.NET and Mono. Call for action: ask for retraction

[Jeff Bone]

I'm as big an M$ critic as you'll find around these parts, but I
think that Nick Petreley is both (a) way off the mark with his
assessment / analysis of Mono, and (b) stands to infect --- a first
for the Open Source community --- unnecessary FUD into what looks to
be a valuable and worthwhile effort.  In particular, he attacks the
open source .NET effort Mono for not also encompassing all the
(currently) M$-only services intended to be offered ATOP .NET.  This
would be equivalent to criticizing somebody for offering an
opensource ASP alternative because they didn't duplicate and emulate
all the MSN services that are or might be built on ASP.  Or
criticizing any efforts to produce open-source VB interps / compilers
that run on anything but Windows, etc.

This is yet another example of the misinformed / hype-driven
confusion between .NET the platform, Hailstorm, M$'s online service
strategy, and the various XP tie-ins.  The press is to blame, but so
are the otherwise-clueful techies-cum-pundits who graze purely from
the pop press outlets rather than going straight to the technical
sources.

As much as I hate to say it, .NET looks like a good thing to me ---
Java done broadly and right --- and it stands to have a significant
positive impact on the ability to write cross-platform code.  (My own
theory is that the core developers of .NET etc. within Microsoft are
subversives, and that the recent moves re: licensing etc. are
too-little-too-late moves by legal and execs to correct the
previously underperceived damage that's now already been done.  In
the long run, I really think M$ may have given away the *current*
franchise with the recent maneuvers.)

If you agree with my assessment about the benign nature of Mono after
reading Nick's clearly misinformed and misconsidered article [1]
below, please drop him a line at nicholas@petreley.com or
mailto:nicholas@petreley.com

jb

[1]
http://iwsun4.infoworld.com/articles/op/xml/01/07/30/010730oppetreley.xml