Interview with Miguel de Icaza, Co-Founder of Gnome, Ximian and Mono
One of the founders of Gnome, Ximian and Mono, Miguel de Icaza
Born in
Mexico City
, Miguel de Icaza was the driving force behind the creation of the Gnome free software desktop, and co-founded the open source company Ximian, bought last August by Novell In July 2001, he helped start another ambitious project, Mono:. A free implementation For GNU / Linux Of Microsoft's .NET Framework. He Talks to Glyn Moody About Mono's Progress, How Ximian Was Bought by Novell, And why He is So Scared of Microsoft's Longhorn.
Miguel DE ICAZA is born in Mexico City. He promoted the advent of GNOME (a free desktop software on Linux operating system), but also the joint founder of Ximian, open source company. Ximian was acquired by Novell in August 2003. Since 2001, he works with people to launch another project: Mono, a free GNU / Linux implementation of a Microsoft .NET Framework. In this visit, Miguel talks about MONO's progress, Ximian is acquired by Novell, as well as the reason why you are afraid of Longhorn.
Q. How has your vision of mono change Since You Began The Project, And What Are The Main AIMS of MONO TODAY?
Q: How do you think of the project, MONO changes? What is the main goal of MONO?
A. a Lot of the Things That Microsoft Was Addressing with .NET WERE TOUCHING ON EXISTING PAIN POINTS for US. We've BEEN USING C and C Way Too Much - They're Nice, But The're Very Close To The Machine and what we wanted was to empower regular users to build applications for Linux. Windows has a lot of tools that address a particular problem but on Linux we're kind of on our own in terms of development So when Microsoft came out with this [.Net 】 Thing, Initially What We Saw Was Very Interesting, and That's How The Project Got Started. But ask to Work and Collaborate On this Effort, a couple of things happened.
A: Microsoft Touchs our pain in many of the .NET. We have always used C and C too much - they are very good, but too close to the bottom, we want to make ordinary users can create Linux applications. There are many tools on Windows to solve specific problems, but in Linux, you have to rely on yourself. So, when Microsoft launches .NET, we started Mono at first sight. However, after everyone started working, there have been some things.
The first is about creating APIs compatible with Microsoft .NET, Novell, and Ximian only focuses on core libraries and C # languages; many other participants are more interested in Windows Forms, ASP.NET, Web Services or databases.
. The first one is that there was more and more momentum behind building APIs that were compatible with the Microsoft ones Novell and Ximian were focused just on the core and C #; a lot of the people who came and contributed software to the project were interested in Windows Forms, OR ASP.NET or Web Services Or Databases, Which Were Part of the Microsoft Stack.
And at the same time we have grown organically a stack completely independent of the Microsoft stack, which we call the Mono stack but it includes things like tools for doing GUI development for Linux - that was one thing that we were very interested in and we actually Invested a lot of effort inTo That.
At that time, we have built a system outside the Microsoft component set, including tools for GUI development under Linux (we are very interested in this, and invested a lot of work).
So today at the core we still have Mono, which is what we wanted to do, and now we've got two very healthy independent stacks: the Microsoft-compatible stack for people who want to bring their applications from Windows to Linux, and also This Completely New and Fresh Stack of Things That In Some Cases Are Portable from Linux To Windows, and in Some Cases Are Very, Very Linux Specific.
In this way, in the core layer, we created mono, and get two high-quality independent component sets: compatible with Microsoft component set, developers use it to migrate applications from Windows to Linux; another new component set in some cases It is a cross-platform, but it is more Linux in another case.
Q. Microsoft Doesn't Seem to Be Making So Much Noise About .NET So Much Noise About .NET THESE DAYS: What's your view of .net's progress at the moment: how is it shaping Up as a platform for Writing Software? Q: Now Microsoft does not seem to be Promote .NET. How do you see the current progress of .NET? How did it build a software written platform?
A. I think that Microsoft overdid what .Net was. Initially, the message was extremely confusing because .Net meant too many things. It meant a set of server products, it meant a special edition of Windows, it meant a development platform. When we refer to .Net we call it the .Net framework, which is what it actually was -.. it was only one of the components of .Net And the .Net framework is actually a fairly good development platform At least it has stopped the migration of people who were sick and tired of MFC to Java. Now they have a much better solution if they go with the Microsoft-based technology and there's a nice migration path. So I think they've been successful.
A: I think the approach of Microsoft on .Net is too much. First of all, .NET means too much, but it is extremely confused. It is a set of server products and a special Windows version, or a development platform. When we talk about .NET, we actually refer to .NET Framework, which is its original face -.net. .NET Framework is a very good development platform. At least, it makes people who are disgusted to MFC no longer transferred to the Java platform. If these people continue to take the Microsoft technology route, they get more solutions than before, and easily transferred. I think Microsoft is successful.
. You probably do not hear too much about .Net because now it's not hot news, it's just something that developers have And the other reason might be because they're going through another rebranding exercise within Microsoft - I think it's going to be massively . complex They're trying to rebrand .Net framework into WinFX -. not to be confused with WinFS WinFX is basically the new version of the .Net framework with things for Longhorn, so it includes WinFS, it includes Avalon, it includes communications. The Whole Longhorn Thing is Built on top of .net. Maybe you don't hear news about .NET, because it is not a hot news, but has become a tool for developers. There is also a possibility that Microsoft's retrofit brand strategy - I think it will make things more complicated. They tried to reshape the .NET Framework for WinFX - not confused with WinFS. Winfx is basically a new version of the .NET Framework on Longhorn, so it will include Winfs, Avalon, and Communication Architecture. The entire Longhorn is built above the .NET platform.
Q. ONE BIG CHANGE SINCE MONO STARTED HAS BEEN NOVELL'S ACQUSITION OF Ximian; How Did IT COME ABOUT?
Q: Novell acquisition Ximian is a major event since the Mono project, how is the specific process?
A. We had a product for Linux called Red Carpet. It's something for maintaining the software and software updates on Linux machines on servers and clients. We had a fantastic GUI, we had a command line tool that allowed administrators to schedule things so it can be completely unattended, you could centrally manage things, roll out deployments, back out, undo. We basically had a very good product for Linux, and Novell has an equivalent software product for Windows. So we were talking about how can we marry these products , How can we benefit from each other.
A: We have a Linux-based product, the Red Carpet, which is used to manage software updates between Linux servers and clients. The graphical interface is great, and there is also a command line tool for the administrator to make a planned task; you can centrally manage, distribute, backup, recovery, etc. This product is based on Linux, Novell has a Windows-based similar product. So everyone sat down how to combine them, so that the two sides benefit. . A few of their guys came They were really trying to see how to position Novell and how they could ship services for Linux; they had a long-term plan One day they came and presented and they said, well, here's the situation,. We really want to get ip Linux. I think you guys can Help US.
They sent some people to see how to locate Novell, and how to port Novell service to Linux; this is a long-term plan. One day, they came over, then said: "Something, we really want to go to Linux, I think you can help us."
Q. What did you find attractive in becoming part of novell?
Q: What is the benefit of being part of Novell?
A. The negotiations, as I said, began with Red Carpet, but the Linux desktop was something that also fascinated them and they also wanted to become a player in the desktop space - we do not want to be relegated to the server space only The client is where all the action is happening. so [being acquired] allowed US to restwith 10 on on desktop without having to focus continally on this [red carpet] thing.
A: I just mentioned that cooperation begins with Red Carpet. The Linux desktop system is also attractive to them. They want to have achievements in this area - we will never be willing to draw in the server side, the client is the place where all operations occur. The Novell Acquisition allows us to reorganize teams and continue to work on the desktop side without going on on the Red Carpet.
Q. HAS NOVELL DECIDED What FORM THE Desktop Will Take - WILL IT BE GNOME-BASED, or HAVE OTHER Elements?
Q: Is Novell to determine what form should be used in the desktop? Will it be based on GNOME? Or will there be other elements to join?
A. We can not choose one desktop over the other - Gnome or KDE -. Because there's users for both code bases What we're planning on doing is we're working with an organisation called the Freedesktop.org The idea there is they define. protocols - things like desktop notification systems, system-wide configuration engine, clipboard support, drag and drop, etc. we're pushing those into Gnome and KDE to unify those things and the default desktop really is a combination of elements A: we. Can't have their own users from one and final - Gnome and KDE. Our plan is to cooperate with FreeDesktop.org. They develop an agreement - such as a desktop notification system, a system-level configuration engine, a clipboard support, drag and more. We are putting these elements into GNOME and KDE, allowing the desktop to integrate these elements.
Gnome and KDE are basically the shells, but then there are higher-level applications like the office suite. We're making the decision it's going to be OpenOffice, the browser it's going to be Mozilla, the email client it's going to be Evolution, The Im Client It's Going to Be Gaim. So We Basically Have To Pick Successful Open Source Projects and Put Them Together. There's a Lot of Work On Integrating.
Basically GNOME and KDE are both kernel housings, and there is a high-order application such as the Office suite. We decided to use OpenOffice, the browser uses Mozilla, the Email client adopts Evolution, and the instant messaging client uses GAIM. This way, we need to combine these successful open source projects. Integration work is very powerful.
Q. You'VE DRAWN A DISTINCTION BETWEEN A GNU / Linux Desktop and an open source desktop: What did you mean by That?
Q: You have made a choice between the GNU / Linux desktop and the open source desktop, please explain it in detail.
A. In some cases we've been building tools that are specific to Linux for the desktop, and they only work on Linux, but I see two major projects that are wildly, wildly successful: Mozilla and OpenOffice, and those two programs are cross . platform So if we're going to build new applications that require a large time investment, like say movie editing - today that does not matter for the enterprise desktop, but eventually it will when we get closer to consumers - you really need to have a cross-platform story. We all love Linux, but it's also a fact that some people might not be able to migrate. But we can still have them reduce their TCO. you do not necessarily need Office, you do not necessarily NEED IE or you do't Necessarily Need Final Cut Pro Etc. We Should Be Thinking In Terms of Building Cross-Platform Applications That Will Work Fine On Windows and Under Macos AS Well. A: To some extent we have been developing with Linux The desktop is closely related and can only run on Linux. I have seen two quite successful items: Mozilla and OpenOffice are cross-platform. So, if we plan to develop new projects that take more time, such as video editing - this type of tool currently does not have cross-platform problems on the enterprise desktop system, but the more close to software customers, the bigger cross-platform demand may be more likely. We love Linux, but not all users can move smoothly to this platform. Despite this, we can still reduce their overall cost. Maybe you no longer need office, no longer need IE, or no longer need Final Cut Pro, etc. We should consider creating cross-platform applications, allowing it to run on Windows and Macos.
Q. WHEN DOES NOVELL THINK That The GNU / Linux Desktop Will Be Ready for The General User?
Q: When will Novell migrate to the GNU / Linux desktop?
A. We're doing this exercise ourselves I think that by October the whole company has to migrate to OpenOffice, and then I think it's by June next year we all migrate to Linux -. You do not want to migrate 6,000 people both operating System and office suite in a single jump.
A: We are working hard. I think the whole company will move to OpenOffice in October this year. It will move to Linux in June next year. Don't expect to migrate your work. We have a lot of existing customers which are also considering Linux desktop migrations and rolling out some of these programs, so we're learning from them. For example, in Extramadura and Andalucia they've been going out for two years now with these deployments . They have 200,000 deployed seats and they're going towards 400,000 deployed seats by the end of the summer on pure Linux, Gnome, Mozilla, OpenOffice desktops. They're two very, very large deployments, probably the largest deployments of Linux desktops today ...............
Our existing quite users are also considering migrating to the Linux desktop, and there are problems in the process, which is exactly what we can for reference. For example, Extramadura and Andalucia have started to move for two years, and now they have deployed Linux, Gnome, Mozilla and OpenOffice on 200,000 computers, and this number will grow to 400,000 in the end of the summer. This is two great deployment projects, perhaps the largest Linux desktop system deployment project, including children and grandmothers.
Q. What do you see as the greatest danger to the Continuing Adoption and Progress of Open SOURCE?
Q: What is the biggest risk that you think will be faced?
A. Microsoft realises today that Linux is competing for some of the green pastures that it's been enjoying for so long; I think that Longhorn is a big attempt to take back what they owned before Longhorn has kind of a scary technology called Avalon, which. when compounded with another technology called XAML, it's fairly dangerous. And the reason is that they've made it so it's basically an HTML replacement. The advantage is it's probably as easy as writing HTML, so that means that anybody can produce this content with A Text Editor.
A: Microsoft realized that Linux broke into the pasture of our many years and became its own competitors; I think Longhorn is a major weapon for Microsoft. Longhorn includes an amazing technology: Avalon, which is a technique that has become XAML, will be very threatened. They are basically HTML alternatives as it is as easy as writing HTML, which means that everyone can create content using the text editor. It's basically an HTML Next Generation A lot more widgets, a lot more flexibility, more richer experience -... Way, way richer experience You get basically the native client experience with Web- like deployments So you develop these extremely rich applications but they can be deployed as easily as the Web is It's just like going to a URL:. you go to Google, and you get the Web page and it works So it's the same deployment model but the user interface interaction is just fantastic..
Basically this is the next generation of HTML. More tools, more flexible, and richer user experience - you can feel like web general forms on your local machine. You have developed such a great application, but it is easy to distribute as a web. Like the URL: Access to Google, the web page appears, and work is normal. The distribution model is thus this, but the high interactivity of the user interface is fascinated.
Of course, the only drawback is that this new interaction is completely tied to .Net and WinFX. So we see that as a very big danger. A lot of people today can not migrate to Linux or can not migrate to Mozilla because a lot of their internal Web Sites Happen to Use IE Extensions. Now Imagine A World Where You Can Only Use Xaml.
Of course, it is unfavorable in that the new interactive mechanism is tapered to .NET and WinFX. So we think it is a great danger. A large number of users cannot migrate to Linux or Mozilla because many of the enterprise's internal sites only support IE extensions. Think about it, can only use XAML world, what will it be?
It's Massive - I'm So Scared.
Giants, I am very scared.
