D-BUS support for Mono

[Tom von Schwerdtner]

I'm all about getting Mono into GNOME, but I do think there are some
issues that need to be resolved first.  Some comments are in line. 
I'm not attacking, I just don't agree with most of your points (or
don't think they are strong enough):

Note: after writing this I realized I had not considered Mono on OSX
in any of my statements, but I'm going to send this anyways.

On Fri, 26 Nov 2004 06:22:26 -0500, r_a_trip <dlist at ubuntuforums.org> wrote:
> The fear of MS retalliation against Mono seems to be endemic and also
> totally out of proportion. Just think about it logical.
> 
> What benefit does MS have to start a high profile attack against a
> reimplemented competing .NET stack? Strangle the competition?

Making it harder for people to transition from Windows based
development (in .NET) to Linux based development (in Mono).  I really
fail to see what benefit MS would get from Mono being widely adopted
in Linux.  Wider developer pool?  I don't think so, for every 1
developer that abandons Linux to move to MS there would be 100 that
went the other way.  MS has not won many wars with "better products",
they have won them with "lock-in".  Why would they risk giving someone
a choice when you can force them to choose MS?

> MS has found a more powerful weapon. Exclusive contracts with key
> agencies like Healthcare and Defense, that run for over NINE years.
> Good luck competing with a tender against that...

Just because they have one weapon does not mean they will not use
another weapon.  This is business we are talking about.

> An all out copyright and patent attack on Mono would damage MSes
> already haggard public opinion/image to the point of total loss.
> Remember Steve Ballmer? Developers, developers, developers, developers.
> Attacking Mono is not attacking FOSS, it is attacking developers. That
> is one thing MS cannot afford. (Not to mention that IBM/Novell have a
> huge patent arsenal to squash MS if they want to).

It's attacking 1% of the developers with the end reward being getting
to keep the other 99%.  Sounds like a good deal to me.

> Having a development framework that is similar between two major
> competing platforms is of importance to MS. One day a Mono developer
> might consider switching sides and then he can just plug into .NET and
> off he goes. For MS .NET means forging a developer base that can code
> for Windows and because they control the spec, they are two steps
> ahead.

Since when is Linux/GNOME a major competing platform with MS?  We have
seen some good things in its adoption but we aren't even close to
competing with OSX let alone MS.  We have the potential to be but I
think getting Mono widely adopted would help us achieve this and thus
be something MS would not want.

<snip/>
> Ultimately, it doesn't matter who built the spec for the framework.
> What really counts is how easy is it for a developer to work with it
> and does it give the developer a tool that makes development faster,
> while being able to forge powerful and innovative apps.

I think it does matter who came up with the spec when they are a
"mortal enemy" to FOSS.  What happens when they start "enhancing" the
spec in-house the same way they did with web standards and IE?
 
> Beagle and Dashboard seem to be the prime example that .NET/Mono fits
> the requirement.

I do love Mono and what has come out of it.  I use Muine and Tomboy on
a daily basis and I am awaiting some stable Beagle releases with much
anticipation.   It seems that Mono provides an environment that makes
it easier for people with good ideas to see those ideas come to
fruition.

On the other hand, I'm very skeptical about accepting things as they
stand without some assurance that MS isn't just waiting a few years
before making our legal nightmare a reality.

Kind Regards,
Tom

-- 
Tom von Schwerdtner
Etria, LLP :: Open Source Solutions
Baltimore, MD
http://etria.com/