Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Microsoft Linux

The Mono Mystery That Wasn't 268

Posted by Soulskill
from the context-is-everything dept.
jammag writes "It was shocking news, or so it seemed: Miguel de Icaza, the Mono creator, was switching his opinion about his life's work — he now seemed to agree with the free software partisans who oppose his Mono work and his Microsoft connections. The story flamed across the Internet and even got picked up on Slashdot. But Bruce Byfield reports that 'De Icaza has not changed his opinions.' De Icaza calls the rumors 'a storm in a teacup.' Tracing the misinformation trail, Byfield concludes that 'the FOSS community excels at communication. However, in this instance, that ability was used irresponsibly.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

The Mono Mystery That Wasn't

Comments Filter:
  • His life's work? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Punto (100573) <<puntob> <at> <gmail.com>> on Friday March 26, 2010 @12:07PM (#31627484) Homepage

    Didn't this guy start Gnome (or maybe KDE)? that is actually "life's work" worthy, not something nobody cares about like mono.

  • by BassMan449 (1356143) on Friday March 26, 2010 @12:22PM (#31627732)
    They aren't implementing WPF for the same reason that Microsoft is not adding anything to WPF. MS considers it a dead technology and is pushing SilverLight. Mono is much better off putting the resources into Moonlight than it is into a Mono implementation of WPF.
  • Re:Good News (Score:5, Interesting)

    by fejjie (192392) on Friday March 26, 2010 @12:23PM (#31627758)

    As someone who actually knows Miguel de Icaza and someone who was there when Mono began, I can tell you with absolute certainty that he started Mono because he truly believes that it's a good platform. As do I and all of the other Mono developers (none of whom get a "fat paycheck" from Microsoft or anyone else). The Mono team is underfunded at Novell, so I and likely other developers have taken a pay CUT in order to work on what we believe in.

    We are not paid to parrot any opinions from Microsoft or Novell. Our opinions are our own and we stand by them.

  • by Dan Ost (415913) on Friday March 26, 2010 @12:30PM (#31627914)

    What does java do that python can't?

  • Re:Good News (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 26, 2010 @01:18PM (#31628852)

    I don't work for the enjoyment of it. I've never had a job I wouldn't rather quit to go read novels all day. I believe most people, if they were being honest, would agree with the statement. That makes us both whores. The only people who work who are not whores are those who are independently wealthy or retired, and work merely for fun or to stave off boredom.

  • by Alex Belits (437) * on Friday March 26, 2010 @02:01PM (#31629652) Homepage

    There was no open source framework like this because no one in his right mind would want to develop such a framework for his own use.

    Both Java and .NET are frameworks made for OTHER people, so those other people can produce seemingly working software while being completely ignorant and untrained. This is why most of "convenience" of Java and .NET is completely irrelevant for developers who produce high-quality code -- as far as language is concerned, if one can notice any "improvement" between C++ and Java, he is likely not qualified to use either.

    Java and .NET conquer developers by building massive blobs of interdependent infrastructure that can be only used within those frameworks. Once someone makes an attempt to use a tiny part of it, he has to accept the whole thing, and reject everything else, as this is the core design behind those systems. This is why non-idiots end up working with Java and .NET, not because those platforms are based on some kind of useful ideas.

    And now those massive pieces of infrastructure are crumbling under their own weight because everyone who is working on them, mimics Sun and Microsoft, and writes his own massive infrastructures on top on those infrastructures without having nearly enough resources to maintain those things. It's infrastructures all the way down.

    C++/Qt developer produces better-looking, more portable and much simpler GUI applications, C programmer does likewise with network servers, and Python programmer writes complex scripts. Java and .NET ended up being a path toward eternal mediocrity that Microsoft so much relies on, and Sun ended up contributing to.

  • by segedunum (883035) on Friday March 26, 2010 @03:05PM (#31630656)
    Whatever way you cut it, this is an admission of defeat and it has been exactly what everyone has complained about regarding .Net and the nonsense surrounding Mono for years. De Icaza has sought to paint over it at every single turn until now. Maybe the penny seems to have finally dropped:

    "The most important part is that Microsoft has shot the .NET ecosystem in the foot because of the constant thread of patent infringement that they have cast on the ecosystem. Unlike the Java world that is blossoming with dozens of vibrant Java virtual machine implementations, the .NET world has suffered by this meme spread by Ballmer that they would come after people that do not license patents from them.

    Sun on the other hand said from day one: we will not sue you over patent infringement if you implement your own Java. Google does something similar with their APIs and Google's Wave: they are giving everyone access to their stuff.

    As the only implementor of the ECMA standards outside of Microsoft, I sure would have hoped that they had given rights to everyone to implement. They would still be the #1 stack, but it would have encouraged an ecosystem that would have innovated extensively around their platform.

    Instead, people went and innovated on Java or other platforms that might not have been as advanced as .NET, but at least they were not under Microsoft threat."

    It's very clear. The part in bold I find most damning. This indicates that he knew all along that you couldn't create an open source implementation of even the CLR without permission from Microsoft. There is a lot in here, but people like Bruce Byfield obviously havent read it properly. He's tried top backtrack and cover up a bit by saying that it's all nothing, but it most certainly is something.

When you don't know what to do, walk fast and look worried.

Working...