I found an interesting comment by someone named Dave in response to Shelley Powers's post Always in Alt. Dave wrote

Microsoft made the bed they are now laying in.

(1) As Shelley put so well, they abandoned an exceptionally large group of developers when they moved to .NET - I should know, I was one of them. (Don’t worry for me… I’ve moved onto greener, less proprietary pastures. Screw me once MS, shame on you. Screw me twice, shame on me.)

(2) Worse yet, they are looking to do it again with the latest “Live” demo and supposedly-leaked emails about changing directions. This is one part of what MS has shown us alot of since 2000… they can’t stay in a single direction!

(3) But the larger part of their problems is this insistent craving they have to make bold announcements of products that, well, NEVER see the light of day in a timely manner. Let’s compare….

This year alone Apple announced three new iPods models, one brand-new Mac model, one new software suite, an upgrade to their other suite, delivered a major upgrade to their OS - two months ahead of time.

Microsoft? Well, after underwhelming the media with some pre-beta Longhorn bits (about 2 years late I might add) and holding their PDC which finally showed us developers something of which _might_ be released in another 12 months, they finally delivered - about 18 months late - upgrades to MSSQL and VS.NET. Office got a decent upgrade but users have little compelling reason to spend money on it. There’s XBox of course. And then they delivered the worst demo anybody has ever seen about a change in directions.

Where does this leave us developers? Very unhappy. Of course, as Scoble would put it - “real soon now” that will change. Of course, he said that 2 years ago too. In the meantime, I have to make a living. Can I do it using Microsoft Live products? Um, “real soon now”. How about using the - actually, quite excellent - new features of ASP.NET 2.0? Well, since they were promised back in 2004….

LOL. I guess I would have needed to tell my kids _12 months ago_ that I’d put food on the table “real soon now” if I depended on such PR talk.

PR talk…. now THAT is what is very wrong with Microsoft nowadays.

There are a couple of themes here that should be addressed. The first is that Microsoft abandoned developers with its .NET strategy. In the move to managed code, I believe Microsoft could have done a better job of satisfying large bodies of its developer constituents such as VB6 users. The classic VB petition is probably the most visible manifestation of this feeling of abandonment by our customers. As Soma pointed out in the discussion around his post "Rumors of my (VB6) demise...", the leap the incompatibility between VB6 and Visual Basic.NET was not a decision taken lightly by the Microsoft Developer Division but was deemed necessary to advance the platform.

The next point that Dave brings up is that the latest "Live" announcements are a radical change of direction that will cause disruption among our developer customers. I think this isn't right on two counts. First of all, the announcements aren't that radical a shift. A number of industry watchers such as Mary Jo Foley and Joe Wilcox have rightfully focused on this being more of a "sharpening of focus" for Microsoft than a radical new strategy. A significant number of the "Live" offerings are existing offerings that have been given new purpose and clearer goals. As time progresses, the Windows Live platform will unfold. This platform isn't a new set of developer tools and runtimes that will obsolete the .NET framework. That would suck. Instead these are APIs built around the Windows Live offerings and more that will give developers more opportunities to build interesting applications that delight users. A taste of this platform is at http://msdn.microsoft.com/msn and we will be announcing more details in the coming months. 

Dave's final point is that Microsoft is fond of announcing stuff years before it is ready. That is true and as a Microsoft employee I hate it a lot. I was talking to Brian Arbogast about this on Monday, and he agreed that we should endeavor to only announce things that people can use right away or can shortly thereafter. This is the philosophy around http://ideas.live.com.  

There definitely is a lot of confusion out there about Microsoft's "Live" strategy and exactly what the "supposedly-leaked memos" mean. Now that Ray Ozzie has started back blogging, I assume he'll be taking a personal role in clarifying what his "Live" strategy means to Microsoft, its partners and its customers. I've subscribed to his blog. Have you?


 

Thursday, 17 November 2005 14:33:23 (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
Well, Dare, I'm subscribed to Ray's blog and your blog too. I think yours is better :-)

I think Dave's comments reflect a wide dissatisfaction. Those that can't deal with it may seek solace in other computer systems and development environments. They should understand that life is like that and quit being so bitter. Just be happy where you are, you know?

The dissatisfaction comes from complexity in many cases. All the major computer technical areas change radically or shrink over time. If you lock into VB6, there is less work as time goes on. But more than VB4 (no pun intended!). I understand the market for DEC and SGI programmers is shrinking radically.

Complaining about .NET now, though, only shows that you are about 3 years out of touch, or that after 3 years of study you can't deal with its complexity. The release of .NET 2.0 has raised that bar significantly.

I point to the complexity because that factor drives confusion. And if somebody wants to complain about the Live strategy while whining about Microsoft abandoning developers with .NET, then maybe they are truly confused. The next thing you know, we'll be hearing how Bill Gates personally drove up the price of gas.
Thursday, 17 November 2005 14:57:53 (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
I'm one of those VB6 developers who wandered away at the time of the big .NET transition. From my perspective, I don't think MS's mistake there was in breaking compatibility -- it was in the lack of a clear path forward for VB6 developers at the time.

When the .NET wave hit, it came with not one, but two potential paths VB developers could take. One was to abandon VB altogether and move to C# -- and all the evidence was that this was MS would really have preferred us to do.

But there was also another product called "Visual Basic.NET", with different syntax than C# -- and, confusingly, than classic VB.

If you were a VB developer before, you would think the obvious next step would be to VB.NET. However, everything I heard from MS seemed to indicate that C# was the .NET golden boy; VB.NET seemed more like a bastard child, unwanted and unloved.

So I could move to C#. But if we're all supposed to move to C#, what's the point of VB.NET? Why have it in there at all, especially when it's as big a leap from VB6 to VB.NET as it is from VB6 to C#?

I decided that if I was going to have to train up all over again, I may as well do it in the OSS world and at least I'd be off the upgrade treadmill. I imagine there are others who did the same.

If VB had to die, MS would have been better off had it decisively killed the product with the release of .NET and worked aggressively to migrate developers to C#. Keeping it on life support only confused people and muddied the waters.
Friday, 18 November 2005 00:35:23 (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
"I decided that if I was going to have to train up all over again, I may as well do it in the OSS world and at least I'd be off the upgrade treadmill. I imagine there are others who did the same."

If you're working in software development because you hate to learn new things and don't want to ever upgrade your skills, I strongly recommend looking for a COBOL job.
Friday, 18 November 2005 04:17:59 (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
Unfortunately MS seem to be damned if they dont release information freely, and damned if they do.

Years ago people were complaining that MS were a 'closed' shop and didnt release enough information about their upcoming products soon enough. Now that MS are releasing visionary information about where their products and platforms are going, people are still complaining.

At the end of the day it is very difficult to make everyone happy, and as we all know this is an impossible task anyhow. I would suggest that MS continues to give developers as much information as possible about their upcoming offerings as possible.
Kristoffer Sheather
Saturday, 19 November 2005 15:33:39 (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
Just to add another product to the list - Microsoft CRM 3.0. It's amazing to see that after pushing back the release date, etc., that they're now heralding it as being ahead of the (late) anticipated release, while causing all sorts of headaches for their ISV and VAR partners who have been trying to prep for the moving-target date that the RTM/QA/actual bits will be released...
Monday, 21 November 2005 01:26:56 (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
"If you're working in software development because you hate to learn new things and don't want to ever upgrade your skills, I strongly recommend looking for a COBOL job."

Um, you missed the point. Notice that I ended up choosing a path that required _more_ learning up front -- switching over to OSS. I don't mind learning. What I _do_ mind is getting yanked around, and MS yanked us all around a good bit by (1) telling us our current platform was dead, and then (2) not giving us a clear idea of what "the next thing" was going to be.

Nobody wants to go learn a bunch of skills that are going to be obsoleted again in 2 years by another corporate fiat. That's what MS missed then.
Comments are closed.