EARLIER today we wrote about Microsoft betraying those who adhered to its APIs, including Mono/Moonlight boosters. The biggest Microsoft boosters at Novell created a poorly-funded startup called "Xamarin" [1, 2, 3]. It is almost nowhere in sight*, except for the 'Microsoft press' (advertising) and other Microsoft-boosting 'news' sites (pushing Microsoft promotion as 'news'). Mono is clearly beneficial to Microsoft, but it is good for nothing else. Its CEO is a former Microsoft employee, as we noted before. Part of the funding comes from a Microsoft MVP. Techrights wishes to draw attention to the following new articles:
As .NET's sun sets, its open-source counterpart Mono may be fading on Linux, too.
Just after Attachmate's takeover of Novell and just before it did the breaking of that company into two divisions, SUSE selling Linux and Novell selling everything else, Attachmate told the people working on the open source Mono project they were no longer needed at the company. But it is a lot harder to kill an open source project than taking away techie paychecks, and a new project has sprung up to carry on the Mono work.
Comments
Will
2011-06-08 05:26:30
Dr. Roy Schestowitz
2011-06-08 06:08:59
Will
2011-06-08 13:28:57
Dr. Roy Schestowitz
2011-06-08 14:21:43
NotZed
2011-06-09 03:05:56
Here 'mono' means a wheelie, or at least did when I grew up.
Needs Sunlight
2011-06-08 07:04:13
Dr. Roy Schestowitz
2011-06-08 07:23:17
Needs Sunlight
2011-06-08 08:30:11
Dr. Roy Schestowitz
2011-06-08 14:23:03
Needs Sunlight
2011-06-08 16:13:50
Dr. Roy Schestowitz
2011-06-09 09:29:48
twitter
2011-06-08 20:47:38
Slashdot provides some stories. Google search order is generally gamed towards positive and fluff articles but Slashdot was relatively straightforward at the time. Things are always worse in Windows land than gnu/linux users can imagine because Microsoft's spin machine is effective. Here is a small list of things goofed up and why/how:
Firewire performance degraded - article links to Microsoft page that states, "This article applies to a different operating system than the one you are using. Article content that may not be relevant to you is disabled." The fix is a patch and tedious registry editing. Microsoft promoted the technically inferior USB over Firewire, probably to harm Apple. An article complaining of widespread breakage. Broken networking is listed specifically, comments are spammed. "Business Programs slowed down. Microsoft boosters claimed the 22% performance hit was for security and they still do but what can you expect from a company that called Vista "the most secure OS ever"? SP2 was not more secure, had a terrible performance hit due to a buggy "processor driver" (probably ACPI "degrade" problem later complained about by Intel people), and Microsoft blamed malware for their problems. In 2005 Microsoft made it impossible to run XP without SP2 and also published a partial list of software that would be broken.
There you go. Outside of the last link, I saw no specifics.
Microsoft's jerk around is more than breaking user's applications. They often break their own code and the higher up in the Microsoft abstraction layer you get, the worse off you are. Windows 95 api remained relatively stable through at least 2002. Microsoft's Foundation Class was not so stable, ever. Visual Basic broke things between every release, so coders had to fix everything all the time. I can only imagine how miserable .NET and Silverblight users are. Part of Microsoft's control of mental input is to make their dependents so busy keeping up with changes that they never have time to consider fundamental change, like choice of OS.
Dr. Roy Schestowitz
2011-06-09 09:30:20