Slash Boxes

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Tuesday November 03 2015, @02:22PM   Printer-friendly
from the same-old-routine dept.

It looks like Microsoft hasn't reformed as some would like to think, but has moved its embrace, extend, extinguish policy to the mobile platform. In this article from , we see a company (responsible for Mono) with strong MS connections take over an open source project and close it.

LAST WEEK we wrote about Xamarin's disturbing takeover of RoboVM [1, 2], which was a threat to Microsoft's monopoly and domination of APIs (especially on the desktop). Xamarin, for the uninitiated, creates proprietary software that strives to spread Microsoft's .NET to mobile (including Android) devices.

It has only been less than a week and now we learn from Abel Avram that "RoboVM Is No Longer Open Source".

"Following RoboVM's acquisition by Xamarin," explains Avram, "the company has raised the price of their offering and has closed the source code."

Discussion of a fork is in the works:

It has gotten so bad that RoboVM might be forked. To quote Avram, "some developers consider that closing down the source code has to do with Xamarin's acquisition. And some are discussing forking the project, perhaps starting with the sources v. 1.8 which will be pushed to GitHub this week, according to Zechner. It remains to see how successful they are in their endeavor considering that RoboVM is not a trivial piece of software."

Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by quacking duck on Wednesday November 04 2015, @02:42PM

    by quacking duck (1395) on Wednesday November 04 2015, @02:42PM (#258369)

    I never called what Apple now allows users to do "sideloading". The only times I used that word were when I said "although you can't just sideload pre-built iOS apps like Android" and that it "is more secure than Android sideloading".

    And, if WillR's comment [] is accurate, Google is trying hard to make Thelaxon's comment ("Google: Wants a nice take via Google Play every time somebody adds an app to their phone") more true... which was the very point you were trying to refute.

    And since you want to argue definition, sideloading is *exactly* what's going on anyway: "process of transferring data between two local devices, in particular between a computer and a mobile device" []. Just because Android users started using it in a specific (and technically inaccurate!) context, doesn't make the term theirs exclusively.

    So no, Apple isn't allowing Android app-like sideloading. But it is now allowing sideloading (by definition!) of unapproved 3rd party software, for free.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2