8 ms·
> What makes me stay away from it is the non-free nature. Yes, there is Mono, but I wouldn't like to base my stuff on a language that is there because of Micros
by LeafStorm 15y ago
> What makes me stay away from it is the non-free nature. Yes, there is Mono, but I wouldn't like to base my stuff on a language that is there because of Microsoft's benevolent permission which it could turn into patent-lawsuits any time. We all know the tricks that company (well, actually any large company) has up its sleeves.
Microsoft has standardized C# and the CLR through ECMA, and issued a promise stating that they will not assert their patents against alternative implementations thereof. Non-standardized APIs like ADO.NET, ASP.NET, and System.Windows.Forms are not protected by that promise, but Mono discourages their use anyway and if they had to remove them, it would not affect the C# compiler or CLR in any way. So this is not a legitimate reason to avoid using Mono, unless you (a) need to use the non-standardized Microsoft APIs or (b) are Richard Stallman.
- j_s 15y agoI agree with your summary of the situation. However, some commercial development shops won't touch anything LGPL (a license compatible with commercial use). Mono adds additional complexity. The concerns of the FSF are here: http://www.fsf.org/news/2009-07-mscp-mono http://www.fsf.org/news/2009-07-mscp-mono The Mono project's perspective can be found here: http://www.mono-project.com/FAQ:_Licensing#Patents http://www.mono-project.com/FAQ:_Licensing#Patents
- noveltyaccount 15y agoAgree. I would have preferred he kept politics out of the argument and actually reviewed the language.
- Corrado 15y agoI think the author is correct in excluding languages that are non-free. Microsoft's promise means almost nothing in the real world. They could retract that at any point in time and leave any project built on that technology at risk. Mono is a non starter for any open project built today.