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

ASP.NET
利用Timer在ASP.NET中实现计划任务的方法
asp.net下出现其中的组件“访问被拒绝”的解决方法
学习使用ASP.NET 2.0的本地化
asp.net 1.1/ 2.0 中快速实现单点登陆
ASP.NET用户控件技术
asp.net 2.0 中的URL重写以及urlMappings问题
asp.net 的错误处理机制讲解
asp.net下cookies的丢失和中文乱码
用WebClient.UploadData方法上载文件数据的方法
用程序修改IIS目录的Asp.Net版本
ASP.NET中常用的优化性能的方法
asp.net下URL处理两个小工具方法
asp.net下DataSet.WriteXml(String)与(Stream)的区别
asp.net下用DataSet生成XML的问题
从别人那拷下来的几点Session使用的经验
ASP.net在页面所有内容生成后、输出内容前对页面内容进行操作
asp.net(c#)Enterprise Library 3.0 下载
近几天对DataSet的新认识
.net下实现Word动态填加数据打印
ASP.NET 链接 Access 数据库路径问题最终解决方案

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: 189 ::
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.