Glimps into the future?

[PhilT]

Re: Glimps into the future?

Thanks for that Claydoh.

That's exactly what I was getting at in the last paragraph of my previous post. I'm certainly not partisan - and I don't understand all the MONO technicalities - but, I really support the FOSS concepts and I just want to know if Kubuntu would be able to continue IF some horrible scenario involving a patent-war targeting Ubuntu should ever occur. Sometimes when you don't keep vigilant, you can loose precious possessions ... and then we would all have to migrate to a different distro that wasn't compromised. What a shame that would be!

[monte48lowes]

Re: Glimps into the future?

The problem I see here is this: Kubuntu is built on top of Ubuntu. If Ubuntu ends up in a patent dispute with MS over the use of Mono Kubuntu will lose the base upon which it was built. It seems that Mono may end up in more than just a few applications isolated to Gnome. If the kernel and the whole structure of Ubuntu ends up in Mono than the entire bus, not just the unsavory passengers, would be driven off a cliff.

I would be left with a Linux From Scratch system or some other distro.

Mike

[GreyGeek]

Re: Glimps into the future?

.....
the actual truth probably lies somewhere in the middle.
...

Except that, Claydoh, there is no "middle". Either Ubuntu will be dependent on MONO or it is will not.

Since Novell & de Icaza have made it clear that GNOME will be rebuilt using MONO and the Ubuntu Technical Board announced on June 29, 2009 that the Ubuntu Desktop remix WILL become DEPENDENT on MONO, which means they will be built using the MONO version of GNOME, the future of Ubuntu is very clear.

As far as the future of Kubuntu is concerned, IF Canonical goes so far as to make the Linux utilities operating between the kernel and GNOME re-engineered with MONO as well, then even IF KDE4 is added to an Ubuntu core stripped of GNOME it is obvious that Kubuntu would be dependent on MONO, too. I.E., removing libmono* would break Kubuntu's KDE4 installation. IF the middleware does not get re-written using MONO then Kubuntu can, or should be able to, remain MONO free. That would be wonderful! (Personally, I believe that Kubuntu is Shuttlesworth's "Ace in the hole" should MONO/GNOME run into legal troubles.)

IF Debian becomes dependent on MONO, which is probably something that Canonical wants because it would eliminate MONO modification costs by moving them upstream to Debian, then a multitude of distros which base off of Debian would become MONO dependent IF they continue to base off of Debian. This will guarantee that Microsoft and 3rd party Windows software vendors, competing in a saturated Windows market, can sell the MONO versions of their .NET applications to a large and burgeoning Linux market on which the MONO version of their apps will install as a proprietary binary without regard to the distro itself. This will be a wonderful economic advantage for them but these apps have a history of built-in license checking functions which require root access (they don't trust you).

I can see nothing that can prevent these events from transpiring except a massive Linux community protest. But, I can't see that happening because so many former Windows users have now migrated to Linux, but brought their Windows mentality with them, they fail to see or comprehend the threat that MONO poses to the Linux desktop. Windows programmers, having moved from VB, VS, FoxPro, Java, etc..., to .NET, see the burgeoning Linux market as fresh blood for the sale of their commercial software, shareware, demoware, etc.... Many are programmers for companies making mobile apps or embedded software for devices that will or are using .NET and want to cover the Linux market using MONO. It is their propaganda campaign (fuelled by MS and Novell?) which has driven the MONO movement in Linux.

What MOST MONO advocates fail to understand, or if they understand it they remain mute about it, is that the moment the Linux desktop becomes dependent on MONO that marks the day from which, going forward, Linux will NEVER be able to exceed or even match the Windows desktop in features and functionality. From that time forward the MONO desktop will always be playing catch up to Windows. I repeat -- MONO will ALWAYS be behind .NET After TEN YEARS of development the current situation is this: MONO is at 2.4.6 and Microsoft is on the verge of releasing .NET 4.0 !! - that is SEVERAL YEARS, TWO versions and LOTS of features!!! ahead of MONO 2.4.6. IF de Icaza can't catch up after 10 years he will never be able to, IF he wants to.

Quite frankly, once I read that de Icaza KNEW of the patent problems with the GUI portions of MONO FIVE years ago but kept them in MONO anyway, and that it was recently revealed that, even though MONO is WAY BEHIND .NET, he and his dev team were writing MONO apps that were designed to compete directly against Apple iPhone apps, an act which directly assists ONLY Microsoft, and made it obvious that using MONO to assist Microsoft in competition against Apple is more important than bringing MONO up to par with .NET on LInux, it became obvious to me that de Icaza was and is an MS mole. It makes sense. de Icaza wrote GNOME to "counter" KDE because, he claimed, GNOME was GPL and KDE was tainted by proprietary connections. In fact, KDE shortly became GPL and GNOME will be tainted by MS IP. The KDE desktop was a match for Win95 and the first release of XP. So, de Icaza was actually fighting against a Microsoft competitor (KDE) then just like he is fighting against a Microsoft competitor (Apple) now. And, it seems, now it doesn't matter that MONO IS tainted by Microsoft's IP or that KDE is totally under the GPL with NO contaminating IP, and will always be.

All of this answers a single question --- WHY would anyone work so hard to make the Linux desktop DEPENDENT on Microsoft's API, and thus make the LInux desktop dependent on Microsoft Especially since GNOME was supposedly created to counter a Free(Qt) desktop, as a typical discussion from 1998 reveals. Another document, written at about the same time, reveals another set of goals.

[claydoh]

Re: Glimps into the future?

Still no answer to my question:

What will actually happen to us as real-world end users? What would happen to us as we use our software? What do we and the distros we use loose? Both probable and worst-case scenarios?

That is all I want to know: what actually happens if MS exercise any sort of patent maneuver.

No real answers in long-winded responses does not really help promote your viewpoint.

[mfburgo]

Re: Glimps into the future?

GreyGeek,

Thank you for a wonderful thread full of information that is very useful.

Cladoh,

While perhaps the discussion is not clear to you simple answer. If gnome and ubuntu go mono, if they change the middleware for the mono release then kde will not be able to be free and clear in the *buntu's . this will effect every user of the *buntu's.

Mark

[Telengard]

Re: Glimps into the future?

Whether M$ can do anything patent-wise is not the most important point IMHO. The fact remains that if they control the API then they can wield influence over our distro. That is bad enough news for me

[Raven-sb]

Re: Glimps into the future?

The question remains, what can we as ordinary computer users do about it? I'll admit up front that I have a bias against Microsoft. I don't like the way they bully other software projects around. I was an avid user of OS/2 and Netscape and I remember full well how Microsoft bullied those projects. I used to love using Gnome, but I became wary of it once it became clear that Gnome was integrating more and more Mono apps into itself. Why Gnome had to use Mono and not something like python is beyond me.

The scary thing is that there is very few popular linux distributions these days who don't use mono in someway. Fedora use of mono surprises me, given their obsession on avoiding anything with the even the potential of having a patient issue. I mean Fedora removed the auto-correct feature of Open-office because their legal team was concerned about the possibility of it being patented, yet they are happy to ship Gnome with mono apps.

The question has to be asked, why are they doing this and what can we do about it? It would be interesting to hear from someone who is pro-Mono answer these concerns, if for no other reason, then to simply get both sides of the story.

I've just read these two articles that add some more information on the dangers of Mono from the perspective of the FSF. http://www.fsf.org/news/dont-depend-on-mono and http://www.fsf.org/news/2009-07-mscp-mono

[Qqmike]

Re: Glimps into the future?

@ Raven-sb, excellent summary article you posted. This one:
http://www.fsf.org/news/2009-07-mscp-mono

@ the subject:
Reading all this, as a math-type guy by training, and therefore with a natural tendency to be intellectually impatient though theoretically humble in principle, "I think to myself, M$'s a chicken s* company with questionable business ethics. And Linux people playing with fire like this must surely be dumb a* (or, at best, naive)." But then, there must be something else woven intricately into this risky picture, and of course, assuming it is not stupidity, it must be money, somehow. All issues, from the point of view of Linux, should be rendered immediately moot assuming there are viable alternatives to avoiding MONO. Which, there seems there are. What am I missing here?

[Telengard]

Re: Glimps into the future?

Is there a list of distros that reject mono? I may be willing to switch rather than have to worry about this.

[PhilT]

Re: Glimps into the future?

Claydoh,

I think your comment, above:

"No real answers in long-winded responses does not really help promote your viewpoint. "

was a little unfair on GG. A lot of what he has explained has been very helpful to less knowledgeable members; quite a bit of it was in answer to my questions! And I am very grateful he has taken the time to explain things. If people are not interested in this they do not have to read it.

I think this subject is very important and cuts right to the core of the whole FOSS concept. I feel a lot of sympathy with GG's views concerning de Icaza and it would be a wonderful outcome if Kubuntu WAS Shuttleworth's "Ace-In-The-Hole".

I came to Kubuntu some years ago when the, then, Mandriva version I was using would not upgrade on my hardware. I've just looked, and their KDE4 version has no MONO dependences, but their GNOME version obviously does. But I don't want to switch!! I like Kubuntu/KDE, but if it DOES Go MONO, then I'm off!

Incidentally, have you noticed that M$ has just done a deal with Rupert Murdoch (that other well-known oligarch) in an attempt to de-index Google from his newspapers http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/998350.stm . Yet another example of "control".

[GreyGeek]

Re: Glimps into the future?

Is there a list of distros that reject mono? I may be willing to switch rather than have to worry about this.

As long as apt-get allows me to purge my Kubuntu of any MONO dependencies I won't switch. Kubuntu is, IMO, just TOO GOOD of a distro to walk away from as long as MONO can be removed.

What has me more concerned is FireFox, Thunderbird, VLC, kdenliven, kplayer, kmplayer, ruby-gnome2, sabayon, and other apps built with the GTK+ toolkit. While de Icaza did not create the GTK toolkit, he used it to create GNOME, and in doing so the additions his dev team added to GTK to make GNOME makes it the predominate parts of the GTK API. In affect, just like GNOME, de Icaza "owns" the GTK.

I just did

sudo apt-rdepends -r libgtk2.0-0 > GTK_dependencies.txt

followed by

sort -dbf GTK2_dependencies.txt > GTK_dependencies_sorted.txt


to see how many applications were dependent on libgtk2.0-0. (apt-rdepends is in the repository) The list was over 7,000 lines, not counting lib* files. Some apps have more than two lines because each line represents a variation of feature of an app. The most drastically affected apps include Python bindings to GTK, middleware utilities FireFox, Mozilla, seamonkey, (mono/moonlight has 62 connections), xfce, gnomestudio, and lxde, to name a few. It would be a good idea to run that konsole command yourself and look at the sorted file to see if there are any GTK2 based apps that you consider indispensable for your desktop.

IF the GTK# version of the GTK+ API replaces the GTK+ API then those apps would become MONO dependent, or the GTK and those apps would have to be forked. I suspect that .NET developers would look at GTK2 based apps as a fertile source of ideas for apps that they can build using MONO without using GTK2, further embedding MONO into GNOME/Ubuntu. That list also provides the same fertile field for Qt4 developers, too. I see many Qt4 developers re-engineering GTK2 apps using the Qt4 toolkit to populate the holes created by GTK2 being subverted.

Can you imagine running FireFox with MONO's Microsoft's technology underneath? That's like removing the factory built engine from a Maserati and replacing it with an engine from a Yugo . While most people swore at their Yugo's, some people swore by them. As far as MONO goes, consider the success of its parent.

[Telengard]

Re: Glimps into the future?

Kubuntu is, IMO, just TOO GOOD of a distro to walk away from as long as MONO can be removed.

So you are like the abused wife who thinks she has a good thing with her husband? Even though he kisses other women and gets MONO?

I don't know GG. If this is really such a huge deal like you make it out to be then I think the whole Linux community would already be on fire because of it. If your assessment of the situation is true and accurate, then we are already doomed. There will no longer be a free operating system called Linux because all the major distros will sell out quickly to follow Ubuntu's lead.

All I want to know is, where can I run to escape Microsoft?

[russlar]

Re: Glimps into the future?

erm...

forgive me for being simplistic, and I do admit to being largely ignorant of most of MONO, but now if this different, from a philosophical viewpoint, from samba?

samba is the MS file and print sharing standard, reverse engineered. If MS makes a change in their client-code, new Windows desktops can't connect to a samba server, and the samba team has to update their code to work with the latest Windows clients, but is in no way dependant on MS code.

I can see where this might be another instance of MS's strategy of embrace-extend-extinguish (remember FoxPro?), but I can also see where this is also a lot of reactionary behavior from free software purists. I'm a firm believer that, if you don't like something, don't install it.

As an end user, I just want a system that works properly.

[russlar]

Re: Glimps into the future?

While perhaps the discussion is not clear to you simple answer. If gnome and ubuntu go mono, if they change the middleware for the mono release then kde will not be able to be free and clear in the *buntu's . this will effect every user of the *buntu's.

Mark

wait, what? If Ubuntu's GNOME desktop introduces dependencies on MONO, how does that effect the KDE desktop?

[mfburgo]

Re: Glimps into the future?

If you know anything about M$ they will have someone tie mono into the utilities. This will not allow any *buntu distribution to be completely free of mono.

you would be able to use another distribution that is not so tightly ties to gnome but that is what ubuntu is tied to at this time. Kubuntu utilizes quite a few of the ubuntu gnome utilities. So kubuntu would be tied to ubuntu/gnome/mono.