-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Mono and Samba
,----[ Quote ]
| In any case, I first started noticing Mr.
| Allisonâs responses directly addressing the
| fallacy of comparing Mono and Samba in the
| comments to an error-filled attack rant
| against RMS by Jason Perlow for ZD Net.
| Although it is certainly âpearls before swineâ
| to attempt to correct Mr. Perlow, Mr. Allison
| does make his point:
|
| Comparing Mono to Samba is incorrect.
| Samba has the PFIF agreements, see here
| for details:
|
| http://www.samba.org/samba/PFIF/PFIF_agreement.html
|
| To my knowledge Mono has nothing like this.
|
| [...]
|
| Mr. Allison has now taken the time to address
| Mono in more detail with a blog entry
| âMonomaniaâ. I encourage you to read it.
|
| I also encourage you to consider all the hoops
| that Team Mono insists critics people must
| jump through to criticize Mono, and how Mr.
| Allison surely meets or exceeds all that I
| have seen. Yet, I do not see Team Mono
| accepting his criticism, nor do I see my
| mailbox filling with acknowledgement that itâs
| not just crazy zealots that have a problem
| with Mono.
|
| Why am I not seeing these things? Because Mono
| apologists are not honest in their arguments.
| They like Mono, and will make any argument
| they think supports it, and ignore or attack
| anything that they think weakens it.
|
| Itâs a song Iâve sung many times, and this
| latest wrinkle on Mono == Samba is just one
| more example of the sloppy reasoning and poor
| logic behind Team Monoâs defenses.
`----
http://www.the-source.com/2009/10/on-mono-and-samba/
Recent:
Mono and Samba: smell the difference, says Allison
,----[ Quote ]
| It may be recalled that Allison quit Novell in disgust
| soon after the company signed a patent indemnification
| deal with Microsoft in November 2006.
|
| [...]
|
| "Miguel's employer, Novell, has a patent agreement
| with Microsoft that exempts Mono users from Microsoft
| patent aggression, so long as you get Mono from
| Novell. Miguel takes pains to point this out," Allison
| wrote.
|
| As far as Mono goes, De Icaza has implemented parts of
| it which are not covered by the specifications
| submitted to the standards body ECMA by Microsoft; the
| parts submitted are said to be available on royalty-
| free terms and without fear of patent violations.
`----
http://www.itwire.com/content/view/28570/1090/
Consequences (If You Wait Long Enough)
,----[ Quote ]
| Monomania
| Jeremy Allison argues that Mono is dangerous
| to free software distributions and should be
| relegated to the "restricted" repositories
| along with other software with unsafe
| licensing and/or patent contexts. He makes
| rational arguments, avoids emotion and thus
| when he is inevitably dismissed with a hand-
| wave by the Monomaniacs like the rest of us it
| will be especially telling.
`----
http://blogs.sun.com/webmink/entry/links_for_2009_10_16
Mono a mano - Many of us are wrestling with this, I suspect
,----[ Quote ]
| Allison's contention is that while he can
| understand original Mono creator Miguel de
| Icaza's reasons for wanting to code GUI apps
| in C# rather than C or C++, Allison would
| rather that the open-source community turned
| to Java instead in its quest to build out the
| graphical environment. There is some talk
| about, at the time Mono was started, Java not
| being available under a free license, but
| Allison contends that it has more to do with
| potential or real rivalries among developers
| wishing to use Java or Mono/C++, as well as
| control over their respective projects.
|
| [...]
|
| On the other hand, seeing Mono as the "Miguel
| de Icaza-who-works-for-Novell Show," keeping
| in mind that I know little about him and have
| never met him, doesn't give me a good feeling
| about how GNOME is tipping every more closely
| into becoming a Mono-powered world.
`----
http://www.insidesocal.com/click/2009/10/mono-a-mano---many-of-us-are-w.html
Monomania
,----[ Quote ]
| But the problem is that Mono is dangerous for
| Free Software. The heart of the matter is, as
| usual, software patents. Microsoft have patents
| on the technology inside .NET, and since the
| Tom Tom lawsuit, Microsoft have shown they are
| not averse to attacking Free Software using
| patent infringement claims. Microsoft have
| tried to allay some fears by putting the .NET
| specification under their "Microsoft Community
| Promise" which you can read here:
|
| http://www.microsoft.com/interop/cp/default.mspx
|
| Miguel hailed this a the solution to all the
| patent problems with Mono. But this promise is
| simply not good enough to base a language
| environment implementation upon. After all, if
| the rug is pulled out from under that
| implementation by the threat of patent
| infringement you don't just lose the
| implementation itself, you lose all the
| programs that depend upon it. That's a really
| dangerous situation for Free Software programs
| to be in. The Free Software Foundation wrote a
| good analysis of the problems with this promise
| here:
|
| http://www.fsf.org/news/2009-07-mscp-mono
|
| But my basic issue with the Microsoft Community
| Promise is that Miguel doesn't have to depend
| on it like everyone else does. Miguel's
| employer, Novell, has a patent agreement with
| Microsoft that exempts Mono users from
| Microsoft patent aggression, so long as you get
| Mono from Novell.
|
| [...]
|
| Microsoft isn't playing games any more by
| merely threatening to assert patents. Real
| lawsuits have now occurred and the gloves are
| off against Free Software. Moving Mono and its
| applications to the "restricted" repositories
| is now just plain common sense.
`----
http://tuxdeluxe.org/node/299
Mono is a trap â evidence
,----[ Quote ]
| Still arenât convinced that Mono is a trap
| which ultimately only benefits Microsoft?
|
| Take a look at this âHighly Confidentialâ
| document from Microsoft (from Comes vs
| Microsoft case) entitled âEffective Evangelismâ
| and decide for yourself. It exposes Microsoftâs
| game plan for dominating the market with their
| platforms (which we already know, but some
| choose to ignore).
`----
http://blog.christophersmart.com/2009/10/15/mono-is-a-trap-evidence/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEARECAAYFAkrdH24ACgkQU4xAY3RXLo6JfQCcCdQM4B9ort0u4PG4zLXoibAM
tsEAn13qduYdl+NdUEkeKjhx63whZWiU
=Fe1Q
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
|
|
