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

ASP.NET
DVNEWS 3.2 1013版免虚拟目录的安装方法,只要三个步骤
DataRow的序列化问题
VB.net基础:使用UDP发送和接收消息
采用HttpModules来重写URLs(实践篇)
要用到事务了
DataGrid中单元格的比较
动态引用WebService,建立WebService虚拟机
[初学VB.NET]数据绑定
使用ASP调用WebService时不能以Name为数据库中的字段
在VB.NET里操作文本文件
web下打印的办法
怎样把SQL_SERVER数据库里的(类型是image)图片显示在aspx页面里的image控件里
C#中字符串的加密
中小企业信息应用的利器:DAP-Dynamic Applications Platform
数据库系统概论学习笔记
体会到译者的艰辛,也发现了他们犯的错误
IISManager V1.1 是一个在线管理IIS,维护站点组件,安全稳定,最重要的是完全免费。
VS FlexGridPro 8.0如何在window98运行---有没有升级版本,急请高手指点
给立方体添加纹理
Wrox的C#高级编程第三版第一部分第一章(1~9页)

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: 181 ::
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.