Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Miguel Plans Silverlight on Mono & Linux by Years End

Posted by CmdrTaco on Thu May 03, 2007 04:41 PM
from the how-does-miguel-get-to-be-a-vp dept.
El Lobo writes "The Mono open-source project will create a Linux version of Silverlight by the end of year, said Miguel de Icaza, a Novell vice president and head of Mono. Asked about plans for Linux, Microsoft executives have been non-committal, saying that it will depend on demand. But de Icaza, who is attending Mix, was able to commit without hesitating."
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • ItsATrap! (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 03 2007, @04:42PM (#18979891)
    The way I see it, only Novell has a license to be releasing a Mono/Silverlight plugin with Linux. Anyone else who jumps on the bandwagon might get a nasty call from Microsoft Legal demanding that they pay up the $650 extortion fee. Or has Miguel conveniently forgotten that the XAML/WPF framework is Microsoft's proprietary technology? (For which I'm sure they have many patents and trademarks.)

    Tag: itsatrap
    • I don't get it. That just means that if you want it, you just have to get it from Novell. Or Microsoft. I mean, if Novell has the license to distribute it, and they distribute it, then there should be no real issue. While I don't like Quicksilver (I trust MS less than Adobe, personally), I don't think Linux support will dramatically affect adoption, so this is at best a neutral move (possibly a positive one).
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        this only works if your product only has an expected lifespan of 3 or 5 years. Basically the life of the MSFT / Novell license. Not worth it IMO.

        LoB
  • by Breakfast Pants (323698) on Thursday May 03 2007, @04:45PM (#18979945) Journal
    when you don't have any customers depending on it.
  • by miguel (7116) on Thursday May 03 2007, @04:48PM (#18979991) Homepage
    Sebastien Pouliot suggested we call it "Moonlight" (anagram on Mono).

    And I was thinking Silver-light in another language, bonus points if the script is good looking.

    For instance, in Arabic it would be fad-da daw' ( ) which looks cool on a large font(thanks to Hisham Bardam for the translation) although it does not roll easily. We might need some shortening.

    Miguel.
    • by NaCh0 (6124) on Thursday May 03 2007, @05:04PM (#18980251)
      You know Miguel, I was thinking the same thing. Software names on linux are not obscure enough. Picking a name that can't even be written in latin characters would be the pinnacle of l337ness. Faddadaw' will conquer the market for sure.

    • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 03 2007, @05:34PM (#18980669)
      How about keeping the "mono" in there. You could call it "Monopolight" maybe.

    • How about "monochrome" instead of silverlight. (ie. whitelight versus single frequency). Of course those opposed to it might call it silverblight.

      Other possibilities:

      flash-light
      sliver-lux
      silver-tux
      silvix
      sliver
      Gold-light

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      Now...

      Why don't you anticipate Microsoft moves, and include on your implementation of Silverlight some features that could be achived only with Mono? I'm serious, make it so appealing, so fantastic that sites using YOUR version will be much easier to develop, and much easier to deploy.

      Add crazy things, like bindings to SDL, with accelerated 3D graphics where avaliable... so your plugin will be able to run on Linux, MacOSX and ... WinXP!

      I mean... why play catch-up when you could be ahead of the game?
        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          Miguel, please. I believe you have the sincerest intensions in making Microsofts technology run on Linux (.Net). Mono is a great piece of technology - Banshee would not be without it.

          However, i get the feeling like youre doing the devils work for Microsoft - youre spreading their technology when the market doesnt want it. What youre basically doing is helping the "bait and switch" strategy to work - and they get it for free (by making the community do it for them). Silverlight and the other runtime gizm
          • Linux is, and should be, so much more than a poor man's clone of either of these systems. The people who use Linux do so because they like it, not because it's free. If it were just about price any of us could have a "free" copy of windows too.

            ...
            PS We all hate gnome, too. If we wanted the worst of mac combined with the worst of windows we'd just run vista!
            Thing is, we don't all hate GNOME. GNOME has some very innovative features, such as Beagle and the new GNOME File Chooser dialog, which make it ideal for some kinds of users. I personally prefer KDE for its superior customizability, but GNOME is by no means worthless. In the same way, I think that Mono has some very innovative features that are unique to it: Mono.Addins [mono-project.com] comes quickly to mind. Even outside of Mono, the Nemerle language [nemerle.org] is another great open-source addition to the .NET framework. The Gtk# engine is one of the most easy to use and powerful GUI frameworks yet made, and is only possible due to Mono. In short, please don't claim to represent all of Linux userdom when you spout off your hatred of GNOME and Mono. You don't.
            • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

              FWIW, I like Gnome, or at least, I like GTK; for whatever reason, GTK-based apps just feel better and nicer and cleaner on average than Qt-based apps. I think Gnome/GTK has some really great solid technology and design behind it.

              OTOH, I don't really like many aspects of the Gnome project -- mainly their apparent discounting of any users except windows mouth-breather types when making UI decisions (I don't think it's asking too much, just the occasional nod to other audiences, the occasional configuration t
          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            With all due respect, there is a world of difference between "Can't do it because it's not allowed" and "Can't do it because it's not able to be done".

            Having a re-implementation means you can't run Silverlight on Linux in the same way that I can't burn you a free copy of Windows.

            The end result of all this re-implementing will be that countries that respect the concept of IP will become increasingly less competitive on the world stage than countries that do not until they are eventually marginalized by their
      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        Hello,

        IronPython provides a direct bridge to communicate with .NET, so it is a more natural choice for .NET developers to use IronPython. Also IronPython is being used as a test-bed (together with new implementations of Javascript, Ruby and Visual Basic) for the Dynamic Language Runtime.

        Part of the realization is that web developers use dynamic languages, and they are doing an effort to make sure that there is good support in the platform (in particular Silverlight, a technology targeted to the web develo
  • Mono.. (Score:3, Funny)

    by Mockylock (1087585) on Thursday May 03 2007, @04:52PM (#18980065) Homepage
    "mono" Great name. Nothing like naming a project after a virus known for disabling whole cheerleading squads in a single bound.
      • Re:Mono.. (Score:5, Funny)

        by aristotle-dude (626586) on Thursday May 03 2007, @05:55PM (#18981009)

        If as a geek (other than a medical doctor) that's the first thing that comes to your mind when you hear the word "mono", then you need to seek some counseling.
        If the first thing that comes mind for you when someone mentions "mono" is some obscure open source implementation of the .NET CLR, then you need to seek some counselling.
  • by Rik Sweeney (471717) on Thursday May 03 2007, @04:54PM (#18980103) Homepage
    You've clearly got a lot of talent, so why are you wasting your time making Open Source versions of all of Microsoft's products? All you're effectively doing is giving Microsoft the foothold in Linux that they need.

    There are plenty of Linux apps out there that could do with your skills and that don't infringe on Microsoft's patents. Why not write a program that'll do something with that number that everyone's been talking about recently. I can't remember what it is, but I'll find it in a moment...
    • by miguel (7116) on Thursday May 03 2007, @05:21PM (#18980493) Homepage
      You've clearly got a lot of talent, so why are you wasting your time making Open Source versions of all of Microsoft's products? All you're effectively doing is giving Microsoft the foothold in Linux that they need.


      Well, because I believe that Siverlight will become an important component in future applications. The majority of people will probably be happy to spice up their web applications with a little silverlight as it will run on Windows and MacOS.

      But if there is no Silverlight for Linux, we will be prevented from getting access to content and applications that will be available.

      So we got a couple of strategies dealing with this:

      (a) the ostrich strategy also known as the "i-cant-hear-you" strategy: pretend that Silverlight does not exist and hope that by ignoring it, it will go away and vanish.

      (b) Hope that nobody adopts it. I seriously doubt that Silverlight will not be adopted, in particular the CLR version shows a lot of promise.

      (c) Be proactive and implement it ourselves: we got most of the hard bits of the technology already (a CLR, a JIT, the GC, the core class libraries, even up to some parts of LINQ).

      Considering that we are very familiar with the technology, we can do something along the lines of (c). You can feel free to pursue avenues (a) and (b).

      In fact, you can ignore Mono completely, nobody is forcing you to use it; Nobody is asking you to contribute to the effort, and nobody is in any position to force you to stop using whatever other technology happens to be your favorite one.

      I loved the Silverlight announcement, it is a way of bringing my favorite platform to the web (the CLR and now the DLR) and it seems like a natural fit and extension to what Mono does.

      There are plenty of Linux apps out there that could do with your skills and that don't infringe on Microsoft's patents. Why not write a program that'll do something with that number that everyone's been talking about recently. I can't remember what it is, but I'll find it in a moment...


      And why exactly would I care about your pet project?
      • by DragonWriter (970822) on Thursday May 03 2007, @05:57PM (#18981039)

        So we got a couple of strategies dealing with this:

        (a) the ostrich strategy also known as the "i-cant-hear-you" strategy: pretend that Silverlight does not exist and hope that by ignoring it, it will go away and vanish.

        (b) Hope that nobody adopts it. I seriously doubt that Silverlight will not be adopted, in particular the CLR version shows a lot of promise.

        (c) Be proactive and implement it ourselves: we got most of the hard bits of the technology already (a CLR, a JIT, the GC, the core class libraries, even up to some parts of LINQ).


        I think you left out:

        (d) come up with something better that can be made cross-platform from the get-go that gives people a compelling reason to use it instead of Silverlight, rather than permanently following along a few steps behind Microsoft.

      • by oGMo (379) on Thursday May 03 2007, @06:03PM (#18981141)

        You've clearly got a lot of talent [...]

        Making poor imitations of crappy ideas isn't clear indication of talent; quite the opposite, in fact.

        Well, because I believe that Siverlight will become an important component in future applications. The majority of people will probably be happy to spice up their web applications with a little silverlight as it will run on Windows and MacOS.

        You forgot "want" before "believe", and we all know the result of introducing yet another nonstandard web extension is. I mean, it's worked so well for Microsoft in the past: proprietary JavaScript extensions, HTML extensions, ActiveX. It's just brought the web together into a nice, unified platform, so you never have to worry about how every different browser handles your website. Oh wait, no it hasn't: just the opposite.

        But if there is no Silverlight for Linux, we will be prevented from getting access to content and applications that will be available. So we got a couple of strategies dealing with this:

        How about: d) Proactively discourage its use; build, distribute, and support and alternative framework that is not under the control of a corporation known for breaking compatibility regularly to discourage competition. Get this into Firefox and build an IE plugin to support it.

        In fact, you can ignore Mono completely, nobody is forcing you to use it [...] I loved the Silverlight announcement, it is a way of bringing my favorite platform to the web (the CLR and now the DLR) and it seems like a natural fit and extension to what Mono does. [...] And why exactly would I care about your pet project?

        I think you just asked the question that so many others are asking about Mono.

      • I loved the Silverlight announcement, it is a way of bringing my favorite platform to the web (the CLR and now the DLR)

        We know you love the CLR... unfortunately, it's not an open system like the UNIX programming environment and so it's not really well liked in the open source world. We're not happy with the limitations of the Windows programming environment, and we find the large and complex APIs beloved of the Windows developers a throwback to the old pre-UNIX mainframe era, so we expect Silverlight to be the same kind of Windows wart on the side of UNIX. If we're mistaken, if Mono can be integrated well into the UNIX world, we'd love to see you prove us wrong by doing it.

        But you don't seem to like the UNIX environment, so I guess you won't be doing anything along those lines...

        Well, because I believe that Siverlight will become an important component in future applications. The majority of people will probably be happy to spice up their web applications with a little silverlight as it will run on Windows and MacOS.

        ActiveX has failed to make Dot-NET take off in the web application world. Why do you think that Silverlight will do any better?
      • Miguel says...

        Well, because I believe that Siverlight will become an important component in future applications. The majority of people will probably be happy to spice up their web applications with a little silverlight as it will run on Windows and MacOS.

        I'd like to remind everyone that just a few years ago, Miguel was saying the same thing about XAML. [tirania.org] "XAML/Avalon applications will be written, and people will consume them. The worst bit: people will expect their desktop to be able to access these "rich

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)


          Invent something better and open source it rather than play catch up and gamble on the evil empire playing nice.

          Seriously, rather than copy them, try being creative for a change and invent something better.

          The problem is that some of us want to have access to content that will be produced with Silverlight, inventing a better system will not make the Silverlight content magically be transformed or accessible to us.

          Building a "player" for Silverlight is also orders of magnitude simpler than building the com

          • Not buying it (Score:4, Insightful)

            by geek (5680) on Thursday May 03 2007, @05:55PM (#18980997)
            The problem with your argument is that no one has even tried to make something better. You jump on the Microsoft bandwagon every single time. I miss the Miguel from the Gnome project. This new Miguel is just a Microsoft sellout. Silverlight hasnt even begun to take root, not by a long shot, and yet here you are already working hard to make sure it does.

            Microsoft is not unbeatable. They have failed at everything they've tried over the last 5 years, whether it's Vista, IE7 or Zune. Making the stupid assumption that Silverlight is the next greatest thing is why people have lost respect for you.
            • Re:Not buying it (Score:5, Informative)

              by miguel (7116) on Thursday May 03 2007, @07:32PM (#18982125) Homepage


              The problem with your argument is that no one has even tried to make something better. You jump on the Microsoft bandwagon every single time.


              People have created tons of fantastic development platforms, are you kidding me?

              I can name a few:

              * The whole python universe.
              * The Javascript/Ajax revolution in all of its forms and shapes.
              * Smalltalk/Squeak
              * Java/Swing
              * Java/SWT and the Eclipse platform
              * Ruby on Rails
              * Pylons/Dojo/TurboGears
              * Flash

              Aa for jumping into Silverlight, the explanation is very simple: it has a high resonance with what we do: it is an incremental upgrade to the Mono platform.

              We work on Mono, and on many technologies based on the CLR (both for .NET and Mono-unique), and this seems like a natural next step.


              I miss the Miguel from the Gnome project. This new Miguel is just a Microsoft sellout.


              Brother, am sorry I have shattered your childhood dreams. You are going to find yourself a new role model to fight the system and stick it to the man [wikipedia.org].


              Silverlight hasnt even begun to take root, not by a long shot, and yet here you are already working hard to make sure it does.


              If you think that /us/ supporting Silverlight is really what will tilt the balance in the Flash/Silverlight/Ajax universe you are giving us way more credit than we deserve. You might want to revisit your assumptions.


              Microsoft is not unbeatable. They have failed at everything they've tried over the last 5 years, whether it's Vista, IE7 or Zune. Making the stupid assumption that Silverlight is the next greatest thing is why people have lost respect for you.


              From reading this dialog, I get the feeling that fear and hatred have overtaken you. I can appreciate Silverlight and at the same time dislike Windows, I know that this might cause a bit of cognitive dissonance, but my evaluation of technology is not binary. I think Silverlight is a very nice use of the CLR, resonates with our work, and is relatively simple to implement.

              My recommendation: "The Art of Possibility" from Benjamin Zander, one of my favorite books. Either that, or going on meds.

              Miguel.

              • Re:Not buying it (Score:4, Insightful)

                by geek (5680) on Thursday May 03 2007, @08:08PM (#18982493)
                Ah yes. The "get on meds" retort. That's usually where people go when they lose the argument. You've obviously spent too much time on usenet. By all means though, I'm an easy target, just a nameless person on slashdot. It doesn't change what you're doing.

                Any respect I had for you as a software developer is gone. Good luck though, sounds like you will need it.
          • Legal options (Score:5, Insightful)

            by overshoot (39700) on Thursday May 03 2007, @06:10PM (#18981237)

            The problem is that some of us want to have access to content that will be produced with Silverlight, inventing a better system will not make the Silverlight content magically be transformed or accessible to us.
            Well, guess what: US law gives a 20-year monopoly on access to that content to Microsoft. If you want access to that content, get a Microsoft system and have at it.
          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            Building a "player" for Silverlight is also orders of magnitude simpler than building the complete ecosystem: the engine, the development tools, the designer tools and the partnerships.

            You are proposing to make Linux a second-class citizen on this future Web. Today, the Internet is created and operated, at least in part, on Linux systems. You are saying that we will be able to use Silverlight application on Linux, but we won't be able to create or serve those applications, and we certainly won't be able

          • Option E (Score:5, Insightful)

            by argent (18001) <peter.slashdot@2006@taronga@com> on Thursday May 03 2007, @07:16PM (#18981969) Homepage Journal
            The problem is that some of us want to have access to content that will be produced with Silverlight

            And some of us don't want there to be lots of content produced with Silverlight. It's bad enough that so much of the content on the web is tied up in little obfuscated applets in Java and Flash as it is. Seriously, there's pretty much only three things these are used for: advertising, low-quality DRM, and toys and games. Exceptions like the Java applets at Greg Egan's site are far and few between, and Google has shown us with Maps and Gmail that you don't *need* these plugins to produce rich content.

            Thank goodness Microsoft's first try failed, and we don't have ActiveX and its security problems on Mac and Linux.

            We don't need a better Silverlight or a better Flash. We need better tools inside the framework that we already have.
        • Re:Option D (Score:5, Insightful)

          by FooBarWidget (556006) on Thursday May 03 2007, @05:55PM (#18981003)
          "Seriously, rather than copy them, try being creative for a change and invent something better."
          Oh, you mean this? [mono-project.com] GTK+ is a very good toolkit (the best one, as far as I'm concerned). And GTK is available on Mono. I used it, it's good - VERY good, very easy to use. As far as I'm concerned, this is much, much better than Windows.Forms.

          Look around you. There are tons of high-quality non-MS open source projects that run on Mono. You seem to be thinking that copying the Microsoft runtime library is all that Mono does. That's far from the truth.
          C# is a good language. I don't care whether MS made it or the Martians - it's good, there is an open source implementation, there are open source libraries, so I will use it.
        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          Problem is, that there are solutions which are more worthwile to push into existence than playing catchup with microsoft with a uncertain future, there are alternatives to silverlight, Microsoft is very late to the game, projects worthwile would be:

          a) improve the svg situation now that Adobe has dropped the ball, on windows, after all silverlight is mainly a flash clone with .net added as backend tech

          b) try to give a helping hand to one of the projects why try to implement a really opensource flash tech or
        • I am somewhat sad to see that many of our fellow Slashdotters have chosen the head-in-sand option, rather than recognizing the place that .NET and Silverlight will most likely play in the IT infrastructure of tomorrow. Whether I may like it or not, Microsoft is a major player, and can push new frameworks into prominence easily.

          A couple of decades ago that would have read "I am somewhat sad to see that many of our fellow developers have chosen to re-implement UNIX, rather than recognizing the place that Wind
  • by overshoot (39700) on Thursday May 03 2007, @05:05PM (#18980263)
    However, since I don't have your "special friend" relationship with Steve Ballmer and he has a much larger budget for lawyers, I'll pass.

    Call us again in a few years when the patents (whichever they are) have expired. Say, about 2026.

    • by HRbnjR (12398) <chris@hubick.com> on Thursday May 03 2007, @06:30PM (#18981469) Homepage
      That's pretty much just what I thought when I heard the "Icaza, was able to commit without hesitating" thing.

      I mean, with Mono they at least tried to pretend like they understood the patent situation surrounding the technology. But with this Silverlight stuff just being announced, there is no way you could have done any type of audit to know what you are getting yourself into!
  • *sigh* (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Ant P. (974313) on Thursday May 03 2007, @06:09PM (#18981231) Homepage
    What does this format bring to Linux, other than a patent minefield that renders it useless to all but Novell (and then only until MS extinguishes them)?
  • Get A Grip (Score:5, Insightful)

    by N8F8 (4562) on Thursday May 03 2007, @06:30PM (#18981475)
    Slamming Mono [wikipedia.org] for implementing Silverlight is about as irrational as slamming Opera or Mozilla for implementing JavaScript.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      But Javascript is actually a pretty nice scripting language. It's got a better object model than C++ or Java, better than Objective C, and in some ways it's even better than Smalltalk's. The libraries in the browser world is somewhat messed up, but that's due to the fact that it's had to build on and remain compatible a set of experimental and mutually antagonistic libraries... and it's survived that pretty damn well.

      Dot NET, on the other hand, is built on an OS specific design that's got a huge semantic ga
  • by 2ms (232331) on Thursday May 03 2007, @06:31PM (#18981485)
    Used to love Miguel and I know him and Nat do a lot of incredible stuff. But this Mono stuff has always completely baffled me. Ever since the very beginning over 5 years ago. Has always seemed like terrible idea to me. Just don't understand his obsession with MS. Can someone tell me what good has come out of Mono? I would like to know (I not denying there is good, I'm genuiously interested in being informed).
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 03 2007, @06:34PM (#18981525)
    Web Projects Using Mono

            * Fiducial (http://fiducial.biz): Their new site uses Mono and ASP.NET.

            * Wikipedia (http://wikipedia.org): WikiPedia uses Mono for its search facilities. The indexing and the actual searching is done by Mono-based applications.

            * GovTrack.Us (http://www.govtrack.us/)

            * GotMono.Net (http://www.gotmono.net)

            * Yakugo.com (http://www.yakugo.com) is an AJAX-based English-Japanese dictionary site that uses Mono.

            * [1] (http://www.saileventschedule.de) A web-based schedule for sailing events like racing and training.

    More can be found at:
    http://www.mono-project.com/Companies_Using_Mono#W ho_uses_Mono.3F [mono-project.com]
  • by chazzzzy (238911) on Thursday May 03 2007, @08:19PM (#18982585) Homepage
    All Mac users were UNABLE to watch any videos on MSNBC AT ALL for YEARS.. because Microsoft required you to "Upgrade to Internet Explorer ON WINDOWS ONLY". Even though other sites were able to show Windows Media files on Macs.. MSNBC DISABLED the ability for macs to try to get us to switch.

    Lately you can watch snippets of videos on MSNBC because they are "beta testing" FLASH to show their videos ONLY because of the success of YouTube. You still cannot watch live events on macs though.

    The point of all this is that Microsoft is not making Silverlight because they care about the community. They are making it so that they can stranglehold all of the non windows users at some point down the road Once we all get sucked in and a bunch of sites are made using Slverlight.. Microsoft will then come out with a new feature that will ONLY work on Windows.. and then we will all be sorry again.

    I am a web developer who has to make 4 different versions of each site because of all the "bugs" in IE.

    I would be an idiot to build a site using Silverlight.. because we all know exactly what's going to happen with that format down the road.
  • Another piece of software to avoid. Miguel though I don't know you, you seem to be the kind of powerhouse who I wish wasn't working at Novell. Actually sitting in the seat that is responsible for Novell's side of the MS embrace and extend campaign. I even took the time to look a little at Silverlight - no I didn't install it. If it is as nice as you say maybe it would be nice, if all things were equal.

    But they aren't. And I don't know if I trust someone who is both indeminified against lawsuits from Microsoft and (as he blogs) gets drunk with senior Microsoft employees. The timing is bad, to say the least, who wants to use crippleware and anything smelling of MS/Novell?

    Other people have said but I will add: There is nothing earthshaking about Miguel's desire to extend Mono, his copy of .Net, by copying MS' extension of .Net. There is nothing inevitable about silverlight. In fact, someone of Miguel's talent (at least in project management, I don't know him personally) could do a great deal for open source if he wasn't always copying Microsoft.

    I believe his arguments are disingenuous. (Well, fake.) MS is NOT able to easily push new technologies into acceptance. They can spend a lot of money on advertising. The video of siverlight movie editing was cute but huh? It was using a faked Minority Report video, and an attempt to make a Minority Report interface (not as good as Kai's Power Tools about 10 years before this), and a laugh at anyone who really does video editing. This new Novell project is premature, serves to support MS embrace and extend, paints a nice target for threats and guess what if you build a successful company on it MS will own your ass.

    Whatever silverlight promises may be nice to have, and some snippets I saw in his blog about Ruby and 3D sounded enticing. But you know what? You don't need anything Microsoft to do cool things. Maybe this will be impetus for open source people who don't work at Novell and carouse with the MS senior execs to get moving on developing something more interesting. I'd rather not intentionally put manacles on my own arms and wait for the other shoe to drop, which is what it seems is required for using Miguel's software. Head in the sand indeed, let's wait until the world depends on silverlight I've got plenty of other things to do. Someone tell me why you want to help son of SCO? Getting drunk with the execs indeed! Fuck off!
    • by miguel (7116) on Thursday May 03 2007, @05:28PM (#18980581) Homepage


      They didn't. They instead chose to pull the rug out from under you by open sourcing their own CLR (to some extent) and making it cross platform (to some extent).


      They did not open source their CLR, you are confused.

      They open sourced a chunk of code that we do not have, the DLR and as I said on my blog post, we will be shipping the DLR together with IronPython and NRuby (when it becomes
      • MS doesn't like your project, why don't they work with you guys to say "the Mono team will help us bring Silverlight to the Linux platform". Instead, they ignore your project, and no sane corporation is going to base serious development efforts on mono when it will always be seen as the illegitimate ugly step child in the .net family.

        Really, can you admit that the only reason MS even tolerates your product, is just in case somebody brings up how they have no solutions in Linux they can just casually just sa
    • Re:ffs (Score:5, Insightful)

      by markh100 (696858) on Thursday May 03 2007, @06:16PM (#18981297)
      Agreed. The vitriolic tone of this thread is somewhat astonishing to me. I'm primarily a Windows/.NET developer that is slowly working towards migrating to a Linux platform, and the Mono project is one of the key technologies leading me in that direction. When Microsoft announced that Silverlight was going to be a cross-platform technology that only ran on Windows and Apple, I was extremely frustrated. I can understand why, strategically, Microsoft has chosen not to implement a Silverlight implementation on Linux, but I cannot understand why the majority of those commenting on this thread are arguing so vehemently against Miguel.

      Silverlight is not just a reimplementation of Flash. Coding in .NET is a pleasure, and a can gaurantee you that coding for the Silverlight platform is going to be infinitely more organized and structured than coding for Flash. Website developers are going to flock to this new technology. Without a Linux implementation of Silverlight, 20% of websites will be completely inaccessible to Linux users in 5 years.
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        When Microsoft announced that Silverlight was going to be a cross-platform technology that only ran on Windows and Apple, I was extremely frustrated. I can understand why, strategically, Microsoft has chosen not to implement a Silverlight implementation on Linux, but I cannot understand why the majority of those commenting on this thread are arguing so vehemently against Miguel. Silverlight is not just a reimplementation of Flash. Coding in .NET is a pleasure, and a can gaurantee you that coding for the Si
      • Re:ffs (Score:4, Insightful)

        by naden (206984) on Thursday May 03 2007, @08:18PM (#18982575)
        Silverlight is not just a reimplementation of Flash. Coding in .NET is a pleasure, and a can gaurantee you that coding for the Silverlight platform is going to be infinitely more organized and structured than coding for Flash. Website developers are going to flock to this new technology. Without a Linux implementation of Silverlight, 20% of websites will be completely inaccessible to Linux users in 5 years.

        See this is classic 'geek' delusion. It assumes that just because something a technology is easy to program with that's its going to take over the world. Lets look at the facts:
        • From the perspective of content creators, Adobe is the most loved (Photoshop/Flash/Dreamweaver) and Microsoft is the most hated (FrontPage/IE).
        • Flash is on 97% of machines (500 million+ users), Silverlight is on 0% (5+ users) of machines.
        • Flash requires nothing to install or download, Silverlight requires a 4MB+ download and install. It still remains to be seen whether non-admin users have access to install IE/Firefox plugins under Vista.
        • A large percentage of content creators use Macs which Visual Studio/.Net is not available for.
        • Flash programmers are cheaper to hire than .Net ones.
        • Flash is proven on existing web sites (YouTube), Silverlight is unproven.
        • Flash is on version 9, Silverlight is on version 1. That's a lot of bugs/features that have already been addressed.
        • Flash is based on Javascript which is more common amongst web developers than C#.
        So as you can see MS is once again creating new, proprietary technologies that the world doesn't need.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      microsoft came a long and actually made a really usefull piece of technology that ties alot of features together in one package

      It's only a useful piece of technology if you want to abandon the UNIX programming environment and switch to one that's based on the Windows API and isolates you from all the rest of the UNIX tools you're used to.

      Just because something is free, that doesn't mean it's worth less than you paid for it. Microsoft apologists have been pointing this out for years, as if it was somehow new
      • Re:ffs (Score:5, Informative)

        by miguel (7116) on Thursday May 03 2007, @08:09PM (#18982507) Homepage

        It's only a useful piece of technology if you want to abandon the UNIX programming environment and switch to one that's based on the Windows API and isolates you from all the rest of the UNIX tools you're used to.


        When was the last time that you used the "UNIX programming environment" in your web browser? Last I checked, you had to write in a subset that isoaltes you from the operating system and only allowed DOM access and Javascript.

        Flash, the other major tool for RIAs, does not give you access to *any* Unix facilities.

        You seem to be confused as to what Silverlight is.

        One of the nice things about Silverlight (as I pointed out in a blog entry a few weeks ago) is that you can actually generate Silverlight content with any Unix tool you want.

        You can easily generate it with PHP:

        header ("Content-Type: application/xaml");
        print "

        ";

        Or you can generate it with shell, perl, python or assembly language.

        The server side is probably as Unixy as anything else can get.
    • Re:Wake up (Score:4, Insightful)

      by LarsWestergren (9033) on Friday May 04 2007, @07:35AM (#18986601) Homepage Journal
      While some parts of .NET are not be as good as other offerings on the market, as a whole there is nothing which compares to it.

      Yes there is, the Java platform, which has a larger number of users, developers, and platforms it has been ported to.

      .NET brings everything under one roof

      We know. Microsofts roof. I don't want to be there.

      eliminates entire classes of "glue" and "can't get there from here" problems.

      I notice you don't give any concrete examples to refute... Is it possible that some of these "can't get there from here" problems you mention exist on other platforms because they were designed with more security in mind, or to be more platform independent for instance?

      You've all seen the demos of movies projected onto flying 3D surfaces etcetera

      Pfft. Like that is new. Come back when it works both for Linux, Solaris, Mac, or Windows, OpenGL accelerated [java.net].

      With .NET and Silverlight, it is slowly becoming possible to leverage the same skills and code on the Web (both server side and client side), the desktop, games consoles, set top boxes, PDAs and Mobile phones.

      Just like the Java platform then, only 5 years late and Windows only.

      Christ, that sounds like a commercial.

      Yes, you do sound very much like a commercial.