Microsoft is releasing the source code to the .NET Framework - my cynical reaction

The microsoft reference license (the license under which the BCL is being released):

The Microsoft Reference License (Ms-RL) is the most restrictive of the Microsoft source code licenses. The license prohibits all use of source code other than the viewing of the code for reference purposes. The intent of this license is to enable licensors to release, for review purposes only, more sensitive intellectual property assets. --- How hard is it going to be for the mono project to prove that any contributions related to WPF, ASP.NET, and WinForms after this public release weren't influenced by source code under the reference license?

I'm happy, yet cynical as well. However I disagree that this is a challenge to the Mono project. A future implementation of WPF or the existing implementations of WinForms and ASP.NET are built on completely different technologies (i.e. GTK+ vs. the Win32 API) and the resulting code is necessarily different enough from Microsoft's implementation as to not be a problem.

This move is likely driven by the US and EU anti-competitive rulings. How could the blue monster be hiding anything from competitors when the source code is available?

I was under the impression that Microsoft actually helped with the development of moon light in partnership with Novell

Given that is so easy to see the psuedo-source using Reflector I can't imagine having the real source out there gives Microsoft any better legal defence for claims of plagiarism.

But it will certainly be useful with debugging.

[)amien

This will allow the mono folks to more easily reverse-engineer .NET libraries. Having the source code will allow them to make Mono more compatible faster. It will greatly benefit MS developers as Darwin benefits mac developers and probably lead to greater adoption of .NET.

In terms of pushing .NET usuage, it is a great move. But, will it sell more copies of Windows in the long term? I doubt it. A well-running Mono project opens the door to companies replacing Windows servers with Linux or Unix machines. If MS is going to remove the barrier to dumping Windows, they better get on the ball and start innovating and fixing their problems or Linux will do to them what it did to Sun.

-James

James..if a mono programmer accepts the license by looking at the code, Microsoft can claim that the mono project has been stealing IP. Folks on the mono project can reverse engineer the code quite easily now using Reflector. If anybody on the mono project signs the license (they must agree to it in order to see the source code to .NET) then Microsoft can attempt to claim that the mono project stole code from them and tangle them up in legal battles.

surely there are ways for a saavy person to work around that.

No doubt there are ways for savvy programmers to work around it, and anyone with a decent knowledge of licensing schemes will be able to find ways around it as well. I don't think MS intends to actually sue anyone, I think MS intends to impede competition through the threat/fear of legal action.

If people are suddenly able to run the full-blown 100% full-featured .NET Framework 3.5 sitting on top of MONO on a LINUX box ... then MS may find their server business slipping some.

.NET was a dumb move by MS overall. MS depends heavily on customer lock-in. They should have never set the system up so that it would be relatively easy to clone it on other platforms.

Now that they have gone this route, they are going to have to compete by innovating and staying ahead of the OS competition. Political and legal games aren't a long term solution to their monopolies eroding.

I've had the same basic thought on Java. I've never understood the business model for Java...how does this tool benefit Sun? All I see is that is has allowed their customers to slip away to cheaper alternatives.

MS followed Sun into the same nonsensical business model for developer tools. Its only a matter of time before Linux and Mono are "good enough" and Windows starts losing server share to Linux as Sun did.

Holy crap you come up with some doozies. There are many ways in which mono is a benefit to MS. Do you *really* think MS want stamp out mono? Seriously .. it makes no sense. The damage to their reputation amongst the community would not be small (developers, developers). They are pobably the most watched company in the world over anti-competitive practices, as a result in many cases they are now one of the most open IT companies. There's little to no blog cencorship and they've gone a long way standardising their technology and playing fair with third party software.