| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
Is Microsoft's .Net Ready For Prime Time? | |
|
||
| Time: 18:52 EST/23:52 GMT | News Source: ZDNet | Posted By: Viper | ||
|
Despite the anticipation caused by Microsoft's .Net strategy, many developers still are not convinced that the impending Web services platform is stable, reliable or ready for the enterprise. The Redmond, Wash., company presented several new components of .Net to developers at its TechEd conference here last week, including the second beta of Visual Studio .Net, the centerpiece tool set for building .Net applications. But while the pieces are coming together, the vision is not. "Microsoft does not appear to have a uniform platform vision," said Roger Sessions, CEO of ObjectWatch, in Austin, Texas, who attended TechEd. "While the individual technologies it is delivering are solid, the many pieces simply do not as yet interact the way you would expect and do not in any way support a common platform vision." | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 147 Last | Next |
The time now is
7:07:36 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 20 (Unknown) at 6/25/2001 9:12:00 PM |
|
They don't have a uniform platform vision? As compared with what? It's leading competitor J2EE? ROFL. What a cobbled mess EJB is on top of the performance harried Java platform. .NET is much more unified and cohesive. A quick look at the various components and one sees a comprehensive enterprise development framework (.NET Framework), enterprise development studio (VS.NET), as well as comprehensive suite of enterprise ebusiness applications (Exchange.NET, BizTalk.NET, Application Center Server, IAS, Content Server, Commerce Server.NET, SQL.NET, and many others). No other company has all the bases covered like MS. Sun, BEA, and Oracle combined don't have the width and depth of MS's .NET enterprise package. This guy is smoking dope... oh wait, it's ZDNet, what a suprise. I can hear the phone call now: ZDNet Editor: Hello? Larry Ellison: Yes, editor? We just paid a substantial amount of money for an advertising blitz in your portfolio magazines. We would like you to help us make .NET go away. Publish as much Fear, Uncertantity and Doubt as you can about .NET! ZDNet Editor: But wouldn't that violate our journalistic integrity? Larry Ellison: You have no journalistic integrity ZDNet Editor: Oh yeah, I forgot. Who is we, by the way? Scott McNealy: Larry and I are on conference call. ZDNet Editor: Oh, howdy Scott. I got your new delivery. That new Lexus is sweet! Scott McNealy: Great. Glad to hear it, just remember our agreement, ok? ZDNet Editor: Ok, I'll post more articles about how bad Windows 2000 is and how bad Windows XP is already. Scott McNealy and Larry Ellison in unison: Good boy. *click* |
| #2 By 125 (Unknown) at 6/26/2001 11:47:00 AM |
| Oh dear... here we go again... |
| #3 By 20 (Unknown) at 6/26/2001 5:00:00 PM |
| #8: Actually, I wouldn't call Linux a superior server OS. It still has serious I/O threading issues in the kernel not to mention a poor filesystem, etc. It's a good low-budget server for low-end tasks like DNS, etc. It's also good to throw a bunch of Linux boxes together for cheap and make a cluster to act like a big-boy server, but I still wouldn't call it "Superior". |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 147 Last | Next |
The time now is
7:07:36 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
