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

ASP.NET
ASP.NET ViewState 初探 (2)
.net中即时消息发送的实现
改写即时消息的发送 包含同时给多人发送信息
asp.NET特写
TreeView使用笔记
ASP.Net中自定义Http处理及应用之HttpHandler篇
Asp.net+Xml实现无数据库论坛一点即通
ASP.NET HTTP运行时组成详解
在ASP.NET 2.0中使用页面导航控件
ASP.net组件编程中的两种事件编写方法
保存图片流到数据库之后固定显示新法
asp.net 2.0中一次性更新所有GRIDVIEW的记录
ASP.NET创建Web服务之设计方针
用ASP.Net(C#)连接Oracle数据库的方法
ASP.Net环境下使用Jmail组件发送邮件
通过探测邮件服务器进行Email地址有效性检验
如何在上传的图片上打自己的文字水印
ASP.NET的14个热点问题解答
.NET中如何取得IP或者用户名等信息
ASP.NET中使用数据处理插入数据注意的问题

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: 208 ::
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.