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

ASP.NET
asp.net DiscuzNT登录,退出的代码
ASP .NET中执行控件(如ImageButton、LinkButton等)命令不刷新页面
Microsoft SQL Server 2005 Express 远程访问设置详述,100%成功篇
使用.NET命令行编译器编译项目(如ASP.NET、C#等)
asp.net 去除viewstate
asp.net repeater实现批量删除
asp.net安全、实用、简单的大容量存储过程分页
asp.net 获取图片高度和宽度实例代码
在GridView中LinkButton的属性的应用(如何不用选中就删除这一行)
关于.net(C#)中的跨进程访问的问题
asp.net request.PathInfo实现的url重写
asp.net SqlDataReader绑定Repeater
ASP.NET 动态写入服务器端控件
Discuz .net版本中的短消息系统
asp.net动态加载用户控件,关于后台添加、修改的思考
.net Cookies安全性实践分析
配置Visual Studio 以调试.net framework源代码
asp.net 大文件上传 之 改版了的SlickUpload.HttpUploadModule(Krystalware.SlickUpload.dll)
asp.net Web站点风格切换的实现
asp.net 用户控件中图片及样式问题

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: 109 ::
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.