EditorsAbout the SiteComes vs. MicrosoftUsing This Web SiteSite ArchivesCredibility IndexOOXMLOpenDocumentPatentsNovellNews DigestSite NewsRSS


Novell/Microsoft and the Funding of Pinta’s (Mono) Developer

Posted in Free/Libre Software, GNU/Linux, Microsoft, Mono, Novell, Patents, Ubuntu at 10:48 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

“Our partnership with Microsoft continues to expand.”

Ron Hovsepian, Novell CEO

Summary: Novell has a Mono-based replacement for the GIMP and some of the most expected sources are covering it

THREE months ago, one of our readers hypothesised that the GIMP would be replaced by Paint.NET, at least in Ubuntu. The man who ported Paint.NET (for GNU/Linux) is working to receive a paycheck from Novell, which is in turn funded by Microsoft. He says that he “work[s] on Mono, specifically on Mono Tools for Visual Studio.” It’s about assimilating to Microsoft rather than the other way around.

Earlier this week we mentioned this article from The H. It is about a Mono project named Pinta, developed alone by that Novell employee who had previously ported Paint.NET. Thom Holwerda, who is quite often seen as hostile towards GNU/Linux (he loves Windows Vista 7 and he loves Mono), promoted this application, calling it “a Gtk+ Clone of Paint.NET.” DownloadSquad did the same thing and in Heise/The H we found the sole comment which says: “I read an article earlier on today that stated Novell were trying to get over the problem of mono being so unpopular with everyone by writing all the programmes themselves. Is this true? Just who else is writing programmes in mono?”

“Mark Shuttleworth once said that if the Windows API becomes the default on GNU/Linux, then there is no point to GNU/Linux.”Pinta is just more trouble, very much like Moonlight. Mark Shuttleworth once said that if the Windows API becomes the default on GNU/Linux, then there is no point to GNU/Linux. He was right, but he ignored his own intuition and embraced the Trojan horses from Microsoft and Novell (there is another side to this story). Those who are always defending and promoting Mono applications are those who offer complimentary coverage to Pinta. One of them is Ryan Paul and among the comments he received there is this one: “Great, yet another Microsoft .NET application to be included in Ubuntu. Before long, they will just switch to a licensed Windows kernel and nobody would see the difference.”

Here is new coverage from FOSDEM 2010:

Last weekend, during the tenth edition of FOSDEM, we had the joy of organizing the first ever Mono developer room. While there had been talks about Mono before (including Miguel’s great presentation at FOSDEM 2007), it was still a rather underrepresented topic. For that reason, Stephane and I requested a developer room and gladly we got it.

So those who asked for the room are contributing not just to F-Spot but to Novell’s very own Banshee too (which only Novell customers can use [1, 2, 3, 4]).

Gates on SUSE

Share this post: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Reddit
  • co.mments
  • DZone
  • email
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • NewsVine
  • Print
  • Technorati
  • TwitThis
  • Facebook

If you liked this post, consider subscribing to the RSS feed or join us now at the IRC channels.

Pages that cross-reference this one


  1. ml2mst said,

    February 11, 2010 at 11:40 pm


    Yawn!, another trojan, to add to the list of trojans, to be removed immediately from a fresh Ubuntu Gnome install:


  2. clifnotes said,

    February 11, 2010 at 11:43 pm


    Ok, so what is the problem with Mono? I’m late to this ballgame, tell me the score.

  3. Roy Schestowitz said,

    February 12, 2010 at 5:08 am


    Here is a good introduction to the subject.

  4. dyfet said,

    February 12, 2010 at 12:05 pm


    While it’s still easy to remove mono from installed systems the most frustration thing from a Debian development perspective is mono build dependencies. There are now patches submitted in lots of packages that each separately build mono cil files for various libraries, etc, and each of these of course require “mono” as a “build” dependency for the package to now build from source. Hence, it is now for example now impossible to “build” an Ubuntu desktop system from ubuntu/debian source packages without also having a working mono, and for every target platform, regardless of how easy it may be to remove from user systems after install. I think this is perhaps part of the reason gNewSense dropped Ubuntu.

    Roy Schestowitz Reply:

    According to their updated FAQ (“modified on December 23, 2009, at 09:42 PM”):

    13. Will gNewSense 3.0 be based on Debian instead of Ubuntu, and why?

    Yes, because:

    * Debian separates free and non-free software better, so it’s easier to make a fully free derivative out of it.
    * Debian supports the architectures we want to support (e.g. MIPS).
    * it suits our infrastructure better (easier development).

    dyfet Reply:

    The question I have is whether mono is now “required” to “build” Debian the way it now seems required to build Ubuntu. It is not clear to me if these mono build dependencies were introduced upstream in Debian, or downstream in Ubuntu, and I had not had the chance to review their history. From the Debian, and I would presume especially, the gNewSense, perspective, requiring non-free software to build free software is also a bad thing, whether it is actually in the distribution delivered or not. At bare minimum it is a nuisance.

    Roy Schestowitz Reply:

    There’s the Tomboy issue in the GNOME ‘stack’ (default).

    dyfet Reply:

    That again is a “runtime” issue. I am talking about “build” issues, in respect to what is required to produce binaries for building a complete distro. The build issue is far worse than the runtime problem, because you cannot remove mono unless you modify every package that now requires it as a build dependency.

    Roy Schestowitz Reply:

    Maybe it got monotised to be monetised.

    dyfet Reply:

    Well, the way I look at it, when I require “mono” to be built and running simply to be able to rebuild nautilus from it’s Debian (or Ubuntu) source package, something is fundamentally wrong.

    A user can remove Tomboy, of course, and replace it for example with gnote, or even get a pre-built distro that does not have mono apps at all. But I should not have to alter packages just to be able to build free software mono free. This is also a Mono issue I do not yet see being talked about…

    Roy Schestowitz Reply:

    Do you have any URLs on the subject? I didn’t realise it had gone so badly,

  5. dyfet said,

    February 12, 2010 at 2:54 pm


    No, not any url’s. But if we take debian/control from nautilus from Ubuntu for Lucid, for one example, it’s build-depends includes “liblaunchpad-integration-dev”. This is built from launchpad-integration, who’s build-depends includes:

    Maintainer: Sebastien Bacher
    Build-Depends: debhelper (>= 5),
    libbonoboui2-dev (>= 2.10.1-0ubuntu2),
    libgtk2.0-dev (>= 2.8.2),
    python-central (>= 0.5),
    cli-common-dev (>= 0.7),

    Hence one cannot build launchpad-integration without mono, and one cannot currently build Nautilus on Ubuntu without launchpad-integration support, at least without altering the package. But there are many other packages which similarly fail to build without Mono or that have what dependent packages which lead to mono build dependencies even though they do not “require” Mono to be installed to run. I have not evaluated Debian vs Ubuntu in this respect however as yet. But it should be looked into by “some” responsible journalist, the implications clearly more deeply considered, and then explained for the community at large, hint hint ;). What does it mean if the free software build process itself is being contaminated?

    Roy Schestowitz Reply:

    How reminiscent of the Winforms trap.

  6. clayclamp said,

    February 12, 2010 at 5:41 pm


    “I never attack developers” – Roy Schestowitz

    your_friend Reply:

    Explaining a corrupted build process is not an attack on a developer. If Gnome is really impossible to build without mono, it will be dropped the way mono has been or it will be forked. A thing can not be free and encumbered at the same time.

    Roy Schestowitz Reply:

    I don’t attack developers (be they Microsoft, Apple, or Mono coders). I think of them like I think of troops deployed in Iraq; they believe they do the right thing but rarely do they ask themselves why they were sent there and what for (“weapons of mass destruction” or something like that). Their impact on society at large is mostly negative because they choose to follow orders from megalomaniacs who abuse power.

    Coming from a longtime Internet troll (“clayclamp”), I am not surprised by this slur attempt.

What Else is New

  1. Public Protests by European Patent Office (EPO) Staff Weaken the EPO's Attacks on the Media

    Where things stand when it comes to the EPO's standoff against publications and why it's advisable for EPO staff to stage standoffs against their high-level management, which is behind a covert crackdown on independent media (while greasing up corporate media)

  2. Why the European Patent Office Cannot Really Sue and Why It's All -- More Likely Than Not -- Just SLAPP

    Legal analysis by various people explains why the EPO's attack dogs are all bark but no bite when it comes to threats against publishers

  3. How the EPO Twisted Defamation Law in a Failed Bid to Silence Techrights

    Using external legal firms (not the EPO's own lawyers), the EPO has been trying -- and failing -- to silence prominent critics

  4. East Texas and Its Cautionary Tale: Software Patents Lead to Patent Trolls

    Lessons from US media, which focuses on the dire situation in Texas courts, and how these relate to the practice of granting patents on software (the patent trolls' favourite weapon)

  5. The Latest EPO Spin: Staff Protesters Compared to 'Anti-Patent Campaigners' or 'Against UPC'

    Attempts to characterise legitimate complaints about the EPO's management as just an effort to derail the patent office itself, or even the patent system (spin courtesy of EPO and its media friends at IAM)

  6. The Serious Implication of Controversial FTI Consulting Contract: Every Press Article About EPO Could Have Been Paid for by EPO

    With nearly one million dollars dedicated in just one single year to reputation laundering, one can imagine that a lot of media coverage won't be objective, or just be synthetic EPO promotion, seeded by the EPO or its peripheral PR agents

  7. EPO: We Have Always Been at War With Europe (or Europeans)

    The European Patent Office (EPO) with its dubious attacks on free speech inside Europe further unveiled for the European public to see (as well as the international community, which oughtn't show any respect to the EPO, a de facto tyranny at the heart of Europe)

  8. What Everyone Needs to Know About the EPO's New War on Journalism

    A detailed list of facts or observations regarding the EPO's newfound love for censorship, even imposed on outside entities, including bloggers (part one of several to come)

  9. EPO Did Not Want to Take Down One Techrights Article, It Wanted to Take Down Many Articles Using Intimidation, SLAPPing, and Psychological Manipulation Late on a Friday Night

    Recalling the dirty tactics by which the European Patent Office sought to remove criticism of its dirty secret deals with large corporations, for whom it made available and was increasingly offering preferential treatment

  10. The European Private Office: What Was Once a Public Service is Now Crony Capitalism With Private Contractors

    The increasing privatisation of the European Patent Office (EPO), resembling what happens in the UK to the NHS, shows that the real goal is to crush the quality of the service and instead serve a bunch of rich and powerful interests, in defiance of the original goals of this well-funded (by taxpayers) organisation

  11. Microsoft Once Again Disregards People's Settings and Abuses Them, Again Pretends It's Just an Accident

    A conceited corporation, Microsoft, shows not only that it exploits its botnet to forcibly download massive binaries without consent but also that it vainly overrides people's privacy settings to spy on these people, sometimes with help from malicious hardware vendors such as Dell or Lenovo

  12. When the EPO Liaised With Capone (Literally) to Silence Bloggers, Delete Articles

    A dissection of the EPO's current media strategy, which involves not only funneling money into the media but also actively silencing opposing views

  13. Blogger Who Wrote About the EPO's Abuses Retires

    Bloggers' independent rebuttal capability against a media apparatus that is deep in the EPO's pocket is greatly diminished as Jeremy Phillips suddenly retires

  14. Leaked: EPO Award of €880,000 “in Order to Address the Media Presence of the EPO” (Reputation Laundering)

    The European Patent Office, a public body, wastes extravagant amounts of money on public relations (for 'damage control', like FIFA's) in an effort to undermine critics, not only among staff (internally) but also among the media (externally)

  15. Links 27/11/2015: KDE Plasma 5.5 Plans, Oracle Linux 7.2

    Links for the day

  16. Documents Needed: Contract or Information About EPO PR/Media Campaign to Mislead the World

    Rumour that the EPO spends almost as much as a million US dollars “with some selected press agencies to refurbish the image of the EPO”

  17. Guest Post: The EPO, EPC, Unitary Patent and the Money Issue

    Remarks on the Unitary Patent (UP) and the lesser-known aspects of the EPO and EPC, where the “real issue is money, about which very little is discussed in public...”

  18. Saving the Integrity of the European Patent Office (EPO)

    Some timely perspective on what's needed at the European Patent Office, which was detabilised by 'virtue' of making tyrants its official figureheads

  19. A Call for Bloggers and Journalists: Did EPO Intimidate and Threaten You Too? Please Speak Out.

    An effort to discover just how many people out there have been subjected to censorship and/or self-censorship by EPO aggression against the media

  20. European Patent Office (EPO) a “Kingdom Above the EU Countries, a Tyranny With ZERO Accountability”

    Criticism of the EPO's thuggish behaviour and endless efforts to crush dissenting voices by all means available, even when these means are in clear violation of international or European laws

  21. Links 26/11/2015: The $5 Raspberry Pi Zero, Running Sans Systemd Gets Hard

    Links for the day

  22. EPO Management Needs to Finally Recognise That It Itself is the Issue, Not the Staff or the Unions

    A showing of dissent even from the representatives whom the EPO tightly controls and why the latest union-busting goes a lot further than most people realise

  23. Even the EPO Central Staff Committee is Unhappy With EPO Management

    The questions asked by the Central Staff Committee shared for the public to see that not only a single union is concerned about the management's behaviour

  24. The Broken Window Economics of Patent Trolls Are Already Coming to Europe

    The plague which is widely known as patent trolls (non-practicing entities that prey on practicing companies) is being spread to Europe, owing in part to misguided policies and patent maximalists

  25. Debunking the EPO's Latest Marketing Nonsense From Les Échos and More on Benoît Battistelli's Nastygram to French Politician

    Our detailed remarks about French brainwash from the EPO's media partner (with Benoît Battistelli extensively quoted) and the concerns increasingly raised by French politicians, who urge for national or even continental intervention

  26. The Sun King Delusion: The Views of Techrights Are Just a Mirror of EPO Staff Unions

    Tackling some emerging spin we have seen coming from Battistelli's private letters -- spin which strives to project the views of Techrights onto staff unions and why it's very hypocritical a form of spin

  27. Links 25/11/2015: Webconverger 33.1, Netrunner 17 Released

    Links for the day

  28. United They Stand: FFPE-EPO Supports Suspended Staff Representatives From SUEPO

    An obscure union from the Dutch side of things at the EPO is expressing support for the suspended colleagues from SUEPO (more German than Dutch)

  29. Censoring WIPR Article About Censorship by EPO

    A testament to how terrified journalists have become when it comes to EPO coverage, to the point of deleting entire paragraphs

  30. Censorship at the EPO Escalates: Now We Have Threats to Sue Publishers

    Having already blocked Techrights, the EPO's management proceeds to further suppressions of speech, impeding its staff's access to independently-distributed information (neither ordinary staff nor management)


RSS 64x64RSS Feed: subscribe to the RSS feed for regular updates

Home iconSite Wiki: You can improve this site by helping the extension of the site's content

Home iconSite Home: Background about the site and some key features in the front page

Chat iconIRC Channel: Come and chat with us in real time


Recent Posts