Mono .net  
Author Message
rshimizu12





PostPosted: 2004-12-11 6:19:00 Top

java-programmer, Mono .net Recently I learned that Mono .net will run MS .net applications. This
came as a bit of a suprise to me because I thought Mono was a different
implenteation of .net and therefore incompatible.

So this raises some interesting questions. Since Microsoft still
retains copyrights and patents to .net is Mono .net governed by the
MSDN EULA. Or can Microsoft revoke the license to the ECMA at a future
date. If that were possible it would not seem inconcievable that
Microsoft could theaten to withdraw if they did not agree to adhere to
a MS EULA. On the otherhand Microsoft could demand a fee for each
transaction. Awhile back Bill Gates said that Microsoft was not making
enough money from the internet and wanted to use .NET as a chargeback
mechanism to force them to pay 1 penny for each transaction.


Alternatively speaking however Mono .NET could be used as a migration
platform to move people to Linux. One possible advanate to Mono .NET is
that SE Linux gives the administrator more granularity to lock down the
OS.

In any case there is a lot to ponder.

 
rshimizu12





PostPosted: 2004-12-11 7:45:00 Top

java-programmer >> Mono .net The Toll Road Ahead:The Impact of Microsoft's New Licensing Scheme
on Free and Open Source Software (FOSS)

(http://www.penguinpros.com/Viewpoints/TollRoadAhead.html)

This document is quite illuminating on Microsoft's plans regarding IP
and patents

 
General Protection Fault





PostPosted: 2004-12-11 7:46:00 Top

java-programmer >> Mono .net ["Followup-To:" header set to comp.os.linux.advocacy.]
On 10 Dec 2004 14:18:50 -0800, email***@***.com wrote:
> Recently I learned that Mono .net will run MS .net applications. This
> came as a bit of a suprise to me because I thought Mono was a different
> implenteation of .net and therefore incompatible.
>
> So this raises some interesting questions. Since Microsoft still
> retains copyrights and patents to .net is Mono .net governed by the
> MSDN EULA. Or can Microsoft revoke the license to the ECMA at a future
> date. If that were possible it would not seem inconcievable that
> Microsoft could theaten to withdraw if they did not agree to adhere to
> a MS EULA.

> On the otherhand Microsoft could demand a fee for each
> transaction. Awhile back Bill Gates said that Microsoft was not making
> enough money from the internet and wanted to use .NET as a chargeback
> mechanism to force them to pay 1 penny for each transaction.

Microsoft can only charge you for using .NET if you're using one of their
.NET services, like MapPoint. They abandoned Hailstorm after no major
backers trusted them with their customers' personal information, and rightfully
so.

Then again, your statements are so far from logical I'm sure you meant
something else.

> Alternatively speaking however Mono .NET could be used as a migration
> platform to move people to Linux. One possible advanate to Mono .NET is
> that SE Linux gives the administrator more granularity to lock down the
> OS.

None of the SELinux features are accessible from .NET.

> In any case there is a lot to ponder.

It's still amazing in this day and age that people still don't know what
.NET is.

--
FreeBSD 4.8-RELEASE i386
5:40PM up 17 days, 23:02, 2 users, load averages: 0.00, 0.00, 0.01
 
 
John Bailo





PostPosted: 2004-12-11 10:45:00 Top

java-programmer >> Mono .net email***@***.com wrote:

> Recently I learned that Mono .net will run MS .net applications. This
> came as a bit of a suprise to me because I thought Mono was a different
> implenteation of .net and therefore incompatible.

True and false.

Mono is a reference implementation of the .Net ECMA standard.

However, things like Windows.Forms are ports of Windows specific assemblies.

So, some code will run, that only uses the reference assemblies, but a
program that, say, uses Outlook Interop may not.

> So this raises some interesting questions. Since Microsoft still
> retains copyrights and patents to .net is Mono .net governed by the
> MSDN EULA.

No.

> Or can Microsoft revoke the license to the ECMA at a future
> date.

No...but there is nothing to say that it might abandon .Net in favor of some
other standard that it would make proprietary.

> If that were possible it would not seem inconcievable that
> Microsoft could theaten to withdraw if they did not agree to adhere to
> a MS EULA.

Right now, it would probably be glad that Linux users adopt a MS platform so
that they can port their code to Linux more easily.

> On the otherhand Microsoft could demand a fee for each
> transaction. Awhile back Bill Gates said that Microsoft was not making
> enough money from the internet and wanted to use .NET as a chargeback
> mechanism to force them to pay 1 penny for each transaction.

Huh?

> Alternatively speaking however Mono .NET could be used as a migration
> platform to move people to Linux. One possible advanate to Mono .NET is
> that SE Linux gives the administrator more granularity to lock down the
> OS.

Exactly.

>
> In any case there is a lot to ponder.

There certainly is...I have done a lot of .Net in the past two years ( and a
lot of java ) and at this point, I feel that I want to learn more g++/c++
just to have a way around both of them.

I find that with both .Net and Java it is not the language that is
important, but the quality and richness of the platform API/Assemblies.
These determine how much /stuff/ I can manipulate.

However, if that is true, then one has to look at c++ libraries, which are
far more adaptable and richer than either the java API or the .NET
assemblies. And, once you pass a certain point in learning c#/java, you
will find that c++ is just as easy/hard and can do more.

Why would you want something that is costly, proprietary, almost as easy and
not as powerful? Why wouldn't you want the GNU compiler as your base
development platform ?!




--
Language is a virus from outer space.
--William S. Burroughs
 
 
dc





PostPosted: 2005-1-5 10:48:00 Top

java-programmer >> Mono .net
"John Bailo" <email***@***.com> wrote in message
news:tatud.7445$email***@***.com...
> email***@***.com wrote:
>
>> Recently I learned that Mono .net will run MS .net applications. This
>> came as a bit of a suprise to me because I thought Mono was a different
>> implenteation of .net and therefore incompatible.
>
> True and false.
>
> Mono is a reference implementation of the .Net ECMA standard.
>

Yes, the ECMA/ISO standards apply to CLI and C#. Neither are officially
".NET", which is a Microsoft trademarked name. So the implementations of
the ECMA standard are not really .NET, although they look and feel very very
similar.

> However, things like Windows.Forms are ports of Windows specific
> assemblies.
>

Windows Forms, ASP.NET, ADO.NET, and other stuff is not included in the
ECMA/ISO standards. These are class libraries for which no public
"specification" exists. They are not intended to be standards. Of course
there is the definitive implementation of those API's - within the .NET
Framework. Most of the "other" implementations (like Mono, dotGNU, maybe
there are others) have reproduced at least *some* of these non-standard
APIs.

> So, some code will run, that only uses the reference assemblies, but a
> program that, say, uses Outlook Interop may not.
>
>> So this raises some interesting questions. Since Microsoft still
>> retains copyrights and patents to .net is Mono .net governed by the
>> MSDN EULA.
>
> No.
>
>> Or can Microsoft revoke the license to the ECMA at a future
>> date.
>
> No...but there is nothing to say that it might abandon .Net in favor of
> some
> other standard that it would make proprietary.
>
>> If that were possible it would not seem inconcievable that
>> Microsoft could theaten to withdraw if they did not agree to adhere to
>> a MS EULA.
>
> Right now, it would probably be glad that Linux users adopt a MS platform
> so
> that they can port their code to Linux more easily.
>
>> On the otherhand Microsoft could demand a fee for each
>> transaction. Awhile back Bill Gates said that Microsoft was not making
>> enough money from the internet and wanted to use .NET as a chargeback
>> mechanism to force them to pay 1 penny for each transaction.
>
> Huh?
>
>> Alternatively speaking however Mono .NET could be used as a migration
>> platform to move people to Linux. One possible advanate to Mono .NET is
>> that SE Linux gives the administrator more granularity to lock down the
>> OS.
>
> Exactly.

Miguel went with Mono because he felt it offered benefits for Linux
developers.
http://www.oetrends.com/news.php?action=view_record&idnum=339


-Dino

--
Dino Chiesa
Microsoft Developer Division
d i n o c h @ OmitThis . m i c r o s o f t . c o m


 
 
rshimizu12





PostPosted: 2005-1-5 11:47:00 Top

java-programmer >> Mono .net So this raises some interesting questions. Since Microsoft still
> retains copyrights and patents to .net is Mono .net governed by the
> MSDN EULA.

No.

I am not so sure about this since Microsoft still owns the IP rights to
.net.....??