Why Mono Is Desirable For Linux

[directhex]

Qt comes to mind. (It appeared way before 1996, 1992 to be exact, so if your question really is about 1996 specifically, then I don't know.)

Also, does Gtk from 1998 count?

Qt 1.0 and GTK 1.0 are still shipping? An app built against those will build today and run?

If not, you need to relearn/retrain every time the Mad Hatter shouts "change places!" and random APIs get thrown out of the window

[hoohoo]

Really are there ANY deprecated development environments on Linux? They are ALL still around. I can pop in one of my old SLS disks from 1995 and ALL of those tools are still around and still supported. Perl, C, C++, scheme, Motif, they were all available then and they are still available now, with support even. Your programs from back then will still work today.

...

If you try to build a program written to a 5 or 10 year old version of KDE or Gnome then you'll need that version installed.

Example: my fave MP3 player, XMMS, uses GTK 1.2.10 toolkit that no distro (that I use) ships anymore.

Certainly I can build the toolkit, but doing so amounts pretty much to building Gnome 2, and that's really no fun at all.

So, yeah, in theory there are no deprecated environments on Linux. In practice however...

--

I think *NIX use of C & C++ as main system & library level languages is a great thing - the languages are defined by ISO or such - can't be arbitrarily modified by single vendor to counter perceived competitive threat.

[nadro]

The best choice for a games is C++. Maybe for a small project C# or JAVA are ok, but for more advanced games these langueages are useless. These langs has got too big overhead and this is a waste of memory and CPU (eg worse hit in a cache). It's better do do more advanced physic, AI or sound and other CPU resources give to a graphic driver than waste a lot of resources for a language.

[directhex]

i think *nix use of c & c++ as main system & library level languages is a great thing - the languages are defined by iso or such - can't be arbitrarily modified by single vendor to counter perceived competitive threat.

iso/iec 23270?

[hoohoo]

I believe that the majority of the resistance to C# adoption has little to do with the language, and much to do with MS. I like C# as much as I like Java. It makes writing middleware logic a breeze to the point where I can write and navigate code as I think. I feel that java is more desirable for non-gui applications and .Net is more desirable for GUI applications. I would love to see the stability of the mono runtime improve a bit, as I have had a couple bad experiences in the enterprise.

The entire patent argument may be moot, but is part of a larger fear. The fear is that somehow MS will find a way to screw us. They have done so in the past, they will do so in the future. I cannot help but feel a hefty amount of paranoia every time I see C# running on linux. Its uncomfortable and I don't like it.

I hope the author is right. I hope mono does great things for the linux desktop. I hope MS doesn't pull another SCO or some new trick.

F

Hmmm, I don't use C# or mono, or Java for that matter. C++, C, Python & PHP will get you pretty far ;-)

But I do fear MS using .NET & C# as a wedge to open legal action against Linux.

However, I think MS submitted C# to ISO or ECMA as a standard some years ago.

So is my fear irrational, or is MS even more devious than I think it is?

[directhex]

The best choice for a games is C++. Maybe for a small project C# or JAVA are ok, but for more advanced games these langueages are useless. These langs has got too big overhead and this is a waste of memory and CPU (eg worse hit in a cache). It's better do do more advanced physic, AI or sound and other CPU resources give to a graphic driver than waste a lot of resources for a language.

Big games aren't written in one language. The graphics engine is written in one thing, in-game object scripting is another, and so on. For example, Civilization 4 uses Python for everything other than the graphics engine; Civilization 5 uses Lua; The Sims 3 uses Mono.

[frantaylor]

Access? Visual Basic? Who the fuck would ever use that, aside from the first time you tried it and saw how bad it is/was.

Perhaps when MICROSOFT prints promotional materials touting their capabilities? Oh you say they LIED? What a FINE company to deal with!

And as someone who coded and codes both Java and C#: C# is better. Regardless about which point you are talking.

As for mono: The only bad thing about that is, that they (the company behind Mono which I'm not able to spell correctly) aren't porting WPF. That stuff is so friggin awesome.

You just DESTROYED your VERY OWN ARGUMENT! WHY invest in a fractured development environment where the "good stuff" is only available on one platform?

HOW HOW HOW is C# supposed to be "better regardless of which point" when the point happens to be cross-platform portability?

[hoohoo]

iso/iec 23270?

Yes I thought so, but .NET & C# are predominantly used on Windows, so MS can break the standard if it wants to in such a way as to break mono implementation but leave Windows still working. So your wonderful killer cross platform app that is drawing the world onto Linux suddenly works so much better on Windows.

In the same way, SUN for example, could not have tried to close SunOS even back in the day by redefining C - the language was too widely used and breaking it would have cost Sun too much.

I don't know that I am explaining myself very well. Just take it as my probably incoherent two cent's worth.

[directhex]

But I do fear MS using .NET & C# as a wedge to open legal action against Linux.

I just don't understand this.

Why is Mono the magical wedge to fear?

Why isn't the Linux kernel, over which Microsoft have sued e.g. TomTom over, the wedge?

Why isn't Freetype, which Apple threatened to sue over, the wedge?

Why isn't OpenOffice.org/LibreOffice a wedge for the same patent trolls who sued Microsoft over Word's ability to save to XML-based formats (ODF is XML-based, and OOo/LO also saves to Microsoft's XML formats too)?

Why isn't Java a wedge, given the patents Kodak sued Sun over?

Why isn't JavaScript a wedge, given the JavaScript specification is (c) Microsoft (amongst others; the C# and .NET specs are also done by Microsoft and many non-Microsoft people)?

Why isn't Vala a wedge, given how much of C# it copies, and that Microsoft's "will not sue" patent pledge applies only to full implementations of the language and not partial clones?

Why is Mono something to run in fear of, and none of the above are worth thinking about?

[directhex]

Yes I thought so, but .NET & C# are predominantly used on Windows, so MS can break the standard if it wants to in such a way as to break mono implementation but leave Windows still working. So your wonderful killer cross platform app that is drawing the world onto Linux suddenly works so much better on Windows.

If Microsoft change the spec, then the app - and every app relying on the old version of the spec - breaks.

In fact, it'd become paradoxically the case that the best way to continue making your app available to users is to bundle Mono for Windows - which would still run your app - than to use Microsoft.NET, which would not.