Weekly Edition
Return to the Announcements page
| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Novell Releases Mono 1.2 With Enhanced Support for .NET on Linux
Novell, Inc. has announced
the release of Mono 1.2.. "Mono 1.2 adds support for the Microsoft*
Windows* Forms API to more easily port .NET client-side applications to
Linux*. Other enhancements in this release include virtual machine upgrades
and enhanced Java* support, significant performance, memory consumption and
stability improvements, and support for many .NET 2.0 features."
(Log in to post comments)
Deafening Posted Nov 9, 2006 18:42 UTC (Thu) by dskoll (subscriber, #1630) [Link] the silence is.
So who exactly cares about Mono any longer?
Deafening Posted Nov 9, 2006 22:36 UTC (Thu) by drag (subscriber, #31333) [Link] Who cares?
Any application developer or corporate body that has a number of programmers who have expertese in Windows, but not in Linux, and would like to switch systems from Windows to Linux.
Mono enables people to write fairly complex applications for Linux who otherwise have no prior experiance with Linux.
Beleive you me, programmers who understand how to program with C#/.NET are much much much easier to come by then programmers who are experts at Linux C and Gnome or C++ and QT.
Deafening Posted Nov 10, 2006 13:06 UTC (Fri) by dskoll (subscriber, #1630) [Link] Beleive you me, programmers who understand how to program with C#/.NET are much much much easier to come by then programmers who are experts at Linux C and Gnome or C++ and QT. Over the last 10 years, I've been in the position to hire (and alas, fire) programmers. It has been my experience that the "easier to come by" programmers are worth about what you'd expect. In other words: Not much.
Deafening Posted Nov 10, 2006 13:36 UTC (Fri) by khim (guest, #9252) [Link] Quite true. I also been in the same position and now my position is clear: either peson knows how to program - and then he can program in C/GObject, C++/Qt, Java or C#/Mono. Just give him week or two to learn new language. Or he does not know how to do this and then he can not write good programs in any language.
P.S. Haskell, OCaml and other functional languages are somewhat different - it's possible to be good C# prohrammer and poor Haskell programmer (or vice versa). But switch from C# to Java (or even to C/GObject) ? Don't make me laugh...
Deafening Posted Nov 10, 2006 15:57 UTC (Fri) by landley (guest, #6789) [Link] The thing about mono is you're supposed to get over it after 30 days.
What a self-disproving comment Posted Nov 16, 2006 21:22 UTC (Thu) by proski (subscriber, #104) [Link] ... it was
And now we know... Posted Nov 9, 2006 19:10 UTC (Thu) by AJWM (guest, #15888) [Link] What that patent deal with Microsoft was all about.
(FUD value aside.)
And now we know... Posted Nov 9, 2006 21:58 UTC (Thu) by russell (subscriber, #10458) [Link] Perhaps they should update there FAQ and Changelog for version 1.2 to say:
"Mono knowingly infringes on Microsoft patents, particularly related to Windows Forms. Please refer to Microsofts patent pledge and only using mono for hobbyist activities."
And now we know... Posted Nov 10, 2006 4:12 UTC (Fri) by thebluesgnr (guest, #37963) [Link] Mono doesn't infringe any Microsoft patents. If you have any documents that say otherwise, please provide them.
If Mono did what you claim Novell could still get sued by Microsoft, but the OIN makes the chance of anyone getting sued over Mono extremely small.
And now we know... Posted Nov 10, 2006 12:42 UTC (Fri) by coriordan (guest, #7544) [Link] "Novell could still get sued by Microsoft" I think it's a bit insulting to imagine anyone would believe that. Novell and Microsoft are now business partners, and even if their's nothing in there contracts protecting Novell, Novell is safe by nature of being a business partner. Maybe a good analogy would be if I walked into my friend's garden and told you it was mine and offered the proof that if it wasn't, surely my friend would have prosecuted my for trespassing.
And now we know... Posted Nov 10, 2006 17:42 UTC (Fri) by AJWM (guest, #15888) [Link] > Novell and Microsoft are now business partners, and even if their's nothing in there contracts protecting Novell, Novell is safe by nature of being a business partner.
Ha ha ha ha ha! LOL! Now that's funny.
For those who didn't get the joke: the landscape is littered with the corpses and near-corpses of Microsoft business partners. (STAC Micro, Spyglass, Corel, plenty of others...)
And now we know... Posted Nov 13, 2006 11:10 UTC (Mon) by coriordan (guest, #7544) [Link] I hope you're right. I find it unbelieveable they would sue a new parter for patent infringement after indemnifying their customers, but I'm not well-read on Microsoft's business history
And now we know... Posted Nov 16, 2006 19:26 UTC (Thu) by lysse (guest, #3190) [Link] > "Novell could still get sued by Microsoft"
> I think it's a bit insulting to imagine anyone would believe that.
Ciaran, your idealism and innocence are both delightful and valuable. Please, never lose them.
...But this gave me the best laugh of today. :) Although in fairness, it's highly unlikely Microsoft will have to sue Novell, given their wide-ranging experience and, um, innovative approach to driving its partners out of business in the past.
And now we know... Posted Nov 9, 2006 22:03 UTC (Thu) by skitching (subscriber, #36856) [Link] I suspect you're right.
Mono's legal standing on most of their work seems fine to me; AFAIK the vitual machine definition, the c# language and the core libraries have all been explicitly submitted to standards bodies by Microsoft. It seems to me that it would be extremely difficult for Microsoft to now assert rights over this (IANAL).
The bit that's always been legally uncertain is Mono's implementation of the Windows Forms library -- which has *not* been submitted to any standards body. This library is of course entirely optional; there are bindings to many other UI libraries (eg GTK#) for applications to use. Windows Forms is likely to be used primarily by companies that have comercial products written in c# for windows that they want to port to Linux.
It makes perfect sense to me that Novell have made an arrangement with Microsoft to cover the Mono implementation of Windows Forms. This won't hurt the rest of us; at worst Windows Forms would become subject to license fees on platforms other than Novell. As the apps using it are almost all going to be commercial products anyway that's no big deal.
BTW, thanks Jonathon for your nicely balanced and non-paranoid article on the Novell/MS for LWN.
And now we know... Posted Nov 9, 2006 22:24 UTC (Thu) by drag (subscriber, #31333) [Link] Yep. That's why you would try to avoid using winforms.
But it's a non-issue for Linux programmers who are undoubtably going to be using the GTK bindings or other open source toolkits.
Novell Releases Mono 1.2 With Enhanced Support for .NET on Linux Posted Nov 9, 2006 20:22 UTC (Thu) by hilmi (guest, #41368) [Link] Since MS patent promise may be interpreted as an official threat (rather than giving rights) to free software developers, Mono is the last development platform I would use. Because I don't want to use it as a developing platform, I don't want to use applications written in Mono either...
Novell Releases Mono 1.2 With Enhanced Support for .NET on Linux Posted Nov 9, 2006 22:26 UTC (Thu) by drag (subscriber, #31333) [Link] If your scared of Mono then be sure to avoid things like Samba or OpenOffice.org or Abiword or any other system in Linux setup to provide compatability with any Microsoft software anywere.
Novell Releases Mono 1.2 With Enhanced Support for .NET on Linux Posted Nov 9, 2006 22:27 UTC (Thu) by drag (subscriber, #31333) [Link] Oh and for god's sake avoid Wine or Crossover or Cedega like the freaking plague. Man those things are 10 times more legally dubious then Mono (which is to say not that much at all)
Novell Releases Mono 1.2 With Enhanced Support for .NET on Linux Posted Nov 10, 2006 8:45 UTC (Fri) by job (subscriber, #670) [Link] I wouldn't count on that. The APIs WINE implement are much older than those that Mono implement, and it's more recently that Microsoft started designing things around what they could patent (such as XML transforms).
Novell Releases Mono 1.2 With Enhanced Support for .NET on Linux Posted Nov 10, 2006 10:12 UTC (Fri) by hilmi (guest, #41368) [Link] Using these programs may be accepted when there are no free software alternatives to them. As another commenter pointed out sometimes using Mono is better than installing windows to make your homework; I agree with this. On the other hand using Mono for development of free software for multiple operating systems or just free operating systems is not a must. You can always use other development platforms (Ruby, C++, Java, etc.). Since there are many alternatives to Mono I have the option not to use it and I will definitely use this option.
Novell Releases Mono 1.2 With Enhanced Support for .NET on Linux Posted Nov 13, 2006 10:25 UTC (Mon) by thebluesgnr (guest, #37963) [Link] "Using these programs may be accepted when there are no free software alternatives to them."
These programs (Mono and Wine) are also Free software.
Novell Releases Mono 1.2 With Enhanced Support for .NET on Linux Posted Nov 9, 2006 21:41 UTC (Thu) by einstein (subscriber, #2052) [Link] I for one welcome our new mono overlords.
Seriously, when I was taking a computer languages course at university, and we were required to write some c# programs, it was nice to have the ability to do it natively in linux. If not for mono, I would have had to set up a windoze peecee, obtain the microsoft development tools, and drink the peecee coolaid in order to get any c# programs. That would have been a real hassle, so mono was a lifesaver.
|
|
||||||||||||