User: Password:
|
|
Subscribe / Log in / New account

A bit harsh...

A bit harsh...

Posted Jun 5, 2008 17:27 UTC (Thu) by grantingram (guest, #18390)
In reply to: Mark Shuttleworth on the future of Ubuntu by jdub
Parent article: Mark Shuttleworth on the future of Ubuntu

Well although it is true that there might be no organisational relationship between GNOME and
$ORGANISATION.  As far as I can see GNOME (and I've been wrong many times before :-( ) is the
only major desktop shipping Mono applications.  

Now I'm a big fan of GNOME and suspect that the patent problems are the usual load of hot air.
But the fact that GNOME is shipping Mono based software seems to me as an outside observer
that GNOME has in fact "bought into" Mono at some level...  

Glyn's question didn't strike me as unreasonable and Shuttleworth's answer was quite
illuminating and I think the flak he is taking reflects more the sensitivity over this issue
rather than anything objectionable about the interview.  

Of course my contribution to the free software world has been to program as little as
possible, thereby significantly raising the average standard of code produced so what do I
know!  


(Log in to post comments)

Throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

Posted Jun 10, 2008 21:42 UTC (Tue) by Kamujin (guest, #52482) [Link]

I find it funny how close minded people are being about the benefits of C# and Mono just
because of its source.

I understand skepticism. I don't understand irrational fear.

I understand engagement. I don't understand isolationism.

Which camp are you in?

Throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

Posted Jun 10, 2008 23:54 UTC (Tue) by felixfix (subscriber, #242) [Link]

When one company has spent decades building up their reputation as someone not to be trusted,
it is only surprising that gullible people pop up now and again to trust them.

It isn't Mono and C# that are the questionable items, it is the company behind them, who have
made plenty of noise about enforcing their patents on those items.  Address that issue, and
perhaps then you will have some cred.

Throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

Posted Jun 11, 2008 12:55 UTC (Wed) by Kamujin (guest, #52482) [Link]

I agree that MS has earned its bad reputation.

I think your response proves my point though. I am not aware of any real patent issues that
exist with Mono and C#. If there are issues, then there should be debate and action taken to
correct them. I don't hear real issues being raised. I just hear a lot of anti-MS rhetoric.

If your just going to dismiss a really good technology because you don't like who invented it,
I think your making a mistake.

Throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

Posted Jun 16, 2008 12:31 UTC (Mon) by occ (guest, #38482) [Link]

>"Which camp are you in?"

I'm in the anti- "false dichotomy fallacy" camp. (1)


"I find it funny how close minded people are being about the benefits of C# and Mono just
because of its source."

I find it sad how gold-fish-memory like people are being about the said 'source'. Heck the
recent story of another of their ECMA so-called-standard  - pushed down ISO with corruption,
pressures, ballot stuffing and plain smear campaigns - should alone give any rational person
pause.(2)



(1) "you are either with me or against me" (a brilliant early 21th century philosopher circa
2001.)
(2) "Fool me once, shame on ... shame on you, fool me twice ... euh. fool me I can't get
fooled again" (same brilliant early 21th century mind, circa 2006)

Throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

Posted Jun 16, 2008 16:12 UTC (Mon) by Kamujin (guest, #52482) [Link]

I think your being extreme.

"Trust but verify" is what I am advocating. Not blind acceptance. And certainly not the "I'm
smarter then the world" attitude that is the logical implication of your disengaged viewpoint.


Copyright © 2017, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds