You gotta give Miguel de Icaza credit.

As a Microsoft shareholder I’ve been opposed to Mono.

Not as technology, but as theft of Microsoft’s Technology. [Personal opinion, not a statement of Microsoft’s Position.]

Now, before the attack start – just Google Me. I’m as active in Open Source Developer Technologies as I am in Closed Source.

For developers who seek to actively avoid Microsoft technology, I respect their choice, so (and ESPECIALLY where Mono is concerned.)

  1. Stop being mad at Microsoft for choosing not to ship products on Linux.
  2. Do YOUR OWN thing on Linux or cross-platform, but don’t try to do OUR thing on Linux.

So, philosophically, I think Mono is both theft and hypocritical.

(Ok, NOW you can attack.)

But, politics aside – you really gotta give Miguel de Icaza big credit. He’s keeps doing really significant stuff.

Gnome (of which he’s the co-founder) kicks butt and has surpassed KDE as the popular Linux Desktop, Mono, whatever one thinks of the politics, is significant (and amazing when you consider the size of the development team), and NOW………


Quite an accomplishment.

Comments (9)

  1. I actually quite like the idea (and the fact in many cases) that I can write any app in C# with visual studio on my vista machine, compile it, get the executable on my linux box and run it just as well from there…

    It’s just another way of "cross platform" stuff… should I write it in PERL or PHP or Python ? Maybe. Maybe not 😉 Which way is more "cross-platform" ? they ALL need a common ground to really be portable. If this common ground is the .Net Framework, why not ?

    Of course this is also my personal and humble opinion 🙂

  2. tonyr says:

    Didn’t MS turn his job application down?

    Joe Said – I’d be interested to know details !!!!

  3. Dave Edwards says:

    “I think Mono is both theft and hypocritical.”

    Regarding hypocrisy, you have to be careful with the pot-kettle situation. If MS publishes something as an open standard (and actually sticks to it), they (and you) cannot cry foul when someone actually creates an implementation of it.


    Joe Said – But Dave, that’s common OpenSource phylosophy. “ONLY Commercial entities should need to follow the rules, Open Sourcers should be able to break all the rules !!”  I simply disagree!

  4. Jack Bond says:

    I despise both Linux and Firefox, along with Sun, Adobe, Novell, etc. But if MSFT didn’t want 3rd party implementations, why submit to ECMA? As a MSFT shareholder, I don’t see how Mono or Moonlight hurts the bottom line. Doesn’t it sell more copies of Visual Studio?

    Joe Said – Please see my earlier comment. What the mono guys build was NOT limited to what Microsoft shared with ECMA (the CLI and C#) !

  5. Matthijs says:

    Who cares about Mono? It’s awesome that somebody is dedicating his life to create such software (I couldn’t do it) but it’s also a waste of a lifetime, what company is seriously considering using that stuff on linux anyway?

  6. Jay R. Wren says:


    Are you crazy?

    If MS didn’t want it reimplemented, they shouldnot have submitted the C# Language spec and CLR spec to ECMA!

    What is this theft you speak of?

     Joe Said  Jay, you are WRONG! Microsoft did not submit the .NET framework or to ECMA – we only submitted the CLI and C# specs. This is a common error when looking at Mono.

  7. Alexey Lavnikov says:

    IMHO, the sooner .NET will become truly crossplatform the better. I hate to rewrite all my stuff in java just to fit client web server architecture…

  8. Hi Joe,

    I know you’re close to the Open Source world, especially close from the PHP comunity since we’ve been in contact together sometimes about this topic.

    I also know the Mono Project pretty good, as I follow their progress for several years now, and since I had the chance to present a session about Development using Silverlight, featuring Miguel de Icaza and his first public demos of Moonlight.

    That being said, in the form of a disclaimer/backgrounder, I would say that I do not share your views on this topic.

    Again, neither you and I are lawyers, so I think it’s worth highlighting that we both here only express ou OWN OPINIONS which in no way can be read as being "Microsoft says/declares that blablabla…".

    I think that all the efforts that were done around standardizing .NET and the CLI to the ECMA and to the ISO were meant with the hope in mind that someday, someone would be brave enough to take those specs and write his own implementation. That’s mainly what the guys from Mono did.

    OK, I know, there’s more in Mono and Moonlight than the area covered by the ECMA/ISO standards. And? WTF?

    We’re in a world of coopetition. If we, as the creators of the .NET platform, are not confident enough that our implementation will bring more value to our customers than the one from the Mono team, then we have a serious problem, and we way follow the same way as the other guys with the Java platform for which they’re not the leaders anymore for quite a long time already.

    Another way to say this is that I’m pretty sure that the Mono Project and Moonlight do more good to us than they hurt. I for one am very supportive of those guys.

    And besides this pseudo-legal questions, I affirm that from a technical perspective, they deserve big Kudos and thumbs up.

    Just my $0.02,

    Christophe Lauer,

    also a former U**x developer and PHP-er some years ago.

Skip to main content