当前位置: 首页 > 图文教程 > 网络编程 > ASP.NET > IsVS.NETreadyforenterprise?(6)

ASP.NET
.Net业务平台的数值精度陷阱与解决方法
投票结果的图片进度条显示
七招制胜ASP.NET应用程序开发
ASP.NET 2.0的导航控件treeview和menu的实例
ASP.NET实现页面间值传递的几种方法
项目调试时出现用到的一个组件“访问被拒绝”的解决方法
ASP.NET中“找不到指定模块”的解决办法
C#中的委托和事件
在指定应用程序域中执行代码
Ajax简单客户登陆验证
AJAX将成为移动Web2.0时代首选开发平台
关闭按钮点击事件的捕捉
远程抓取GOOGLE的自动翻译结果
保护你的DLL和Code不被别人使用
ASP.NET的底层的工作机制介绍
ASP.NET2.0服务器控件之捕获回传事件
使用Data Access Application Block 得到存储过程的返回值
面向服务及其在互联系统策略中的角
ASP.NET2.0服务器控件之创建复杂属性
ASP.NET:设置页面buffer引出来的问题

ASP.NET 中的 IsVS.NETreadyforenterprise?(6)


出处:互联网   整理: 软晨网(RuanChen.com)   发布: 2009-11-03   浏览: 50 ::
收藏到网摘: n/a


LT: Given that the .NET platform is open to all ISVs, doesn't this mean that developers can mix and match .NET-aware lifecycle tools and get this kind of integration?
MD: There are different levels of integration. The VS.NET environment provides much more integration, and in that sense it is certainly easier to use different vendors' tools. But you still face the issue of deeper semantic integration, such as data integration. With different vendors' products, will you get, for example, common representation of use cases between your requirements management tool and your modeling tool? You benefit from deeper semantic integration, where each tool knows how the rest work.
For another example, our component test tools rely heavily on information stored in the models for test-case generation and test-stub generation. That's harder to integrate between vendors. So you can get good UI integration and control integration across vendors, but not data integration and process integration. Deep integration helps us in providing more lightweight, agile versions of lifecycle tools as well. That's why we didn't just port our stuff to .NET. We rearchitected it. The fundamentals don't change with .NET, or with lifecycle tools, but the practicality of using them with a wider variety of projects will.

LT: The old saw goes, "Wait for rev 3 of any MS product; by then it will be in great shape." That has to be doubly true with a technology as vast as .NET. What would you tell development managers who think they should sit on the sideline and let others work with the inevitable bugs in a first release this ambitious?
MD: Like all technologies, there will be glitches along the way. However, we've been impressed with the completeness and robustness of both VS.NET and Microsoft .NET. Remember, in the past we integrated with many Microsoft technologies but only embedded a few in our product. Now our basic product architecture depends upon Microsoft technology. We cannot ship if VS.NET does not work. Our experience (having built millions of lines of code on this stuff) is that this is a stable platform. We are betting our business on it, and I am happy to say that we are completely confident. Admittedly, we were pretty scared a year ago, but it is now clear that we made exactly the right bet. Those companies that "wait for version 3.0" will simply miss the boat. Those that move quickly should see (and must demand) immediate business returns.