Comments on: How Microsoft “Acquires” New .NET Features http://blog.palehorse.net/2007/03/23/how-microsoft-acquires-new-net-features/ Thoughts from a mind twisted by tech and sports Wed, 10 Mar 2010 16:23:24 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 By: palehorse http://blog.palehorse.net/2007/03/23/how-microsoft-acquires-new-net-features/#comment-70 palehorse Sun, 25 Mar 2007 04:07:14 +0000 http://palehorse.wordpress.com/2007/03/23/how-microsoft-acquires-new-net-features/#comment-70 I understand the reasoning as well, and I for one commend the idea, it is the implementation that I, and I think the author of the article, are pointing at. Microsoft definitely has the resources and the talent. If they want to include the functionality, bravo, but give it the effort that the existing projects already have rather than include something that is not as feature rich and mature. If they do not want to do that or cannot for budgetary reasons, make it easier to integrate the existing projects. I understand the reasoning as well, and I for one commend the idea, it is the implementation that I, and I think the author of the article, are pointing at. Microsoft definitely has the resources and the talent. If they want to include the functionality, bravo, but give it the effort that the existing projects already have rather than include something that is not as feature rich and mature.

If they do not want to do that or cannot for budgetary reasons, make it easier to integrate the existing projects.

]]> By: david http://blog.palehorse.net/2007/03/23/how-microsoft-acquires-new-net-features/#comment-68 david Sat, 24 Mar 2007 21:58:46 +0000 http://palehorse.wordpress.com/2007/03/23/how-microsoft-acquires-new-net-features/#comment-68 I saw this yesterday and thought he made a good argument. The reason I've heard for duplicating NUnit and NAnt was because they wanted the functionality in Visual Studio, but couldn't include them or make Visual Studio dependent on them. Microsoft is making Linq to Entities which seems to compete with NHibernate and ActiveRecord and there's this new MVC framework which sounds like it might compete with Monorail. In these cases too the Microsoft version will probably be added to Visual Studio so that it can have gui designers, generate code, etc. It's almost like Microsoft won't support something unless there is a drag and drop designer for it. I don't know, maybe most of the developers working on these competing products really aren't aware of the open source versions. Or maybe not, looking at how similar MSBuild is to NAnt and MSTest is to NUnit. I saw this yesterday and thought he made a good argument. The reason I’ve heard for duplicating NUnit and NAnt was because they wanted the functionality in Visual Studio, but couldn’t include them or make Visual Studio dependent on them.

Microsoft is making Linq to Entities which seems to compete with NHibernate and ActiveRecord and there’s this new MVC framework which sounds like it might compete with Monorail. In these cases too the Microsoft version will probably be added to Visual Studio so that it can have gui designers, generate code, etc. It’s almost like Microsoft won’t support something unless there is a drag and drop designer for it.

I don’t know, maybe most of the developers working on these competing products really aren’t aware of the open source versions. Or maybe not, looking at how similar MSBuild is to NAnt and MSTest is to NUnit.

]]>