DevX does seem one sideded

[Rob Abbe]

It may be no fault of their own though since they clearly have a vast number
of Microsoft people on hand and dare I say it 0 Java people?

Where are the Java section leaders now? There was a guy by the name of Brad,
but he dropped of the planet. Phil makes his presence known here as a section
leader he seems to love and favor .Net. Where is the Java representation?

To their credit, the Devx people do provide some nice Java articles but they
have a long way to go. Maybe DevX should consider becoming Microsoft exclusive,
since this is what they know best?

Some of what I feel is missing, is that Java is much broader than just Sun
and the JDK. There are many companies out there that provide Java and J2EE
offerings. I would like to see features on some of these tools as well.
Dealing with Web Logic issues, using non Sun JVMs, Great Java IDEs and so
forth.

The surface Java world has not really even been scratched by DevX. Java
coverage has been too vanilla in terms of the JDK and basic J2EE specs.

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.

Rob Abbe

"mxc" <mxc@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>I agree. My perception is that DevX is not so hot on technologies other
than
>MS's. This is a perception of mine which is created by experience of using
>the site. For example it used to take ages for there to be updates to the
>java section but there was always new stuff on the MS side of things.
>
>Of course you can produce statistics to prove me wrong but all I am saying
>that this is a perception I have and I think it is shared by many others.
>
>
>"Randy" <blah@blah.com> wrote:
>>
>>Does anyone else think that DevX and Fawcette clearly favor Microsoft technologies
>>in favor of alternatives?
>>
>>The latest poll asked "As a Java developer, which feature of the .NET IDE
>>do you most covet?" DevX should really look at some of the MANY IDEs available
>>to Java developers and see that most of the features of VS.Net are already
>>available.
>>
>>I also remember getting some VS.Net beta disks with my Java Pro subscription.
>>Back then I think DevX was still a part of Fawcette were. No more Java
Pro
>>for me!
>>
>>DevX should just change it's tune and become a site for M$ only technology
>>since that is what pays their bills.
>>
>

[Phil Weber]

> Phil makes his presence known here as a section
> leader; he seems to love and favor .NET.

Rob: Just to clarify: I do favor .NET, because it's what I know. I've been a
BASIC programmer since the late 1970s; MS has enhanced BASIC over the years,
allowing me to do my job without having to abandon my favorite language
(I've also used C, assembler and JavaScript, when necessary, but deep down
I'll always be a VB guy).

I have nothing against Java (now that I've learned .NET, I expect I'll find
it much easier to learn Java, when I finally get around to it), I've just
not had occasion to use it yet.

That said, I am neither a Section Leader nor an employee of DevX (I have
been both, but not for a couple of years now), so you should not hold my
personal preferences against DevX.
--
Phil Weber

[Lori Piquet]

Rob,

I appreciate this feedback. Here's my thoughts:

Acquiring an audience is a long-term endeavor, and we've made headway. A
couple of years ago DevX wasn't on even on the map as a Java developer site
and though we still have a long way to go we're gratified to find our Java
audience grow, even if it's not as quickly as we'd like. The key here, as I
see it, is perseverance. To throw in the towel simply because we haven't
reached the level of acceptance in the Java community that other sites enjoy
would be defeatist.

Not to quibble but I think I'm obliged to say here that it's not quite
correct that we have 0 Java people. Brad, unfortunately, had to give up his
post (after only a month <sigh>) owing to the fact that he found himself
overcommitted. (I should point out here that at the time that he resigned he
actually suggested that I should contact you personally to see if you would
be interested in taking over. A task which I've neglected so this is
actually a serendipitous exchange.) We have many experienced authors who
contribute their expertise to editorial planning, though admittedly, few of
them participate in the groups. Maybe that's something I can work on. But
the idea here is that I don't think it's quite right to judge our commitment
to Java based solely on the number of posts in the Java groups. I will agree
that it's an indicator of an imbalance in the popularity of the groups
themselves, but that doesn't mean that our Java content is not read or that
we don't give the Java platform care and attention or that we don't care
about acquiring a larger Java audience.

IMO, part of the problem for us in reaching more Java developers is that
some Java developers prefer a site that is homogeneous in approach. They
like the idea of going to a site where everything and everybody is working
in Java. Now that is admittedly a gross generalization, but if it's even a
little bit true, we just have to try that much harder to produce content
that Java developers want and need.

And that, really, is where people like you come in. You've given me some
things to think about in your note below. If you'd be interested in a
private dialog with me, maybe we can work up some story ideas that we (DevX)
can execute on over time. If you're interested in participating in the
solution (by contributing content), even better. Probably the one thing we
really need, as it regards Java, are readers who'll tell us when we're
hitting the mark and when we aren't.

Lori Piquet
Editor-in-chief
DevX


"Rob Abbe" <rabbe@mn.rr.com> wrote in message
news:3e1c9f79$1@tnews.web.devx.com...
>
> It may be no fault of their own though since they clearly have a vast
number
> of Microsoft people on hand and dare I say it 0 Java people?
>
> Where are the Java section leaders now? There was a guy by the name of
Brad,
> but he dropped of the planet. Phil makes his presence known here as a
section
> leader he seems to love and favor .Net. Where is the Java representation?
>
> To their credit, the Devx people do provide some nice Java articles but
they
> have a long way to go. Maybe DevX should consider becoming Microsoft
exclusive,
> since this is what they know best?
>
> Some of what I feel is missing, is that Java is much broader than just Sun
> and the JDK. There are many companies out there that provide Java and
J2EE
> offerings. I would like to see features on some of these tools as well.
> Dealing with Web Logic issues, using non Sun JVMs, Great Java IDEs and so
> forth.
>
> The surface Java world has not really even been scratched by DevX. Java
> coverage has been too vanilla in terms of the JDK and basic J2EE specs.
>
> 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.
>
> Rob Abbe
>
> "mxc" <mxc@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >I agree. My perception is that DevX is not so hot on technologies other
> than
> >MS's. This is a perception of mine which is created by experience of
using
> >the site. For example it used to take ages for there to be updates to the
> >java section but there was always new stuff on the MS side of things.
> >
> >Of course you can produce statistics to prove me wrong but all I am
saying
> >that this is a perception I have and I think it is shared by many others.
> >
> >
> >"Randy" <blah@blah.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>Does anyone else think that DevX and Fawcette clearly favor Microsoft
technologies
> >>in favor of alternatives?
> >>
> >>The latest poll asked "As a Java developer, which feature of the .NET
IDE
> >>do you most covet?" DevX should really look at some of the MANY IDEs
available
> >>to Java developers and see that most of the features of VS.Net are
already
> >>available.
> >>
> >>I also remember getting some VS.Net beta disks with my Java Pro
subscription.
> >>Back then I think DevX was still a part of Fawcette were. No more Java
> Pro
> >>for me!
> >>
> >>DevX should just change it's tune and become a site for M$ only
technology
> >>since that is what pays their bills.
> >>
> >
>

[Rob Abbe]

Phil,

I wasn't trying to single you out.

Rob

"Phil Weber" <pweber@nospam.fawcette.com> wrote:
>Rob: Just to clarify: I do favor .NET, because it's what I know. I've been
a
>BASIC programmer since the late 1970s; MS has enhanced BASIC over the years,
>allowing me to do my job without having to abandon my favorite language
>(I've also used C, assembler and JavaScript, when necessary, but deep down
>I'll always be a VB guy).
>
>I have nothing against Java (now that I've learned .NET, I expect I'll find
>it much easier to learn Java, when I finally get around to it), I've just
>not had occasion to use it yet.
>
>That said, I am neither a Section Leader nor an employee of DevX (I have
>been both, but not for a couple of years now), so you should not hold my
>personal preferences against DevX.
>--
>Phil Weber
>
>

[Rob Abbe]

Lori,

I think part of what made DevX so popular with the Microsoft crowd was the
runaway success of VBPJ. I still see a lot of the same old names in the
VB news groups. It is clear that VBPJ helped nurture a sense of community
that is noticeably absent on the DevX news groups for the Java people. It
will no doubt take much longer to acquire the same base that you enjoy with
your Microsoft following.

For the VB people that need to learn or transition to Java for any reason,
DevX is probably (and should be) one of the first places they will turn to
for information and assistance. There is some good content available, but
the newsgroup assistance is not there at all.

Even though Brad was only on for a short time, he made a noticeable difference
and is missed. I understand where he is coming from since I'm stretched
pretty thin these days myself and therefore would probably be a poor choice
to replace him. I thank him for his praise though. I will however be more
than willing to make any practical contribution that I can to further the
Java cause.

I didn't mean to say that the lack of activity on the news groups was an
indicator of readership of your articles. I don't think that can be determined
from newsgroup activity alone.

I'm more than willing to help and provide feedback. Feel free to contact
me via email.

Thanks for taking the time to reply,

Rob Abbe

[Karl E. Peterson]

Hi Rob --

> I think part of what made DevX so popular with the Microsoft crowd
> was the runaway success of VBPJ.

Without question, VBPJ was _the_ reason DevX became popular. In fact, it was _the_
reason DevX came into being. Of course, that's history, as both the journal and the
language it covered are now dead.

DevX probably has no hope other than to diversify, as Microsoft saw to it that the
old VB community was shattered beyond all repair. I think they understand that, but
it is hard escaping one's roots.

Later... Karl
--
[Microsoft Basic: 1976-2001, RIP]

[Rob Abbe]

Karl,

Yeah, the whole .Net fiasco has been very damaging to the VB community.
It could have been handled much better. I personally had been a critic of
Java and the entire JIT and bytecode way of life until I got my first look
at the CLR, C#, VB.Net and discovered I had no choice but to accept JIT compiled
languages as the future of software development... at least for now.

I'm not sure if you'll appreciate this or not, but I used the information
on your site to motivate change within our organization. I gave your list
of differences between VB and VB.Net to my boss on flight from San Francisco
to Minneapolis. We discussed it for several hours and determined .Net was
not the direction we were headed in the future.

Rob

"Karl E. Peterson" <karl@mvps.org> wrote:
>
>Without question, VBPJ was _the_ reason DevX became popular. In fact, it
was _the_
>reason DevX came into being. Of course, that's history, as both the journal
and the
>language it covered are now dead.
>
>DevX probably has no hope other than to diversify, as Microsoft saw to it
that the
>old VB community was shattered beyond all repair. I think they understand
that, but
>it is hard escaping one's roots.
>
>Later... Karl
>--
>[Microsoft Basic: 1976-2001, RIP]
>
>

[Karl E. Peterson]

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.

I was talking with another (former) section leader from the old VB groups just the
other day, and our joint conclusion was: The fun is gone. VBPJ/BasicPro used to
target *enthusiasts* -- folks who coded for fun, whether they were paid or not. Now,
they target folks who *have* to code. Same deal with Microsoft. The fun is gone.

> I personally had
> been a critic of Java and the entire JIT and bytecode way of life
> until I got my first look at the CLR, C#, VB.Net and discovered I had
> no choice but to accept JIT compiled languages as the future of
> software development... at least for now.

Think there's a chance you didn't consider another viable option? Namely, using what
works now? I think Microsoft achieved a state of "good enough" a few years ago.

> I'm not sure if you'll appreciate this or not, but I used the
> information on your site to motivate change within our organization.
> I gave your list of differences between VB and VB.Net to my boss on
> flight from San Francisco to Minneapolis. We discussed it for
> several hours and determined .Net was not the direction we were
> headed in the future.

I actually appreciate that quite a bit, thanks! That page bought me no end of grief
from you-know-who. But I always thought it highlighted just how far the Trust had
been broken. They would *never* consider shipping a version of Word or Excel that
couldn't read the last version's data. What they did to VB folks was simply
appalling. It's one thing to treat your competitors like that, but to turn that sort
of violence on your own customers is beyond words.

Jeez, sorry 'bout all that. Guess you hit an old sore spot. <g>

Thanks... Karl
--
[Microsoft Basic: 1976-2001, RIP]

[Rob Abbe]

Karl,

>Think there's a chance you didn't consider another viable option? >Namely,
using what
>works now? I think Microsoft achieved a state of "good enough" a few >years
ago.

VB6 is still used here and will be for some time, just not for new projects.
There were many factors that played into the use of Java. Moving forward,
we thought it would be difficult to attract and retain programming talent
if we didn't make some sort of move. Plus the VB6 UI is really starting
to show it's age, it's also becoming difficult to find new ActiveX controls
and we expect support to drop off for what we do use now. Like I said many
reasons, it was not a knee jerk reaction out of bitterness even though it
may sound that way.

Rob

[Eddie Burdak]

Karl,

Karl E. Peterson wrote:
<snip>

: They would
:: *never* consider shipping a version of Word or Excel that couldn't
:: read the last version's data.

But isn't that precisely what happened with the first release of Word
97 (pre Sp1). Didn't MS come out with a bunch of nonsese to justify it
then speedily backtracked and issued SP1 to correct that deliberate
oversight. I like to think they learn't there lessons on that one. I'm
gobsmacked my Excel 4 macros are still running happily in Excel 2000!

Now if only the VB team learnt from the office team.

Ho hum....

Eddie

[Larry Serflaten]

"Karl E. Peterson" <karl@mvps.org> wrote
>
> I was talking with another (former) section leader from the old VB groups just the
> other day, and our joint conclusion was: The fun is gone. VBPJ/BasicPro used to
> target *enthusiasts* -- folks who coded for fun, whether they were paid or not. Now,
> they target folks who *have* to code. Same deal with Microsoft. The fun is gone.

Your quite right, and I don't get it either. The API used to animate that player and
draw its map are the same API's used to animate or draw a usercontrol. Or, the
mechanism for using RS232 to talk to one's own ham radio, or wireless robot, is
the same mechanism in the methods that use RS232 to interface with production
machines. But, in one instance, ideas abound, yet in the other, its the old mundane
tedium.

If mom wants her kids to eat spinach, should she plop a serving on their dinner
plate and demand they eat it, or should she make a great tasting spinach dip and
throw a hamburger party with plenty of chips?

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)....

LFS

[Robert Scoble]

> 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.

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.

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.

3) Fawcette's economic troubles (and business choices, ala splitting off
DevX). It was easy to be an excited, motivated employee at FTP when things
were going up, up, up. That translated into an engaged conversation with the
industry. Right now...

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.

5) The death of the farm system. During the 1990s, there was a good "farm
system" of small companies. Today that system is totally dead due to the
excesses of the VCs (and because Microsoft hasn't been looking outside
itself to grow and has been investing internally for growth). Remember where
Hotmail, PowerPoint, FrontPage, WebTV, etc, came from? That's right, small
companies). Right now VCs are clueless as to what to invest in and Microsoft
isn't taking up the slack. What's the most innovative thing that Microsoft
announced at CES? Come on, a watch? <sigh>

6) The growth of open source. Come on, if you're a geek, which do you
prefer? A black box you can't see inside? Or a system where you can look at
all the code and how it works? Oh, and you get it for free? Tinkerers don't
have a lot of money. They prefer things that they can get for very little
money. I grew up in Silicon Valley. I watched as kids literally built kit
computers with components that big companies threw away. (And, of course, we
stole all of our software -- two of the kids in my high-school computer club
went onto work at Microsoft, funny enough). It's the kids who invent the
future. Not the old folks (I'm already an old folk, by the way).

7) The price of Microsoft stuff. Yeah, it's remained fairly constant, but as
a percentage of a PC purchase, their prices are out of control. Where 10
years ago VB probably cost 5% of a decent system, today it's closer to 30%.

8) Alternatives. Hey, 10 years ago we didn't have PocketPCs. We didn't have
wireless. We didn't have Tivo. We didn't have PS/2. We didn't have DVDs with
NetFlix. We didn't have cell phones. We didn't have Web sites. We didn't
have digital cameras and camcorders. There's a lot more that's interesting
to a geek today than there was back then.

9) Community feeding. Microsoft, three years ago, nearly killed its MVP
program. That's turned around, but the group still hasn't gotten back to its
evangelistic feel that it used to have in the mid 90s.

10) The death of Microsoft's competitors. It was more fun when we wondered
what Borland would do or what Novell wold do. Some of that fun is coming
back now that we're watching Apple do some interesting things, but it really
isn't enough. It's not a fair fight anymore and people have picked up on
that. Some have even left the industry.

I'm sure that there are other factors as well.

I think the main thing is that Visual Studio just doesn't have the lead on
the rest of the market that it once did. When VB 3.0 came out, there just
wasn't anything like it. Now, there are a lot of alternatives, many of which
are cheaper and more transparent and offer the opportunity for more future
growth. Tell me, if you were a hot developer straight out of college and you
had an idea for something that'd change the world (say, Napster or ICQ)
would you use Visual Studio? I don't think so.

Not to mention: The Visual Studio group started treating us like IBM used to
treat Microsoft. And they are amazed that people still don't understand what
..NET is? Well, duh. If you want people to understand something they don't
understand, you invite them over for a conversation. So far I'm still
waiting for the conversation to start.

Robert Scoble

###

[Phil Weber]

> I don't know a single person who loves Microsoft...
> Not a single one.

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. ;-)
--
Phil Weber

[Phil Weber]

> 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

[Jonathan West]

"Phil Weber" <pweber@nospam.fawcette.com> wrote in message
news:3e1f5bba$1@tnews.web.devx.com...
> > 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."

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.

--
Regards
Jonathan West