5 ms·

Its an open spec that can be implemented on any other platform that cares. Mono is available on many platforms btw

by YeahKIA 14y ago

jiggy2011 14y ago
This is true, but Mono has always lacked implementations of a bunch of APIs and had not quite as nice dev tools. If there had been a true first party (i.e provided by MS .Net CLR) for other platforms it would probably have had massive traction.
- pbz 14y ago
  No, it wouldn't. Let's be honest, people would say it's from Microsoft and not use it for that very reason. Could be better than JVM and still most wouldn't use it. Linus was right, the hatred of Microsoft is a disease, and a lot of people in the open source community suffer from it.
  - guard-of-terra 14y ago
    Microsoft cast it upon itself. When you cry wolf all the time, nobody comes to help. Microsoft can't let go. They can't say "this code is now open and no strings attached". They can say "but not really". They can say "but don't touch anything". Microsoft can't open. What they can do is okay for consumers. Consumers will download whatever software available and use that. Developers? Hell no. Developers don't trust openness that can be revoked. Because this means their product stops working.
    - pbz 14y ago
      Then how do you explain that with mono? It's open source, but since it used MS's specs, with OS license, it has been vilified by the open source community. The reality of the matter is that while developers like to think they're rational, they're just as emotional as any non-developer. Their decisions are driven by emotions, by their hatred for MS or some other company / technology, hence the disease Linus was talking about.
      - guard-of-terra 14y ago
        How is it vilified? De Icaza loved it and pushed everywhere. Gnome played with it. But mono is not .Net. I mean, if you look at Java, there is a very strict process which a JVM implementation must undergo in order to be called Java (and still there are a dozen of such implementations). It means it behaves predictably and have every one of the required APIs. And most of development tools are written in Java. On the other hand, with .Net we have Microsoft implementation on Windows - and we have everything else. .Net on Windows has a massive number of APIs (many of those system dependent), hatches into COM, can easily use native code and libraries. Most .Net tools only work on Windows and are written as a mixture of native code, bytecode and COM. And mono is a second class citisen forever. It will never have all those limitless APIs and will never have all the tooling. It is extremelly unlikely that developers (of proprietary, in-house, server software) who use OS X or Linux as their development environment will ever adopt it. Nobody likes to be second class. Programming is painful enough even without that.
        pbz 14y ago
        It has been, and it still is, thankfully to a somewhat lesser degree. Even Stallman said "we should discourage people from writing programs in C#". This, of course, is just the tip of the iceberg. Whether .NET is different from Mono is not what I argue. Mono brought a MS-inspired technology to Linux so they got under the MS hatred umbrella. There was and still is a purely knee-jerk / emotional reaction to whatever they bring to the table.
        guard-of-terra 14y ago
        I also remember how Stallman praised the starting of two GNU projects to reimplement .Net. Anyway, Stallman is not a good example of vilifying anything. He's the strictest man in town. He is afraid of everything. Rightfully so. But he's not a representative sample of the community.
    - recursive 14y ago
      That would mean that there aren't any .net developers.
  - jiggy2011 14y ago
    I don't think that necessarily true. Maybe it is for "the open source community" in terms of Stalanites. OTOH lots of people use and love OSS including very profit driven startups and Apple "fanboys". Being able to write C# using Visual Studio under OS X and deploy to Linux would be killer app for a lot of startups and of course whatever stack gets used by the popular startups will be lionised.
shadowmint 14y ago
It's rubbish though. Not the mono runtime; the fact that there are two runtimes. The official MS one, and the Mono one, and although they're kind of compatible, in that your C# can be compiled to run on either of them (mostly, sometimes, if you haven't done anything fancy, if you're not using MVC, if you're not using a UI layer that isn't portable, if the version of mono you're using from A is the same as from B ( >_> unity...) ), this is FAR away from the java JVM, where you can ship an application that just runs on all the platforms. Don't get me wrong, you can do that with C# too... if you use Mono only, and flip off the official M$oft .Net runtime. ...but the mono runtime is behind the curve, always playing catchup to the 'official' runtime, supporting a subset of the features, and everywhere runs different versions of the mono runtime. It's a mess. You've got to admit, the JVM is 100% superior in this regard.
- sk5t 14y ago
  I suppose you've never had a problem with two JVMs that ran a package but didn't behave quite the same way, to disastrous effect? Or dealt with software that only worked with one very specific version of the JRE that was exclusive from the equally specific JRE required by another bit of software? To compare Mono to the MSFT CLR and call it rubbish by way of contrast to Java-land strikes me as hilarious. I'll choose .NET every time given that choice...
  - pretoriusB 14y ago
    >I suppose you've never had a problem with two JVMs that ran a package but didn't behave quite the same way, to disastrous effect? No, never. You mean two different JVMs, from different vendors? Who uses those anymore?
    - jiggy2011 14y ago
      Well there's weirdness between Oracle and OpenJDK, thought to be fair I haven't had a problem with OpenJDF for a while. I don't imagine it's that unusual to find a server running Oracle JVM though.
pretoriusB 14y ago
>Its an open spec that can be implemented on any other platform that cares. Which is something a lot different than an a project actively developed and supported on multiple platforms by Microsoft. Xamarin is OK, but it's tiny (in resources and reach) compared to Microsoft.

Its an open spec that can be implemented on any other platform that cares. Mono is available on many platforms btw

by YeahKIA 14y ago

Its an open spec that can be implemented on any other platform that cares. Mono is available on many platforms btw

jiggy2011 14y ago

This is true, but Mono has always lacked implementations of a bunch of APIs and had not quite as nice dev tools. If there had been a true first party (i.e provided by MS .Net CLR) for other platforms it would probably have had massive traction.

pbz 14y ago
No, it wouldn't. Let's be honest, people would say it's from Microsoft and not use it for that very reason. Could be better than JVM and still most wouldn't use it. Linus was right, the hatred of Microsoft is a disease, and a lot of people in the open source community suffer from it.
- guard-of-terra 14y ago
  Microsoft cast it upon itself. When you cry wolf all the time, nobody comes to help. Microsoft can't let go. They can't say "this code is now open and no strings attached". They can say "but not really". They can say "but don't touch anything". Microsoft can't open. What they can do is okay for consumers. Consumers will download whatever software available and use that. Developers? Hell no. Developers don't trust openness that can be revoked. Because this means their product stops working.
  - pbz 14y ago
    Then how do you explain that with mono? It's open source, but since it used MS's specs, with OS license, it has been vilified by the open source community. The reality of the matter is that while developers like to think they're rational, they're just as emotional as any non-developer. Their decisions are driven by emotions, by their hatred for MS or some other company / technology, hence the disease Linus was talking about.
    - guard-of-terra 14y ago
      How is it vilified? De Icaza loved it and pushed everywhere. Gnome played with it. But mono is not .Net. I mean, if you look at Java, there is a very strict process which a JVM implementation must undergo in order to be called Java (and still there are a dozen of such implementations). It means it behaves predictably and have every one of the required APIs. And most of development tools are written in Java. On the other hand, with .Net we have Microsoft implementation on Windows - and we have everything else. .Net on Windows has a massive number of APIs (many of those system dependent), hatches into COM, can easily use native code and libraries. Most .Net tools only work on Windows and are written as a mixture of native code, bytecode and COM. And mono is a second class citisen forever. It will never have all those limitless APIs and will never have all the tooling. It is extremelly unlikely that developers (of proprietary, in-house, server software) who use OS X or Linux as their development environment will ever adopt it. Nobody likes to be second class. Programming is painful enough even without that.
      - pbz 14y ago
        It has been, and it still is, thankfully to a somewhat lesser degree. Even Stallman said "we should discourage people from writing programs in C#". This, of course, is just the tip of the iceberg. Whether .NET is different from Mono is not what I argue. Mono brought a MS-inspired technology to Linux so they got under the MS hatred umbrella. There was and still is a purely knee-jerk / emotional reaction to whatever they bring to the table.
        guard-of-terra 14y ago
        I also remember how Stallman praised the starting of two GNU projects to reimplement .Net. Anyway, Stallman is not a good example of vilifying anything. He's the strictest man in town. He is afraid of everything. Rightfully so. But he's not a representative sample of the community.
  - recursive 14y ago
    That would mean that there aren't any .net developers.
- jiggy2011 14y ago
  I don't think that necessarily true. Maybe it is for "the open source community" in terms of Stalanites. OTOH lots of people use and love OSS including very profit driven startups and Apple "fanboys". Being able to write C# using Visual Studio under OS X and deploy to Linux would be killer app for a lot of startups and of course whatever stack gets used by the popular startups will be lionised.

shadowmint 14y ago

It's rubbish though. Not the mono runtime; the fact that there are two runtimes. The official MS one, and the Mono one, and although they're kind of compatible, in that your C# can be compiled to run on either of them (mostly, sometimes, if you haven't done anything fancy, if you're not using MVC, if you're not using a UI layer that isn't portable, if the version of mono you're using from A is the same as from B ( >_> unity...) ), this is FAR away from the java JVM, where you can ship an application that just runs on all the platforms. Don't get me wrong, you can do that with C# too... if you use Mono only, and flip off the official M$oft .Net runtime. ...but the mono runtime is behind the curve, always playing catchup to the 'official' runtime, supporting a subset of the features, and everywhere runs different versions of the mono runtime. It's a mess. You've got to admit, the JVM is 100% superior in this regard.

sk5t 14y ago
I suppose you've never had a problem with two JVMs that ran a package but didn't behave quite the same way, to disastrous effect? Or dealt with software that only worked with one very specific version of the JRE that was exclusive from the equally specific JRE required by another bit of software? To compare Mono to the MSFT CLR and call it rubbish by way of contrast to Java-land strikes me as hilarious. I'll choose .NET every time given that choice...
- pretoriusB 14y ago
  >I suppose you've never had a problem with two JVMs that ran a package but didn't behave quite the same way, to disastrous effect? No, never. You mean two different JVMs, from different vendors? Who uses those anymore?
  - jiggy2011 14y ago
    Well there's weirdness between Oracle and OpenJDK, thought to be fair I haven't had a problem with OpenJDF for a while. I don't imagine it's that unusual to find a server running Oracle JVM though.

pretoriusB 14y ago

>Its an open spec that can be implemented on any other platform that cares. Which is something a lot different than an a project actively developed and supported on multiple platforms by Microsoft. Xamarin is OK, but it's tiny (in resources and reach) compared to Microsoft.