OpenOffice.org releases 3.0, faces new challenges [LWN.net]

OpenOffice.org releases 3.0, faces new challenges

Posted Oct 16, 2008 14:52 UTC (Thu) by epa (subscriber, #39769)
In reply to: OpenOffice.org releases 3.0, faces new challenges by anselm
Parent article: OpenOffice.org releases 3.0, faces new challenges

Indeed, any nobody has pointed out any single software patent which Mono is infringing. They should be treated the same. Miguel de Icaza gave his view on this issue:

The position of the Mono project has always been that we believe .Net includes a lot of innovation along with a good mix of well-known technology. So, if people found a patent infringement, we would take it out. If there's prior art, though, the patent is invalid. This is the way it is done in the open source world. A good example is Freetype. They discovered that they could not use a byte code interpreter for fonts, so they invented a different approach.
This kind of punditry is always light on details. We've grown used to this. Mono was criticized way before Novell acquired Ximian. There is an animosity toward "anything Microsoft," and it lowers the level of discourse that you can have.
I wish people focused on what the actual problems are. I am certainly against software patents. It is not only Microsoft that owns software patents, but hundreds of companies. But, I think Mono is singled out, and people give a free pass to lots of other projects.

(Log in to post comments)

OpenOffice.org releases 3.0, faces new challenges

Posted Oct 16, 2008 15:38 UTC (Thu) by anselm (subscriber, #2796) [Link]

The big difference may be that while you can exist in perfect comfort on a Linux system without using Mono at all, you can't very well do that without the Linux kernel. While possible patent infringement in the Linux kernel is a necessary evil, using Mono just means avoidable exposure. When you are a developer it means basing your code on something that might possibly go away at any time, when perfectly workable alternatives exist that do not carry the same risk at all.

Also, these days, attacking the Linux kernel over a software patent essentially means attacking IBM. The one thing you do not want to do in the software patents world is attack IBM, so Linux seems to be reasonably safe. In comparison, Novell is pretty much a non-entity.

Personally I have decided that for me, Mono isn't worth the trouble. There is literally nothing written in Mono today that I think is worth having, and I do not find it compelling as a development environment compared to other free alternatives, so until that changes Mono stays off my machine. For the record, I also try to avoid Java stuff wherever I can.