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

ASP.NET
asp.net Linq TO Sql 分页方法
asp.net 用XML生成放便扩展的自定义树
asp.ent下合并两个结构相同的DataTable
asp.net 遍历repeater中的控件的几种方式
asp.net 处理原文件中过长的viewstate代码
asp.net下遍历页面中所有的指定控件的代码
获取创建Membership的数据库创建脚本
asp.net AJAX注册类
asp.net 处理F5刷新页面重复提交页面的一个思路
ASP.NET 缓存分析和实践浅析提高运行效率
asp.net 读取并显示excel数据的实现代码
ASP.NET中常用的用来输出JS脚本的类
ASP.NET中内嵌页面代码的一个问题
asp.net(C#)操作excel(上路篇)
一个基于Asp.Net MVC的权限方案
ASP.NET实例教程:51job网站地区选择功能
ASP.NET教程:友好的Html和JS适合SEO
ASP.NET教程:使用.ashx文件去除重复内容
ASP.NET做SEO:制作架构清晰和更新及时的网站地图
ASP.NET优化:Sql注入和Html注入的黑帽SEO

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: 38 ::
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.