Mono “..and still nothing on whether WinForms is legally safe to use.”
- Dr. Roy Schestowitz
- 2008-05-14 11:33:23 UTC
- Modified: 2008-05-14 13:23:16 UTC
Says a voice in Slashdot
Novell
et al released a complete implementation of WinForms and the
Slashdot crowd reacts. The Mono/.NET advocates respond in the same typical way that reminds me of Richard Stallman's talk where he says that people are taught to judge a program by criteria like "How powerful is it?" Not things like "how does it affect my freedom?" (as a user or developer)
Have a look at this
new comment from Free Software Daily, which says that "
better development methods are meaningless without being able to own the software.
"Without the ownership of the software, you will continue to be at the developers/corporate overlord's mercy."
In this case there are two overloads. One is Microsoft which owns software patents and the other is Novell, which
has copyrights.
⬆
Comments
AlexH
2008-05-14 12:09:45
"For people who need full compatibility with the Windows platform, Mono's strategy for dealing with any potential issues that might arise with ASP.NET, ADO.NET or Windows.Forms is: (1) work around the patent by using a different implementation technique that retains the API, but changes the mechanism; if that is not possible, we would (2) remove the pieces of code that were covered by those patents, and also (3) find prior art that would render the patent useless."
-- http://www.mono-project.com/FAQ:_Licensing#Patents
GNU are also working hard on getting Windows Forms working; take this latest news:
"April 04-15-2008: Libjit runs Windows.Forms Applications native on X86-64 !"
-- http://www.dotgnu.org/
The comments about copyright are meaningless. All free software has copyright owners.
Roy Schestowitz
2008-05-14 12:21:32
Why would a person wish to enter Mono as a development platform as opposed to a legacy/compatibility thing? That's the question we ask. We see Novell developing using Mono (developing a reliance on Microsoft). Mainsoft, for instance, is more about migrations.
At the end of the day, Novell seems to be arriving from Microsoft's side to develop GNU/Linux the 'Microsoft way'. That's just the problem. Let me know when GNU emacs gets rewritten in C# and signs a patent deal with Microsoft.
AlexH
2008-05-14 12:27:59
"Just like it's the goal of the GNU project to create a complete operating system that makes it completely unnecessary to use a non-free operating system like e.g. Microsoft Windows, it's the goal of the DotGNU project to be a complete competitor to Microsoft's ".Net initiative".
"The DotGNU project will compete with Microsoft for end-users, business customers and developers."
-- http://www.dotgnu.org/danger.html , my emphasis
This isn't a "legacy/compatibility" thing - they want developers, for example, so they do see it as a development platform. They're actively trying to improve the .net platform with decentralized services, for example.
So, not so irrelevant.
akf
2008-05-14 20:25:02
Niklas (sic!) Koswinkle
2008-05-14 22:27:36
So stop acting like a headless chicken.
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.
Dan O'Brian
2008-05-15 02:36:14
If that's not enough, DotGNU also implements Windows.Forms.
If that's not enough, Windows.Forms is only meant for porting, not for writing new applications on Linux (that's what Gtk# is for).