Skip to main content

Why MS Doesn't Do All Their Products in Dot Net

Yag does a great job of explaining to those who don't get it why not all MS products are using DotNet as a native framework.

If you read all the comments, you'll see that part of the issue has to deal with the components that have not yet been put into DotNet (Uniscribe, and features for multi-lingual text etc).

Yag's basic premise though is that no one should expect every single MS app to flip over to DotNet overnight - there's a lot of work involved in moving it over and as the DotNet framework matures, more features get added in.

How this will apply to the entire Avalon scenario is up for grabs. It reminds me a little of how DNA has matured into DotNet and also how FoxPro has matured into Europa. The basic MS approach of development frameworks and almost any new technology (at least in my view) is:

Phase 1: Tell Everyone How they Should Be Doing It (VFP example: VFP 3 / Win Example: COM and Windows DNA)
Result: Some people get it, some people don't.

Phase 2: Show Everyone How To Do It (Ex: VFP 6 with the FFCs / DotNet v 1.0 / COM + )
Result: More light bulbs go off and more people get it

Phase 3: Write Tools so people can do it easier (VFP 8 / Whidbey)
Result: More applications start using it across the board.

Phase 4: Continue to mature the toolset (VFP 9/ _____________ )
Result: More applications use it than don't

Phase 5: Come up with a new idea (or rename the older one) and go back to Phase 1
(just kidding)

Seriously though, that is the basic path that these things take.

But at any step in the road, people get frustrated with waiting for Phase 3 and jump off the wagon. At other times, you may think you're ready for step 3 but you took a wrong course and have to go back to step 2 to get it right.

In some scenarios, MS jumped the gun and did a lot of steps 1 and 2 in secret (umm, research) and then introduced a product like MS Bob only to be assailed by critics and the public.

In the development world, MS has been a little more open in this context, perhaps to avoid the surprises or headaches of newer technology. Some succeed, some fail but each one builds on each other.

Just because MS had a monopoly in DOS didn't mean it would naturally succeed with Windows 9x. Likewise with XP and future versions.

Many of the technologies found in DotNet 1.0 needed to mature to be "production-ready" but just like SpaceShipOne is simply the first version of what will be more tourist trips into space, the conceptual foundation of managed code is the one that MS has built its future on.

Now it's a matter of getting to phase 4 and ensuring you don't lose any more developers on the way.

Microsoft and .NET (by yag)

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Well, that explains CodePlex...

In a move that will be sure to anger open source (or rather anti-paid software, anti-Microsoft open source)  zealots, Microsoft is planning to buy GitHub . A year ago, I mused about why Microsoft would shut down CodePlex and how the world needs competing source code repositories to be strong. I'm not the only one per this Slashdot article  : "...   people have warned about GitHub becoming as large as it did as problematic because it concentrates too much of the power to make or break the open source world in a single entity, moreso because there were valid questions about GitHubs financial viability...." - Jacques Mattheij I will be interested in seeing this play out - whether developers jump ship or not. Have all the efforts Microsoft has made in pushing towards open source be seen as genuine or will all the zealots jump ship or maybe even attack? Microsoft's comment about why they shut down CodePlex referred to how spammers were using CodePlex. Well, GitHub

Attending Southwest Fox 2019 could change your life - Find out how

Southwest Fox is coming up in October and as I do every year, I spoke with the organizers Rick , Doug and Tamar on the FoxShow. Deadlines for Southwest Fox: Super-saver price (before July 1): $695 Early-bird price (before August 1): $770 Regular price (August 1 and later): $820 This year, I took a different approach with separate shows for each organizer but the main message is still the same : July 1st is their Go/No-Go date. Conferences don't talk about this very often. I don't think developers really question if Apple will hold their WWDC in June or Microsoft will hold their Build conference - but that's because those conferences are vendor-led. Southwest Fox is a community-driven conference - it's not driven by a company with an agenda. Listen to the interviews and you can hear how important each of the organizers feel the live connection between speakers and among attendees.

Virtual FoxFest - A New Way to Conference

If you haven't been keeping up with the news around the Fox community, the Southwest Fox conference has gone digital now showing up as  Virtual FoxFest .  At $49, it's a steal and a great way to learn some new ideas and get inspired. While the reasoning for this change is fairly obvious with the year of COVID - for me, this is something that has been a long time coming. I appreciate many people's needs for a physical conference but the world is very large and it's difficult to get people from around the world into a single physical location. I recently attended a single-track conference via YouTube (a Quasar conference). YouTube's Live stream provided a very handy way to watch, rewind and communicate with people online. While Tamar, Doug and Rick are still making decisions related to the streaming platform, there are lots of great options available. I'm really looking forward to it. The FoxPro community has also really felt its international roots