Comments

• mike

  2009-01-21 23:11:00

  Umm Roy, isn't that exactly what you want?
  
  A distro has to generally build things themselves and tweak it to suit the system. Particularly when there's some fundamental differences between them. If no other distro is putting in the effort, isn't that - on the face of it - a good sign?
  
  Not that it really means much at this stage - not until it is 'mature' at least.
  
  And 'problematic' here clearly means 'difficult', not 'illegal' - even if it is.

• Roy Schestowitz

  2009-01-21 23:19:00

  Here's a new post that explains it decently.

• Dan O'Brian

  2009-01-21 23:48:11

  Too bad this quote is woefully inaccurate.
  
  The Moonlight xpi installed and worked fine for me on my Ubuntu 8.10 desktop as well as a friend's Fedora system (I think he's on 9).
  
  Which system did this guy try to install it on where it was "problematic"? A 10-year-old distro?

• Ian

  2009-01-21 23:54:30

  That link has nothing to do with the quote you have in the original post. What does one have to do with the other?

• Michael

  2009-01-22 02:30:06

  Yeah i'm with Ian - what does it have to do with it, other than background to why many think mono is bad? That presumably isn't what Peter was saying, just that it was 'difficult'.
  
  "Too bad this quote is woefully inaccurate."
  
  Do you mean the statement in the quote? Presumably the quote is accurate, if that is what Peter wrote. As to the statement, it's just an opinion, one, or even a million examples otherwise don't make the telling of his experience `inaccurate'.

• Roy Schestowitz

  2009-01-22 02:32:58

  Miguel has already 'hunted down' this quote, to which he replied only to be met with more disagreement.

• Ian

  2009-01-22 03:02:22

  Miguel could have "hunted" the quote, tied it to a stick, shoved an apple in its mouth and rotated it over a fire. What does one quote have to do with the article you linked?

• Roy Schestowitz

  2009-01-22 03:23:58

  You'd know if you had seen the thread where it is mentioned as well.

• Dan O'Brian

  2009-01-22 03:26:23

  LOL, Roy, Miguel's response to you on COLA was not "met with more disagreement". Your moronic friends attacked him saying he was right about how easy it was to install Moonlight, but countered that they found Mono hard to install, when Mono isn't even needed for Moonlight (but they clearly were trying to assert that Moonlight required Mono).

• Roy Schestowitz

  2009-01-22 03:28:21

  LOL, Roy, Miguel’s response to you on COLA

  
  
  He did not respond to me.

• Dan O'Brian

  2009-01-22 03:30:24

  The response you were referring to, obviously.

• Dan O'Brian

  2009-01-22 03:32:38

  Your friends being incompetent Linux users who are incapable of figuring out how to use apt-get or the rpm equivalent don't make Mono hard to install either, it just makes your friends incompetent.

• Roy Schestowitz

  2009-01-22 03:33:20

  Which friends?

• Dan O'Brian

  2009-01-22 03:35:04

  Your COLA groupies.
  
  I also notice you managed to misrepresent what I said when you tried to claim I said something which I never did (e.g.. you tried to claim I said that Mono or Moonlight has patent problems which II never said).
  
  You're a fucking douchebag.

• Ian

  2009-01-22 03:39:04

  You’d know if you had seen the thread where it is mentioned as well.
  
  So, it's an insider thing then? ;)

• Dan O'Brian

  2009-01-22 03:49:53

  Ian: Google for comp.os.linux.advocacy + "Schestowitz wrong again"
  
  

  
  
  Peter Köhlmann Jan 21, 5:12 pm Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy From: Peter Köhlmann Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 23:12:44 +0100 Local: Wed, Jan 21 2009 5:12 pm Subject: Re: Schestowitz wrong again Reply | Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author
  
  Miguel de Icaza wrote: > Hello,
  
  >> And he is right.Moonlight is problematic to install on anything >> besidesSuSE/Novell. On those install is dead easy
  
  > I suspect you did not even try to install it, did you?
  
  I have installed it. Runs fine so far
  
  > Moonlight is installed as Firefox plugin and we test this on all sorts > of Unix systems (Debian, Ubuntu, Fedora and SUSE) and it works like > this:
  
  > 1. Click on download from www.go-mono.com/download (we auto-detect > your platform, so you do not need to do anything). > 2. Click "Install" when you are prompted for install or cancel > 3. Restart the browser.
  
  > The experience is *identical* for all the systems.
  
  > Miguel.
  
  Right. For *Moonlight* it is. Now tell us all about the many default installations for Mono, needed to run it. SuSE/Novell offer it by default. Most others don't

  
  
  Too bad that Peter Köhlmann wasn't smart enough to figure out that Moonlight does not depend on Mono and therefor his entire argument saying that "Moonlight is problematic to install" is total horse shit.

• Dan O'Brian

  2009-01-22 03:51:14

  This makes poor Peter's quote an obvious troll since he OBVIOUSLY didn't try installing Moonlight on ANY system, because if he had, he would have seen that Moonlight Just Worked for him, without needing to install Mono.

• Dan O'Brian

  2009-01-22 03:52:33

  Michael: I'm sure that now you see why Peter's quote was woefully inaccurate? ;-)
  
  Roy and his troll friends on COLA simply make shit up and then publish it as fact.

• Roy Bixler

  2009-01-22 14:23:20

  Does this "easy-to-install" Moonlight included patented Microsoft CODECs?

• Roy Schestowitz

  2009-01-22 15:25:52

  The assumption at the Mono/Moonlight/Novell club is that we should trust Microsoft, never mind their everyday attacks on Linux.