Microsoft-esque and Microsoft-funded/inspired software (see Wiki pages on Mono and Moonlight) continues to fragment and separate the community of Free software users. Recently we saw hostility towards GNU in GNOME [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7]. It came from the same guy who had started a banner meme to protest against Stallman's stance on Mono.
"I [imagine] Microsoft (Nasdaq: MSFT) is very pleased with this new direction with Gnome," wrote Stumbles on Slashdot, for example. "I predict in 5 years, perhaps less, Microsoft will have maneuvered these short sighted individuals to accepting Microsoft to buy Gnome."
There is still a strong thread of thought at Microsoft that imagines open source is purely the domain of solitary programmers of private means. This is yet another "covenant" from them that gives no assurance whatsoever to the average FOSS developer. Microsoft desperately needs a clueful open source leader to fix this stuff.
Moonlight 2 sounds good but they still need the licensed codecs.
"Covenant" appears to be a marketing term that means:
"If you only do what we say we'll let you do with our stuff, we think we'll let you use it. For now, anyways. But we can still take it all back if we happen to change our mind."
This isn't a "covenant"; it's an advert for a "free trial offer".
But de Icaza explained to eWEEK that this model was not so "open-source-y." Yet, he assured readers that "Microsoft's intention was to expand the reach of Silverlight, but the original covenant was not a good cultural fit." And, "The new patent covenant ensures that other third-party distributions can distribute Moonlight without their users fearing ... getting sued over patent infringement by Microsoft," he said.
rysiek writes "A few days ago, Miguel de Icaza wrote on his blog that the whole of MonoDevelop is now 'free' of GPL-licensed code. 'MonoDevelop code is now LGPLv2 and MIT X11 licensed. We have removed all of the GPL code, allowing addins to use Apache, MS-PL code as well as allowing proprietary add-ins to be used with MonoDevelop (like RemObject's Oxygene).'"
To say that Microsoft and Novell have a muddy history when it comes to open-source projects and the GPL would be an understatement. Things were looking up, with the release of the open-source implementation of Silverlight, Moonlight 2, last week, but today things took a turn for the worse: Novell has just cut all the open source code from MonoDevelop.
Novell stacks Linux and Mono for mainframes
[..]
Novell doesn't just want mainframe shops to put SLES 11 on their boxes and run Linux workloads, it wants them to take the commercially supported Mono clone of the .NET runtime environment and use that to move Windows workloads over to mainframe boxes. So Novell's SUSE Linux Enterprise Consolidation Suite (SLECS) bundles roll Linux and Mono software together and provide a single support package for the stack.
Along with Mono, I see Ubuntu including this on the live CD as well. Microsoft writes such good software and has such excellent standards that we should all embrace whatever Microsoft wants. Besides they have never done anything that would harm any potential competitor. So, people in charge of what gets included in Ubuntu, bring it on.
Microsoft just doesn't change. No matter what they say.
As always the best course is to avoid them. There is no longer any real need to use any of their technology. You may try to convince yourself otherwise, but you are just wasting your time. Rather, look forward and embrace the new world that is before you.
Subject: And let's not forget the Microsoft trolls..
Bill Gates and Nathan Myhrvold own companies that buy many patents. They are not bound by any Microsoft covenants. Both of these individuals serve their interests today by working to Microsoft's benefit.
And note the covenant doesn't apply to old versions. This pressures existing users to stay on the treadmill investing in Microsoft standards over and over to avoid patent problems from Microsoft.
I've read the analyses of the most recent promise, and it's not good enough. I don't care how "nifty" people think this new software is, because with that license/promise I'm never going to even look at it.
P.S.: Miguel was, apparently, recently so proud of removing "all GPL components" from MonoDevelop. Makes me quite glad I removed the installation as soon as I noticed it...and all other mono components with it.
Maybe I should say "good riddance" to him... but that's not ok. What is better is that Miguel does what he wants and Linux folks do whatever they want. If that means parting ways, I see it as a good thing for both parties. I really should say to Miguel "goodbye". And "thanks for all the fish". What if Novell starts selling some kind of *BSD? Maybe they can start selling something without the Linux kernel?
Comments
Bertrand
2009-12-26 21:58:41
How is it "not good" that workloads (probably existing custom enterprise apps) are moved from Windows servers to mainframe servers running Linux ?
Roy Schestowitz
2009-12-26 22:17:54
To use an analogy, it's like the promise that invading Iraq will improve security; in reality, it has exactly the opposite effect.
Bertrand
2009-12-27 09:53:17
Roy Schestowitz
2009-12-27 10:08:39
NotZed
2009-12-28 00:11:08
I just setup a machine for my mum, and although I initially considered GNOME because of it's user simplicity I decided against it - it's so complex internally and there's too much that can go wrong. It is simply too high a risk.
And after installing xfce4 (it's a fairly old machine) I was surprised at how much faster it really is, and about the only feature I need a `desktop environment' for - automatically mounting USB drives and CD's, works even better, since it doesn't bug you with unnecessary prompts. Also dumped PulseAudio for OSS4, and bob's your uncle, no more sound skipping either.
Roy Schestowitz
2009-12-28 01:58:04