GNOME embraces .NET

GNOME embraces .NET

Post by Sean » Sun, 03 Feb 2002 16:50:43



Is this the thin end of another wedge?....

     "If the free-est of free software
      projects is abandoning the GPL, and
      adopting APIs written in Redmond, are
      we facing a Windows future without
      the gougeware licenses?"

See:
    http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/23919.html

Sean

 
 
 

GNOME embraces .NET

Post by Jeff Hal » Sun, 03 Feb 2002 18:23:06


No, because we can use Linux without Gnome.

> Is this the thin end of another wedge?....

>      "If the free-est of free software
>       projects is abandoning the GPL, and
>       adopting APIs written in Redmond, are
>       we facing a Windows future without
>       the gougeware licenses?"

> See:
>     http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/23919.html

> Sean


 
 
 

GNOME embraces .NET

Post by Roy Cull » Sun, 03 Feb 2002 18:01:31




Quote:> Is this the thin end of another wedge?....

>      "If the free-est of free software
>       projects is abandoning the GPL, and
>       adopting APIs written in Redmond, are
>       we facing a Windows future without
>       the gougeware licenses?"

> See:
>     http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/23919.html

Its the death of gnome if the gnome developers accept .net. I think
Miquel de Icaza is very much out on a limb here. I certainly hope
so.
 
 
 

GNOME embraces .NET

Post by Arthu » Sun, 03 Feb 2002 19:28:36



> No, because we can use Linux without Gnome.

And we can use GTK++ and Gnome without Ximian.
 
 
 

GNOME embraces .NET

Post by domi » Sun, 03 Feb 2002 21:48:17



> Is this the thin end of another wedge?....

>      "If the free-est of free software
>       projects is abandoning the GPL, and
>       adopting APIs written in Redmond, are
>       we facing a Windows future without
>       the gougeware licenses?"

> See:
>     http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/23919.html

> Sean

what exactly is wrong with an api that's written in redmond, one doesn't
license an api, one licenses an implementation
domi
 
 
 

GNOME embraces .NET

Post by Linon » Mon, 04 Feb 2002 04:50:32


After takin' a swig o' grog, Jeff Hall belched out this bit o' wisdom:

Quote:> No, because we can use Linux without Gnome.

I'll go to bare X if I have to.  Or CDE or even KDE.

--
A day without some form of UNIX sucks

 
 
 

GNOME embraces .NET

Post by Marc Geerling » Mon, 04 Feb 2002 10:36:51



> Is this the thin end of another wedge?....

>      "If the free-est of free software
>       projects is abandoning the GPL, and
>       adopting APIs written in Redmond, are we facing a Windows future
>       without
>       the gougeware licenses?"

> See:
>     http://www.veryComputer.com/

> Sean

Not every idea coming from Microsoft is bad, if it is why does KDE try to
mimic Windows? Why does KDE office packet koffice looks like a Office
rip off? Nobody is screeming * there.
But if somebody is saying dat the infrastructure .net is providing isn't
a bad one, purely looking to the api and when he says he like it so
much he wants a  linux implementation and base desktop on it,
everbody is screeming betrayal and *!
I for one like the api .net provides, this doesn't mean I like the
things microsoft is planning to implement with it (passport and the
likes.

I for one wish that mono will be a success, if implemented good it will
be a usefull extension of linux. As for compatibility with microsofts
implemantation. I trust microsoft will take care of that and*it!
But that doesn't mean mono will be unusable for the *nix community.

regards

Marc Geerlings

 
 
 

GNOME embraces .NET

Post by Jim Richardso » Mon, 04 Feb 2002 11:12:55


On Sun, 03 Feb 2002 09:36:51 +0100,


>> Is this the thin end of another wedge?....

>>      "If the free-est of free software
>>       projects is abandoning the GPL, and
>>       adopting APIs written in Redmond, are we facing a Windows future
>>       without
>>       the gougeware licenses?"

>> See:
>>     http://www.veryComputer.com/

>> Sean

> Not every idea coming from Microsoft is bad, if it is why does KDE try to
> mimic Windows? Why does KDE office packet koffice looks like a Office
> rip off? Nobody is screeming * there.
> But if somebody is saying dat the infrastructure .net is providing isn't
> a bad one, purely looking to the api and when he says he like it so
> much he wants a  linux implementation and base desktop on it,
> everbody is screeming betrayal and *!
> I for one like the api .net provides, this doesn't mean I like the
> things microsoft is planning to implement with it (passport and the
> likes.

> I for one wish that mono will be a success, if implemented good it will
> be a usefull extension of linux. As for compatibility with microsofts
> implemantation. I trust microsoft will take care of that and*it!
> But that doesn't mean mono will be unusable for the *nix community.

> regards

> Marc Geerlings

The question is, do you trust microsoft to play fair with the api?

--
Jim Richardson
        Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
www.eskimo.com/~warlock
        Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.

 
 
 

GNOME embraces .NET

Post by Tim Smit » Mon, 04 Feb 2002 13:42:32



>The question is, do you trust microsoft to play fair with the api?

People always bring this up, and it makes no sense.  Once Microsoft
publishes an API and tells developers it is OK to use, Microsoft is
much more constrained than most free software projects, because of the
need for binary compatibility with third party applications.

Microsoft can add some things to the API that the GNOME people don't
want to copy into the Linux implementation, and so code that uses
those things will be hard to port to Linux.  Presumably, GNOME is
going to limit the APIs they use to the ones that they are going to
implement on Linux, and nothing Microsoft subsequently does will break
that.

So, the worst that can happen is that some time down the line, the
GNOME people decide to stop tracking Microsoft, and GNOME .net and
Microsoft .net diverge.  We still win, because .net is a technically
better base for something like GNOME than the existing things on Linux
or Java.  It doesn't matter where it came from.

--Tim Smith

 
 
 

GNOME embraces .NET

Post by domi » Mon, 04 Feb 2002 16:09:16




>> Is this the thin end of another wedge?....

>>      "If the free-est of free software
>>       projects is abandoning the GPL, and
>>       adopting APIs written in Redmond, are we facing a Windows future
>>       without
>>       the gougeware licenses?"

>> See:
>>     http://www.veryComputer.com/

>> Sean

> Not every idea coming from Microsoft is bad, if it is why does KDE try to
> mimic Windows? Why does KDE office packet koffice looks like a Office
> rip off? Nobody is screeming * there.
> But if somebody is saying dat the infrastructure .net is providing isn't
> a bad one, purely looking to the api and when he says he like it so
> much he wants a  linux implementation and base desktop on it,
> everbody is screeming betrayal and *!
> I for one like the api .net provides, this doesn't mean I like the
> things microsoft is planning to implement with it (passport and the
> likes.

> I for one wish that mono will be a success, if implemented good it will
> be a usefull extension of linux. As for compatibility with microsofts
> implemantation. I trust microsoft will take care of that and*it!
> But that doesn't mean mono will be unusable for the *nix community.

note there is also the dotGNU project, which seems to do about the same as mono
domi

- Show quoted text -

Quote:

> regards

> Marc Geerlings

 
 
 

GNOME embraces .NET

Post by domi » Mon, 04 Feb 2002 16:12:16



> Is this the thin end of another wedge?....

>      "If the free-est of free software
>       projects is abandoning the GPL, and
>       adopting APIs written in Redmond, are
>       we facing a Windows future without
>       the gougeware licenses?"

> See:
>     http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/23919.html

> Sean

err, does anyone know why this mono project is linked to gnome all the time,
since it seems that a java-replacement should also be usable by other things
than gnome (kde for example, which i think is way better than gnome, especially
from the programmer's point of view (but let's not start a discussion about
that :) ))
domi
 
 
 

GNOME embraces .NET

Post by Craig Kelle » Mon, 04 Feb 2002 18:54:28



> After takin' a swig o' grog, Jeff Hall belched out this bit o' wisdom:

> > No, because we can use Linux without Gnome.

> I'll go to bare X if I have to.  Or CDE or even KDE.

Why?  Mono is open-source.

--
It is financially more expensive to go to prison than to attend Harvard.


 
 
 

GNOME embraces .NET

Post by Kenneth Down » Mon, 04 Feb 2002 19:22:35



> So, the worst that can happen is that some time down the line, the
> GNOME people decide to stop tracking Microsoft, and GNOME .net and
> Microsoft .net diverge.  We still win, because .net is a technically
> better base for something like GNOME than the existing things on Linux
> or Java.  It doesn't matter where it came from.

> --Tim Smith

Jim, can I trouble you to elaborate on why .net is a better platform for
developing what I understand to be just a GUI desktop?  I'm not flaming, I
just noticed that nobody is really talking technical, and you have
expressed an opinion, so I hope you will elaborate.

From what I understand, Gnome is first a library.  Then, though it is
technically not part of Gnome, there is the companion Sawfish window
manager.  Finally, and here is where I am haziest, there is "what you see",
the wallpaper, menus, icons, and so forth.

Getting back to the original question, I find myself asking, what is better
than C?

--
Ken

After 13,000+ hours of tube-time in front of Win, I have opened
a new source for my OS and app needs.

 
 
 

GNOME embraces .NET

Post by Erik Funkenbusc » Mon, 04 Feb 2002 21:26:45



Quote:> Jim, can I trouble you to elaborate on why .net is a better platform
for
> developing what I understand to be just a GUI desktop?  I'm not
flaming, I
> just noticed that nobody is really talking technical, and you have
> expressed an opinion, so I hope you will elaborate.

I'll take a stab at this.

Like all technology, I don't think .NET is a "better" anything unless it
fits your specific needs more closely than anything else.  Having said
that, from GNOME's perspective I can see why it's so attractive.  They
spent a lot of time developing Bonobo, and frankly, it's a lot of work.
If they can drop that work and let MS do the design for them, they can
concentrate on implementation of that design instead.  Further, since
the .NET framework is far more extensive than Bonobo, it's a much bigger
win.

Traditionally, Open Source developers have been much better at imitating
someone elses design than designing something themselves from the ground
up.  Such projects usually take years and often die before they reach
maturity or spend an eternity going nowhere (For example, look at HURD
which was (and probably still will someday) to be a revolutionary new
kernel compared to Linux which was a reimplmentation of other existing
Unix facilities).

Quote:> From what I understand, Gnome is first a library.  Then, though it is
> technically not part of Gnome, there is the companion Sawfish window
> manager.  Finally, and here is where I am haziest, there is "what you
see",
> the wallpaper, menus, icons, and so forth.

GNOME is an environment.  It's the whole package.  That package includes
the library, the icons, the window manager, the API's, etc..).  Miguel
is just suggesting doing away with one of the most resource intensive
parts of developing GNOME.

Quote:> Getting back to the original question, I find myself asking, what is
better
> than C?

C has nothing to do with it.  You can write .NET applications in C if
you want (well, C++ and if someone bothered you could create a C only
version as well).  .NET is language neutral, which is why there are
already over a dozen .NET languages.
 
 
 

GNOME embraces .NET

Post by Marc Geerling » Mon, 04 Feb 2002 22:25:48



> I'll take a stab at this.

> Like all technology, I don't think .NET is a "better" anything unless it
> fits your specific needs more closely than anything else.  Having said
> that, from GNOME's perspective I can see why it's so attractive.  They
> spent a lot of time developing Bonobo, and frankly, it's a lot of work.
> If they can drop that work and let MS do the design for them, they can
> concentrate on implementation of that design instead.  Further, since
> the .NET framework is far more extensive than Bonobo, it's a much bigger
> win.

> Traditionally, Open Source developers have been much better at imitating
> someone elses design than designing something themselves from the ground
> up.  Such projects usually take years and often die before they reach
> maturity or spend an eternity going nowhere (For example, look at HURD
> which was (and probably still will someday) to be a revolutionary new
> kernel compared to Linux which was a reimplmentation of other existing
> Unix facilities).

Hey Eric, this is a very good post :-), i like it.
It says everything I wanted to say to defend my claims in a post earlier.

Quote:> GNOME is an environment.  It's the whole package.  That package includes
> the library, the icons, the window manager, the API's, etc..).  Miguel
> is just suggesting doing away with one of the most resource intensive
> parts of developing GNOME.

Exactly, and it doesn't matter if microsoft changes its api again,
because the current layout is good enough to use instead, or more like a
evolution, of bonobo :-). People who are now screaming that gnome is
selling its soul don't know the history of bonobo, take an another look
where does bonobo remind you of...... exactly!! Hell, if microsoft doesn't
change its api its only a nice extra.

Quote:> C has nothing to do with it.  You can write .NET applications in C if
> you want (well, C++ and if someone bothered you could create a C only
> version as well).  .NET is language neutral, which is why there are
> already over a dozen .NET languages.

exactly, mono, will not replace c or gtk.

Nice post Erik!

Regards
Marc Geerlings

 
 
 

1. Gnome to be based on .NET

How much do you love Microsoft's .NET? Enough to trust your Gnome
applications to its APIs in the future?

That's what Gnome leader Miguel de Icaza, believes should happen. Miguel
calls .NET the "natural upgrade" for the Gnome platform, and enthused
about the technology in an interview with us at LinuxWorld this week.
Basing Gnome on the .NET APIs will cut development time significantly,

He also had praise for the new Microsoft security model, dismissed the
notion that Redmond was employing embrace and extend to its web services
protocols, and put the message that the community should get over its
beef with The Beast.

"I'd like to see Gnome applications written in .NET in version 4.0 - no,
version 3.0. But Gnome 4.0 should be based on .NET," he told us. "A lot
of people just see .NET as a fantastic upgrade for the development
platform from Microsoft.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/23919.html

--

Replace the obvious with paradise to email me.
See Found Images at:
http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/~mlvburke

2. Audio Excel sound card problem

3. Gnome to support Microsoft .Net

4. KDE 3.1 RPMs for RedHat distros?

5. Gnome to be based on .NET

6. Does anyone know a command to return the Solaris version number?

7. Gnome and .Net -- Time to Fork?

8. grep -v a list from a file

9. I have now embraced Linux except for ...

10. AOL embraces Linux and Mozilla, plans to drop MS Explorer

11. Microsoft embraces cable television, MSNBC.com

12. Is Microsoft secretly embracing Linux?

13. Copy, Embrace, Exclude