I saw an old programmer in 9CBS, although it was about MFC discussions, but developers in other languages also learned.
Transferred from the 9CBS technology community (http://community.9cbs.net), more content can be found at http://community.9cbs.net/expert/topicview1.asp?id=3834281.
Author: Sunhui (MFC.NET)
I. I first kneg the MFC, I found that MFC was probably in 1993. At that time, Visual C has not yet available, then Microsoft's C compiler is still very weak, the official name is Microsoft C / C 7.0, the MFC version is 1.0, almost There is no response, the best C development environment during that period is Borland C 3.1, in fact, probably in November 1992, an accidental opportunity, I appreciate Borland's power, I can't remember, I saw a A wonderful integrated development environment, Turbo C 3.0 for Windows, this is the first C integrated development environment in my memory in my memory. The exciting feeling is still remembering, it is not polite, at least at least In C , Microsoft and Borland are not a level, Borland is obviously higher than Microsoft, Borland's products, leaving a deep impression on me. At that time, Microsoft's best development platform was Visual Basic 3.0, while Borland's Delphi is in the development phase (Delphi's code name is: "VB Killer") ..., I remembered the past more than ten years ago, I can't help but feel excited . For more than a decade, I have used many development environments, about Visual Basic, I have used the earliest DOS version, the Windows version of Visual Basic I basically used, I still remember the number of discs of each version of VB installation disk disk . Similarly, I have used all versions of Delphi, especially Delphi 2.0, leaving me an excellent impression. Delphi provides a truly compiled visual development environment, then (around 1994), Delphi can develop a dynamic link library with the GUI, you can imagine, you can load a delphi form in Microsoft Access 2.0 applications, program interaction The feeling is really great. Borland C is a regret that I can't erase in my heart. From Turbo C to C Builder, I deeply experience Borland's brilliant and helpless, Delphi walks from VB Killer to VB escort (you can imagine ActiveX control development technology in step from Delphi) There are many bovine, early VB has soil, early VB cannot develop dynamic link libraries, so it is unable to develop ActiveX controls, think of it is really inexplicably), Borland C fate is also unjust. Borland C 3.1 will never have, in the development of more than ten years, I have put a lot of energy on C , Borland C has brought me countless excitement, but this classic name is in competing with Microsoft. Gradually lapse .... The appearance of MFC4.0 makes people feel that Microsoft caught up in C , and the MFC of this version was Win95 launched in Visual C 4 (Microsoft did not have VC3, VC4 previous versions were 2.2, 2.1, 2.0, 1.51 1.5, 1.0).
Perhaps the disappointment of the subconscious of Borland C , I don't know the MFC, and when VC 4.2 is launched, I bought this compiler throughout the channel. Second, about Microsoft About Microsoft, there is countless person to say to this name, this annoying name! I don't know if I like or hate. You are a programmer, your mind may be due to Microsoft's existence, even if you use Linux, you may also be because of Microsoft technical factors. How many years come, this name appears every day, I, in front of him, because you have to face the existence of Windows, but can you hate this name? Do you hate this name? I don't know if I have numb this name. In 1998, I personally booked a Microsoft MSDN Universal version. I started to comprehensively exposure to this company's development technology. You can imagine that when you face hundreds of technology discs in 1998, you know what is called "thickness". We sometimes say that when "catching" or "reaching" Microsoft's level, we may lack the true understanding of this company "thickness". Entering MSDN, I feel that Microsoft is not a "company", but (or being formed) a "society". At that time, the famous technical website http://www.codeguru.com All technical information was downloadable (That time http://www.codeguru.com offers the entire website content download service, about 3m or so), the famous WWW. CodeProject.com does not exist. At the beginning, I have always laid in technology comparison Microsoft and Borland, which should say that Borland is not weak than Microsoft, even if someone holds this view, but why borland goes today? And the Microsoft is in the day? A few years ago, how fierce these two companies is, but now there is another "cooperation" scene? Maybe many people think that if Borland does not exist, isn't it more powerful to Microsoft? In fact, Microsoft may be proficient in Chinese history, read "Three Kingdoms", very well, China, in fact, in the form of Borland, is very advantageous for Microsoft, at least in the form of competitors, and in fact Borland has been controlled Microsoft (Microsoft is a big shareholder of Borland). You can see some subtle phenomena: Borland provides a lot of talents for Microsoft, including the Delphi chief designer and the core member of the Borland C compiler; also provides powerful escort services for Microsoft .NET (see C # Builder , Delphi .NET). In 1998, Microsoft's COM technology is basically mature. This technology makes people feel shocking. At that time, Microsoft's opponents made "openDoc" for confrontation "COM", you see several members of the "OpenDoc" camp: IBM, Apple, Borland Novell, you will feel that this camp is very luxurious, powerful. However, the result is a powerful, "OpenDOC" has no death, and "COM" is still vibrant. Some people say "COM" is not falling, then I don't know how Microsoft.
In the competition with "OpenDoc", "COM" is a thorough victory. In the competition with "Java", "COM" has evolved in this process, and Microsoft reflects powerful absorption capacity in this process, and cannot be imagined. Tough. .NET is just a "alias" of COM. For an experienced C programmer, .net is evolution of COM, and the internal .NET is "COM 3.0" in Microsoft (OLE2 is COM 2.0), and "CLR" is an unscrupulous COM object. Someone once asked me, since the Newton era laid the foundation (think about the famous Newton-Leibniz formula), today, math still study "calcination"? The answer is of course still study! The early stage of "calculus" is aimed at functions. Modern "Fiber Bundle" is targeted by "Fiber Bundle", but the basic thinking is unchanged, just "calculus" ideas. Get reasonable extension and evolution, do you know Microsoft? Microsoft Research has a group of super-first mathematicians working for Microsoft, some of which are the winners of the Vilz Prize, and Microsoft is implementing "COM" to ".NET" like "calculus" evolution to "differential flow". From the perspective of scientific concept, COM and Java may be more comprehensive and accurate. Java may be more mature from the maturity of realization, but you see that Microsoft is chasing. Microsoft's Lenovo's Qin Qin during the Warring States Period. The Qin State during the Warring States Period, taking the measures such as "Fight Tracking" and "Weaked and Strong", today's Microsoft is also like this, VB1.0, Microsoft launches "VBX" control technology, and many small companies have survived, Microsoft themselves Does not develop "VBX" components, the same "VBX" into "OCX", Microsoft is not very powerful, but this kind of test is a response to many small companies. In 1997, Microsoft Office 97, 1998 Microsoft launched Visual Studio 6.0, giving a lot of money, providing opportunities for survival, development, such as the MICROSOFT Office 97 integrating Visual Basic for Application 5.0, which makes hundreds of software development The merchant and Microsoft signed the VBA technical license agreement, even if Autodesk has signed this protocol with Microsoft, this protocol makes each integrated VBA product gives a license fee for Microsoft pays 40 $, if you know vsip (Visual Studio Integration Protocol) Agreement, and how many companies signed a VSIP protocol, you really feel the terrible Microsoft's terrible; Microsoft Office 97, Visual Studio 6.0 user interface is very beautiful, why Microsoft's own development tool does not provide similar software Component? You have seen many third-party Microsoft allies have launched their interface libraries to imitate Microsoft, they will not be against Microsoft because they have formed an ecotrial circle that makes Microsoft and these companies to survive.
How much is Microsoft's technical reserves, people outside Microsoft are difficult to say, Microsoft China does not necessarily understand how much, in 1999, when the WTL class library has just emerged, people hope that WTL will be officially supported, or authorize to a Microsoft. A company (you can imagine the Borland C 5.0 built-in ActiveX development mechanism is based on Microsoft ATL class library?), Until today, WTL is still afraid, we fully believe that if Microsoft promotes WTL, WTL is completely popular, but Microsoft does not lack similar technologies, similar libraries include BCL (Base Control Library, a class library for developing a lightweight ActiveX control), Microsoft has a ATL-based class library, this class library is used to develop ACTIVEX Designer, ActiveX Designer is the vast majority of programmers who don't understand a class, if you are familiar with Office development, you know that there is a class of objects in Office VBA, which is form2, the report designer in VB6.0 (and famous Active Reporter) These objects, with this class library, you can provide customized visual design mechanisms for VB6.0 and integrated VBA systems, and today ActiveX Designer has evolved into designers integrated into Visual Studio .NET. . (Do not be treated. If you want to continue to see, go to the link above, this will not continue)
