Sunday, August 31, 2008 8:02 AM
So tell me what the following have in common:
WebTV
TabletPCs
WinFS
Passport
.NET
Windows Live Spaces
SidewinderFreestylePro
WinG
Sidewalk
OS/2
Give up? Well, according to Jeremy Kaplan and Sascha Segan of PC Magazine, these are all 10 Great Microsoft Technologies That Failed. There’s nothing really scientific about this list, especially considering that its a jumbled collection that spans 1980’s operating systems, a gaming controller, and a very well established development platform.
In fact, I would have just laughed this list off if it wasn’t for the inclusion of .NET and the un-educated statements made about it:
.NET (2002)
Runtime compiled, and featuring Net-connected apps back when people were laughing at the idea? You go, Microsoft! Go people did…to Java. Microsoft keeps improving the .NET framework, and people do build apps based on it, but it has nowhere near the scope that MS had envisioned back in 2002.
Nowhere near the scope? Where have these guys been the last 7 years?! .NET has become *the* Microsoft development platform, touching all product areas in the Microsoft space! Game development using the XNA tools and framework, integration with all major Microsoft platforms (Sharepoint [built using .NET btw], BizTalk, Microsoft Office, etc.), driving new technologies like Silverlight and WPF…
The only statement in that paragraph they published that had any ring of truth to it was that “people do build apps based on it…”. A quick search of ASP.NET case studies brings up some pretty big names like USAToday.com, Nasdaq, US Air Force, Xerox, L’oreal, and others. Recent Tech Ed conferences produced approx 15000 developers and IT pros who attended talks and discussions that involved .NET at some level. .NET user groups exist throughout the world (check out the International .NET Association for how to find a user group near you). .NET jobs are still in high demand, both in North America and abroad. There’s obviously still people “building apps” for .NET.
The inclusion of .NET in this list is BS, and IMO its an example of irresponsible journalism. Spouting your opinion about something is one thing…having no data, examples, or …anything!…to back up your statements is nothing but spouting off at the ass.
What’s worse is that PCMag is recognized, at some level, as a quality, reliable publication. When an executive editor, which Jeremy Kaplan apparently is, puts his name to something like this it brings down the authenticity, objectivity, and reliability of information published in print and online of PCMagazine.
Since Jeremy and Sascha both come from more hardware and peripheral type backgrounds, maybe they should stick to making comments about those things that they are experienced and knowledgeable about and leave any opinions on development products to those qualified to make them.
D