Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Banshee, Mono May Be Dropped From Ubuntu Default

Soulskill posted more than 2 years ago | from the voted-off-the-island dept.

Ubuntu 255

itwbennett writes "The Banshee music application, and Mono, the open source implementation of Microsoft's .NET framework, on which Banshee is dependent, may be excluded from the next release of Ubuntu. In 'a blog entry titled Bansheegeddon,' Banshee and Mono developer Joseph Michael Shields says the reasons given for the change are that Banshee is 'not well maintained' and 'porting music store to GTK3 is blocked on banshee ported to GTK3.' Other reasons mentioned but not in the session logs are complaints that it doesn't work on ARM. Ubuntu Community Manager Jono Bacon pointed out in a blog post that the decision to drop Banshee, Mono or other apps that are dependent on Mono has not been finalized. But the blogosphere is lit up with speculation that this is a deliberate move to exclude Mono because of its emulation of Microsoft .NET."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Wasn't it only recently... (2)

__Paul__ (1570) | more than 2 years ago | (#37991880)

...that Banshee was made a default? ffs, make up your mind, Ubuntu people.

How about they would block the whole... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37991882)

How about they would block the whole Ubuntu community and Canonical from rest of the world?

Two such dangerous parties doing almost what ever they want and ripping peoples rights and knowledge.

Re:How about they would block the whole... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37991938)

i always uninstall mono and monoprograms after instaling ubuntu

Re:How about they would block the whole... (1)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992166)

+1, this saves me time. And good riddance to Banshee, such a slow POS that is.

Re:How about they would block the whole... (1)

dmbasso (1052166) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992514)

Nice, never thought of that before. "After this operation, 75.8 MB disk space will be freed." Au revoir mono. :)
And it was nice to find out Gnote, a C++ replacement for Tomboy.

Re:How about they would block the whole... (1)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992676)

Also I use Eye of Gnome to replace that shitty photo previewer that uses Mono.

Re:How about they would block the whole... (2)

maugle (1369813) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992882)

+1, this saves me time. And good riddance to Banshee, such a slow POS that is.

Seriously. When a music player decides it needs to be able to play DVDs, it's time to move on.

Re:How about they would block the whole... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37991960)

Shut the fuck up, stupid.

Good thing, too (4, Insightful)

AliasMarlowe (1042386) | more than 2 years ago | (#37991894)

I have Rhythmbox as default on 10.04 (Ubuntu and Lubuntu), and see no need for Mono. Is this an outbreak of uncharacteristic good sense in Ubuntu (but only a partial atonement for their Unity sins)?

Re:Good thing, too (1)

IANAAC (692242) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992248)

Tomboy. I live by Tomboy.

To my knowledge, Gnote doesn't do sync like Tomboy does.

Re:Good thing, too (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37992770)

Not to mention that Ubuntu dropped GIMP from the default installation. HOW DARE THEY!

Oh! Oh! And I bet their ridiculous claim is that it was done "to save space", YET THE INSTALLATION ISO BLOATS TO THE POINT WHERE IT REQUIRES A DVD?!?!?

???

!!!

...the nerve of some people, I swear.

Re:Good thing, too (1)

IANAAC (692242) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992962)

Not to mention that Ubuntu dropped GIMP from the default installation.

Apparently AC missed the Mono connection.

Honestly, if Banshee had worked better for me, I would be using that instead of Rhythmbox, but it crashed often. It makes no difference to me whether Mono is used or not in that particular application.

The original post questioned why there was a need for Mono at all. I gave Tomboy as an example, because it does something that the non-mono Gnote can't do. If there were a non-mono note-taking application that let me sync, use on other platforms (Win, Android (albeit read-only) and web), and more importantly had the ability to import my thousands of already-created notes, I might use that. But as sit stands, I need Mono because that's a requirement of Tomboy.

Re:Good thing, too (1)

igreaterthanu (1942456) | more than 2 years ago | (#37993042)

From the thread linked in the article, it appears that the problems with Banshee were due to bugs in mono [ubuntu.com] that have now been fixed.

Re:Good thing, too (5, Informative)

pwizard2 (920421) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992774)

I've been using Clementine [google.com] for awhile now. It's still a bit rough around the edges (no podcast support) but it looks and works just like the old Amarok 1.4 did. (I always hated Amarok2... I kept old KDElibs around just so I could run 1.4 as long as possible) I forget if Clementine is a complete rewrite or a port of 1.4 to Qt4 libs.

Besides, who needs Mono when you can write cross-platform apps with Qt? Stuff like automatic garbage collection isn't enough to get me using .NET, not when Qt is pretty good about cleaning up after itself at the QObject level. Sure, you may have to do some manual GC here and there, but its nowhere near as bad as vanilla C++ is.

Re:Good thing, too (1)

the eric conspiracy (20178) | more than 2 years ago | (#37993220)

Mono has other uses besides Banshee support. I use it for Keepass2 which allows my to use a kdbx file on all of my machines and not have to mess around with import/exports.

okay (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37991896)

fine by me. i always preferred rhythmbox.

Re:okay (1)

couchslug (175151) | more than 2 years ago | (#37993226)

Same here, Why is this even news??

No Mo Mono (2)

ichthus (72442) | more than 2 years ago | (#37991930)

But the blogosphere is lit up with speculation that this is a deliberate move to exclude Mono because of its emulation of Microsoft .NET.

So?

Re:No Mo Mono (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37992038)

But mono $hill Jo Shields is ANGRYYY! He's probably still butthurt over gnote as well.

But, the Blogosphere likes creating controversy (1)

kvvbassboy (2010962) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992130)

.. and spreading it, even when there is none.

I don't remember the link now, but Microsoft made an irrevocable promise not to sue implementations of .NET, under certain specified conditions.

What about MS proxies? Like Acacia? (1)

walterbyrd (182728) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992188)

Considering Microsoft's shamefull history, it's hard for me to fully trust Microsoft.

Re:What about MS proxies? Like Acacia? (-1, Troll)

Richard_at_work (517087) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992380)

If you are going to go down that road, then theres pretty much no one you can trust.

Plus Microsoft (and its so called "proxies") is much more likely to bring suite against parties which are implementing different languages - there's little reason to bring suite against a project which is spreading your own language around, when there are others potentially infringing on the same patents while implementing competing languages and ecosystems (see Sun vs MS first time round, and now Oracle vs Google for Dalvik).

On an unrelated note, to the infantile little turd who is wholesale modding bunches of my posts down as "-1 Troll" (unrelated posts, in groups of 5), grow up and get a life. Perhaps consider moving out of your parents basement and living a little.

Re:What about MS proxies? Like Acacia? (4, Insightful)

Grishnakh (216268) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992796)

If you are going to go down that road, then theres pretty much no one you can trust.

How do you figure? He's simply judging them by their reputation and past actions. Why would you not do that for any person? Don't tell me Microsoft isn't a person either, because that's not really true. For instance, judging IBM by their past actions (WWII, PS/2 computers, etc.) would be pretty silly, because for their WWII sins, everyone involved is long-since dead now, and for their lame actions in the 90s with trying to push proprietary junk on everyone when clones were taking over, again, the people in charge are long-since gone (probably not dead though, but not with the company either). Most corporations change leadership periodically, so it's not sensible to hold grudges against them indefinitely. This isn't true of Microsoft: that company has been run by the same two guys ever since it started: Bill and Steve. Bill's not even gone; when Steve was too dumb to make his own decision about Courier, he called in Bill to make the decision for him. So any past bad actions that MS has done are fair game for criticizing it now, and this will remain true until they finally get some new leadership, which doesn't look like it's going to be any time soon.

Re:What about MS proxies? Like Acacia? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37993206)

On an unrelated note, to the infantile little turd who is wholesale modding bunches of my posts down as "-1 Troll" (unrelated posts, in groups of 5), grow up and get a life. Perhaps consider moving out of your parents basement and living a little.

If you had a life in the first place you wouldn't care about people who mod your posts negatively to make you angry. They won, good job.

Re:But, the Blogosphere likes creating controversy (3, Informative)

gbjbaanb (229885) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992608)

the promise was made to Novell which licenced .NET. Anyone who dowloanded Mono from Novell would be protected (with the implication that anyone who got it non-Novell sources would not be protected, I don't know if that'd stand up in court, but it was used as an excuse against using Mono by various people)

Now Novell no longer exists, I'm not sure where the promise went, or the licencing agreement they had. Perhaps de Icaza's spin-off company has it, maybe Attachmate has it.

Re:But, the Blogosphere likes creating controversy (1)

Raenex (947668) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992820)

under certain specified conditions.

Yeah, exactly. Don't follow Microsoft's lead unless you want to get burned. Everything they do revolves around their desktop monopoly.

Did we start liking Mono, and I missed it? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37991942)

Quickly, tell me what to think, Slashdot groupmind!

Re:Did we start liking Mono, and I missed it? (5, Funny)

Tr3vin (1220548) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992012)

It is awesome and much better than Java! Think of the great note taking and music apps you can write! Don't worry, Microsoft will never block its development because they said so. You can always trust a large company when they say something in a non-binding manner.

Re:Did we start liking Mono, and I missed it? (0)

DeathFromSomewhere (940915) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992094)

Having a language ratified as an ECMA standard is fairly binding I find. You might want to update your trolling.

Re:Did we start liking Mono, and I missed it? (2)

bky1701 (979071) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992150)

Because Microsoft has never used vague legal threats to leverage the Linux market before, right? Except those times they did...

The less Microsoft in Linux, the safer it is to use. If some programmers need to learn a real language in order to deal with that, then guess what? They will have to. There isn't a shortage of languages leading to a requirement to use Mono.

I applaud this move and hope other distros follows. Mono has no place in Linux. It is an EEE torpedo of the worst kind.

Re:Did we start liking Mono, and I missed it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37992578)

Zealot much?

Re:Did we start liking Mono, and I missed it? (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37992238)

Having a language ratified as an ECMA standard is fairly binding I find. You might want to update your trolling.

Mono has always been substandard and playing feature catch-up compared to the actual .Net runtimes available only for Windows.

This is what was intended. Even if you can't admit it. Just ask yourself, with all the resources and talent available to Microsoft, why they couldn't have simply made .Net cross-platform from the start and released their own Linux version at the same time each Windows version was released? Answer: they could if they wanted to.

Obvious conclusion: they don't want to because a truly cross-platform .Net with no "yeah but ..." differences would make it easier for popular applications to not *require* and *depend on* Windows. That would not serve Microsoft's interests. Letting other people do the Linux work for them in a way that will never be complete serves two goals: 1) costs them nothing and 2) makes people like you feel a baseless goodwill towards a monopolistic corporate giant that plays to win.

If you actually look at the facts of the situation the intention is not difficult to understand. But what the fuck ever. If you want to be naive it's your choice.

Re:Did we start liking Mono, and I missed it? (1)

DeathFromSomewhere (940915) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992374)

Microsoft actually does contribute code to mono. The missing components are mainly either deprecated or windows specific; for 99% of applications it's good enough. Troll harder.

Re:Did we start liking Mono, and I missed it? (2)

causality (777677) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992596)

Microsoft actually does contribute code to mono. The missing components are mainly either deprecated or windows specific; for 99% of applications it's good enough. Troll harder.

I don't know a lot about .NET vs. Mono, but can you address this part before you call "troll"?

Just ask yourself, with all the resources and talent available to Microsoft, why they couldn't have simply made .Net cross-platform from the start and released their own Linux version at the same time each Windows version was released? Answer: they could if they wanted to.

If you could invalidate that question you'd really have a case for GP being a troll. As it stands you seem to have selectively glossed over it. I know people around here love to cherry-pick what they respond to, but it really weakens your case.

Microsoft really does have a lot of wealth and a lot of highly talented programmers. It's not a question of whether they could or couldn't. I mean, they could have done what Sun did with Java and simultaneously release the runtimes for multiple platforms while maintaining a degree of control over the standard. Why do you believe they didn't? What explanation do you have for this that fits the observed facts better than GP's position? I really want to know and am willing to entertain a solid explanation.

Re:Did we start liking Mono, and I missed it? (1)

DeathFromSomewhere (940915) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992728)

Saying things like this:

If you actually look at the facts of the situation the intention is not difficult to understand. But what the fuck ever. If you want to be naive it's your choice.

Is absolutely trolling.

I can't speak for decisions I didn't make, but I can guess. Linux is an very fragmented platform. Getting a major piece of software to work across different distros often requires hacks and changes specific to each one. It's very rarely just a matter of recompiling and it's good. If you follow some of the microsoft blogs (windows 8 for example), one of the most common questions they get asked is why didn't you include feature X. The response is usually along the lines of not enough people would use it to be worth the effort. No company has enough resources to implement everything that everyone ever wanted.

Re:Did we start liking Mono, and I missed it? (2)

Raenex (947668) | more than 2 years ago | (#37993054)

Just ask yourself, with all the resources and talent available to Microsoft, why they couldn't have simply made .Net cross-platform from the start and released their own Linux version at the same time each Windows version was released?

They should have. I think it was a strategic blunder not to, from a Machiavellian viewpoint, because all they needed to do was pretend to play nice with multi-platform and then yank the rug out once they achieved marketshare. They did this with IE [wikipedia.org] .

Re:Did we start liking Mono, and I missed it? (1)

RCL (891376) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992656)

The did release a cross-platform (running on FreeBSD [microsoft.com] ) implementation of .NET 1.0... "from the start".

Re:Did we start liking Mono, and I missed it? (1)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992888)

Just ask yourself, with all the resources and talent available to Microsoft, why they couldn't have simply made .Net cross-platform from the start and released their own Linux version at the same time each Windows version was released?

Likely yes, but what would be the return on such an investment?

What does that have to do with anything? (1)

walterbyrd (182728) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992406)

Isn't Java ratified as an ECMA standard? Yet Google is being sued by Oracle for using Java.

Just because MS has no case does not mean that MS can not cost you many millions in legal fees. Are you familiar with MS-funded scox-scam?

Re:What does that have to do with anything? (1)

DeathFromSomewhere (940915) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992466)

Isn't Java ratified as an ECMA standard?

Nope, it's not.

Re:Did we start liking Mono, and I missed it? (2)

Raenex (947668) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992922)

Having a language ratified as an ECMA standard is fairly binding I find.

Mono, and the .NET framework they seek to implement, is much more than what was standardized in ECMA. Windows Forms is one example.

Re:Did we start liking Mono, and I missed it? (3, Insightful)

Dogtanian (588974) | more than 2 years ago | (#37993080)

Having a language ratified as an ECMA standard is fairly binding I find. You might want to update your trolling.

While ECMA supposedly requires that all patented technologies standardised by them be made available under a "reasonable and non-discriminatory terms", you might want to note the Wikipedia article [wikipedia.org] which states that parts of .Net *not* covered by ECMA include "Windows Forms, ADO.NET, and ASP.NET". Even if the ECMA-standardised parts of .Net are safe from patent infringement, this doesn't necessarily cover the rest.

And realistically, .Net applications *will* be written assuming the whole ecosystem is available. One may argue that the core ECMA-covered parts are useful in themselves, but I suspect that this will miss what most people want (and expect) ".Net compatibility" to deliver. This is in addition to MS being in control of the language and thus always one step ahead of the competition.

Gotta fit on a CD (1)

MrEricSir (398214) | more than 2 years ago | (#37991950)

Whatever Ubuntu includes, they insist it fit on a CD (for better or worse.)

The Mono runtime libraries and Banshee together are over 15 megs. Then consider the size of Gtk+2, and the case to leave it off the disk makes a lot of sense.

(Of course once you've installed Ubuntu it's not very difficult to install Banshee, Mono, etc. on your own.)

Re:Gotta fit on a CD (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37992016)

they insist it fit on a CD (for better or worse.)

No longer, the target for 12.04 is 750MB. Too big for a CD, small enough for a 1GB USB stick.

I am quite fond of Banshee. It is the only Ubuntu music player I've found that works the way I work (Album oriented where albums are grouped by album name and Album artist.

Re:Gotta fit on a CD (0)

Enry (630) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992162)

My Amazon Cloud player has 137 Albums and 212 Artists. Sorting by artist is completely retarded when dealing with compilations.

Re:Gotta fit on a CD (3, Informative)

icebraining (1313345) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992828)

That's the point. "Album Artist", which is different from "Artist", is always the same in every track of the album, so grouping works.

For example, in the Pulp Fiction soundtrack [musicbrainz.org] , each music has a different Artist, but the Album Artist in all of them is "Various Artists", so the tracks are kept together.

Re:Gotta fit on a CD (1)

lordandmaker (960504) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992826)

I thought that, as with this idea of dropping Banshee was just an idea posited at UDS, rather than a decision that's been taken? They wanted to come up with plans of what to do with the rest of a 1GB/2GB USB stick.

Re:Gotta fit on a CD (1)

Inconexo (1401585) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992990)

Doesn't rhythmbox use the same grouping?

Re:Gotta fit on a CD (2)

OliWarner (1529079) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992046)

They've already said they're setting the limit at 750MB (more than a standard CD). There might be a slight argument there but with the next limit being 800MB, then 1GB, disk space isn't as premium as it used to be.

Re:Gotta fit on a CD (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37992244)

Or perhaps this is an effort to get back under that 650 limit?

Re:Gotta fit on a CD (1)

gbjbaanb (229885) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992488)

disk space isn't as premium as it used to be.

it is if you're running on a phone or tablet, that flash-drive space is pretty precious.

Makes perfect sense (2, Insightful)

jmorris42 (1458) | more than 2 years ago | (#37991978)

This makes perfect sense. Almost nothing depends on mono anymore. Ditch the last holdouts, replace them with alternatives without the taint and move on. Besides, Ubuntu has made it clear they see tablets as THE future and tablets run ARM. So they really can't afford to offer a second class status to ARM and thus anything that isn't portable to it has to go from the default experience.

If they were removing mono from the repository or moving it to non-free or something there would be a story here, but they ain't so there isn't.

Re:Makes perfect sense (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37992360)

You do realize that Mono does run on ARM? Heck, Xamarin makes its money primarily from running Mono on ARM systems (among other things, the iPhone/iPad). So, claiming that Mono is being disqualified because it doesn't run on ARM tablets doesn't really hold water.

Re:Makes perfect sense (2)

cbhacking (979169) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992544)

In fact, if you're a switch from x86 focus to ARM focus then Mono makes even more sense. Like Java, the binaries use an architecture-agnostic bytecode (CIL, or Common Intermediate Language) which is JIT compiled at first execution, with optimizations speciic to the platform it runs on (well, .NET has those optimizations, I assume Mono does too). No need to recompile your apps when switching platforms, or store multiple copies of an app in the repository to account for different architectures.

Who gives a fuck? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37991990)

Linux is for dick smoking fags anyway. I hope all Linux lusers get aids and die.

Works for me on ARM. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37992034)

I haven't had any issues running banshee in the Ubuntu chroot on my ARMv7 touchpad. What's the supposed problem?
For fuck's sake, some lunatic even ported MonoDevelop to the Nokia N900.

I'd bet dollars to doughnuts the real issue behind dropping Banshee has something to do with this [networkworld.com] .

Re:Works for me on ARM. (2)

HarrySquatter (1698416) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992208)

It doesn't work on the omap4 apparently according to Canonical which is what they are targeting for tablets and phones.

Problem is MS patent suits (0)

walterbyrd (182728) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992274)

In case you have not noticed, Apple and MS are hyper-aggressively suing everything that moves. MS especially has been suing everything Linux either directly, or through MS proxies like Acacia.

Mono helps make Linux vulnerable to MS patent scams.

Not very Linux-like (1)

devleopard (317515) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992040)

Since when has Linux been about "production" code only in distros? Projects should, and have, made into distros based on demand, not based on whether they have an RTM stamp. Great example: apt-get install nodejs (unless you update apt, it installs an old version, no less)

I can get not installing it based on the fact that it targets libraries that drive for-profit philosophy, but at least call it that. Of course, then why is there still wine? samba? tsclient? All of these support and encourage Windows use.

Re:Not very Linux-like (1)

Joey Vegetables (686525) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992128)

Profit is not bad unless it is achieved at the expense of someone else's rights. Failing to respect the rights of users (or anyone else) is bad, but you can respect those rights while still making a nice profit; the two concepts are completely orthogonal. As for Wine and Samba, I don't see them as encouraging Windows use; I see them as opening doors for people who need to interoperate with Windows software and/or networks, and who otherwise might not be able to use Linux or other Free Software at all.

Re:Not very Linux-like (1)

bedouin (248624) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992198)

Not to mention tons of non-Windows devices use SMB nowadays. Samba really has transcended what MS does with it at this point.

Avoiding MS patent aggression should be Linux like (2)

walterbyrd (182728) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992302)

After nearly a decade, MS is still involved in the scox-scam. This in spite of the facts that linux is not infringing, and scox doesn't own the code anyway. Any steps linux can take to avoid patent parasites, like MS, should be taken.

Re:Not very Linux-like (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37992214)

Of course, then why is there still wine? samba? tsclient? All of these support and encourage Windows use.

Samba and tsclient make it easier for Linux systems to function in a Windows-dominated world, and the only purpose of WINE is to make it easier to migrate away from Windows.

Mono is comparable to some extent, but Banshee is not. Banshee is equivalent to a Linux program written from scratch using the Win32 API and relying on WINE, which would also not be suitable for use as a central piece of a major Linux-based OS.

Basically, there is a very big difference between enabling Linux use by helping people run legacy Windows software, and deliberately setting out to make Linux software that depends on a technology controlled by a corporation that has a stated goal of destroying Linux.

Re:Not very Linux-like (4, Insightful)

causality (777677) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992384)

I can get not installing it based on the fact that it targets libraries that drive for-profit philosophy, but at least call it that. Of course, then why is there still wine? samba? tsclient? All of these support and encourage Windows use.

It's minor, but I disagree with this notion.

Interoperability and compatibility are good things. There are situations where your end-users must run software available only for Windows. Wine is constantly improving. Still, not all things fitting this description run well in Wine, and many production environments don't want to struggle with getting them to work based on forum posts etc. when it is known that simply running Windows avoids all of this. Remember that to a Fortune 500 corporation, the cost of a Windows license is less than marginal but the cost of downtime can be significant.

I don't like this and I don't like Windows and I'm not fond of Microsoft, but this is a reality. Things like Samba open up new options that may not have been available before. So you're stuck with Windows for your end-user workstations? At least now your servers can be Linux. That's one more Linux system than you would have been able to use if you had no Samba (et al) equivalent.

Interoperability means you can pick the best system for the particular job knowing it will work with the rest of your systems. There's a freedom in this that you just don't get without it. Without interoperability you're much more at the mercy of vendorlock. The only thing that's a shame is that interoperability is always a one-way street when you deal with a monopolist. Interoperability today means it is always Linux's job to accommodate Windows protocols and filesystems. Microsoft is terrified of merit-based competition on an open playing field with no vendorlock, proprietary protocols, or other cheap tricks designed to prevent evaluation of merit.

When that changes, everyone will benefit. There is no concern about "encouraging Windows use" for those cases where it really is the best tool for the job; nor are there such concerns when it isn't and you can easily replace it with something more suitable.

Re:Not very Linux-like (1)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992640)

Samba, at least, is basically covered by the EU threats to Microsoft. I'm not really worried about using it because if MS tried anything funky, they'd have one of the largest trade organizations on the planet pounding them into the Earth.

But Mono, not only does it suck donkey balls, but there are no real protections beyond Microsoft's word.

Re:Not very Linux-like (1)

devleopard (317515) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992734)

What about when a company has spent tons of money building out C# libraries - I think Mono gives them a migration path. Migrations (in this case, to open source alternatives) are more likely to get green-lighted when pieces of infrastructure can move, rather than all-or-none.

Then again, not sure in an enterprise how relevant baked-in Ubuntu packages are, or Ubuntu itself for that matter ... after all, there's nothing preventing anyone from bringing in Banshee, mono, etc ...

Re:Not very Linux-like (1)

makomk (752139) | more than 2 years ago | (#37993068)

Even Richard M Stallman doesn't object to Mono being developed as a way to run formerly Windows-only applications on Linux - but that's not how it's used. Instead applications intended to run on Linux are developed using Mono and then people get to take advantage of its cross platform nature to run them on Windows easily as well. Sometimes they actually run better on Windows because Mono's performance sucks.

No love for mono? (1)

Xanny (2500844) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992060)

At some fundamental level, I like C# more than Java, because it has some Lambda functionality which can lead to less boilerplate. mono isn't copying .net, because C# is a programming language outside .net - it is just that Microsoft for a long time was the only company making a compiler for it, since they made the language in the first place. In terms of Banshee, I have likes and dislikes about it. It was a pain to get my media keys on my keyboard to reference banshee, and Banshee segfaults if it detects my iPhone, so I can't have it plugged it when starting Banshee. I feel that something like a basic music player can easily be written in C without needing all the huge project overhead of a C# / Java platform. Just have GTK+ as the GUI and some folder in the installation called codecs that you can throw some .so files of codecs not already in the system codecs for portability.

No love for being sued by Microsoft (0)

walterbyrd (182728) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992316)

Do you think Linux makers are wise to leave themselves open to scam patent lawsuits by Microsoft, or Microsoft proxies, like Acacia, or Intelectual Ventures?

Re:No love for being sued by Microsoft (2)

the linux geek (799780) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992496)

Strawman arguments for 100, Alex.

Microsoft has stated that they won't sue over C# usage, and they've demonstrated no inclination whatsoever toward doing so. Nobody has ever presented evidence that they will - only vague accusations about how EVILLLL Microsoft is.

Re:No love for being sued by Microsoft (2)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992674)

Well they can't sue over C# usage. They can't stop someone from creating their own C# compiler. But they can still hypothetically cause a world of grief over .NET-like functionality. Judging by the lack of interest in a C# compiler outside of Mono, I'm guessing the wonderfulness of C# is not so great that there's a huge push to see native C# compilers or Java byte code compilers for C#.

Re:No love for mono? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37992348)

mono isn't copying .net, because C# is a programming language outside .net

Except Mono is copying .NET, because it is not just a C# compiler but also a clone of Microsoft's .NET CLR and .NET standard library.

It's true that the GTK# library is not a copy of .NET, but bundling a few extra libraries does not alter the fundamental purpose of Mono, which is to be a close copy of Microsoft's .NET platform.

That's a useful thing to have existing, for when you want to migrate to Linux but still rely on some .NET applications; but it is not a sensible platform for Linux software development, because Mono is a copy of .NET, and .NET is controlled by Microsoft, a hostile company that is actively engaged today in abusing software patents to force Linux users to pay a literal Microsoft tax.

(Had you missed the part where Microsoft is now probably making more money out of Android than Windows Phone 7? Yeah. Now imagine Android used Mono rather than Java ... you bet Microsoft would be dusting off their many .NET patents.)

Re:No love for mono? (1)

caywen (942955) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992588)

A ton of games use Unity, which basically makes your game run on mono. Microsoft's own WP7 can't run Unity, and that's one of the major complaints of indie game developers on that platform. It'd be in Microsoft's best interests for its mobile platform to apply the screws to Unity as well, but they haven't done so. Neither have they done so with any of the apps that use MonoDroid, MonoTouch, or MonoMac. I just don't see the evidence that they'd do that. Maybe they would, but I wouldn't bet on it if I had to judge by their (lack of) legal actions surrounding .NET.

Music players on Linux SUCK (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37992110)

What is it about music players? Maybe because they attract inexperienced kids to do the programming?

There is not a single good one for Linux, none.

Songbird might have eventually gotten there but they abandoned the platforms that wanted them (UNIX-like system) for platforms that don't want or need them. They look doomed at this point.

Amarok works pretty well but the GUI is the most fucked up thing I have ever seen in a production application. Plus it has all that KDE/Qt bloat baggage.

Banshee, Rythembox, etc are all pretty crappy. Bad UI's, lack of features, ugly, etc.

Re:Music players on Linux SUCK (3, Informative)

kvvbassboy (2010962) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992160)

Clementine and Audacious are pretty good. Check them out.

Re:Music players on Linux SUCK (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37992366)

No, both Clementine and Audacious are stripped down Winamp and Rhythmbox-style applications that are ugly, lack features, and buggy.

Re:Music players on Linux SUCK (1)

aftermarketgirl (1399563) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992532)

Clementine is an Amarok 1.4 clone with added features but the old UI. It's been awhile since I've used winamp, but it offers a pretty different way of interacting with your music.

What features are you missing? I'm curious.

Re:Music players on Linux SUCK (1)

grumbel (592662) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992220)

I have to agree with that. I have been looking for a Podcast player/manager to replace Rhythmbox (very buggy, lacks plenty features, can't stop it from reencoding some tracks when copying to MP3 player, ...) and rather shockingly most alternatives where even worse. The most promising alternative so far seems to be Guayadeque, but it's not exactly bug free either and the GUI has written "programmer art" written all over it.

Default (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37992120)

A lot of people forget that when something is excluded from the default installation of Ubuntu, that doesn't mean that you can't install that feature later.

distrowatch (4, Informative)

FudRucker (866063) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992138)

looks like ubuntu finally dropped off the #1 spot in the rankings on the right hand column

Re:distrowatch (1)

Fri13 (963421) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992174)

That is worth of news....

Re:distrowatch (1)

watermark (913726) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992336)

Not sure if sarcastic, or truthful. Funny enough, I just switched from Ubuntu to Mint because Unity is terrible and for some reason I can't get Gnome Shell to run on 11.10....not that the default Gnome Shell is that much better.

Re:distrowatch (1)

jimshatt (1002452) | more than 2 years ago | (#37993228)

I switched to Mint (LMDE) as well, but did not see any value over Debian proper. Now I run Debian unstable with Gnome-shell (*ducks*) and I'm very happy with it. But I hear Linux Mint LXDE is good as well.
If it's just the Desktop you want to change, but stick to Ubuntu for the rest, you should try Xubuntu or Lubuntu as well. Or Kubuntu, of course.

Re:distrowatch (2)

auLucifer (1371577) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992392)

It is now number 2 behind mint! Which "is an Ubuntu-based distribution"

Re:distrowatch (1)

ohnocitizen (1951674) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992426)

Very informative. It looks like Ubuntu has been bleeding users to Mint primarily, but also to Fedora and OpenSuse. (Debian seems to be a bit stable, but Mint users could be using their excellent Debian based distro as well).

Re:distrowatch (1)

FudRucker (866063) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992442)

yup, if i wanted to use a debian based distro i would just simply use debian (eliminate the middle man)

Re:distrowatch (1)

H0p313ss (811249) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992446)

looks like ubuntu finally dropped off the #1 spot in the rankings on the right hand column

And what surpassed it is Mint, which is basically Ubuntu++

What does that imply?

Re:distrowatch (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37993180)

Er, what do /you/ imply? Ubuntu is just Debian++.

Re:distrowatch (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37993252)

It implies that Ubuntu has promise, but is being taken in the wrong direction.

Re:distrowatch (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37993150)

The Distrowatch "stats" just track the number of visitors for that distribution's page on distrowatch, nothing more. It doesn't track downloads, installs, users and developers, or traffic by those users on any other site other than distrowatch itself.

In other words, it's a web poll based on the number of people who read distrowatch.

sudo apt-get install banshee (3, Informative)

T-Mckenney (2008418) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992140)

sudo apt-get install banshee

Is it that fucking hard?

so... (1)

inexia (977449) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992168)

When will they improve or give up on Unity?

The bigger question is.. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37992182)

When will they wake up and block Oracle's Java, which is very much proprietary, owned and maintained to a company much more hostile to open source and the development community?

Wake up, Sun is dead and gone. Java is not free, not Free as in freedom, free as in beer, or free as in Fuck All.

Call me crazy... (1)

PessimysticRaven (1864010) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992196)

But I, for one, couldn't care less, actually. It's their distro, they can include/exclude whatever they see fit. Also, it's not like there isn't hundresds+ of other distros.

Or, you know, install it yourself.

Deliberate move... (1)

H0p313ss (811249) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992412)

lit up with speculation that this is a deliberate move to exclude Mono because of its emulation of Microsoft .NET

No, once apply Occam's Razor and ignore the conspiracy angle it's quite obvious that it's "a deliberate move to exclude Mono because" it sucks dead dingo kidneys.

(Cue the pedants who will argue into the wind about an improper usage of Occam's Razor. a.k.a. Howler Monkeys [theoatmeal.com] )

Ohhhh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37992600)

You had me at Bacon.

What?

No big loss (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37992616)

I started as a Fedora user and since my classes require Ubuntu 10.04 LTS I've been experimenting with Ubuntu/Kubuntu 10.04 and the latest version that just came out on separate laptops. Since I rarely use Linux for multimedia I am not all that knowledgeable about the pros/cons of Banshee/Mono, but when I do want to play some media files on my Network Storage, I used the default player (Banshee) but it needed some plug-in that I had to download. Instead of doing that though and possibly stumbling upon with complications I decided to scrap Banshee and use VLC Media Player instead. It plays pretty much everything and is updated fairly frequently.

Whats the issue? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37992684)

There is hand wringing over software that plays dvd's (not rips, just plays), because there are people out there that don't want you to play a cd that you bought and have a receipt for on a computer that you bought and have a receipt for. Yet there is proprietary hell and a walled garden surrounding everything MONO, and its available? And for a while it was even a default include? I can see it as a 3rd party unsupported extra for people that want it, but I've never been one of them, and in no way can any of the applications that use it be described as 'a native app'. Its inclusion in Ubuntu makes Ubuntu a litigation target. We don't need MONO, its a hot potato, and while WINE is not an ideal solution, at least the technology is useful, effective, and doesn't have a million strings attached to an Intellectual Property Predator(tm). Sidious de Icaza's talents are wasted in developing and promoting it. It makes Ubuntu and other free software a litigation target, and wastes resources (time and talent) better used anywhere else. Stronger arguments than these have been attempted, and have failed. Sidious de Icaza is lost to the dark side. Its best for Ubuntu to drop it.

Great! Depending on Mono is a mistake (5, Insightful)

ciaran_o_riordan (662132) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992834)

Mono has its uses - it could help people remove .Net dependencies from their software packages.

But for new software packages, choosing a Microsoft technology is a mistake. Microsoft calls free software an enemy - "cancer" to be "extinguished", so building on their technologies is folly, especially when there are lots of non-Microsoft languages and frameworks that we can use. The problems of software patents are only getting worse, so we need to prepare for the future by applying some caution today.

I hope this is indeed the real reason for taking Mono-dependent software out of Ubuntu.

http://en.swpat.org/wiki/Mono [swpat.org]

Alas (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 2 years ago | (#37993204)

After even writing a howto on removing mono from Ubuntu... I have it installed now, so that I can have autopano-sift to use with Hugin.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?