Re: Why no serious MS Application in .NET yet ??

Tech Tip: Click here to run a free scan for Windows Errors and optimize PC performance

From: in (gunther_at_treeview.control)
Date: 03/04/05 

Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2005 17:18:01 -0800

CMM wrote:
> I just thought of this after reading your post:
> Before they can (or should) rewrite office, maybe they should practice by
> completely making the .NET IDE as an all "managed" application rather than
> the COM application that it is today (as much as I love the .NET IDE).

That sounds like a lot of work for not much gain.

The future of .NET is not big apps, it's the SOA.

Perhaps even the IDE should be an SOA...a set of very small components,
like say, a notepad, that can call a /syntax/ web service.

Or a messaging system for sending debug information back and forth to a
little service app with a popup window.

In other words, build a brand new type of system for creating code that
reflects the SOA nature of .net

>
> "Bob Grommes" wrote:
>
>
>>They'll do it when the pain of not doing it exceeds the pain of doing it.
>>That's the point at which anything gets done, by anyone ;-)
>>
>>Seriously, I believe that every code base needs a thorough (and probably
>>complete) rewrite every 5 to 10 years, even in the absence of a major
>>platform change -- just to blow out the lint and gain the benefit of
>>hindsight and experience and bring things more into sync with all the other
>>technologies that the software has to interface with. Office is approaching
>>that point anyway. Currently, MSFT's public stance is that it's perfectly
>>good code and they aren't going to "throw it away" but I'm sure that
>>sometime in the next few years that various forces will overcome the
>>inertias at work here and suddenly all you'll hear about is the sleek new
>>Office v13 or 14 that is all managed code.
>>
>>In the meantime I don't believe that the lack of a publicly acknowledged
>>crash Manhattan Project to port Office to .NET says anything at all one way
>>or the other about whether MSFT "believes" in .NET or is willing to eat its
>>own dogfood. With Office they are in fact eating their own dogfood today
>>anyway, even if it's yesterday's dogfood. At about the point that Office is
>>finally redone in .NET we will no doubt be having a similar debate about why
>>they haven't rewritten it in Super-Avalon-Plus or whatever is supposed to
>>save the world of 2010. So I am just going to take it as it comes and not
>>read too much into the tea leaves. It always takes quite a bit of time for
>>the marketplace to fully absorb any new technology, and we are always in a
>>transition state. It's not a perfect world.
>>
>>--Bob
>>
>>"CMM" <CMM@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>>news:BC39778B-69CC-45D8-A7B3-6EC7BD466C98@microsoft.com...
>>
>>>I agree... but would add that once the Framework matures to the point of
>>>being able to do everything the direct API's can do (even if it's just in
>>>the
>>>form of "managed" wrappers around the API's), MS would have no reason to
>>>not
>>>completely rewrite their apps using the Framework... even the big apps and
>>>even the heavy duty code like rendering engines. I mean, at some point MS
>>>had
>>>to "rewrite" Word for DOS right? Why can't they do it again?
>>
>>
>>

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Why no serious MS Application in .NET yet ??
    ... >>They'll do it when the pain of not doing it exceeds the pain of doing it. ... >>technologies that the software has to interface with. ... MSFT's public stance is that it's perfectly ... With Office they are in fact eating their own dogfood today ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.clr)
  • Re: Why no serious MS Application in .NET yet ??
    ... >>They'll do it when the pain of not doing it exceeds the pain of doing it. ... >>technologies that the software has to interface with. ... MSFT's public stance is that it's perfectly ... With Office they are in fact eating their own dogfood today ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.framework)
  • Re: Why no serious MS Application in .NET yet ??
    ... >>They'll do it when the pain of not doing it exceeds the pain of doing it. ... >>technologies that the software has to interface with. ... MSFT's public stance is that it's perfectly ... With Office they are in fact eating their own dogfood today ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.performance)
  • Re: Why no serious MS Application in .NET yet ??
    ... the COM application that it is today (as much as I love the .NET IDE). ... > technologies that the software has to interface with. ... MSFT's public stance is that it's perfectly ... With Office they are in fact eating their own dogfood today ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.framework)
  • Re: Why no serious MS Application in .NET yet ??
    ... the COM application that it is today (as much as I love the .NET IDE). ... > technologies that the software has to interface with. ... MSFT's public stance is that it's perfectly ... With Office they are in fact eating their own dogfood today ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.performance)