DevX does seem one sideded

[Robert Scoble]

> Robert: Who's "us?" MS has invited influential developers to Redmond, on
> multiple occasions, to have such a "conversation."

Exactly.

But, .NET is a lot more than technologies for developers, no?

Ahh, the confusion reigns: http://www.atnewyork.com/news/article.php/1568041

So, is .NET just a runtime? Heh.

Why not have an open discussion in public with all developers, not just your
friends and the "A" team?

Or, did you forget that I used to plan the world's largest Visual Studio
conference and Microsoft wouldn't even tell me what was going on in .NET and
I needed to plan a conference about it? (That doesn't excuse the sleazy way
I responded, but the truth of the matter is that they weren't sharing info
at all back in early 2000).

Oh, and it seems to me that you guys only got invited up there after a bunch
of bad press hit PCWeek and someone's *** got chewed out by Steve Ballmer.
Why weren't you involved all along?

Anyway,

[Robert Scoble]

> Robert: Well, I can't say that I "love" any corporation, but I like
> Microsoft as much as I ever have. I think they make the best development
> tools. I own MSFT stock. I'd work for them, if they'd let me do it without
> relocating.
> So now you know at least one. ;-)

OK, although as an employee of FTP (which continues to get large
sponsorships from Microsoft) I'd count you as among the "biased" crowd in
that respect.

So, I'll count you as a lover, but with an asterisk.

Oh, and, I've talked to many who take a "I love Microsoft" stance publicly,
but then when you get them off the record, or visit their houses, you find
that they are only taking that stance to profit off of them.

Nothing wrong with that, you understand. I'm still living large at
Microsoft's food trough myself.

:-)

Robert

[Robert Scoble]

> By many accounts I've heard and from my own personal experience,
Microsoft's
> definition of "influential" appears to be "publicly on record as agreeing
> with what we have done" and "conversation" is "briefing on what we are
about
> to do next". The idea of Microsoft allowing itself to be influenced by a
> 2-way exchange of views with people who are not already in full agreement
> with them is not one that seems to have any influence within senior
> management circles in Redmond.

Yeah, tell me about it.

Even the meeting that Phil is talking about only happened after the
"VB.notters" showed up in the pages of PCWeek.

I've seen this behavior up close and personal. Steve Ballmer was at Comdex
saying "we want a community, just like Slashdot" all while talking about
XDocs, a product/technology no one (even the MVPs) had seen or played with
or hand any knowledge of.

How many people have been approached by a Microsoft person lately saying
"hey, buddy, want a watch?"

Robert

[Phil Weber]

> The idea of Microsoft allowing itself to be influenced by a 2-
> way exchange of views with people who are not already in
> full agreement with them is not one that seems to have any
> influence within senior management circles in Redmond.

Jonathan: Well, at the meeting I attended, there was plenty of dissent (this
was no gathering of yes-men), and the VS.NET team appeared to change
direction on several points based largely on the influence of the
dissenters. So, for what it's worth, my experience has apparently been
different from yours.
--
Phil Weber

[Robert Scoble]

> Jonathan: Well, at the meeting I attended, there was plenty of dissent
(this
> was no gathering of yes-men), and the VS.NET team appeared to change
> direction on several points based largely on the influence of the
> dissenters. So, for what it's worth, my experience has apparently been
> different from yours.

But, the fact is, this was still a group of insiders. Mostly MVPs. Why
wasn't it written up on weblogs? Did you sign NDAs? Did you get free swag
for coming? Did Microsoft pay your way?

And, why was this meeting held only after the ".Notters" got press in
PCWeek?

Finally, why is there only one example in the past 24 months that we can
point to?

Microsoft has announced dozens of products. I'm on the beta of some of them.
Unfortunately, I've signed non-disclosures, so I can't even tell you which
ones they are.

Oh, and even though I'm on the "inside" and on the beta, I don't get the
feeling that they are really being open with me.

For instance, one of the products I'm on the beta of, Steve Ballmer has
already announced some features that will be included in this product. I
didn't even know about those until I read news.com. So much for being open.

Microsoft is controlled by the PR and Marketing teams now. Back to the
point: it's a lot less fun than it used to be when it was geeks.

Yes, there are occassionally signs of life.

Of course, having a dying patient look up at you and mention a few words
doesn't change the fact that it's dying.

The patient still hasn't gotten out of bed. Let me know when you get invited
to the next meeting.

By the way, I've heard that Visual Studio 2.0 will be released next year.
Oh, and another version of Windows is coming too. Have you had influence on
either of those? Knowledge? Etc.?

And you work for a company that has VERY tight ties with Microsoft.

<sigh>

Robert

[T. Hoskins]

"Robert Scoble" <robertscoble@hotmail.com> wrote:
>I think there are a lot of factors contributing to the lack of enthusiasm.

Robert, nice post!

Although, for Karl it probably has more to do with the "Wild West" being
tamed. That is, the IT world has changed a lot since VB first became popular.
Of course, I am just speculating here since Karl rarely posts more than a
sentence or two unless he is responding to a very specific technical question
that someone has posted.

Working for/at Dilbertesque type companies is about the only thing that has
stayed constant for me since I first entered this field and that is something
that can take the enthusiasm out of anybody.

[Jonathan West]

"Phil Weber" <pweber@nospam.fawcette.com> wrote in message
news:3e1f619f$1@tnews.web.devx.com...
> > The idea of Microsoft allowing itself to be influenced by a 2-
> > way exchange of views with people who are not already in
> > full agreement with them is not one that seems to have any
> > influence within senior management circles in Redmond.
>
> Jonathan: Well, at the meeting I attended, there was plenty of dissent
(this
> was no gathering of yes-men), and the VS.NET team appeared to change
> direction on several points based largely on the influence of the
> dissenters. So, for what it's worth, my experience has apparently been
> different from yours.

I wasn't at the meeting you are referring to, so I have 3 questions

1. What was asked for?
2. What was promised?
3. Has it been delivered?

--
Regards
Jonathan West

[Rob Abbe]

Phil,

Define "infuential" would those "influential" people still be considered
"influential" in a positive way by the vb community today? If this is the
end result, they sure had an influence on me.

Sounds like you like them because they stroked your ego by inviting you to
come to a meeting with the other "influential" programmers.... Maybe I'm
just jealous

Rob


"Phil Weber" <pweber@nospam.fawcette.com> wrote:
> > Not to mention: The Visual Studio group started treating us
> > like IBM used to treat Microsoft...If you want people to under-
> > stand something they don't understand, you invite them over
> > for a conversation. So far I'm still waiting for the conversation
> > to start.
>
>Robert: Who's "us?" MS has invited influential developers to Redmond, on
>multiple occasions, to have such a "conversation."
>--
>Phil Weber
>
>

[Mark Hurd]

Robert Scoble wrote:
> > The community is still out there, they're just not as enthused as they
> > once were. I can only wonder what part of that can be contributed to VBPJ
> > folding, and the change you indicate (aside from MS's part)....
>
> I think there are a lot of factors contributing to the lack of enthusiasm.

<Very good post snipped>

What confuses me is why Microsoft aren't pointing out very publicly that they
have given back the *free* C/C++ (as well as VB.NET, C# and JScript.NET)
compiler (as part of the .NET SDK, which is free to download) that Sun
"unbundled" (from their basic Unix system) around 1990.

With vbscript as well, there are now lots of ways to program for a Window
environment for no more that the cost of the Windows O/S and downloading IE6
and the .NET SDK. That should be increasing the amount of free software and
hence the community that creates.

I guess the issues you highlighted (esp. that there's too many alternatives, a
mundane corporate p.o.v, and the bad MS PR) are even overridding free
software...

Regards,
Mark Hurd, B.Sc.(Ma.) (Hons.)

[Mike Mitchell]

On 8 Jan 2003 14:00:25 -0800, "Rob Abbe" <rabbe@mn.rr.com> wrote:

>Like it or not, some people out there that opted not to continue on the Microsoft
>road after .Net came about. If DevX would like to retain these people as
>readers and attract more advertiser revenue, they should provide "deeper"
>java content.

Judging by the thinness of January's issue of VSM, they don't have
either a lot of content or a lot of advertisers any more. I put my
£3.75 back in my pocket.

MM

[Mike Mitchell]

On Thu, 9 Jan 2003 17:07:22 -0800, "Karl E. Peterson" <karl@mvps.org>
wrote:

>Hi Rob --
>
>> Yeah, the whole .Net fiasco has been very damaging to the VB
>> community. It could have been handled much better.
>
>Boy, ain't that the truth? :-(
>
>As a community, it was really something. Not as fuzzy as the Foxers or as freaky as
>the Delphites, but somehow just about right for (apparently) millions more. All that
>was just torn apart, almost overnight. It's now fragmented into so many little
>divisions, that I feel like there simply is no community anymore. I doubt there ever
>can be, either, not like it was. Not based on what Microsoft is offering.

<schadenfreude>

Well, don't say I didn't warn you!

</schadenfreude>

MM

[Mike Mitchell]

On Fri, 10 Jan 2003 15:46:21 -0600, "Larry Serflaten"
<serflaten@usinternet.com> wrote:

>The community is still out there, they're just not as enthused as they once were.
>I can only wonder what part of that can be contributed to VBPJ folding, and
>the change you indicate (aside from MS's part)....

It's to do with the fact that Microsoft screwed over three
million-plus faithful VB programmers!

MM

[Mike Mitchell]

On Fri, 10 Jan 2003 15:06:52 -0800, "Robert Scoble"
<robertscoble@hotmail.com> wrote:

>1) IT isn't as hot as it used to be. Being part of an industry on its way up
>is a lot more fun than one on its way down. For the past two years there has
>been very little good news for the IT industry.

This is what I meant the other day when I remarked how computing has
become boring (see Computers are our problem in vb.dotnet.discussion).
I get more fun at the moment out of seeing a room change as I apply
paint, carpentry, tiles, and sweat. Plus, there's more money to be
made in property than in programming!

MM

[Mike Mitchell]

On Fri, 10 Jan 2003 15:06:52 -0800, "Robert Scoble"
<robertscoble@hotmail.com> wrote:

>2) .NET. Microsoft was late to the party (.NET was a reaction to Java) and
>Microsoft didn't have something really innovative. Visual Basic was a
>revolution. The first time we all saw it we said "wow, this is wild." How
>many people said "wow, this is wild" when they saw .NET for the first time?
>In fact, many people, like Karl, said "***?" instead.

Oi! Including me! Me, too! It wuz me wot said it as well! Me, me, ME!
Don't forget that, don't ever forget it!

MM

[Mike Mitchell]

On Fri, 10 Jan 2003 15:06:52 -0800, "Robert Scoble"
<robertscoble@hotmail.com> wrote:

>4) Microsoft's stature in the industry. I don't know a single person who
>loves Microsoft (well, I do know a few, but they all work at Microsoft, so
>they are a little biased). Not a single one. Not even people who've been
>long-term "friends" of Microsoft. I know a lot of people who pretend that
>they love Microsoft but are running Linux machines at home "just to help
>beat the evil empire." Of course, I live in Silicon Valley, so that affects
>some of my perception, but Microsoft clearly has the worst PR of any
>industry in the US today.

Oh, no, this is too much! I can't stand it any longer! Gotta change my
trousers again, and it's not even lunchtime! Gobsmacked, or what!!

MM