Companies Using .NET - Page 11


DevX Home    Today's Headlines   Articles Archive   Tip Bank   Forums   

Page 11 of 14 FirstFirst ... 910111213 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 165 of 208

Thread: Companies Using .NET

  1. #151
    Rob Teixeira Guest

    Re: Companies Using .NET


    "james" <jamesw2@mesh.net> wrote:
    >Patrick, I have been mostly lurking on this newsgroup and reading Mike's
    >posts and taking the majority of them with a grain of salt.
    >But, and as much as I hate to even begin to agree with him, .NET , Passport
    >, My Services, etc. are all pretty well linked together . I have read
    >several press releases over the past year from Microsoft and all of these
    >things are a part of their .NET Initiative.


    You have to read past the hype.
    In a broad sense, .NET is an encompassing term for new software. Much like
    XP. You have Windows XP, Office XP, etc. Shortly, there will be .NET Servers,
    .NET MyServices, Visual Studio.NET. etc.
    The broad .NET initiative is not the same as the VS.NET development tools.


    > They do wish to get away from
    >shrink wrapped software and work towards a Subscription Model and put web
    >based services as a way for consumers to store and retrieve their personal
    >data and information. I don't think all of that is a bad idea except that
    >when someone's internet connection goes
    >down as it can and does out here in the sticks, then you are lost as far

    as
    >being able to have access to your information as you would if it were all
    >stored on your home machine.


    Even MS knows this model doesn't fit for all situations. In certain situations,
    like B2B, this model makes a lot of sense, and is long overdue. However,
    just because you *can* build WebServices in VS.NET, doesn't mean that VS.NET
    *only* builds WebServices. It is probably the most powerful new feature (thus
    the hype), but the rest of the framework is considerably more impressive
    as a whole.

    > It reminds me of the old fashioned networks
    >with the centeral server and dumb terminals.
    >Let the server go down and no one gets anything done.
    >And I would not be entirely suprised if Microsoft would like to be the sole
    >company in charge and in control of Web Services.


    Very unlikely. One of the uses for Web Services is interoperability with
    other processes running on other platforms (say a Java process running on
    Unix for example). The Web Service transport protocol is a standard, and
    companies like IBM, HP, Sun, etc. are all integrating the capability to make
    and run web services into their products. If you look at a web services directory,
    you will note that a large percentage of web services don't run on MS software.

    >So, even though alot of what Mike has to say seems to be overly
    >paranoid , I do have to agree with him somewhat on this one thing.


    He's still being paranoid

    -Rob



  2. #152
    Jay Glynn Guest

    Re: Companies Using .NET


    Hi James,

    They are linked together in marketing terms only.
    MSFT has unfortunately used the same "branding" language across the whole
    spectrum of "stuff" that they are doing.

    You can use .NET (when I say .NET in this context, I am refering to the framework
    used to build applications) to make a web service.

    You can also use .NET to build client apps that have nothing to do with the
    internet at all. Any application you can do with VB 6 you can make with VB.NET
    or C#.

    Passport is or will become a My Services service (which is completely different
    from a web service). MSFT does NOT charge you to build a web service, they
    will charge to host a My Services service (Passport etc ). MSFT will not
    be the only company able to host a My Services service. There will be ways
    for third party companies to get into the fray as well. It should be noted
    that the My Services technology isn't done cooking yet and AFAIK is not planned
    for release with the .NET framework and VS .NET.

    As far as subscriptions go, I can see a use, but I don't think it will fly
    like MSFT or any software vendor would like them to. But they have nothing
    to do with .NET as a technology. I guess you could build you subscription
    based app using web services, and maybe let MSFT host them as a My Services,
    but that would all be entirely optional.

    This all gets rather confusing and I really wish MSFT would not have lumped
    everything from this point on as .NET, but they have, It is going to take
    careful reading on our part to separate the marketspeak from the real technical
    details. Rantings from Mike unfortunately don't help the situation since
    he is unwilling to at least look at what the difference is between a web
    service and a My Services service.

    Jay


  3. #153
    james Guest

    Re: Companies Using .NET

    Patrick, I have been mostly lurking on this newsgroup and reading Mike's
    posts and taking the majority of them with a grain of salt.
    But, and as much as I hate to even begin to agree with him, .NET , Passport
    , My Services, etc. are all pretty well linked together . I have read
    several press releases over the past year from Microsoft and all of these
    things are a part of their .NET Initiative. They do wish to get away from
    shrink wrapped software and work towards a Subscription Model and put web
    based services as a way for consumers to store and retrieve their personal
    data and information. I don't think all of that is a bad idea except that
    when someone's internet connection goes
    down as it can and does out here in the sticks, then you are lost as far as
    being able to have access to your information as you would if it were all
    stored on your home machine. It reminds me of the old fashioned networks
    with the centeral server and dumb terminals.
    Let the server go down and no one gets anything done.
    And I would not be entirely suprised if Microsoft would like to be the sole
    company in charge and in control of Web Services.
    So, even though alot of what Mike has to say seems to be overly
    paranoid , I do have to agree with him somewhat on this one thing.
    james
    (I'm not paranoid, everyone is out to get me !! )
    "Patrick Troughton" <Patrick@Troughton.com> wrote in message
    news:3bf5152d$1@147.208.176.211...
    >
    > kylix_is@hotmail.com (Mike Mitchell) wrote:
    > >
    > >Let me try to put .NET into some kind of perspective, along with
    > >Passport, My Services, Product Activation, and subscription-based
    > >charging.

    >
    > See, you lost me right there on the first sentence. .NET, Passport, My

    Services,
    > Product Activation, and subscription-based charging have little, if

    anything,
    > to do with each other. The fact that you repeatedly lump them together

    demonstrates
    > your inability to distinguish between disparate topics. I can only

    conclude
    > the rest of this post is pure rubbish and therefore I won't waste my time
    > reading the rest of it.
    >
    > /Pat




  4. #154
    Patrick Troughton Guest

    Re: Companies Using .NET


    "james" <jamesw2@mesh.net> wrote:
    >Patrick, I have been mostly lurking on this newsgroup and reading Mike's
    >posts and taking the majority of them with a grain of salt.
    >But, and as much as I hate to even begin to agree with him, .NET , Passport
    >, My Services, etc. are all pretty well linked together .


    No, there is no link whatsoever. AFAIK, Passport and .NET My Services are
    simply XML Web Services. At most, they're applications of .NET, not .NET
    itself. As an analogy, DOOM is an appliction for DOS, it is not DOS itself
    These are two different things. IOW, Application <> Platform. Further, Passport
    and .NET My Services may not even be implemented using .NET. That is to say
    that XML Web Services are platform independent. You can, for example, create
    XML Web Services using VB6 and SOAP toolkit...no .NET involved at all. Now,
    I don't believe I've heard Microsoft indicate which platform Passport and
    .NET My Services were created on. If they're creating using .NET, then they're
    simply applications of .NET. If they're created using VB6 or VC6, then .NET
    was not involved at all.

    >I have read
    >several press releases over the past year from Microsoft and all of these
    >things are a part of their .NET Initiative.


    Microsoft has done a very poor job explaining .NET to the public.

    /Pat

  5. #155
    Patrick Troughton Guest

    Re: Companies Using .NET


    Hi Jay,

    "Jay Glynn" <jlsglynn@hotmail.com> wrote:
    >
    >Passport is or will become a My Services service (which is completely different
    >from a web service).


    I haven't used Passport or My Services yet - are you saying that they're
    not XML Web Services? I was under the impression they were...

    /Pat

  6. #156
    james Guest

    Re: Companies Using .NET

    <Big Snip to avoid long post>
    Rob, I do have to agree with you on what you say about Visual Studio.Net not
    being strictly for Web Service based development. And that is the main
    reason I have disagreed with Mike and his stated position as far as Visual
    Basic.Net is concerned. I , as others, have been using the beta releases of
    VB.NET and have been impressed with it's power and in most cases, ease of
    use. I have even asked Mike (as have countless others) how he can judge
    the language and find it lacking when he has never actually used it. That
    is why I said that I take most of what he has been saying here with a grain
    of salt.
    I think what a lot of people feel about their stated goals as far as any
    of the .NET products and services is that they will not allow all developers
    equal access to the core services in order to make their
    products and services seem better. Such as was the case with the
    often quoted , "It ain't ready if Word still runs", as related to Windows
    3.0 etc. I think there are still people that believe that not all of the
    functions and features of any of their OS's will be accessable to outside
    developers.
    Otherwise, I cannot knock them for trying to make themselves and their
    products the best available.
    end of rambling.
    james



  7. #157
    Rob Teixeira Guest

    Re: Companies Using .NET



    One thing i've learned in this industry is never say never

    However, I think the intent is not to substitute a local harddrive, but rather
    to have pertinent user data available in a location that can be accessed
    anywhere from any machine. This is particularly useful for people on the
    go from office to office, or client sites, etc.
    Like all other technology, remember that there's a time and place for a solution,
    and that almost no solution is perfect for all cases. As a developer, it's
    important to know when and when not to use something. Attempting to lump
    everything into one statement is a bad assumption.
    In this case, a data store service is useful, but it's a mistake to say all
    data belongs there, or that no data will ever go there.

    -Rob

    "Michael Culley" <m_culley@hotmail.com> wrote:
    >as a way for consumers to store and retrieve their personal
    >> data and information.

    >
    >This will never happen, the web will always be many order of magnitude
    >slower than a local HDD
    >
    >--
    >Michael Culley
    >www.vbdotcom.com
    >
    >



  8. #158
    Michael Culley Guest

    Re: Companies Using .NET

    as a way for consumers to store and retrieve their personal
    > data and information.


    This will never happen, the web will always be many order of magnitude
    slower than a local HDD

    --
    Michael Culley
    www.vbdotcom.com


    "james" <jamesw2@mesh.net> wrote in message news:3bf55977@147.208.176.211...
    > Patrick, I have been mostly lurking on this newsgroup and reading Mike's
    > posts and taking the majority of them with a grain of salt.
    > But, and as much as I hate to even begin to agree with him, .NET ,

    Passport
    > , My Services, etc. are all pretty well linked together . I have read
    > several press releases over the past year from Microsoft and all of these
    > things are a part of their .NET Initiative. They do wish to get away from
    > shrink wrapped software and work towards a Subscription Model and put web
    > based services as a way for consumers to store and retrieve their

    personal
    > data and information. I don't think all of that is a bad idea except that
    > when someone's internet connection goes
    > down as it can and does out here in the sticks, then you are lost as far

    as
    > being able to have access to your information as you would if it were all
    > stored on your home machine. It reminds me of the old fashioned networks
    > with the centeral server and dumb terminals.
    > Let the server go down and no one gets anything done.
    > And I would not be entirely suprised if Microsoft would like to be the

    sole
    > company in charge and in control of Web Services.
    > So, even though alot of what Mike has to say seems to be overly
    > paranoid , I do have to agree with him somewhat on this one thing.
    > james
    > (I'm not paranoid, everyone is out to get me !! )
    > "Patrick Troughton" <Patrick@Troughton.com> wrote in message
    > news:3bf5152d$1@147.208.176.211...
    > >
    > > kylix_is@hotmail.com (Mike Mitchell) wrote:
    > > >
    > > >Let me try to put .NET into some kind of perspective, along with
    > > >Passport, My Services, Product Activation, and subscription-based
    > > >charging.

    > >
    > > See, you lost me right there on the first sentence. .NET, Passport, My

    > Services,
    > > Product Activation, and subscription-based charging have little, if

    > anything,
    > > to do with each other. The fact that you repeatedly lump them together

    > demonstrates
    > > your inability to distinguish between disparate topics. I can only

    > conclude
    > > the rest of this post is pure rubbish and therefore I won't waste my

    time
    > > reading the rest of it.
    > >
    > > /Pat

    >
    >




  9. #159
    Jay Glynn Guest

    Re: Companies Using .NET

    Patrick,

    See, it is confusing isn't it. Yes, the technology of a My Service is almost
    the same as a web service, WSDL etc etc etc. The difference is that My
    Services has a central service attached to it. This is where the MSFT
    hosting part comes in. Also all of the SOAP messages use Kerberos
    athenticatiuon to encrypt the messages. A web servcie that you or I might
    create would not be tied to any central "meta-service". Take a look at the
    following link of you haven't read it already:

    http://www.msdn.microsoft.com/librar.../en-us/Dndotne
    t/html/myservpassp.asp?frame=true

    I think it makes more sense to keep web servcices and My Services separate.
    The may use similar plumbing, but I really think that theyare 2 different
    animals.

    >
    > I haven't used Passport or My Services yet - are you saying that they're
    > not XML Web Services? I was under the impression they were...
    >
    > /Pat



    Jay



  10. #160
    MarkN Guest

    Re: Companies Using .NET


    >For all practical purposes almost everyone on a PC logs into Windows every
    >morning today. There is no ground to gain.

    But there is ground to lose. And it is slowly happening. There are rumblings
    due to the requirements of Windows XP.

  11. #161
    Michael Culley Guest

    Re: Companies Using .NET

    True, but most of what we read about the future is not true (my fridge was
    meant order food from the supermarket by y2k), so it pays to be sceptical.

    --
    Michael Culley
    www.vbdotcom.com


    "Rob Teixeira" <RobTeixeira@@msn.com> wrote in message
    news:3bf57c5e$1@147.208.176.211...
    >
    >
    > One thing i've learned in this industry is never say never
    >
    > However, I think the intent is not to substitute a local harddrive, but

    rather
    > to have pertinent user data available in a location that can be accessed
    > anywhere from any machine. This is particularly useful for people on the
    > go from office to office, or client sites, etc.
    > Like all other technology, remember that there's a time and place for a

    solution,
    > and that almost no solution is perfect for all cases. As a developer, it's
    > important to know when and when not to use something. Attempting to lump
    > everything into one statement is a bad assumption.
    > In this case, a data store service is useful, but it's a mistake to say

    all
    > data belongs there, or that no data will ever go there.
    >
    > -Rob
    >
    > "Michael Culley" <m_culley@hotmail.com> wrote:
    > >as a way for consumers to store and retrieve their personal
    > >> data and information.

    > >
    > >This will never happen, the web will always be many order of magnitude
    > >slower than a local HDD
    > >
    > >--
    > >Michael Culley
    > >www.vbdotcom.com
    > >
    > >

    >




  12. #162
    W.E. (Bill) Goodrich, PhD Guest

    Re: Companies Using .NET

    In article <3bf4ffe6$1@147.208.176.211>,
    "Kathleen Dollard" <kathleen@mvps.org> writes:

    [...]

    > For all practical purposes almost everyone on a PC logs into Windows
    > every morning today.


    Nonsense. Of the tens of thousands of people using Windows 95, 98, or
    ME, almost nobody "logs into Windows" in any meaningful sense.

    [...]

    > Face it, MS has risen to its position of power primarily from
    > offering suffciiently quality forward looking advanced tools for
    > the market along with a healthy dose of marketing and a few pinches
    > of heavy handed business.


    You seem to be the one having trouble "facing it". MS rose to its
    position of power primarily from introducing somewhat inferior (but
    not TOO inferior) imitations of existing products into existing
    markets and piggybacking those products on established marketing
    platforms. First, by piggybacking on the IBM marketing machine (as
    the base OS for the PC), and later by piggybacking on the installed
    OS base. The "quality" of their tools was never more than a side
    issue, but the "inside information" - real and implied - associated
    with them was an issue. As was their active sabotage of competing
    tools.

    --

    W.E. (Bill) Goodrich, PhD

    *-----------------------*--------------------------------------------*
    * CHANGE YOUR SEXUALITY * http://www.nyx.net/~bgoodric/ctg.html *
    * * *
    * Without Aversive * ctgcentral@earthlink.net *
    * Behavior Modification * Creative Technology Group *
    * or Drugs * PO Box 286 *
    * * Englewood, CO 80151-0286 *
    *-----------------------*--------------------------------------------*

  13. #163
    B. Lutz Guest

    Re: Companies Using .NET


    > You seem to be the one having trouble "facing it". MS rose to its
    > position of power primarily from introducing somewhat inferior (but
    > not TOO inferior) imitations of existing products into existing
    > markets and piggybacking those products on established marketing
    > platforms. First, by piggybacking on the IBM marketing machine (as
    > the base OS for the PC), and later by piggybacking on the installed
    > OS base. The "quality" of their tools was never more than a side
    > issue, but the "inside information" - real and implied - associated
    > with them was an issue. As was their active sabotage of competing
    > tools.

    What rubbish. My 1989 copy of WordPerfect for DOS still runs fine on my Windows
    98 machine--not that I'd ever use it to try to do useful work, given that
    the entire Office Suite (Professional Version) costs less now in real dollars
    than WP did then. You're perfectly free to go use something else if you don't
    like their software.

    BTW: I find your signature, your attitude, your notes, your consistent misinformation,
    and you, offensive. Why don't you go troll elsewhere?

    >--
    >
    >W.E. (Bill) Goodrich, PhD
    >
    >*-----------------------*--------------------------------------------*
    >* CHANGE YOUR SEXUALITY * http://www.nyx.net/~bgoodric/ctg.html *
    >* * *
    >* Without Aversive * ctgcentral@earthlink.net *
    >* Behavior Modification * Creative Technology Group *
    >* or Drugs * PO Box 286 *
    >* * Englewood, CO 80151-0286 *
    >*-----------------------*--------------------------------------------*



  14. #164
    Rob Teixeira Guest

    Re: Companies Using .NET



    Alright Dr. Bill, why don't explain to us what that linkage is and, more
    importantly, how the alleged linkages will negatively affect developers.
    Facts and cites would be appreciated.

    -Rob

    "W.E. (Bill) Goodrich, PhD" <bgoodric@earthlink.net> wrote:
    >In article <3bf56835$1@147.208.176.211>,
    >
    >Interesting. Bill Gates, Jim Allchin, Eric Rudder, and Tom Button say
    >that there are such linkages. As does the recently announced change to
    >the M$ corporate org chart. Patrick Troughton says there are not,
    >and Rob Teixeira and Jay Glynn say that the only linkage is marketing
    >and hype. Are we to believe that Patrick, Rob, and Jay know more about
    >the issue than the Micro$oft chain of command for those products?



  15. #165
    Patrick Troughton Guest

    Re: Companies Using .NET


    No, I think you're just being deliberately obtuse. Are you honestly saying
    you don't understand the difference an application and a plaform, or the
    difference between between technology and marketing?

    /Pat

    "W.E. (Bill) Goodrich, PhD" <bgoodric@earthlink.net> wrote:
    >In article <3bf56835$1@147.208.176.211>,
    >"Patrick Troughton" <Patrick@Troughton.com> writes:
    >
    >> "james" <jamesw2@mesh.net> wrote:
    >> >Patrick, I have been mostly lurking on this newsgroup and reading
    >> >Mike's posts and taking the majority of them with a grain of salt.
    >> >But, and as much as I hate to even begin to agree with him, .NET ,
    >> >Passport, My Services, etc. are all pretty well linked together .

    >
    >> No, there is no link whatsoever.

    >
    >Interesting. Bill Gates, Jim Allchin, Eric Rudder, and Tom Button say
    >that there are such linkages. As does the recently announced change to
    >the M$ corporate org chart. Patrick Troughton says there are not,
    >and Rob Teixeira and Jay Glynn say that the only linkage is marketing
    >and hype. Are we to believe that Patrick, Rob, and Jay know more about
    >the issue than the Micro$oft chain of command for those products?



Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
HTML5 Development Center
 
 
FAQ
Latest Articles
Java
.NET
XML
Database
Enterprise
Questions? Contact us.
C++
Web Development
Wireless
Latest Tips
Open Source


   Development Centers

   -- Android Development Center
   -- Cloud Development Project Center
   -- HTML5 Development Center
   -- Windows Mobile Development Center