Note: comment has been flagged for arriving from a possible incarnation of a known (eet), pseudonymous, forever-nymshifting, abusive Internet troll that posts from open proxies and relays around the world.

No, thanks, I’ll take the free software solution over the proprietary one, no matter who develops it

From http://www.groklaw.net/newsitems.php :

[PJ: You might want to read the Microsoft-Novell patent covenant for Moonlight, for example. Who can be sued? When? Under what circumstances?]

Good luck with your ‘free’ software.

The only issue around Mono are the tentacles it has all over GNOME, the supposed free software alternative to KDE. (Remember GNOME was built from GNU tools to get around the feared proprietary trap of the QT libraries KDE used before they were open sourced.)

Silver/Moonlight will be easy to ignore simply because, I expect, this time Microsoft bit off more than it can chew. Adobe isn’t going to stand by while MS tries to take some of the Flash market away and smile. More than likely it will fight back and attempt to ensure that Silverlight gets no traction at all.

There was a story on Computerworld, I think, that illustrates this which basically says that books in the latter half of 2007 and Q1 of 2008 on Flash and related techologies outsold books on Silverlight by something like 50-1. As book sales are a good indication of developer interest

Remember too that Adobe has a graphics, video editing, effects, SVG tools etc ecosystem to support Flash. MS has diddly squat. All of these supported by standard tools such as javascript.

At least part of the reason for Adobe’s recent interest in FLOSS is the realization, belatedly, that the desktop OS is increasingly less relevant in the markets they are interested in than the world where the browser is the most important item there is.

Linux powers an immense part of that world so it’s in Adobe’s self interest to become more open. I’m not so concerned how they get there in that they do.

Microsoft, meanwhile, is only interested in protecting their desktop turf and, other than the fantasy that Yahoo will help them online, they seem to be missing the power of the Internet again.

And in the “world” of the internet Microsoft isn’t the giant. Google is.

ttfn

John

No, thanks, I’ll take the free software solution over the proprietary one, no matter who develops it. If that’s Moonlight, or JavaFX, I really don’t care, but at the moment I can only download one of those…

“Proof by Red Hat” doesn’t exist, but “seeing what the experts think” certainly does: Red Hat have a number of extremely savvy lawyers.

As proof of that – and “evidence” that I’m surprised this site hasn’t started shouting from the rooftops – the Moonlight plugin isn’t allowed in Fedora yet, because Red Hat aren’t happy with it.

Now, if Red Hat decide that Moonlight cannot go into Fedora until the licensing changes, then I’ll quite happily admit that Moonlight is not free software, and that we can place it in the same category as Flash as being non-free.

I doubt those on the other side of the argument would make such a commitment. But I’m arguing pro-free software, so it’s very easy to evaluate for me.

Roy:

I’ve read that article and other stuff like it. You can say that about any proprietary technology, be it free software or not (e.g., Mozilla’s XUL, Adobe’s Flash, etc.) The fact that the canonical implementation is not free software isn’t that big an issue, it doesn’t stop free software innovating (e.g., Mozilla has plenty of non-W3C standardised technologies within it).

“Flash can be trusted more than Silverlight” is fanciful nonsense on your part, though. It’s your opinion, it’s not backed up by any fact:

“Adobe is neither interested in discriminating against operating systems, nor has it got a history that demonstrates this.”

So, Adobe doesn’t discriminate against non-i386 Linux users?

This is the same Adobe that had Dmitri Sklyarov arrested in the US for implementing a PDF reader.

Yeah, very friendly company Roy, Keep bigging them up.

Alex, please have a look at this reference which was cited above.

Red Hat wouldn’t touch Mono initially because they were concerned there might be legal issues, they’re very careful around these things. That they now happily use Mono is because they are no longer concerned that there are any legal problems.

Adobe offers no free Flash lunch (it’s available non-free for i386 users – they don’t support x64_64, or PPC), and Gnash and swf-dec aren’t Flash since they’re constantly playing catch-up. Flash is riddled with patents (e.g., the video codec patents) and free software distributions like Debian cannot include support for those patents in their free software codecs.

If you believe that Moonlight can’t build an entirely free software version of Silverlight without infringing Microsoft patents, then we’re basically screwed because those self-same patents are going to cover Flash, XUL, AIR, Weave, and all sorts of other software.