http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/item/16026/
http://boycottnovell.com/2008/11/25/jose-on-mono/

Mono, IMHO is completely the opposite of the Ubuntu philosophy.

Please don't turn Ubuntu into the second Microsoft SUSE Linux.

Edit: I'm not asking to completely remove Mono, users should have the choice to to install it if they actually choose to.

I'm asking to not install it by default.

[19 votes] Solution #1: Auto-generated solution of idea #16026


]]> en-us Fri, 28 Nov 2008 07:47:44 +0000 Wed, 04 Feb 2009 02:12:17 +0000 QAPoll module http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/16026/
Will ubuntu step up to the plate as well as fedora and debian have ?

]]> Fri, 28 Nov 2008 08:50:07 +0000

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=oqpLWzPRfvU

]]> Fri, 28 Nov 2008 09:47:10 +0000
GNU/Linux have enought dev tools, why use Microsoft weapons against us ?

On Ubuntu, Tomboy and the-paint-software-i-dont-remember-the-name should be replaced by mono-free softwares !]]> Fri, 28 Nov 2008 09:51:53 +0000
Why? I read the article twice. The subliminal message is: "for Linux/FOSS to win, Microsoft has to loose" and "everything they do is evil, and must *not* touch anything they do".

That's FUD. Pure and simple. This anti-mono thing is becoming another sub-religion of Stallman's religion...]]> Fri, 28 Nov 2008 10:25:02 +0000 Fri, 28 Nov 2008 10:25:17 +0000
If you are against Mono you should also give some alternatives.

To me Mono seems very well designed and it's support for different kinds of GTK libraries seems quite good.

A good alternative might be doing more with the JVM (especially combined with a modern language like Scala) and I would like that alot. However, that would require lots of effort (stable bindings to things like DBus, better IDE support, better GTK+ support).]]> Fri, 28 Nov 2008 12:03:33 +0000 Fri, 28 Nov 2008 12:20:29 +0000
As long as the licenses comply with Open Source Initiative it should be in the repository.]]> Fri, 28 Nov 2008 13:09:32 +0000
Go give programmers something which is good enough to compete against mono. Java now that its open source may stand a chance (provided they can make their programs easier to run).

But the reason developers use mono is because C# is a very clean language, and is great to deal with. ]]> Fri, 28 Nov 2008 13:34:04 +0000
And end users don't care at the end of the day]]> Fri, 28 Nov 2008 13:34:53 +0000 I'm writing for .net/mono because that's the only managed env. left if you don't like java. (vala is not there yet)]]> Fri, 28 Nov 2008 13:38:46 +0000 I like Mono.]]> Fri, 28 Nov 2008 13:39:38 +0000
Mono is *not* Microsoft.]]> Fri, 28 Nov 2008 13:53:40 +0000
But maybe we shouldn't have it installed by default.]]> Fri, 28 Nov 2008 14:16:58 +0000 Fri, 28 Nov 2008 15:21:34 +0000
What about you thought about what the coders like to code on the best instead of what you religiously think is superbad.]]> Fri, 28 Nov 2008 15:28:34 +0000
Mono is not a virus.

Mono is written by Novell, not by Microsoft Corp. It is an independent work, not a derived work. It is a collection of programming languages, a virtual processor implementing the CLI set of opcodes, a collection of class libraries, a suite of development tools, and a JIT (Just-in-Time) compiler on certain platforms which a JIT compiler has been written for.

C#, one of the languages supported by Mono, is a very elegant language that is something of a mix of C, C++, Java, and other C-like languages, with some new constructs of its own to fit within the CTS (common type system) and the CLR (common language runtime). The base class libraries, the C# language, and much of the rest of this system is standardized by the ECMA.

It is no different (in terms of the class of software it represents) than Java, while being significantly more efficient. C# is very easy to read and write, when done properly, and both Mono and Microsoft's .NET implementations are faster than Java in every case I have been able to test to date. Furthermore, Mono is free software, which means that you can inspect the system and verify for yourself that there are no viruses or malware contained within the source code base.

The presence of Mono will not turn Ubuntu into another piece of Microsoft crap.

There is no technical reason (that I can think of) to remove Mono. Mono is the home to a good amount of very good software, such as Banshee. However, if you want to do so, you can---on your own system. I have a fundamental problem with people that make arguments based on what is most analogous to a religious belief as opposed to cold, hard fact. If there is a *technical* or *legal* reason, bring it (with evidence) for consideration. Otherwise, kindly do not make such a suggestion again.]]> Fri, 28 Nov 2008 16:20:18 +0000
Humanity also means something like "being able to exist next to each other."

-1]]> Fri, 28 Nov 2008 16:38:53 +0000
-1]]> Fri, 28 Nov 2008 17:17:01 +0000
Mono applications have no business in our distribution.

Distributions indirectly funded by Microsoft like OpenSuse however should definitely have lots of .net/mono apps installed by default! ]]> Fri, 28 Nov 2008 17:58:37 +0000
Whilst many people think it's ok to have software that runs on all machines by using mono to code in, I DO NOT.

Microcrap has DICTATED, BULLIED and BRIBED it's way to the top and I for one, want nothing more to do with them, in any shape, or form. Their O/S's have all been absolutely crap and bug ridden and the direction the company as a whole, both ethically and code wise is not where I want to go.

I for one, will make a stand against the incorporation of microcrap into linux by any means. And if that means I don't use any software written using mono, so be it.

I am aware of the power I have when it comes to making choices and my choice is for a future Micrcocrap FREE world.

In my mind, Micrcocrap is evil personified in a company and I am going to exorcise the beast on my Linux right now.

I am looking for the Mono run-times, or whatever they are and am going to remove them immediately after I write this reply.

]]> Fri, 28 Nov 2008 19:36:34 +0000
until this issue is properly discussed in all levels of the community. ]]> Fri, 28 Nov 2008 19:40:38 +0000
http://www.theopensourcerer.com/2008/08/04/how-to-remove-mono-m-from-ubuntu-hardy-heron/

http://www.theopensourcerer.com/2008/11/16/how-to-remove-mono-from-ubuntu-intrepid-ibex/

Here is the actual search in google.

http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=how+to+remove+mono+from+ubuntu&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=com.ubuntu:en-GB:unofficial&client=firefox-a

I hope this helps and please support the microcrap free world.]]> Fri, 28 Nov 2008 19:43:32 +0000
-1]]> Fri, 28 Nov 2008 19:45:14 +0000
It's amazing how the knowledge that I no longer have the virus on my machine is so revitalizing and gives one a feeling of happiness.

]]> Fri, 28 Nov 2008 19:48:22 +0000 I proposed: Use Mono for "native" Windows apps. And got voted to -28.
Mostly because I didn't understand what Mono really is.
I always thought that it's a .NET interpreter.
Anyway I don't like the "tone" of this idea it smells of "zealotry".
I think that proposer of this idea has as much idea about what Mono is as I (please don't take this as an offence).
-1]]> Fri, 28 Nov 2008 19:51:02 +0000
"I think that proposer of this idea has as much idea about what Mono is as I (please don't take this as an offence)."

Can I buy you a beer?

Boycottnovell is fiction, not fact.]]> Fri, 28 Nov 2008 20:22:49 +0000 Also this is a dupe of a dupe of a dupe...
Could you please stop duplicating this idea!?
I mean how hard it is to search Mono and vote the original idea up (it has 94 votes ATM; but will go down because of all the "FUD" around this topic).
]]> Fri, 28 Nov 2008 20:31:39 +0000
@linuxjoedude: Since Linux systems do not catch virii, you didn't have any to start with. Do feel free to do some research. You're using an argumentum ad hominem to attempt to convince others that your unsubstantiated *opinion* regarding Mono is somehow something objective and well-known a priori, which is incorrect and shady. Do take a little while to do some research so that you can learn what the situation really is, what Mono really is, and so forth. Is Microsoft a “bad company”? I would be inclined to say so. It has been convicted of violating antitrust law in the US and EU, it has used shady business tactics to remain at the top of the PC operating system ladder, and so forth. But not all of the people that work at Microsoft are “teh evil”, nor is everything that comes from Microsoft completely horrible. The CLR and the C# programming language are the only decent things I've seen come from there in a long time and reinforces the idea that they should have stuck with their roots in programming languages and development environments, and stayed away from operating systems and applications software.

To the non-technical people reading this idea: Seriously, research it before voting in either direction. And research far more than it, too; research other programming languages and how nearly _all_ vendors have incompatible extensions with each other to try to gain competitive edges (even GCC does this with C), research other managed code systems including those that are very new, spend some time learning about how the system works, and take a look at the published standards. Compare this with Java’s lack of a standardized (via ISO, ECMA, or similar) VM, bytecode, and class library.

And let's not forget that many people run Wine to gain Win32 compatibility. Let's also not forget that what is being gained is not just interoperability, like with Wine, or with OpenOffice.org's reading Microsoft Office file formats, but we're getting the ability to use the system they designed better than they do, for starters. Microsoft, while largely full of people making very stupid decisions, isn't comprised completely of idiots and evil-doers—no company is. All that Mono really is when simplified is a suite which contains a "bytecode interpreter", a "JIT compiler", a "class library", and a suite of "compilers" and "development tools" that is Free Software. And never forget that you can remove anything you want from your default installation, after all, it's your computer Don't wont Firefox? Remove it, then. Don't want Evolution? Remove it, then. Don't want Mono? Well, you get the idea. Just because there are some (ignorant) people in the vocal minority doesn't mean they're right. It just means they're loud.]]> Sat, 29 Nov 2008 05:11:06 +0000
+0]]> Sat, 29 Nov 2008 06:05:31 +0000
I'm not proposing to remove Mono from the repositories. I'm proposing to _not install it by default_.

@ all

If this is a dupe of a dupe of a dupe then we should merge all these dupes to one proposal. If there are so many dupes, than that means that more than "just a minority" want's Mono not to be installed by default.

If the proposal is rejected, I will simply publish my own Ubuntu spinoff, as I described here:

http://osgeex.blogspot.com/2008/10/reconstructor-create-your-own-ubuntu.html
]]> Sat, 29 Nov 2008 06:19:26 +0000
Mono isn't Microsoft. The software installed by default in Ubuntu should not be determined by the irrational fears of uninformed people. boycottnovell is anything but fact.]]> Sat, 29 Nov 2008 15:17:16 +0000
Regardless of what Novel wants to do, you have the freedom of choice to use Mono or not.

So what if MS has a hand in .Net? The more involved in maturing technology the better. That's what started this movement after all.

This MS vs GNU argument is the most ass hat dumbest waste of time that's ever cursed this community.]]> Wed, 04 Feb 2009 02:10:24 +0000 Wed, 04 Feb 2009 02:12:17 +0000