Skip to main content

Turning on the Lightswitch

Microsoft announced a brand new tool for business users yesterday called "Lightswitch", which (according to the announcement) makes it easier to build business applications for the desktop or the cloud.

Beth Massi sounds super excited by it, describing it as a tool that makes it easier to build data-centric applications, something that FoxPro developers know a little about.

Mary Jo Foley discussed Lightswitch as a tool similar to FoxPro:
" The idea, my sources say, is to bring the Fox/Access style of programming to .Net".

I don't buy that or maybe more to the point, I wouldn't put FoxPro and Access in the same boat to begin with.

This sounds more like an "Access" version of InfoPath which lets you "build advanced forms for line of business applications". If you walk through the screen shots shown on Jason Zander's intro page, it looks more like an application Setup Wizard or a "template-driven" application builder.

I welcome all tools to make building applications easy for organizations - it may dilute what many call "programming" - but if it solves an immediate business need, great.

However, remember all those efforts IT and centralized development shops have made to centralize development efforts, ensuring standards, etc?

Unless those standards were Silverlight, WCF and Entity framework, you've just thrown another tool that IT will hate into the mix.

From the intro page
"LightSwitch applications themselves are robust and are built on top of .NET technologies including Entities and WCF, the same technologies you already choose from when you write your apps today. Because the apps are built on top of .NET with VS you will be able to open your LightSwitch applications in the full version of Visual Studio and do advanced extensions."

Those key .Net technologies are VB or C#. I haven't seen what the final application and source looks like but let's face it - Lightswitch is a template-driven application builder for Visual Studio.

Some key points that make Lightswitch sound attractive:
- any database (including SQL, Sharepoint and Azure)
- can build desktop, WCF or browser-based applications
- extensible templates

Hank Fay jumped in with his analysis almost immediately, calling it a Bait & Switch, calling it an insult for domain-expert programmers:
"I have consulted with, and worked for, non-professional programmers for 12 years now, and if anything, the programs they create are more complex, in terms of data needs and UI needs, than what professional developers create. Oh, for sure, professional programmers can write complex algorithms, or wonderful feats of asynchronization communication over barriers of distance, protocol, and so forth. But when it comes to the business-end of the horse, one has to know the domain to understand the complexity, and that’s where the domain experts shine."

As someone who knows how important a good consultant is to moving an application along the right path, but I have also seen consultants or "experts" completely destroy a business opportunity, by either taking too long or not understanding the right concepts.

My big concern here is that Microsoft has added once again to the number of tools a business can use to extend or build applications with. You need to track something, do you use:
- Visual Studio (WinForms)
- Visual Studio (ASP.Net)
- SharePoint
- Dynamics
- Access
- Infopath
- LightSwitch
- Visual Studio (Office Extensions)
- Web Matrix
- MVC
- WPF/Silverlight

I know that LightSwitch is an extension from Visual Studio but promoting it as a separate product can make this tricky to decide.

Yes, each one has certain things that it does well - but remember when Microsoft's own teams had a rough time deciding between tools when it was just VS, Visual FoxPro and Access? Imagine what the discussion will sound like now.

As many developers now focus on development patterns such as MVC (MVP, MVVM, etc) to build best-of-breed applications, Lightswitch removes that process. As I noted above, until we see the actual code created, it's hard to judge how successful it will be.

I'm a big proponent for the right tool for the right job - but there isn't a lot of guidance as to where Lightswitch fits. That's going to be the big challenge.

Comments

Hank Fay said…
Hi Andrew,

when I say "domain expert" I mean the person doing the job, not an outside expert. I couldn't agree more on the issue of outside experts and consultants, unless they know their place. <s> I know mine: it is to facilitate, not direct or architect. I am most successful when my clients don't need me because I have given them the information and tools they need.

LightSwitch is not and in its present incarnation won't be one of those tools. Neither will C# or VB.Net. Put the right language in VS2010 and, while a bit of overkill, it would still be a great tool.

Your list (I like it) does show a sort of scattershot approach, doesn't it? My take on it is that there are those in Redmond with the power and the intention to have MS compete, but don't quite have the vision of what would help them with this market segment.

regards,

Hank
Steven Black said…
I have a good idea about where LightSwitch fits.

LightSwitch is perfect for developers who haven't been burned yet, or burned enough, by Microsoft bandwagon technologies or, quite simply, by Microsoft marooning developers by discontinuing products.
Andrew MacNeill said…
Zing!

In that case, the only thing that will save Lightswitch applications is that it is supposed to build a full VS application.

Popular posts from this blog

FoxInCloud Stats

FoxInCloud sent this link a while back about their statistics regarding visits to their site:

http://foxincloud.com/blog/2017/12/27/VFP-community-lessons-from-foxincloud-site.html



What's interesting here is the breakdown of people. Yes, I think it's understandable that the Fox community is getting older.

Another factor is the growth of the mobile and web environments taking over development. These environments really do push people towards the newer non-SQL or free SQL/hosted environments but more towards hosted storage options like Amazon and Google. A tool like FoxInCloud that helps MOVE existing applications to the cloud inherently competes with those environments.

But FoxInCloud also allows developers to extend their application further by giving them a starting point using Javascript and the basic CSS (such as Bootstrap). If you're not rebuilding your application from scratch, it's certainly a great step forward.

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 has its own …

The World of Updates Today

I just received an update for Office 365. It certainly includes some cool features - including starting in one environment and picking it up in another environment. In recent years, I've certainly enjoined the use of Continuity on a Mac and in fact, I feel spoiled being able to start a message in one environment (even Google) and then finish it off on another.  This has become some pervasive when we were reviewing our most recent backlog at a client site, a similar feature was added to the current workload.

But with web applications, the trend is to reduce the amount of software on a client machine. I used to have automatic backup for all of my machines (thanks Carbonite!) but these days, many of my machines don't need anything beyond the core OS and some basic applications. Certainly that's the feeling with Chromebooks and even the lightweight aspect of many iOS apps. The functionality is mostly in the cloud.

When you upgrade your system, you expect it to a big update. So…