Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Microsoft Software Linux

Miguel Plans Silverlight on Mono & Linux by Years End 350

Posted by CmdrTaco
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."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Miguel Plans Silverlight on Mono & Linux by Years End

Comments Filter:
  • ItsATrap! (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 03, 2007 @05:42PM (#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
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      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)

        by Locutus (9039)
        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
    • I don't know them, but I know they are out there..
    • by nurb432 (527695)
      Exactally.

      So tell me again, we want this to run on *nix, why?

      ( and i wouldnt call it "extortion" if they really do own the IP rights.. its a licensing payment.. at least call it what it is. )
      • To release those who might be dependent on applications developed with it from the Windows codebase.

        IP IS extortion. It's protection money you pay an organization so they won't use the power they have in our corrupt legal system to bring the power of the state to bear on you despite the fact that you have done no harm.

        If you define installing an operating system on your computer in the privacy of your home or office as harm, you've either drifted a little too far into the abstract or you need to check your
        • by nurb432 (527695)
          The legal system being corrupt does not make it extortion. Thats like saying that because the war on drugs is corrupt its ok to smoke weed. "because its right". Its still illegal, regardless of how anyone feels.

          While the legal system still acknowledges that the concept of IP is valid, and it holds that they own those rights, then its not extortion to demand payment for its use.. You have a right to treaten *legal* recourse for a violation of your *legal* rights.

          Now, if its eventually declared that IP isn
  • we'll see (Score:2, Funny)

    by wizardforce (1005805)
    it's a trap.
  • by Breakfast Pants (323698) on Thursday May 03, 2007 @05:45PM (#18979945) Journal
    when you don't have any customers depending on it.
  • by miguel (7116) on Thursday May 03, 2007 @05:48PM (#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 @06:04PM (#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.

    • Sebastien Pouliot suggested we call it "Moonlight" (anagram on Mono).

      Just Some Guy suggests that you call it Zunebrown, conveying both the F/OSS community's likely acceptance of the project, and the likeliness of Microsoft to let it to go without litigation if more than 3 people come to depend on it.

    • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 03, 2007 @06:34PM (#18980669)
      How about keeping the "mono" in there. You could call it "Monopolight" maybe.

    • by tenchiken (22661)
      It seems to me that the best approach here might be to see if we, Microsoft's customers , could convince them to pren the specs under a organization such as the w3c . Unless that happens no one will trust that Microsoft will not yet to leverage this to attack their competitors.
    • 'Tis the season to be jolly

      fa-da-da-da-daw da-daw-da-daw

      Re-make Flash as a knock off co-py

      fa-da-da-da-daw da-daw-da-daw
    • by metamatic (202216)

      And I was thinking Silver-light in another language

      How about just calling it Thirty-pieces-of-silverlight?

    • by ozamosi (615254)
      Moonlight is a great name - not too silly, but still almost made me laugh out loud :)

      Although my instincts tell me to say "I don't want no stinking Silverlight" (just like everyone here, apparently), youtube has really teached me an important lession: sooner or later, someone will do something that you actually want to access in these platforms, and that's when I'll be really happy you already did this job, so I don't have to wait forever for it to start working.

      To summarise: please go fuck yourself, and th
    • SliverLight, it's gonna "stick" ya and hurt. ;-)

      LoB
    • Monochrome (Score:3, Interesting)

      by goombah99 (560566)
      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

    • I know this is mildly off-topic, but I think you would know more than I do on the subject. Anyways...
      I've seen all over the Silverlight articles that it seems to make heavy use of IronPython, Microsoft's re-implementation of Python on top of .NET. Is there a good reason why they're using IronPython over CPython (besides that MS likes .NET a lot)?

      And on the name (so I don't get a huge OT mod), I would say Moonshine, since silver light shines off the moon (no relation to the homegrown alcohol intended)
      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by miguel (7116)
        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
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by vhogemann (797994)
      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, Informative)

        by miguel (7116)
        Hello,

        We already do that; Although Mono has an incredibly rich ecosystem of libraries that are Unix-specific, Linux-specific or Gnome-specific we usually try to make our libraries cross platform.

        This means that we tend to make our code run not only on Mono/Linux but also on .NET/Windows, as it expands the developer base, and the contributor base (see Mono.Addins for a recent example).

        Or www.mono-project.com/Software and www.mono-project.com/Libraries to view the Mono ecosystem of libraries.
  • Someone at Apache, IBM, or Sun announce that they are going to introduce a truely cross platform, open source, and Free alternative to Silverlight and Flash.

    It can be done!
    • by dbIII (701233) on Thursday May 03, 2007 @06:54PM (#18980995)
      There is a cross platform alternative for flash in nearly every web browser - the BLINK tag can be almost as annoying as flash if used correctly.
  • Mono.. (Score:3, Funny)

    by Mockylock (1087585) on Thursday May 03, 2007 @05:52PM (#18980065) Homepage
    "mono" Great name. Nothing like naming a project after a virus known for disabling whole cheerleading squads in a single bound.
    • by pembo13 (770295)
      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.
      • Re:Mono.. (Score:5, Funny)

        by aristotle-dude (626586) on Thursday May 03, 2007 @06:55PM (#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.
    • Mono means monkey in Spanish. [wikipedia.org]
  • "The embrace of Prussia is deadly". It was a reminder that for a long time Prussia was mostly victorious, even against former allies.

    It is not a mistake that Microsoft's strategy starts with "embrace".
  • by Rik Sweeney (471717) on Thursday May 03, 2007 @05:54PM (#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...
    • Aha! Found it! What can you do with this?

      04 08 15 16 23 42
    • by FudRucker (866063)
      i agree, miguel has lost his way...
    • by miguel (7116) on Thursday May 03, 2007 @06:21PM (#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 geek (5680)
        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.
        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by miguel (7116)


          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 @06:55PM (#18980997) 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. 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.
            • by cgranade (702534)
              As Miguel has repeatedly pointed out, the technologies for implementing Silverlight are practically there. Moreover, just because he wants to make a Silverlight client for Linux doesn't mean that no one else can pursue other Flash alternatives (such as my favorite: XHTML+SVG+JavaScript). If I understand things correctly, than the Silverlight/Mono project is just a sane way of making sure that Mono remains relevant.
            • Re:Not buying it (Score:5, Informative)

              by miguel (7116) on Thursday May 03, 2007 @08:32PM (#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 @09:08PM (#18982493) Homepage
                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.
          • 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.
            If you make it better enough that there is a compelling reason for people to use it as their content platform rather than Silverlight, yes, it will. Well, except not "magically", unless you regard the normal action of the market as "magic".
          • Legal options (Score:5, Insightful)

            by overshoot (39700) on Thursday May 03, 2007 @07:10PM (#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)

            by Jeffrey Baker (6191)

            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 @08:16PM (#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: (Score:3, Interesting)

              by jsebrech (525647)
              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.

              You can't do video-, sound- or advanced graphics-based web apps (by advanced I mean high performance) without flash or java.

              That you haven't seen any apps that build on top of the flash or java platform that imp
        • Re:Option D (Score:5, Insightful)

          by FooBarWidget (556006) on Thursday May 03, 2007 @06:55PM (#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.
          • Because I am not a lawyer, I don't trust licenses that I can't understand. (I also don't trust some that I can understand.)

            From what I know of patent law (not that much), I feel that it's best to not use techniques that have been used by a coercive monopoly. As a result, I prefer to NOT use CLI, mono, etc. I may, possibly, be overly cautious, but I have no way of knowing. If you do, you apear to be under a NDA.

            It's all very well to say "if I never share my code with anyone, then I'm safe". It's probabl
      • by mackyrae (999347)
        What exactly is Silverlight? The name made me think of Quicksilver on a Mac, but looking at MS's site it looks like they're reinventing Flash. ewwwwwwww
      • Miguel, read up the court documents regarding java and Microsofts failed attempt to take over the language which was so cross platform and which made several people very up being scared that Windows becomes obsolete. Lets face it how long do you thing you can clone this stuff into Linux until Microsoft comes down on it full force via the patent laws and copyright laws? Seriously I will give you the estimate, as soon as java and probably 1-2 other technologies are not a serious thread anymore. Dont expect
      • by DragonWriter (970822) on Thursday May 03, 2007 @06:57PM (#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 metamatic (202216)

        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.

        Like ActiveX, you mean?

        ActiveX might have been successful if fools like you had been around to implement it on Linux.

      • by oGMo (379) on Thursday May 03, 2007 @07:03PM (#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.

      • nobody is in any position to force you to stop using whatever other technology happens to be your favorite one.

        Well, that's patently false (pun intended.)

        I've never liked Gnome, so I'm less affected than others who do use it. Even I, however, have a hard time avoiding GTK applications unless I want to, for instance, recode OpenOffice.org for personal use.

        As a result, when Microsoft's lawyers send a "cease and desist" order against non-Novell users of the Gnome/GTK software that's been infected with

      • 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?
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        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

  • by overshoot (39700) on Thursday May 03, 2007 @06:05PM (#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 @07:30PM (#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!
  • Dear Miguel.

    When MS designed this thing they could have used mono as a base. That way they would have had an open source, cross platform base from the start. They could have distributed your (and your contributors) work with windows update and gotten mono on every windows desktop.

    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 shit on you. Please don't just sit there with a grin on your face
    • by miguel (7116) on Thursday May 03, 2007 @06:28PM (#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
      • by Salsaman (141471)
        So why not use your skills to create a Linux version which is free from Microsoft patents ?

        To do otherwise suggests you are complicit in MS scheming. Do you understand why so many people are angry with what you do ?

      • 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
  • Finally Linux being embraced . Microsoft is going to let us have our cake and eat it too! Then maybe they'll even provide thier own extended version after the Mono version is stable. Then we can scurry about trying to fix everything before we are extinguished
  • ffs (Score:2, Insightful)

    by wwmedia (950346)
    i dont care if loose karma for this

    firstly i wish to say "thank you" to the mono team! yee are doing a great job!

    secondly what the f*** is wrong with you ./'s ?! get a grip!

    while yee are arguing which distro has the longest .... microsoft came a long and actually made a really usefull piece of technology that ties alot of features together in one package, not only that but some people are sickened that it comes under an open license and are afraid that linux will become that bit more irrelevant on the desk
    • Re:ffs (Score:5, Insightful)

      by markh100 (696858) on Thursday May 03, 2007 @07:16PM (#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)

        by oconnorcjo (242077) *
        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 @09:18PM (#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)

        by LarsWestergren (9033)
        Without a Linux implementation of Silverlight, 20% of websites will be completely inaccessible to Linux users in 5 years.

        BS. Most websites today work fine with Firefox and Linux, despite Microsoft attempts at locking like ActiveX. Most companies now realises the benefits of platform independence (I've heard things are different in South Korea for instance).

        But now you say that this just announced platform will start to break standards and compatibility (surprise!), and you say "WE MUST JUMP ON THIS BANDWAGO
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by argent (18001)
      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 @09:09PM (#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.
    • some people are sickened that it comes under an open license

      MS has licensed bits and pieces of it under licenses that are *supposedly* open. That's an easily-abused word.

      Wake me up when they open things enough such that it's possible to create truly portable and open versions of .Net without *any* potential legal threats.

      and are afraid that linux will become that bit more irrelevant on the desktop side of things

      Well, you're right. We're afraid that MS's pseudo-"open", but in truth proprietary languages/framework- just "open" enough to implement some of the core features but not enough to guarantee support for most applications, playing a permanent one-

  • *sigh* (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Ant P. (974313) on Thursday May 03, 2007 @07:09PM (#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)?
    • by argent (18001)
      It brings a Windows-specific API that's a really really bad fit for the UNIX programming environment! Two hits for the price of one!
  • Get A Grip (Score:5, Insightful)

    by N8F8 (4562) on Thursday May 03, 2007 @07:30PM (#18981475)
    Slamming Mono [wikipedia.org] for implementing Silverlight is about as irrational as slamming Opera or Mozilla for implementing JavaScript.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by argent (18001)
      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 N8F8 (4562)
        OS specific design that's got a huge semantic gap with anything but Windows

        Well, I'm a Java programmer by trade and have used a few others and I don't have any idea what you mean.

        • by argent (18001)
          Well, I'm a Java programmer by trade...

          Java is another little platform-in-its-own-world that is generally isolated from the rest of the operating system it runs on (albeit not to as great an extent as Mono), so it's not surprising that...

          _.. I don't have any idea what you mean.
  • by 2ms (232331) on Thursday May 03, 2007 @07:31PM (#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 @07:34PM (#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 @09:19PM (#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.
  • by mattr (78516) <mattr@teleb[ ].com ['ody' in gap]> on Thursday May 03, 2007 @11:00PM (#18983303) Homepage Journal
    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!

Top Ten Things Overheard At The ANSI C Draft Committee Meetings: (9) Dammit, little-endian systems *are* more consistent!

Working...