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

ASP.NET
asp.net(c#)网页跳转七种方法小结
完美解决在ModalPopupExtender中使用CalendarExtender时被层遮挡的问题
ASP.NET、SharePoint中另存文件的长文件名被截断的原因及解决办法
查看Json输出的*最方便*的方法 (转)
asp.net 代码隐藏的编码模型
ajaxpro.dll 控件实现异步刷新页面
asp.net DbProviderFactory的使用-示例
一个简单的asp.net 单点登录实现
jQuery+Ajax用户登录功能的实现
asp.net 弹出对话框返回多个值
.NET 中英文混合验证码实现代码
一个完整的ASP.NET 2.0 URL重写方案[翻译]
asp.net关于onpropertychange和oninput事件实现代码
asp.net gridview指定某一列滚动
Equals和==的区别 公共变量和属性的区别小结
asp.net 合并GridView中某列相同信息的行(单元格)
ASP.NET(C#) 定时执行一段代码
asp.net 预防SQL注入攻击之我见
asp.net下将Excel转成XML档的实现代码
asp.net url分页类代码

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: 63 ::
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.