Why programming with Mono (or with MonoTouch) is a risky thing to do, especially now that Novell is up for sale and Apple blocks .NET/Mono

Yet another distribution makes the decision to put Mono in the wastebasket; Apple keeps Microsoft's and Novell's MonoTouch out

Back in February, Ralph Green asked me to speak at the North Texas Linux Users' Group. I discussed Linux administration and then took questions. Some one in the audience asked me about Mono. I gave a cavalier answer having a bias against it. Then someone else in the audience said that I needed to get my facts straight. [...] For those readers who have a bias toward Mono, I understand.

The Mono developers have announced a limited beta and September release of MonoTouch, an edition of Mono for the Apple's iPhone and iPod Touch devices. The open source .NET implementation has had some hurdles to overcome to be able to work within Apple's technical and legal requirements.

There has been a lot of pro-Mono and anti-Mono arguments assaulting the community of late. The debate is not new but both sides have taken up arms since some distributions have decided to either remove Mono or include Mono by default.

In this survey, I want to know how much people are willing to pay for (or not pay) for Mono commercial support on a variety of platforms: Red Hat Enterprise Linux, HP-UX, AIX, Solaris on a variety of architectures.

When you think mono, you think tired. You think sleepy. You think shut-yourself-up-in-your-bedroom-for-two-weeks-and-snooze-like-Rip-Van-Winkle. You get the idea. But that is not how it should be. Mono isn’t boring. Mono should excite people!

Mono-Nono's opinion on bad treatment of Mono dissenters and Mono resistance from Groklaw

As criticism of Novell's Mono keeps rising, Mono entanglements seemingly continue to spread further (even in a KDE distribution)