NET faces trust crisis, the root causes the target blur
(2005 No. 4 "Programmer" article, there is an application, full text, please read the magazine)
Richard GRIMES is one of the world's most famous .NET technology experts and writers, not only written a lot of .Net articles and technical books, but also as an important lecturer at the Author and Microsoft Technical Conference as MSDN Magazine. The NET technology agency has a high visibility. However, this old brother, recently in an article published on the DDJ website (http://www.ddj.com/documents/s/s=9211/ddj050201dn/) Accredible Microsoft's series of mistakes in the implementation .NET process And expressed its disappointment and distrust of .NET technology. This article has become the focus of the recent technical community, 9CBS lists this topic as headlines, TSS is also unable to travel, even Microsoft's own online community, the topic related to it Always received attention. As one of the most important spokespersons of Microsoft technology, Richard Grimes suddenly "turned", I believe that Microsoft's technical leaders can't do. We have seen some sporadic "counterattacks" that Microsoft launched, and I believe that there will be organized actions. Microsoft can certainly recover the "bad" affected by this article, but the technical community exposed by this incident is that anyone cannot avoid it for .NET's trust crisis.
Yang Soup is boiled, it is not as good as the bottom of the bottom. Microsoft is in the technical community, it is better to take this as an opportunity, carefully combed his .NET strategy and tactics. Richard Grimes more criticized Microsoft's mistakes on certain tactical issues. These criticisms are not completely convincing, especially that Microsoft has lost confidence in .NET, unveralists. However, in my opinion, the real problem is not Richard Grimes's accusation with ridiculous nature. The real problem is that .NET has been announced in the past five years, and its strategic goal is always blurred, at least from the propaganda effect. .
Microsoft is a leader of the entire software industry. Such a company, its strategic goal should be as clear as the sun. When we explore Microsoft's successful experience, one is that it is not ignored, that is, the Microsoft in the 70s and 1980s, has a very clear strategic goal: let each table put a PC, let each Microsoft software is running in the PC. This is a picture, this is a story, simple, clear, tentacle. Thirty years ago, Bill Gates and Paul Allen have taught such a clear picture for the future world, and the location of Microsoft in this future world is so real, which is the long-term development of a high-tech company. More precious than any specific business means. The results are clear that DOS has laid the foundation of Microsoft. In 1985, Bill Gustz saw GUI, so I developed Microsoft's second 10-year strategic goal, which is to run the graphical interface on all computers, so that ordinary people can easily use the computer. The results are clear, Windows has achieved Microsoft's imperial hegemony. In 1995, although Bill Gates still resolutely develop Microsoft's third strategic objectives, all PCs and applications can be interconnected through the Internet, and the results are also very clear, Microsoft defeated numerous The opponent becomes a giant high-tech enterprise on earth. This is the strategic goal, this is a program, any organization that is far more than a stolen, must be able to come up with such a program, this program must be clear, bright, able to illuminate people in people like a sun. . The strategic goal cannot be concealed, the strategic goal is not ambiguous, only so, only this is conducive to the concomity of all power, launching all the potential, overcoming all difficulties, inspiring all the allies, reaching the goal of the enterprise. Microsoft can have today, to a large extent, we will give him a great delegation. However, when Microsoft threw .NET in 2000, we suddenly found that this technology's strategic goal is so blurred. Microsoft spent a lot of strength to explain to everyone. Net is what is, but it doesn't realize that this explanation itself just explains .NET's largest weaknesses: The target of the target. It is because the target is blurred, but it needs to be interpreted. Is the clear goal need to explain? "Let each table have a computer, let Microsoft's software in each computer," such a goal needs to explain? "Let each computer run the graphical interface", such a goal needs to explain? "Let the computer can put movies, listen to music, play games", such a goal needs to explain? But the turn to .NET, it is not to explain. Yes, you suddenly throw a blame name, and then say this is "Microsoft's core strategy in the next ten years", then hangs the words .NET's words behind almost all products, and do people's war, sincere and fearful. But in the end, what is your .net? Microsoft spent a few years, saying that there is a different understanding of the ten people now .NET. Some people say .NET is the implementation technology of Web Services; some people say .NET is a technology towards software service age; some people say that .NET is a key step in achieving software factory; some say .Net is a Microsoft version of Java; some people say. NET is the technology of all computing devices interconnected; some people say .NET is Microsoft to enter the company's distributed computing technology; some people say .Net is a programming framework; some people simply say, .net is nothing more than Microsoft attempted to maintain himself at the desktop market The tool is the tool; more people will say: I don't know.
Yeah, I don't know. Can you tell me, have .NET, what is our future world? What kind of role in .NET plays in this world? Where is the uniqueness of .NET reflected? Can you tell me a story? Can you draw a picture? ...
...
The vague of .NET strategy has brought a lot of problems. Doubts and distrust from the external technology community are still in its second, and more serious is inconsistent in the minds caused by Microsoft. Microsoft is too large. If the strategic goals are not clear, even the ideas of themselves are uniform, how are you? In the past few years, all kinds of things happening around Longhorn, Yukon, Visual Studio 2005, Web Services, XML and so on, are the uniform reflection of Microsoft internal ideas.
In fact, .NET is a very good technology. Itself has an inherent clear strategic goal, but Microsoft has not been able to show it clearly and implemented it. This strategic goal is so huge, so that different people can only grasp different local, and the most core and essential things, it is difficult to understand. The various views listed above, in fact, it reflects some of the specific goals of .NET, but they have not been able to grasp the overall .NET. This problem must be solved, and this problem must also be solved by Microsoft. Despite the disappointment of Microsoft in this issue in five years, it is still one of the most creative high-tech companies in the world. It is still far from the pessimism and loss of confidence in it. Maybe wait until Longhorn born, everything is suspected and pessimistic, and it will be too late.
