of widespread use of Mono and other .NETiness in open source software, a good thing

    Surely thats a matter of opinion?

    1. Re:Surely... by PsychicX · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's a matter of unnecessary Slashdot editorializing, promotion of stupid viewpoints by stupid people. Free Software, amongst other things, exists to promote choice amongst developers and users both. So why is losing effective development choices productive? It isn't. But because there's a vague connection to Microsoft here, it must be evil and be destroyed. Especially now with Java in Oracle hands, what does this accomplish? It's like these people never got out of college and think their professors' dedication to C and a UNIX variant is the only legitimate viewpoint.

    2. Re:Surely... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      But because there's a vague connection to Microsoft here, it must be evil and be destroyed.

      First of all, it's not a "vague" connection between .NET and Microsoft, they created and own the platform FFS. The connection is as explicit as can be.

      Second, Microsoft has proven time and time again that given half a chance will fuck over anything and anybody that stands in their way. And has never stopped trying to take out FOSS, GPL, Linux, open standards and, again, pretty much anything they see as threatening their cosy monopolies. As we speak they're mounting another covert attack on Linux using software patents.

      Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me. Trust Microsoft? Sorry, never again.

  6. It's open core- not free software, not open source by ciaran_o_riordan · · Score: 4, Interesting

    From TFM:

    The new versions of .NET for the iPhone and Android will be source compatible with MonoTouch and Mono for Android. Like those versions, they will be commercial products, built on top of the open core Mono.

    "open core" is not free software, and it's not open source.

  7. Re:I wonder if Apple would allow it... by kervin · · Score: 4, Interesting

    More likely because DOJ was beginning to probe on the behalf of Adobe.

  8. Not a "Good Thing" by mrbluejello · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It is not a "good thing" to have Mono or .NET interoperability taken out of reach of Linux users. Interoperability layers such as Mono allow Linux systems to participate in networks that are dominated by Windows and other commercial systems. If it weren't for software like this, Linux systems may not be invited into some corporate networks, and would not get a seat at the table. The idea of a "pure" linux or no linux is going to continue having linux sitting out in the cold all by itself. Interoperability is crucial. If anything, we need more software like Mono, not less.

  9. Ok, everybody. Two things: by Qbertino · · Score: 4, Insightful

    1st of all:
    Quit picking on Miguel. You may not share the same opinion as he on bigger issues, as do I, but treating him the way the majority here does is primitive. He deserves all respect and professional merit you can give. Unless you are Linus Torwalds, RMS or someone other of the rare few on which who's work his work is based on, you are not entitled to picking a fight with him or destructively ragging about his decisions and/or motives. The others actually aren't either, but at least they have a track record to back up their ego.
    He's done considerable contributions to the cause of FOSS, more than most of humanity anyway and way more than anybody of the wannabees here on slashdot could ever dream of accomplishing, so suck up any stupid and/or ignorant and/or snide remarks you may have ready and just STFU. Thanks.

    2nd: Mono may be a controversy in broader issues, but that's not to say it's not a good project. As for the product itself and products based of it: I know at least one that is a game changer and a major leap forward in its industry, that is based entirely on Mono and wouldn't be possible without it ( http://www.unity3d.com/ ). Cudos to Miguel and the Mono team for making it possible. I know for sure that the other large x-plattform around, Java, would have been beyond pointless as a foundation for realising this and would have failed miserably. Mono and Monodevelop are cool cross-plattform toolkits, and as far as I can tell they get the job done.
    Who can say that about their pet FOSS project?

    --
    We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
  10. System.Reflection.Emit not in XNA by tepples · · Score: 4, Informative

    And like you noted, .NET apps or games can be written in many different languages. He seems to like Python

    I was under the impression that IronPython and other DLR languages required System.Reflection.Emit, which was not present in the subset of the .NET Framework supported by Xbox 360 and Windows Phone 7 last time I checked.

    All the languages can also use the huge library of code and API's.

    The libraries also have to be written in pure .NET code, unlike in Python where it's common to package a C++ library as a module.

  11. Rewriting code legalities by kripkenstein · · Score: 5, Informative

    If it's under the GPL and LGPL, it's going to be a rough case Attachmate would be making, considering that it's open licensed and they just kicked the team to the curb.

    The FOSS code is not a concern here.

    The issue is the proprietary code that Miguel et al worked on in Novell, the Android and iPhone runtimes. That is owned by Attachmate now, and this new startup contains exactly the same coders, who are intentionally going to write the exact same product from scratch - they will be 100% "source compatible" with the old runtimes.

    So legalities are a reasonable concern. Even if no code is copied, the same people writing the same product - immediately after writing it the first time - may lead to basically the same code being written. It might be hard to prove no code was copied even if none was. Lawsuits are filed for much less.

    Of course, this only matters if Xamarin is a big success - no one sues a failure. Time will tell.