Sometimes saying nothing says a whole lot.
I’m just wondering when Team Mono is going to comment on Microsoft bringing Silverlight to Moblin?
I’d also be interested in why a .NET developer would target Moonlight if developing for Windows/Moblin, rather than Genuine Microsoft Advantage Silverlight?
I know it’s easier to compose fact-deficient rants, attack RMS (again), or plan your appearance at the next Microsoft-sponsored conference (or two), but I sorta thought the Moblin development might at least rate a brief comment?
Just a bit odd the noise machine that absolutely leaps into action at the smallest criticism of yon holy artifact hasn’t been cranked up yet. Talking points not finalized, I suppose.
#1 by Richard on October 2nd, 2009
A Java program usually doesn’t care about which JRE it’s running in, on which OS. A .Net program usually doesn’t care about which CLR it’s running in, on which OS. A Silverlight program usually doesn’t care about which plugin framework it’s running in, on which OS.
You might as well ask why a C programmer would target CLANG/LLVM if developing for Unix, rather than GCC.
#2 by Rui on October 3rd, 2009
Richard, i have been reading your comments all over Mono – No – No…
And you are always PRO MICRO$OFT…
I just would like to ask you: Do you get paid to do so??? Or you do it just because you have nothing else better to do with your spare time ???
If it’s the second option, we all FLOSS lovers and supporters could give you advice with voluntary work and help others.
Your comments just suck for being always the same. You try to debunk anything Jason writes… Jesus… Don’t you get tired of doing so ???
Best regards,
Rui.
#3 by Richard on October 5th, 2009
Rui,
Remind me, which part of my post do you disagree with? I couldn’t quite make it far enough through the thicket of personal attacks, insinuations, accusations, and derogatory comments to find out. Perhaps if you could just quote the part that you disagree with, and state your objection, we might end up with a productive conversation.
Thanks.
#4 by makomk on October 15th, 2009
A .Net program theoretically shouldn’t care which CLR it’s running on. Reality is somewhat different (as, for example, the OpenSim developers are finding on the hard and painful way). If you take a sufficiently complex .Net program and move it across to Mono, it’s unlikely to run well.
As I recall, the problems that OpenSim is having are mostly because .Net automatically cleans up various resources that Mono doesn’t, like thread handles and buffers. So their code runs fine on .Net, but leaks and falls over on Mono. (The remaining problems appear to be down to Mono’s garbage collector sucking massively. In theory, Mono have a generational GC in development – it’s very similar to the one introduced in Java 1.2, actually – but they appear to be having issues getting it release-ready.)
#5 by Jo Shields on October 2nd, 2009
Proprietary software is uninteresting. I wouldn’t bother commenting about a new release of Skype either.
#6 by Richard on October 2nd, 2009
?
Last time I checked, proprietary codebases were pretty interesting. Y’know, little things like Google Wave, DX11, WebSphere, Android, Starcraft 2, …
… disregarding the utility or brilliance of software because the source isn’t open is like disregarding the utility or brilliance of software because the developer had red hair.
#7 by Jo Shields on October 2nd, 2009
But none of those are really relevant in terms of “Team Mono”
My point is, I’m really not interested in this development – I’m not a Moblin user, it doesn’t affect me or my Free Software contibutions. I have a suspicion as to a motivating factor, but it relies upon information I was given in confidence a while back – and would be conjecture.
#8 by Jason on October 5th, 2009
Silverlight coming to Linux is certainly relevant to Team Mono, though.You don’t think it is something that merits some comment from Team Mono? You don’t think it is a bit peculiar that this news is passing without any comment at all on Monologue?
Anyway, I’ll accept that perhaps you yourself are not interested in this development, but I think it’s quite fair to say that some other members of Team Mono do not hold the view that “proprietary software is uninteresting”. Rather, I think adjectives such as “superb” and “awesome” have been applied by some members of Team Mono to some very specific proprietary technologies.
It’s also a bit strange that you take a hard-line “proprietary software is uninteresting” stance, as Mono and Silverlight are nothing more than re-implementations of proprietary software. At least Mono can feebly point to a limited ECMA/ISO sub-set of .NET and pretend that there is some “open-ness” happening, Moonlight can’t even manage that. Not that there is necessarily anything wrong with open implementations in and of itself, but it seems an odd set of projects to become involved in if you genuinely do not find proprietary software interesting.
I can say with some confidence that the leader of the Mono and Silverlight projects thinks proprietary software is quite interesting indeed.
#9 by Jo Shields on October 5th, 2009
Wake me when GNU isn’t a reimplementation of proprietary software too. That’s a pretty silly line to follow isn’t it?
#10 by Lex on October 6th, 2009
@Jo Shields
Here are some posts of yours from this very discussion (in entirety, so no taking out of the context):
So GNU is a reimplementation of proprietary software, but proprietary software is uninteresting. Are you trying to defeat your own argument or just disagreeing for the sake of disagreeing?
#11 by Jo Shields on October 6th, 2009
You’re (deliberately, of course) missing the point.
My point is: I don’t care if there’s a new release of Solaris, IRIX, AIX, HP-UX, UNICOS, Mac OS X. They’re proprietary software I don’t use nor intend to use. GNU conversely is interesting as it’s Free, and I’d take an interest in major changes to the GNU stack which I wouldn’t take in Solaris, IRIX, AIX, HP-UX, UNICOS, Mac OS X.
Similarly, I don’t really care much about changes to Microsoft.NET or Silverlight (such as this Moblin thing) because they’re proprietary software I don’t use nor intend to use – the Free equivalent on the other hand is much more interesting.
Are there cases where the proprietary option is better? Sure, if it’s a game then the Free version is likely shit, but in the general case, I really don’t care enough about proprietary software releases to make the detailed analyses of them that Jason seems to be demanding in this article.
#12 by Anonymous on October 6th, 2009
Actually you’re missing the point. Silverlight on Moblin is Silverlight on Linux. The reason why Team Mono is being asked for a comment is because it’s their goal to bring Silverlight to Linux via Moonlight and this is a direct conflict.