Tales from a Trading Desk

Noise from an Investment Bank

Mono'less PDC

Appear Miguel got another NO from the PDC this year again. As Stephen says, the fact that Microsoft published the CLR and C# specifications through ECMA/ISO doesn't mean a lot in reality.  If Microsoft offered the CLR on Linux etc as Mono does, then you could possibly understand the NO, but since they don't, one has to assume they are scared of the damage Mono could inflict on their own product.

Surf's up again next week

Posted: Aug 31 2005, 08:10 AM by mdavey | with 2 comment(s)
Filed under: ,

Comments

Saber Karmous said:

If find Microsoft's a bit strange. Sometimes they wanna look like they support open source (e.g. Microsoft @ open source conferences). And then they act like b#$ches when it comes to Mono.net.
# August 31, 2005 5:39 AM

Buddy Lindsey said:

Do you do much mono development? If so what are some good resources, in your opinion, for learning it.
# August 31, 2005 10:48 AM

Tom Welsh said:

Microsoft either don't get, or (more likely) don't want to get the idea of standards that actually work and are implemented in practical, everyday software. They use standards, like almost everything else, as one more weapon in the struggle for dominance.

Remember the "Active Group" (stillborn)? Then there was the exercise in futility when OMG asked for specifications for COM and DCOM, to help specify bridges to/from CORBA. Eventually Microsoft handed over specs, but these were snapshots of an instant in time - as they were never updated, they were useless and meaningless.

Then there was the ECMA parade. All this actually allows others to do is implement some parts of the first version of the .NET Framework - namely C# and the CLR. But who is going to want a portable version of vintage-2000 Microsoft software, when Windows is several new versions down the pike with more being talked up?
# September 1, 2005 5:22 AM