Can’t anyone see a taboo on opening this can of worms?
Fine. So we decided to confront and actually face an issue that has been hanging around the Web for several years and whose severity culminated amid Microsoft patent deals that explicitly mention Mono. None of what we said is new, yet it’s seen as controversial and we’re even being accused of lying, which we are not. Here is the response from Slated to these accusation:
Let him rant.
Some anonymous Mono fanb misquoting you, then linking to a non-existent post on Steadfast’s blog, is nothing to worry about.
And it still doesn’t disprove that Gnome is effectively dependent on Mono.
”Wouldn’t they celebrate the fact, rather than exert so much effort denying it, and making ad hominem attacks?“Think about this: If all these Mono fans are so dedicated to their cause, then why would it bother them that Gnome is dependent on their poisonous little toy? Wouldn’t they celebrate the fact, rather than exert so much effort denying it, and making ad hominem attacks?
They’re “doing evil”, and they know it. They’re just trying to disguise the fact.
Note that this VSQA blog is a “Visual Studio Questions and Answers” site, that deals entirely with Microsoft proprietary technology, such as VB.NET and ASP.NET, as well as C# and of course Mono.
This is the kind of people fighting the Mono cause now, this is the kind of people defending Mono’s corner, these are de Icaza’s and Steadfast’s “associates”.
Something has gone badly wrong when Microsoft fans are defending supposedly Linux developers. But then, of course, people like de Icaza and Steadfast are not really Linux developers … any more, they’re just “evangelists” for Microsoft’s encumbered technology.