Re: VS 2005 questions
- From: "Kevin Spencer" <kevin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 08:07:04 -0400
> There is no legitimate reason (outside of marketing and/or totalitarian
> control) that the development environment can only target .Net 2.
In fact, there is. .Net is not Win32. See my reply to this same message. It
is wise to keep silent about what you do not know. And you do not know how
the .Net framework is designed.
No version of the .Net Framework supercedes or replaces an earlier version.
One does not "upgrade" the Framework. Let's say, for example, that you have
a car. Let's call it a Microsoft 2003 Sportster. This year, the Microsoft
car company comes out with the Microsoft 2005 Sportster. You go out and buy
one. Has this in any way affected your Microsoft 2003 Sportster? Are you
going to have to "upgrade" it somehow? No. Now you have 2 cars; that's all.
You may keep your old car, or you may sell it. You may drive the old car
whenever you want.
So, let's say that the new car requires new special tools to work on. So,
the Microsoft Motor Company puts out a new set of tools that is for the new
car. Now, is there some reason that these tools should be able to work on
the old car? Of course not. You can use the special 2003 tools to work on
the old car. The 2005 tools are for the new car.
Get it?
> Our only realistic solution to the MS mess is for some mega-wealthy
> individual to purchase as much MS stock as possible so that they have a
> major voice on the board of directors, then seek a vote to break the
> company up into smaller, separate, and autonomous companies. I'll be
Considering what you know about Microsoft software, the idea that your
company will be successful enought to be able to buy a sizable chunk of MS
stock is unlikely. And for that, I am grateful. Bill G and his company know
quite well what they are doing, and I only rue the day when Bill G retires!
As for you and your company, it might be better to let Microsoft take YOU to
school!
--
HTH,
Kevin Spencer
Microsoft MVP
..Net Developer
A watched clock never boils.
"Peter Franks" <none@xxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:6kz8f.14197$i%.11481@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Ken wrote:
>> It is a shame that that there is no switch or configuration setting in VS
>> 2005 that allows developers to write backwards compatible code for the
>> 1.1 Framework, because then developers could adopt VS 2005 more quickly.
>> By the time we are able to adopt it, you'll be up to VS 2007 (or
>> whatever).
>
> There is no legitimate reason (outside of marketing and/or totalitarian
> control) that the development environment can only target .Net 2.
>
>> Microsoft needs to take into account that there are consumers who
>> legitimately cannot update software as critical as the .NET Framework
>> without at least a year of internal testing. The way Microsoft has this
>> set up, the tool is linked to the framework, so we cannot adopt VS 2005
>> until our client adopts .NET 2.0. It isn't wise for Microsoft to set the
>> upgrade path as an all-or-nothing deal like this. If VS 2005 were not
>> linked to .NET 2.0, you'd get half an update. Now you get none.
>
> Microsoft's answer will be pure and simple: your customer needs to
> upgrade; we don't care and it shows.
>
>> This was not a good plan.
>>
>> By linking the tools to the deployment environment you have gummed up the
>> whole update process and you have lost business.
>
> The problem is that they only lose business to themselves, there is no
> realistic alternative.
>
> Our only realistic solution to the MS mess is for some mega-wealthy
> individual to purchase as much MS stock as possible so that they have a
> major voice on the board of directors, then seek a vote to break the
> company up into smaller, separate, and autonomous companies. I'll be
> waiting in my pumpkin patch for the Great Pumpkin to show up as well...
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: VS 2005 questions
- From: Peter Franks
- Re: VS 2005 questions
- References:
- Re: VS 2005 questions
- From: Kevin Spencer
- Re: VS 2005 questions
- From: Ken
- Re: VS 2005 questions
- From: Peter Franks
- Re: VS 2005 questions
- Prev by Date: Re: VS 2005 questions
- Next by Date: Re: VS 2005 questions
- Previous by thread: Re: VS 2005 questions
- Next by thread: Re: VS 2005 questions
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|