hpr-knowledge-base/hpr_transcripts/hpr0291.txt

Episode: 291
Title: HPR0291: moonlight discussion
Source: https://hub.hackerpublicradio.org/ccdn.php?filename=/eps/hpr0291/hpr0291.mp3
Transcribed: 2025-10-07 15:41:38

---

.
Welcome to Hecker Public Radio, I'm monster B, and on the call with me is 330.
Hello. J Lindsey.
Hello.
Klaatu.
Hello.
And Dan.
Hello.
And tonight we're going to talk about moon light, flash, mono, whatever else you guys want to talk about.
Well then by that reflection we have to talk about air.
Sure.
If you talk about moon light too.
I don't, I don't.
Well, we'll let 330 start off, because he is in love.
He's in love with mono.
Well, not mono specifically, but moon light.
Because I installed moon light 1.0, which after realizing, because I kept thinking that I was compiling 2.0,
but it was just 1.0 and not compiling right.
But I got the Firefox plug and installed.
And went to all the sites that actually let you play with moon light 1.0, and it was actually pretty cool.
You do, excuse me, you do have to download codecs for each of the sites.
And that was kind of interesting because if, in flash, if someone DRM something,
flash automatically downloads whatever is required to play that file, whether DRM encumbered or not.
But from what I can tell in moon light, if you come up to something that's DRM,
then you have to download something for it, you can just choose not to watch whatever it is.
If you're that hardcore about, you know, being anti-DRM.
But on one machine that already had a whole bunch of other stuff that I was playing with installed,
I went ahead and got the codec, which I'm not sure had DRM in it or not.
It was to watch really, really old fantastic four trailers.
But it was pretty cool. They ran fine, and I did it on my triple E.
Yes, I could do it with one gig of RAM and a 900 megahertz Celeron processor.
So it didn't really seem to take up too much in the way of, you know, computer power.
But I thought that the whole, you know, being able to choose whether you were using DRM or not was really interesting.
Can you step back a second from your love of this technology and the answer via question here?
Can you explain further what you mean by downloading codecs for this?
I mean, it's made it sound like you installed Moonlight and you went to a site that had silver light content.
And it prompted you to download a codec at that site, which you did.
You went to another site, that prompted you to download a codec.
I mean, how many codecs are you downloading here? How did this all work and how many codecs were you downloading?
I only downloaded one codec. It was because I went to the Fox movie trailer site
that they had when silver light first came out. It's silver light.net slash Fox, I think.
And that required a plug, you know, for me to download a codec, which just popped up in the browser.
It was like, hey, you need to install this. But everywhere else I went, you ex I was able to go to Microsoft has a silver light page and, you know, just to show off the technology.
And all of that worked without, you know, without any special stuff.
But I think if it's video content, you may have to download, you know, they're calling them codecs.
But it's probably not a codec at all.
Well, it's probably a little bit of codec code to, you know, you know, allow Moonlight to handle, you know, whatever it's actually encoded in.
Now this is coming from somebody that has no idea how this works.
But I'm assuming that it's a lot like flashware on the back end. It's actually H.264, but it's wrapped inside of it.
That's what it seemed to me like, too, because yeah, I had the same experience. Like when I would go to a trailer or something like that, it would, it did seem to ask me to download like a codec.
I said, at first you'd think, well, why do I have to download something? I already installed Moonlight.
So yeah, it must be something inside of the Moonlight, wrapping or something like that.
So what, like did they tell you what it is you were downloading?
Yeah, I think so.
We'll say, the only one I've got was the, it was just, it was called the Microsoft codec.
And it was like a pack of codecs, wasn't it? Didn't it say it was like a couple of different ones?
Yeah. And when I look, and the only thing it gives you as information is the license, which is kind of weird actually.
The license is, you know, it's kind of like a freeware license where, you know, it's still proprietary, but you're allowed to use it and do, you know, do the things required to make use of it, you know, you can play it and you can, you know, you can use it, but you can't deconstruct it or anything.
And it also said that it only lasted until Novel had a commercial release of Moonlight, which that kind of interested me because are they actually going to sell this?
Or, you know, does Microsoft realize that there won't be a commercial offering of it? And so then their license goes forever in perpetuity?
All right, so let me, let me, okay, so what the codec says is you can use this codec under permission of Microsoft until Novel releases a commercial product.
Yeah, pretty much.
Okay.
Well, I'm assuming at that point, Novel would have written their own. I think that's the idea.
Their own codec?
Yeah.
See, I was under the impression that, and if this is how I thought it was, Moonlight, they were putting together to work in conjunction with Silverlight and that Microsoft was providing them the permission to use the codec,
not that they were doing that until Novel produced their own.
So let me put this in a paste bin that I think Monster Re will probably put in the show notes.
Well, then I'm not sure if you're quite understanding, but there are two separate packages. You have to install the Moonlight package into Firefox, and that seems to be just kind of, that gives you the Moonlight, I guess, interface or wrapping or whatever.
And if you go to Silverlight page, like the rollovers and things like that will work. They just kind of work.
And you might be able to load a demo Silverlight application like a little clock or something, and that will work.
Sometimes it seems that if you go to a video site, it says you have to download a separate package to be able to play some of the content on that page.
Which made me think that it was DRM?
Yeah. It seems very distinct from Moonlight as such. I think Moonlight is Moonlight, and yeah, it is the Novel Alternative Silverlight.
The Codec package, I think what 330 is saying, is like a separate thing, and Microsoft is saying you can use these.
So I guess if it or when Novel comes out with their own codec, that's what I'm getting from what 330 said about the life. I didn't read the life.
Let's say it's in both the IRC and the chat, but it actually specifically states that they're supposed to be doing a commercial release of the Codec package or of Moonlight.
Of Moonlight.
Oh, okay.
Well, I was aware that the separation of the 2 Moonlight and the Codec package, what I wasn't aware of that Novel was going to produce their own codec package, or I guess they are going to bundle Microsoft's codec from a permissive codec into one light release.
Yes, no, maybe.
It really beats me because I never know what's going on between Novel and Microsoft.
Well, let me ask you. I got two questions for you. One is you had mentioned that Adobe just Flash does that in the background. I was never aware of Adobe Flash pulling down extra codec or anything.
I didn't realize that they did that. I thought that that was already the stuff that you did in Flash was already encoded into the MPEG for a format that supported natively inside of Flash.
No, there's all kinds of stuff going on. Flash updates itself from the servers of the content distributor is how it works.
So like YouTube, if YouTube decided to DRM 6 videos and only 6 videos, if you clicked on any of those 6 videos, as it was loading the page, as it was loading the video, it would be updating Flash to give you the DRM credentials to it.
So I guess my question then is how do you know that Moonlight doesn't do that?
Well, because it's asking you to install packages.
But you'd only ask you to install one, which was the Microsoft package.
Yeah, which I'm assuming has a whole crap ton of DRM in it. All assumptions.
Okay. I don't know anything for certain because they don't let you look at anything.
Well, it's a codec pack, so it contains several codecs. It's probably given you everything you need in that one package.
Given that, I guess my next question would be without the codec pack, what good is Moonlight?
Well, it does the basic Moonlight stuff. Like if you go to silverlight.net, there are like roll over buttons with little flashy, very flash-like animations. That worked without the codec. I know that for sure.
And if you were like, let's say me on my web server, I set up a Moonlight streaming server.
Yeah, so I made like my own YouTube, but it was all Moonlight stuff.
Silverlight, but I didn't put any DRM on it. You would with your base install of Moonlight be able to watch it without any problems at all.
And Moonlight being free software, you know, free software foundation style, free software.
It would just work, and it would all still be free.
So, 330, I have a question about your experience because I felt like your test went really well. Mine didn't do that well.
I got certain things working, but I don't know if you saw that wiki page on the Moonlight project where there's a whole bunch of tests.
I could not get half of the little web games and things like that to work. I mean, I got like an analog clock, a really big analog clock to work.
A big ass analog clock, maybe?
Yes, that worked for me, but like the card games, you know, just all these other games.
And practically every site on that wiki page that they said was going to work didn't actually function.
It just kept telling me to install Silverlight. And I kept trying to use our agent switchers.
And I mean, just all kinds of stuff, and I could not get.
The only thing I ever got to work was like, I think it was that box trailer site that you're talking about.
Other than that, like Netflix won't play the stuff that it would play on Silverlight.
It just not working for me at all.
I had the same results, and I think it was because we were using Moonlight 1 and not 2.
Oh, okay.
Where is 2? Is it FBN only?
2, you have to use FBN, and it doesn't even build today.
Okay. In that case, that answers that.
Since you're busy there, how easy was it to install?
Which one? 2.0 or 1.0?
I don't know, whatever.
1.0 was really easy. I mean, you just go to the Moonlight page.
I think they give you like three different steps. Finally, there's a link to click.
You click on it. It downloads the .xpi package.
Firefox kind of takes over for you.
And you install this and what?
This is Fedora for me.
And what did you install it in 3.30?
In CrunchBang.
So I would assume that it's pretty easy to install within Linux.
I mean, within Ubuntu, if it was an easy to install CrunchBang.
I mean, anything running Firefox 3 should be able to.
Yeah, I guess so.
Very close to you.
Yeah, I installed it on ice. We saw on FBN. No problem.
1.0.
What did you get working most of you?
Very few sites. I mean, everything is now Silverlight 2.0, so nothing's really working.
And it's kind of like you click on something that takes you right back to the Moonlight site.
The download, the codec are not the codec. The plugin you already have.
Yeah, yeah.
Yeah, that's what I got.
So they are behind.
So again, Moonlight is just going to play catch up to Silverlight.
Right, right.
So I didn't try this because, of course, I have an aversion to using monobased applications.
Not because of any of technical merit, just because of the philosophy behind them.
And by and large.
I just share that, yeah.
By and large, what kind of gets me a little bit is the idea of the permission that is being granted.
And almost sounds like it's ready to be revoked at a moment's notice.
Case in point with the license for the codecs package.
You can use this codec package at the permission of Microsoft until Nobel comes out with their commercial product.
And I don't know.
I just have this aversion towards the whole thing with just Microsoft being the gatekeeper.
Because they have now, you know, in order to get this content, you have to go through Microsoft.
Yeah, I just leave a bad taste in my mouth.
Yeah, Dan, when you're installing it from the Moonlight site, actually, there's a link there to view, quote, the covenants from Microsoft.
And I clicked on that and that there's this page on Microsoft that, you know, it's this, quote, covenant that they won't sue you for using their technology and everything.
And that just, I mean, that leaves a really bad taste in my mouth when I'm going to install, you know, this free software.
I have to automatically go to Microsoft's site and read up on how you don't worry they're not going to sue you.
Well, why would I even worry about that anyway?
You know, why do I need a covenant?
The fact that they make you go there, or have that covenant at all, just I have an issue with that.
Yeah, the covenants.
Yeah, the covenants.
Even 330 dogs hate it.
Yeah.
The covenants are just what Fedora points to on their Moonlight is actually on the forbidden items list.
Yeah, nice.
So they don't like it either.
Yeah, I'm not terribly fond of it.
I installed it for this episode and I'll uninstall it after this episode.
I've got an issue with it.
But I mean, this just, no one, who, who, I don't even like Flash, you know, I mean, like, I didn't want to replace this Flash, that kind of rich content.
You know, I mean, if you want to have little animations and stuff in your, in your website, there's all kinds of technologies that you can do.
They get flashy little bling on your site without resorting to something like Flash or Silver Light or Moonlight or whatever.
It just seems to be not even, it's not even progressive, it's just excessive, you know, to me in web design.
Well, let's, let's give 330 is heyday here because I know he's really, I mean, he is, he is the mono god now.
Right.
Did you join Miguel's team yet?
No, he, he's not answering my emails.
So I mean, you know, regardless, the mono, whatever, Miguel, like I said, I think is a great guy.
It was very talented.
But what's the stability like between Flash and Moonlight?
Flash at this point beats the pants off of Moonlight, but, you know, this is still early development stuff.
Because I know I still have a problem with Flash just like devastating my system requiring me to, yeah.
Let's say the, it seems like the, the actual like system requirements, that's not even the right term either.
Every Linux user knows that as soon as you open anything in Flash, it pegs your processor immediately without, without fail.
But Moonlight doesn't seem to, like it seems to play fairly well with everything else.
I wasn't actually looking because I just didn't think too.
But it doesn't seem like it's really that, like it's that serious of a prospect.
Let it out, man, spit it out.
So it's all my third podcast of the day, right?
Yeah, it, it's, look, it's no worse than Flash.
You know, why didn't Microsoft just release Silverlight for all three platforms?
Why, why do we need Moonlight to sit there and play back seat and try to catch up to Silverlight?
That was my next question.
That was exactly my next question, because Silverlight on the Macs at work when, when I had a job,
worked, you know, as expected, like on Netflix primarily was the one that I had experienced with it,
to watch movies, you know, instantly on Netflix.
You, you install Silverlight for Mac, and it works.
And you're watching movies online.
So then I quit, I no longer have access to back the lesson.
At all, I've got Linux.
I go install Moonlight, try Netflix, and it keeps telling me to install.
I mean, maybe I need to upgrade to 2.0, but yeah, why doesn't Microsoft?
I mean, why don't they just release it for us anyway?
Well, there's, there's two ways to look at it.
One, they hate us, and they're the big blue evil.
Or two, if they made it, none of us would use it, because we don't trust them.
And there's big blue evil, and you know, they can't be trusted.
I don't believe that, honestly, I do not believe that, because it would be the latter.
I thought the former I agree with the latter.
People use Flash, you know, I don't use Flash.
People do, though, on Linux.
So yeah, but everyone has this big like, oh my god, Microsoft's terrible.
They eat babies thing.
Right.
I mean, even more so than Google.
Like, yeah.
Like on this very program, there was a whole roundtable on whether Google is evil.
There hasn't been one for Microsoft.
Because it's already known.
Yeah, exactly, there are evil.
Yeah.
Let me ask you this.
Why, why, what's the difference between getting moonlight from a third party source
and requiring the codecs from Microsoft, and just getting a whole package from them?
Why do you think that there's, you know, one is more acceptable than the other?
Well, say, I really think that we should all be doing like this kind of shit on our own.
You know, everyone should have their own YouTube.
You know, we shouldn't have to rely on one central repository to put our videos of Dan's ass up.
But, you know, I think it would be very beneficial to most of humanity, you know,
that actually cares about this.
To just go ahead and set up, you know, if most nerds already have a web server or a web space, you know,
if you ran your own streaming moonlight video page, you still have something to link.
You still have something to embed.
You get all the spells that YouTube gives you, and you get, you know, this,
you don't get like that, that central, you know, community thing,
but you could make your own community.
And the people are still good.
What the hell are you talking about?
Look, look, you don't need the codec if you don't CRM anything.
It should just work.
What are you going to watch the video in?
If it's not CRM.
Well, I know, but what do you mean?
You still need the codec.
Look, if you took an Aug Theora file, wrapped it, you know, you wrapped moonlight around it,
and then put it on your web server to stream to people.
It would look just like a YouTube and embedded file, but every Linux user already has Theora installed.
You know, every distribution comes with a Theora codec.
So there's no codec to download, because your system already knows what Theora is,
and because you have the moonlight plug-in in Firefox or Ice Weasel,
it knows what's going on, so then the video just plays.
Okay, and then my question is, what's wrong with just saying,
here's a video, click on it, and it plays in your browser because you have VLP-
or whatever you want to use for your browser playback, and that's that.
Well, because really not all of us are brilliant and can embed actual files.
How does that relate into the question of whether or not it's more palatable to get the whole product from Microsoft?
Or I'm not going to get part of the product to Microsoft as opposed to the whole thing.
Let's say, all right, in my theoretical love fest, you wouldn't need Microsoft at all.
You don't need their codec, you don't need their source code, you don't need anything that Microsoft's involved in.
But it's not net technology.
Yeah, which has been re-implemented in a free software way.
Essentially, it's just like Samba.
It's just like everything else that we've taken from someone else and went,
well, everyone's using it, so we might as well make it work, and while we're at it, let's make it not suck.
So you're answering Klatto's question.
His concrete question with a hypothetical situation that doesn't exist yet.
Dan, you're confusing the issue.
That's a great answer.
Okay, let me ask Klatto's question and add on to it.
Why do you feel it is more palatable for third-party vendor, expaltable to Linux users,
in Linux population in general, for the mono project to offer moonlight and take the codec for Microsoft,
as opposed to us getting a whole shabang for Microsoft.
And do you think there's any merit to the idea that the reason Microsoft doesn't provide a full product for Linux
is because they feel that Linux is a threat to their monopoly,
and Apple is no way near the threat that Linux is, or not a threat at all.
Well, I'll do this in reverse.
No Apple isn't a threat because Microsoft owns, like, I think a quarter to half of the shares of Apple.
Yes, we are a threat.
They don't want to play nice with us because they know that we won't play nice back.
We don't, you know, because of my hypothetical, you know, hippie love fest,
we wouldn't need their codec, but if you do want to watch all the other stuff that everyone else is watching,
yes, you would.
Why have Novel do it instead of Microsoft?
Because if Microsoft did it, it would be non-free software, just like flashes,
and by Novel doing it, they released it under the GPL.
They released it under the LGPL.
The part of it is GPL, another part of it is LGPL,
and there is a library that is under the MIT X-11 license.
Yeah.
Can you talk a mono or moonlight?
They're both...
This is on them, one of them gets the same.
No, this is no.
Specifically, this is on the moonlight, heaven and page.
That's where I read about the licensing.
And what 330 just said is correct about the MIT GPL and the LGPL.
Very good.
Did I cover all the points?
Because I know I did it backwards, but the latter ones were more interesting than the beginning ones, unfortunately.
No, I think you make a point there.
I guess by just historical example, Microsoft would not have released a product move.
But still, I mean, do you think that would have really hindered Microsoft's penetration of moonlight,
or silver light technology into Linux?
Have they produced a client that was in GPL?
No, unfortunately, there are a bunch of people that make proprietary comic book readers that really don't care.
But there are still a large amount of people like me that, you know,
are really, really, really into the free software aspect of all of this.
I mean, Linux isn't that fun unless you have the source code and the freedom to share it.
So you're talking about free software.
And, you know, it's great that moonlight and pieces of mono are under, I mean, a lot of mono is under a free software license.
But then, you know, the next thing that begs the question is, when you have a company like Microsoft producing a product like moonlight or silver light,
and in competition to Adobe, which we have seen Adobe go from a very closed company to more open,
and I guess maybe we could say in some respects, Microsoft is doing that, but can we trust them to be good stewards of a technology that has the potential?
For locking up significant portions of content on the web?
Well, the way I look at it is all of moonlight is under a free software license.
You know, the various licenses, but they're all still free software licenses.
If Microsoft starts being dicks, we can take our code and, you know, go play ball somewhere else.
But then, if you have an alternative to silver light and you're risking no longer having something that is compatible with silver light.
Well, what could have been an alternative to silver light if you can't legally use it to access the content that it was designed for?
Right.
What's the good of having a lib lame?
You can get the one from Fraunhofer. Why have lib lame?
But I'm talking about legally accessing and utilizing.
Let's say, but, you know, because not having a legal avenue impedes adoption.
I would beg to differ.
Look at Napster, MP3s are top.
I'm talking about, I'm talking about it impedes adoption in a business and educational environment where it is required.
That should be legal.
Yeah, I'm realistically speaking.
It seems like Microsoft is holding all the playing cards, all the power here, because they say, here's silver light.
And then Moonlight says, okay, we're going to play along with you.
But Moonlight is no good if it can't keep up with silver light.
So if Microsoft just says, okay, well, we're changing things now.
And this is what we're doing.
I mean, Moonlight is going to be just a bastard child that no one can use because it can't access the contents that they want it to access.
Or they're going to have to start making, I guess, compromises on Moonlight in order to keep up with Microsoft whatever direction.
Microsoft ends up really going with silver light.
Let's say, but think of it this way.
If Microsoft doesn't want to play ball, we take Moonlight and basically create the aug vorbest of streaming video online.
Right.
Yeah, we just go, fine, we'll do it ourselves.
Fuck off.
But who's going to use it?
It's Fox News Network going to use it.
Is the YouTube's of the world going to use it?
I mean, we could take our ball and go home and play in our own park.
But are we going to end up stuck in our own little field while everybody else is having fun outside?
But isn't that how it's been in Linux for 15 years?
But I'm not just talking about it.
I'm talking about the web itself.
I mean, it's gotten a hell of a lot better to be able to do just about anything you want in Linux.
I mean, there's always been an obstacle, but you know, those who have the ability can circumvent the obstacles either legally or by a non-legal means that of course that's there.
But it's been a lot better by hearing the standards and open technology that everybody can participate in.
And it's accessible in a legal manner.
The past couple years we getting better and better.
Again, I'm concerned about allowing Microsoft the key to this kingdom.
Okay, here's the point.
At this point, right now, in current times, Adobe Flash is proprietary.
Absolutely proprietary.
There's no, they may be a more open company, but in no way do they, they don't care about your software freedom.
And Microsoft has made a concession to all of us that is giving us a chance to do it ourselves because we usually prefer to do it that way.
And they're letting us do it in a free manner.
And at this point, there's no going back.
They can't re-nig on that offer because of the way the licensing is.
Yeah, I see both.
Honestly, I think you both just made really, really good points.
I think, yeah, I think that Flash and this whole tradition, I feel like all that other stuff, is harming the web much more than it's hurting it.
But like 330 says, I mean, we do have this exciting new code now and it is open and it's completely open and freed, whereas Flash.
Now, I remember that they supposedly opened something about Flash months ago, but no one seems to be talking about it, no one seems to be clear about what they opened.
So we're getting something for free here, it seems like.
And no matter what Microsoft does, technically speaking, we can always just take the code and play by ourselves.
Even though I think realistically, Microsoft is counting on being able to start pulling some strings, you know, by threatening to take away all of them nice.
You know, I think what they would like to do is build up this big dependency upon silver light.
And then at some point, start making it a lot more closed and things like that, hoping that Moonlight is going to have to start making concessions and compromises.
You know, I don't have any more particular love for Adobe, but, you know, I don't like having a closed product on either platform, but I think given the lesser of two evils, I would prefer Adobe's Flash because of Microsoft's history and how they tend to embrace and extend so that no one else can play.
But in recent times, Microsoft has, you know, they gave away .NET. I mean, they literally just gave it away.
They've given away the MPD stuff, the media transport Damon, the stuff the Zoom uses to get files on it.
I mean, they are just sticking stuff in the public and going, here we made this, we already have more money than God, so go ahead and have fun, where, you know, all these other companies that were relying on and asking if they're less evil than Microsoft isn't.
Well, hang on, hang on. Now, when you say Microsoft is doing that, what exactly are they licensing now? They're not doing it. They're not putting it out at GPL.
They're just saying, here's something and here's a covenant that says, oh, we won't sue you, dot, dot, dot, dot, for now.
Well, no, they, all right, they make these, they do the ISO open standard thing, which is, we all know it's a debacle, but it's not their fault, it's a debacle.
It's because the ISO is full of, but it is their fault that they're not going through something that is not a debacle, i.e. GPL.
Wait a minute. They per, they perverted that debacle. I less than a year ago.
Yeah, but it was, it was a perverted, it was a perverted debacle well before they ever did it.
But yeah, but they, they took it to the next level.
Look, the ISO was the skeezy, but they were doing away for free.
Then what is mono? It's dot net given away. They gave us, they gave us all the documentation we needed to do it ourselves.
They gave us all that, and then they said, oh, we're going to sue a certain part of you, but not the rest of you.
Well, say that was, that was novel thing, and there are plenty of us that are upset about that.
Yeah, because Microsoft didn't say they were going to sue anyone.
That company, that company that has more money than God, they're still getting money over those patent agreements.
Yeah, they're not. Yeah, I concur. I don't see this as Microsoft giving anything away at all by any means.
They're, they've got, they've got some purpose behind it.
Microsoft gets revenue and gets more market share based upon the usage of that technology because embedded in their operating system.
It's something that they use, the more people that actually use it, the more likely they are to use Microsoft products or incorporate Microsoft products.
Yeah, it's like company is giving away free movie tickets. They're not giving you a free path to pay the movie.
They're buying some advertising from you. They want you to go tell people to go watch it and pay tickets for it.
They're trying to, they're trying to broaden their market. They're not giving anything away.
And even though that they, you have the ability to use C sharp, the rest of the dot net package, the frameworks and everything are not permissible to use.
We're to incorporate in, in mono because they have restrictions and IP licenses based on those.
The whole wind forms. What is it? Is it wind forms? Is that what it's called? It's not allowed.
Yeah, we wouldn't need that anyways. It doesn't wind forms just make it able to run in windows without having to do a whole lot of extra coding.
Well, that's what TTK is for for us. Yeah, I say there's a reason why we don't have wind forms because we don't bloody need them.
No, we don't, but isn't there other pieces of the dot net framework that are under license that cannot be utilized in mono?
And that impedes us from adopting the full dot net compatibility. And that's why we're always one step behind.
I thought we were always one step behind because we were taking documentation that after they already finished, they turned around and went, okay, here you go everybody else.
And then we were having to re implement what they had already done and got out the door.
I mean, basically they bought a Ferrari and now we have to buy a Ferrari and they bought a boat. So now we have to go buy a boat.
You know, we're always keeping up with the Joneses.
I thought they were giving us all the way.
Well, they were. The Joneses didn't hide their boat inside of a garage. We saw they had a boat. We saw what kind of boat they had.
Now we have to go get that boat so we can, so we can still be together with them.
You know, yes, we're still a second class citizen, but at least now we're a citizen.
You know, before with all this kind of stuff, we were like the, we were the illegal immigrant of Microsoft technology.
It just sounds despicable and dirty when you say it like that.
And now they have embraced this. It sounds more like you embrace them.
No, no, after after we had got done mowing their lawn and watering their flowers, then they let us float.
I'm there for. I'm sorry. That's like slaves becoming part of the family. I'm sorry.
Well, that just sounded like, you know, I might not not agree with the philosophy behind or the problems behind mono there, but you just like basically insulted the entire.
The entire team.
Save it. That's what it is. We're not getting things fresh. The team isn't getting things fresh.
You know, they're not getting raw hamburgers. They're getting a big Mac and then trying to figure out how to make a big Mac.
You know, or more likely they're getting the recipe. You like, you like when you buy food and it tells you what the ingredients are.
Yeah. And you know that, you know, looking at that can of soup, you're never going to be able to make that soup with that list of ingredients. That that's what it's like.
That means they got them right where they want them.
Well, but we still keep pulling soup out of a list of ingredients.
Sounds like someone's pissing in your past 330.
Look, I am not happy that they aren't, you know, playing as nice as they could, but I don't think we should, you know, not use.
A technology based on something they did because, you know, they might get angry at us.
We told me, man, I'm installing moonlight right now.
We should probably wrap this up, guys, because I think the crank is supposed to be happening now.
Well, we better start our vote kick to see who we're going to kick off today.
Should I go ahead and log out now?
No. I think I'm voting for you.
One vote for 330 so far. Dan, who are you voting for?
Man, I think 330 did a good job, so I will vote for myself.
Oh, that was one of the roles you can't vote for yourself.
Oh, are you serious?
Yeah, because that's lame. Come on.
You're not going to be a martyr, look.
I will vote for God.
I want to vote for Monster B just to see what happens if he does get kicked off.
Okay. Cloud 2.
I'm going to have to kick 330.
Uh-oh.
J. Lindsay.
Is he even there?
Let's go 330, yeah.
330, you are the weakest leg.
Goodbye.
He's gone.
Wow, so much more peaceful in here.
Much more free.
Well, thanks for calling in, guys.
We better start the cranks.
Wait, does he come back for cranks in?
Yeah, he's gone.
All right, good night.
Thank you for listening to Half the Public Radio.
HPR is sponsored by Carol.net.
So head on over to C-A-R-O dot-A-T for all of us in need.
Thanks for watching.
Thanks for watching.