____/ Jim Richardson on Thursday 30 August 2007 01:38 : \____
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Wed, 29 Aug 2007 16:16:19 -0500,
> Erik Funkenbusch <erik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Wed, 29 Aug 2007 10:44:56 GMT, Linonut wrote:
>>
>>> After takin' a swig o' grog, Erik Funkenbusch belched out this bit o'
>>> wisdom:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 28 Aug 2007 21:21:32 +0200, Ian Hilliard wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Bullshit. Complete and utter BS on your part. First, most ASP.NET runs
>>>>>> just fine under Mono and mod_mono. Second, ASP.NET doesn't require IE
>>>>>> as a client. You're making that up.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Except for SUSE, most distros are trying to avoid the use of mono,
>>>>> because of its uncertain legal position.
>>>>
>>>> Then explain why the FSF has a .NET project called dotgnu?
>>>
>>> No need for him to do that, they do a fine job themselves:
>>>
>>> http://www.gnu.org/software/dotgnu/danger.html
>>>
>>> DotGNU - Keeping You from Getting Tangled in a Net!
>>>
>>> The DotGNU project was started in reaction to Microsoft's .NET
>>> strategy, which was born out of a vision for the future of
>>> information technology which we do not agree with, namely that "the
>>> era of 'open computing,' the free exchange of digital information
>>> that has defined the personal computer industry, is ending."
>>>
>>> . . .
>>>
>>> Unlike .NET, DotGNU will use a peer-to-peer system for service
>>> discovery, and avoid the use of centralized
>>> authentication/authorization portals like the "Passport" system.
>>> DotGNU's strategy for these areas is not only technologically
>>> superior, but it also serves to ensure that no-one will ever have
>>> the kind of monopoly power which would be necessary for ending the
>>> free exchange of digital information.
>>>
>>> Additional, Related Dangers
>>>
>>> Microsoft's political lobbying
>>>
>>> According to a recent article in CIO Magazine, Microsoft has an
>>> overwhelming impact on technology policy, and Microsoft has lobbied
>>> particularly hard against "open source".
>>>
>>> The Growing Influence of Microsoft Corp. in Academics
>>>
>>> Independent e-Commerce Threatened by .NET
>>>
>>> The Vendor Lock-In Problem for Webservices
>>>
>>> Privacy Issues
>>>
>>> Security Issues
>>>
>>> No-one Else Is Challenging Microsoft
>>>
>>> Frequently Asked Questions
>>> Isn't it foolish to try competing with Microsoft?
>>>
>>> Why can't we just wait and see whether the effects of .NET are
>>> really so bad?
>>>
>>> Good ol' Erik. As always, it is what he doesn't say that is most
>>> important.
>>
>> All that's nice, but it has nothing to do with what we're talking about.
>> It's being claimed that C# code is Microsoft proprietary. That's false.
>>
>> The argument about authentication systems is laughable. *NOBODY*, other
>> than Microsoft uses Passport. None of the code on Codeplex uses passport.
>> Passport is so NOT a part of .NET as to be laughable.
>>
>> But all that is beside the point. Mono and Dotgnu are two implementations
>> of ISO C# outside of Microsoft. That completely obliterates the argument
>> that C# code is proprietary.
>
>
> Ian stated that the reason was the uncertain legal position of mono, not
> that C# was proprietary. Given MS sabre rattling over patents for the
> last couple of months, I'd say that uncertain is a good way to put it.
Novell 'customers' received 'exemptions' for Mono (for 5 years). Xandros and
Linspire /explicitly/ did not. It speaks volumes. Need that be said louder?
--
~~ Best of wishes
Roy S. Schestowitz | "Ping this IP, see if it responds the second time"
http://Schestowitz.com | GNU/Linux | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
Swap: 1510068k total, 510372k used, 999696k free, 90568k cached
http://iuron.com - next generation of search paradigms
|
|
