Coffeehouse Thread

19 posts

Forum Read Only

This forum has been made read only by the site admins. No new threads or comments can be added.

Xamarin, not so open source anymore

Back to Forum: Coffeehouse
  • User profile image
    IsThisReally​Beer

    http://xamarin.com/

    Is it just me or did Miguel and all these guys fired from Novell just flip flop?

    No community edition? Call home activation?

    $399 for a personal license for Android then another $399 for iOS?

    Why not just use Objective C or Java at that point to create iOS and Android apps. It's far less restrictive. XCode comes free with your Mac, and the Eclipse plugin for the Android SDK is also free.

    just ...wow

  • User profile image
    xgamer

    If charging for those tools .. allows them to develop and maintain Mono / Monodevelop, free / opensource .. I think many will be OK with that ....

  • User profile image
    IsThisReally​Beer

    Who's really behind Xamarin?

    actually nevermind this question, the CEO of Xamarin was an intern at Microsoft. How lame. I'm so glad mono is dead.

     

  • User profile image
    felix9

    MonoTouch and MonoDroid were always commercial products based on the opensource Mono platform, they have no free releases since the beginning, nothing has changed here.

    and those .js files with Microsoft comments are part of the jquery nuget package used in Visual Studio project template for ASP.NET MVC3, which is used to build the web site, and has nothing to do with the content of the web site.

    what are you talking about mr. beer ?

  • User profile image
    IsThisReally​Beer

    Ximian evolution was free and open source as well as being commercially available with support.

    query nuget package used in Visual Studio project template for ASP.NET MVC3

    I can't believe somebody would actually use visual studio to make a website. That's right up there with iWeb (except not as good looking)

  • User profile image
    xgamer

    @IsThisReallyBeer : Mono is dead .. may be in your imaginary World .. in the real world .. just day before yesterday they released a good bug fix version with C# 5 features and  async support ...

    Talking about their CEO/CTO ... though they were MS interns .. their contribution to Opensource w.r.t. Ximian, Gnome and many other projects ...  i suppose are far more greater than yours which I think is just some hot air coming from ...

    I rest my case there .... 

  • User profile image
    kettch

    @IsThisReallyBeer: Remember, every time you visit a website made with VS, Bill Gates gets a dollar, and uses it to steal an orphan's Christmas.

  • User profile image
    cbae

    @IsThisReallyBeer: Why do you get so butthurt every time somebody actually wants to charge for something? Yet, you proceeded to flaunt "evidence" of online invoice payments for some useless product that you used peddle.

  • User profile image
    magicalclick

    ,cbae wrote

    @IsThisReallyBeer: Why do you get so butthurt every time somebody actually wants to charge for something? Yet, you proceeded to flaunt "evidence" of online invoice payments for some useless product that you used peddle.

    Because he programmed it. (sarcastic)

    Leaving WM on 5/2018 if no apps, no dedicated billboards where I drive, no Store name.
    Last modified
  • User profile image
    IsThisReally​Beer

    @cbae:

    There has been a lot of flip flopping. For example Google promoted Android as open source, then they closed the Honeycomb source from kernel.org and now suddenly Microsoft goes and threatens HTC, Samsung ect... to license a patent portfolio.

    This after 10,000 manufacturers in China started selling APad tablets on eBay for under $100 with Android 2.2 and started making significant money with it.

    Then people(Xamarin) who made their entire careers out of creating free software and getting big business to foot the bill are now trying to get the public to do it through retail sales directly to them.

    I don't have a problem with Adobe charging for software, or another company that always promoted the software as pay software. But what if Word Press just up and started charging for downloads one day, or Facebook started charging to keep your membership?

    They, including Google, are essentially saying "we're open source up to the point that people can make money with it", then we're turning around and close sourcing it and charging for it.

    Essentially they're saying that they'll only make stuff that's largely useless to end users open source. That's the opposite of what Canonical and the FSF have promoted yet they always try to align themselves with those organizations to get users from those groups.

    Essentially I am calling them massive hypocrites.

  • User profile image
    felix9

    ,IsThisReally​Beer wrote

    I don't have a problem with Adobe charging for software, or another company that always promoted the software as pay software. But what if Word Press just up and started charging for downloads one day, or Facebook started charging to keep your membership?

    They, including Google, are essentially saying "we're open source up to the point that people can make money with it", then we're turning around and close sourcing it and charging for it.

    Should I repeat myself ?

    The Mono platform itself was always and still is free and open source.

    The MonoTouch and MonoDroid products was always and still is commercial products.

    NOTHING has changed here. NOTHING similiar to your examples happened here.

  • User profile image
    IsThisReally​Beer

    @felix9:

    How defensive!

    The Monotouch project was owned by Novell:

    http://www.novell.com/news/press/2010/4/novell-releases-monotouch-2-0-enables-development-of-apple-ipad-applications.html

    Which was later sold to Attachmate. So if it wasn't open source how did De Icaza just walk away with all that IP from Novell which he is now charging $399 per license for in a closed source setting?

    They paid him to do that work right? Now he's taking the work and his salary and selling it wholesale. How is this happening if this wasn't FOSS?

  • User profile image
    cbae

    ,IsThisReally​Beer wrote

    @felix9:

    How defensive!

    The Monotouch project was owned by Novell:

    http://www.novell.com/news/press/2010/4/novell-releases-monotouch-2-0-enables-development-of-apple-ipad-applications.html

    Which was later sold to Attachmate. So if it wasn't open source how did De Icaza just walk away with all that IP from Novell which he is now charging $399 per license for in a closed source setting?

    They paid him to do that work right? Now he's taking the work and his salary and selling it wholesale. How is this happening if this wasn't FOSS?

    If it used to be FOSS as you claim, how come you don't currently have the source code in your grubby little hands and aren't compiling it yourself?

  • User profile image
    DCMonkey

    ,IsThisReally​Beer wrote

    @felix9:

    How defensive!

    The Monotouch project was owned by Novell:

    http://www.novell.com/news/press/2010/4/novell-releases-monotouch-2-0-enables-development-of-apple-ipad-applications.html

    Which was later sold to Attachmate. So if it wasn't open source how did De Icaza just walk away with all that IP from Novell which he is now charging $399 per license for in a closed source setting?

    They paid him to do that work right? Now he's taking the work and his salary and selling it wholesale. How is this happening if this wasn't FOSS?

    Xamarin obtained a perpetual license to all the intellectual property of Mono, MonoTouch, Mono for Android, Mono for Visual Studio and will continue updating and selling those products.

    -- http://tirania.org/blog/archive/2011/Jul-18.html

  • User profile image
    IsThisReally​Beer

    @DCMonkey:


    obtained a perpetual license to all the intellectual property of Mono


    Why would they need to license the intellectual property of Mono from Attachmate? Isn't that GPL?

  • User profile image
    felix9

    ,IsThisReally​Beer wrote

    Why would they need to license the intellectual property of Mono from Attachmate? Isn't that GPL?

    clearly you know nothing about licensing. GPL is just a license to distribute some code you own/wrote, the code is still copyrighted and owned by the owner, hence its still an 'intellectual property' of the copyright owner.

    and in theory the owner can still distribute the code in some other licenses (this is how dula-licensing like Qt (before) or MySQL works), or, the owner can also distribute a new version of the code in other licenses only, and stop using GPL, it may not be the right thing to do, but its legal, they can't retract the GPL-ed version though, so the community may fork it, thats the story of DivX and XviD. And that's what the industry have worried about when Oracle got Java.

    Since Attachmate is kinda unpredictable, in theory the can develop a new version of Mono (those parts they actually own) as a commercial-only product, or doing some other silly things with it, that sucks. So its kinda relief to see Xamarin partmering with them and got the perpetual license, since Xamarin is the open source lover.

  • User profile image
    blowdart

    ,IsThisReally​Beer wrote

    http://xamarin.com/

    Is it just me or did Miguel and all these guys fired from Novell just flip flop?

    It's just you.The dev tools were never free, nor open source. Only mono itself was open source and, of course, as you know, that doesn't preclude Mono charging for it anyway.

  • User profile image
    IsThisReally​Beer

    @blowdart:

    Not much of a reason to use it then. Wouldn't you be much better off just making software for the HD2 if you absolutely positively had to use .NET ??

    http://ios.xamarin.com/Apps

    I'm looking through the apps catalog and none of these are popular or featured in the App store and there are only a small hand full of them.

    I kind of doubt that the sales of all of these apps put together made enough to cover a single license from Xamarin.

Conversation locked

This conversation has been locked by the site admins. No new comments can be made.