Fog Creek Software
Discussion Board




MSDN editorial

I just read the September 2004 editorial in MSDN magazine about Joel's camp wars article. It's interesting that they are sort of claiming that this is no war but don't directly address Joel's points. In fact they bring up the .NET lack of serial port support by saying that someone has made a wrapper class for serial support years ago, oblivious to the fact that after 2 years it's still not part of .NET. They also don't mention the VB6 to VB.NET or ASP to ASP.NET issues of incompatibility.

Bill Nalen
Monday, August 23, 2004

He doesn't address Joel's points because it's not a rebuttal against them.  It's an article that points out that the camps are not mutually exclusive camps, but are symbiotic.

Why not address VB->VB.NET incompatibility?  Because from day 1 they told us this is a very different language with some syntactic throwbacks to old VB.  It's not VB7, there's no new VB runtime dlls.

Somebody
Monday, August 23, 2004

I don't think they directly refute Joel's points quite simply because Joel's article merely provided them another opportunity to address an issue that has been affecting MSDN Magazine for quite a while now - they are a very future facing magazine, which satisfies a lot of people, yet a lot of readers want more practical "now" based information. They've addressed this several times in editorials over the past couple of years (Joel most certainly isn't the first to point this out).

Ultimately I think MSDN Magazine might have conflicting goals - on the one hand most readers would like to make the most of the platform they have today and would love articles on effectively using MSMQ, or really, truly understanding the security model of ASP.NET, yet on the other hand there is the primary sponsor, Microsoft, underwriting most of the content (I question whether MSDN is self-supporting based upon subscriber fees, though I could be wrong) that wants the developer community jazzed about the upcoming version of Yukon or Whidbey or Avalon or WinFS. This sort of thing really doesn't work for the corporate developer community that is often working on 4 year old technology with each new release going throgh arduous year long review processes.

Dennis Forbes
Monday, August 23, 2004

"This sort of thing really doesn't work for the corporate developer community that is often working on 4 year old technology with each new release going throgh arduous year long review processes."

Exactly.  We are just now on SQL 2000 on Win 2000.  I don't give a rat's behind about Long_over_due_Horn or Yukon, Whidbey or so much other test marketing, fingering the wind, consensus building coming out of Redmond.  Unless I am an ISV trying to build to a new platform, what do I care?  I want info on how to use the tools that are currently here.

Mike
Monday, August 23, 2004

Umm...'finger in the wind' ?

Edward
Monday, August 23, 2004

I have most MSJ (ahem) issues going back to about 1993.

anyone beat that?
Tuesday, August 24, 2004

yes, MSDN magazine keeps a online back issue archive of four years.
2000 issue have a lot of usefull stuff about .net basics.
Now next year, this archive will drop off, so you better keep your printed issues.

Well, or keep the older MSDN cds.

Michael Moser
Wednesday, August 25, 2004

*  Recent Topics

*  Fog Creek Home