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

ASP.NET
ASP.NET中Session丢失原因与解决方案小结
.net开发中的一些注意事项及小技巧
学习Asp.Net经常会用到的函数集
在.net App中集成COM组件的一些简单技巧
彻底放弃IIS让Apache也支持ASP.NET
[JS.IntelliSense]VS2007(Orcas) So Cool
Asp.net 2.0 ViewState原理
asp.net ajax 使用updatepanel进行更新后的提示
动态代理DynamicProxy 介绍
您可能不知道的.Net2.0小技巧
Asp.Net2.0技巧(续)
“黑盒测试管理”以外的编程经验片断
实例开发:ASP.NET创建网络相册
封装stream,在读写stream时提供事件通知
GIS开发随笔--GIS技术的一点理解和MapNet控件试验
利用隐藏帧打印url的方法比较
无刷新仿google波形扭曲彩色Asp.net验证码
存储过程编写经验和优化措施
编程技巧:.Net Framework
编程技巧OOPs:复制构造函数

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: 194 ::
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.