The above statement makes it clear that you do not really follow Mono closely and your opinions are based on rumors rather than real life experience.
Let me explain:
I have not seen you post ever on our Mono mailing lists requesting the specific feature that is keeping your code from running on Mono.
I am having a hard time coming up with a feature of .NET 1.1 that you need to have on Mono (the stuff we do not implement does not make any sense on Linux, like support for WMI).
Mono implements quite happily all the core functionality up to .NET 3.5 with gaps on Windows Workflow (not there), WCF (Partial) and WPF (we are not going to implement it).
People that are adopting Mono (many of them) use our Migration Analysis tool to identify the spots that require rewriting (to remove Windows dependencies, and provide the Linux equivalent for example) and get moving on with their life.
From the statistics that we have colleced with the Moma Tool 1,592 application work out of the box; 1,823 require between 1 and 3 source code changes another 1,200 require from 4 to 10 changes. Now if you are even a remotely competent programmer, yous should be able to find work around for up to 10 changes in say, an afternoon?
The rest are more complicated, the next 3,000 or so reports will likely take from a week worth of work to a full scale reimplementation effort (the ones that have up to say 300 P/Invoke calls).
As for innovation in Mono: nothing anywhere says that we should stop at working on compatibility with .NET. We created Mono to create better applications for Linux, which is why we created bindings to Gtk# as well as some other couple hundred libraries: because we want to improve our ecosystem.
The above statement makes it clear that you do not really follow Mono closely and your opinions are based on rumors rather than real life experience.
Let me explain:
I have not seen you post ever on our Mono mailing lists requesting the specific feature that is keeping your code from running on Mono.
I am having a hard time coming up with a feature of .NET 1.1 that you need to have on Mono (the stuff we do not implement does not make any sense on Linux, like support for WMI).
Mono implements quite happily all the core functionality up to .NET 3.5 with gaps on Windows Workflow (not there), WCF (Partial) and WPF (we are not going to implement it).
People that are adopting Mono (many of them) use our Migration Analysis tool to identify the spots that require rewriting (to remove Windows dependencies, and provide the Linux equivalent for example) and get moving on with their life.
From the statistics that we have colleced with the Moma Tool 1,592 application work out of the box; 1,823 require between 1 and 3 source code changes another 1,200 require from 4 to 10 changes. Now if you are even a remotely competent programmer, yous should be able to find work around for up to 10 changes in say, an afternoon?
The rest are more complicated, the next 3,000 or so reports will likely take from a week worth of work to a full scale reimplementation effort (the ones that have up to say 300 P/Invoke calls).
As for innovation in Mono: nothing anywhere says that we should stop at working on compatibility with .NET. We created Mono to create better applications for Linux, which is why we created bindings to Gtk# as well as some other couple hundred libraries: because we want to improve our ecosystem.