On Mon, Jul 16, 2001 at 08:19:54PM -0400, Ed Centanni wrote:
> I'm sure many of you have heard the scuttlebutt:
>
> "...Microsoft told ComputerWire it would provide technical assistance to
> Ximian Inc in its work on the Mono Project, to develop a version of .NET
> for Linux and Unix using open source development..."
>
Wow, I hadn't heard that. That's like Microsoft offering to help Digital
Research come up with DR-DOS. Nothing like a dirty "clean room".
> If not then get a load of this:
> http://www.softwareuncovered.com/news/cgram-20010716.html#1
>
<snip>
> In all fairness, I must ask the question: How is creating an open
> source version of .net (Mono) -- with or without microsoft's help --
> different from creating an open source version of microsoft networking (
> Samba ) complete with all microsoft's non-compliant SMB extensions?
>
> My guts heave at the idea of a .net for Linux but then where would we be
> today without Samba? Didn't Samba PREVENT people from being locked into
> microsoft products for file and print services? Could Mono be another
> Samba?
>
> Ed "recoiling from the loud bang as he presses the send button" Centanni
Samba's been a _great_ thing for allowing more Linux servers to be
insinuated into formerly Microsoft shops.
The best reason I can imagine for an Open Source .Net (Mono) is the hope
that it will compete adequately with Microsoft. And thereby prevent the
majority of the world from being locked into the Microsoft solution.
Also bear in mind that there are similar initiatives afoot to mimic
Microsoft's Passport and Hailstorm services without having the stored
information on any central servers.
Do I think the hope is reasonable? I dunno.
Paul
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 16:08:00 EDT