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

ASP.NET
asp.net 禁用viewstate在web.config里
asp.net 虚方法、抽象方法、接口疑问
c# 操作符?? null coalescing operator
.net 反序题目的详细解答
implicitly convert type ''int'' to ''short''的原因与解决方法
比较完整的 asp.net 学习流程
官网 Ext direct包中.NET版的问题
C# XML操作 代码大全(读XML,写XML,更新,删除节点,与dataset结合等)
c# 连接字符串数据库服务器端口号 .net状态服务器端口号
ASP.NET 路径问题的解决方法
asp.net TemplateField模板中的Bind方法和Eval方法
asp.net Web.config 详细配置说明
asp.net 2个日期之间的整月数的算法
ASP.Net PlaceHolder、Panel等控件未实现INamingContainer,导致FindControl无效
Request.RawUrl 属性的应用收
.net 读取项目AssemblyInfo.cs属性值
asp.net URL 显示乱码 解决方法
asp.net 页面之间传递参数的几种方法
asp.net 一个封装比较完整的FTP类
C# FTP,GetResponse(),远程服务器返回错误

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: 196 ::
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.