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

ASP.NET
探讨:ASP.NET技术的学习顺序问题
关于ASP.NET在IIS一些问题的经验总结
ASP.NET中通过对话框方式下载文件
ASP.NET网络编程中常用到的27个函数集
ASP.NET生成静态网页的方法
ASP.NET 2.0中实现弹窗报警提示
复杂ASP.NET服务器控件调整小技巧
ASP.NET调用oracle存储过程实现快速分页
VB.NET实现窗体图标最小化到状态栏
ASP.NET技巧:DataGrid传统分页方式
ASP.NET里的事务处理
ASP.NET 2.0高级数据处理之数据绑定
ASP.NET多频道网站架构实现方法
.NET vs J2EE——面对SOA的荒谬与误解
ASP.NET 2.0中执行数据库操作命令之一
ASP.NET应用程序资源访问安全模型
ASP.NET 2.0中的Web和HTML服务器控件
对.NET Framework 反射的反思
带你走进ASP.NET(1)
带你走进ASP.NET(2)

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: 42 ::
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.