Page 31 of 32 FirstFirst ... 2129303132 LastLast
Results 301 to 310 of 315

Thread: Why Mono Is Desirable For Linux

  1. #301
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    347

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by narciso View Post
    I'm getting this error while trying to run Wizorb 64:

    Missing method .ctor in assembly /opt/wizorb/MonoGame.Framework.Linux.dll, type System.Runtime.CompilerServices.ExtensionAttribute
    Can't find custom attr constructor image: /opt/wizorb/MonoGame.Framework.Linux.dll mtoken: 0x0a0003a9

    Unhandled Exception: System.IO.FileNotFoundException: Could not load file or assembly 'System.Core, Version=4.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b77a5c561934e089' or one of its dependencies.
    File name: 'System.Core, Version=4.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b77a5c561934e089'
    at Paris.Paris..ctor () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0
    at Paris.Program.Main (System.String[] args) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0
    [ERROR] FATAL UNHANDLED EXCEPTION: System.IO.FileNotFoundException: Could not load file or assembly 'System.Core, Version=4.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b77a5c561934e089' or one of its dependencies.
    File name: 'System.Core, Version=4.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b77a5c561934e089'
    at Paris.Paris..ctor () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0
    at Paris.Program.Main (System.String[] args) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0

    Does anyone knows what it means?
    Assuming a Debian-based distribution, install libmono-system-core4.0-cil?

  2. #302
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BO$$ View Post
    MONO is shit and should be banned from linux because we can't have linux core programs written in C# and thus be made dependent on Microsoft. They can always fuck us over so don't give them the opportunity. Basically don't start writing new apps in C# or convert existing ones to C#. Unless you want to bend over and take it from Mr. I can't program but I am the CEO of a software company Ballmer.
    Thanks, captain obvious

  3. #303
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    316

    Default

    I read the article and I read through all 30+ pages of the arguing back and forth and I have to say.. I agree Mono should be used.

    In fact, I'm thinking about using it instead of Qt. , I have found that Qt applications on Windows run slowly because they are using a "Raster" renderer, so when you run them on a very high resolution display (say, 1920x1080 or higher) the redraw speed of a Qt application with tons of widgets is very slow (ie: Almost "Java" slow). This is on a system with dual GTX 470 water cooled graphics cards. Just try for yourself running an application like Amarok on Windows 7, the graphical user interface is a little sluggish and heavily stresses a 6-Core Phenom II CPU with all the rastering work. I've tried forcing "OpenGL" graphics systems mode for Qt in Windows, but it just crashes, forcing OpenGL rendering doesn't seem to work in Linux either.

    It appears when Qt applications run on linux they get the benefit of some 2D accelerations that they don't get under Windows. I don't know, but it's something that is driving me up the wall, and making me consider not using Qt for application development. I'm leaning towards something that can make use of DirectDraw / 2D Acceleration on Windows while also making use of 2D accelerations on Linux, so I think Mono is the way to go there, but I really don't know for sure.

    For some reason, a while back, some Qt Developers promised DirectDraw / 2D Accelerated rendering of Qt applications on Windows but apparently it never became stable so it just isn't used yet. The only choices Qt gives me on Windows is "Raster" or "CRASH!".

    I'm sticking to using C++/C#, but seeing 98% of the application's CPU usage get sucked down because of 2D graphics work being done on the CPU (in Windows) is discouraging. Shame on you Qt! It's clear Qt favors Linux, how can it really be considered cross-platform when they half-ass the support for other platforms??. I'll definitely give Mono a try.
    Last edited by Sidicas; 09-26-2012 at 06:19 AM.

  4. #304
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    316

    Default

    Hate to quote myself, but I can't edit my post anymore...
    Quote Originally Posted by Sidicas View Post

    It appears when Qt applications run on linux they get the benefit of some 2D accelerations that they don't get under Windows.
    This would be the Qt "native" renderer for the platform which is X11/XRender. X11/XRender is, IMO, a lot better than Raster as it scales up to very high resolutions very beatufully with only modest hardware. The Raster painter in Qt 4.3 and later, in my opinion, simply sucks. As the Qt developer who worked on Raster said...
    "Double the size of the primitive in each direction and you have one quarter the performance. "
    "if you compare the N900 to the desktop Windows machine you see that despite windows only having a 4 times faster processor the speed is often around 10 times worse. "

    Yes, with a 4 times faster processor your Qt applications run 10x slower! That's not platform favoritism at all, is it? /sarcasm.

    I just wish that a Qt developer wrote somewhere that Qt simply sucks on Windows and I wouldn't have even bothered to try it as a cross platform solution. So yes, Mono here I come. I saw this thread already was a ranting thread so I might as well put my 2 cents in as well.
    Last edited by Sidicas; 09-26-2012 at 06:59 AM.

  5. #305
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Madrid, Spain
    Posts
    398

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sidicas View Post
    (...) I'm sticking to using C++/C#, but seeing 98% of the application's CPU usage get sucked down because of 2D graphics work being done on the CPU (in Windows) is discouraging. Shame on you Qt! It's clear Qt favors Linux, how can it really be considered cross-platform when they half-ass the support for other platforms??. I'll definitely give Mono a try.
    Just to say in passing, some people here do not have any reason to use or not use excluding hate, impressionism, mis-characterization, and so on. You're fully right that WPF on Windows and Gtk# on Linux are both GPU accelerated, so Mono applications seem to run faster at least based on UI snappiness if you target WPF and Gtk#.
    Being said that, Gtk# on Windows has the same problems as you described with Qt, but the fault is not on the # side, but on Gtk+ side: GDK APIs and Cairo APIs are translated via GDI+, and Cairo painting is painfully slow because of this translation (yet is a bit faster than Qt). So C/C++ side is slow, because doesn't take advantage of the underlying hardware. For this reason, Mono applications can be abstracted easier based on underlying hardware, and a lot of ways to do it, and this is the Mono's way to do this.
    One last part which I appreciate in your comment is that what's matter for user is the overall experience, and this can be provided given the tools in a lot of other languages/platforms. Users don't care that is written in "optimized C++" if is that sluggish, but they will ditch the application and will use one that looks just nice, and runs fast enough in Adobe AIR or in .Net

  6. #306
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    9

    Default

    We need the certainty that Microsoft will not try to harm Mono in any way.
    Last edited by Jam66es; 09-26-2012 at 07:53 AM.

  7. #307
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    9

    Default

    I think Microsoft is content to have a Linux version available

  8. #308
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    347

    Default

    (Jam66es is an automated spambot; ignore)

  9. #309
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Madrid, Spain
    Posts
    398

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jam66es View Post
    We need the certainty that Microsoft will not try to harm Mono in any way.
    ... and also that Apple and Google will not harm GCC, they seem to work more with LLVM than with GCC lately. And also Microsoft, Oracle and IBM to not attack C++, and as Qt/QML is using Webkit/V8/and JavaScriptCore to not use Apple's JavaScript implementation. IBM and Oracle have huge interest in Java bussiness, and they want to destroy x86, as they want to sell sell SPARC/PowerPC CPUs.
    I think if you're using KDE you should remove it right away:
    Code:
    apt-get remove libqt4-core
    .
    Try XFCE or directly X11: is much safer!

  10. #310
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    355

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BO$$ View Post
    MONO is shit and should be banned from linux because we can't have linux core programs written in C# and thus be made dependent on Microsoft. They can always fuck us over so don't give them the opportunity. Basically don't start writing new apps in C# or convert existing ones to C#. Unless you want to bend over and take it from Mr. I can't program but I am the CEO of a software company Ballmer.
    Translation: You don't like the choice of programming languages, so therefore Mono should not be included, despite being free software.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •