Microsoft .Net software's hidden cost

Companies planning on moving their old programs to Microsoft's new .Net software plan had better prepare for sticker shock: Making the conversion could cost roughly half of the original development cost, Gartner says.

That may come as a blow to penny-pinching information systems departments in big companies, even those very familiar with Windows programming.

Typically, moving to a new software release isn't so costly. But, warns Gartner's Mark Driver, .Net isn't just a new release of Windows.

"People mistakenly assume the cost of upgrading will somehow be the same as going from one version of a well-established product to another. That's definitely not the case (with .Net)," said Driver, who devised the cost model.

Ari Bixhorn, Microsoft's product manager for Visual Basic.Net, disputed Gartner's conclusions. He said most conversions to .Net are about 95 percent error-free, meaning they can be completed at a cost much lower than what Gartner estimates.

Gartner, however, considered factors other than code conversions in its analysis, such as training and lost productivity. Bixhorn said he didn't see either training or productivity problems as much of a concern.

Microsoft's .Net plan includes new releases of the company's Windows operating system and other server software, along with development tools and infrastructure to make programs more Internet-aware. One new technology supported by .Net is Web services, which promise to make linking internal computer systems, and systems residing in multiple companies, far easier than current methods.

What's unclear is whether the additional cost of moving to .Net will slow Web services releases. Several technology buyers told News.com this week that they are waiting for additional standards and better compatibility before they commit to large-scale projects.

The most prominent piece of .Net released so far is Visual Studio.Net, a new version of Microsoft's development tool package, which debuted in February.

Visual Studio.Net includes new versions of familiar tools such as Visual Basic and Visual C++. But the tool bundle is radically different than predecessors. It includes a new development language called Visual C# (pronounced "see sharp"), and introduces the .Net Framework and Common Language Runtime, which are technologies for managing and running programs.

The new development tool package also ushers in ASP.Net, a specialized type of software called a class library, replacing an older technology called Active Server Pages (ASP) for creating Web applications that support new Web services technology.

Still, long term, Driver predicted that making the switch to .Net for building new programs would help lift productivity and create more efficiency within companies.

"Over the course of the lifetime of an application, .Net might give you 20 percent cost advantage or more over using the older technologies," he said. "You will be able to recover that migration cost over the course of three to five years."

Companies making the switch could do so all at once, but most will likely make the change over a longer period of time. Either way, the cost of migration stays the same.

"It's an issue of paying the 60 percent up front or over the course of three years," Driver said.

The largest cost is code conversion. Because it is difficult to calculate, the 60 percent estimate in some cases could be too low.

The cutting edge can hurt
Gartner based its migration cost estimates on Visual Basic.Net and not on its cutting-edge, Java-like Visual C# programming language. One reason: Cost. A forthcoming study will say the migration cost associated with C# would be even higher than the standard Visual Studio .Net tools, Driver said.

"Some clients have asked about going directly to C#," Driver said. "For the vast majority, going from Visual Basic to Visual Basic.Net may be painful, but it's going to be the least painful of the strategies."

C# is seen as a crucial programming language for advancing .Net. Use of the language doubled in six months, according to a March study by Evans Data.

Without a doubt, companies switching to the new tools and migrating software applications over the long haul will find the switch over the easiest, but even they face difficulties in planning. Driver used the example of a developer running the older version of Visual Studio and Visual Studio .Net over a protracted period.

"That becomes untenable at some point," he said. "You've got to make the switch. So even if you go with a hybrid model, you've got to remember that you're spreading your resources thin over two different platforms."

There are other concerns about making the switch to .Net. At the top of the list is security, Driver said. Following a January memo from Chairman Bill Gates ( news - web sites), Microsoft cranked up emphasis on security. But problems have still surfaced in recent months.

"Some people are hesitant to put Internet Information Server (behind a public Web site) because of security issues. Well, .Net doesn't really address those problems," Driver said. "IIS is still just as vulnerable with .Net running behind it as the older ASP (Active Server Pages) code running behind it."

IBM and Sun also are pushing hard into Web services, advancing their own technology strategies and tools.

Security will be an important part of that emerging market. Market researcher ZapLink said on Thursday that the Extensible Markup Language ( XML) and Web Services security market would top $4.4 billion in 2006.

Those lumps by no means keep it from being ready for primetime, which is proven by the number of organizations that are using it in primetime right now, it just means they need to factor in some slightly higher development costs getting it to primetime because they're going to have to navigate through the lumps.

But the point that has come out is that there is no evidence it is being used for prime-time, yet. Just MS press releases that don't give details. Every time you hear a detail, like above, it's negative.

'Prime-time' would mean deployed, mission-critical implementations.

And we can't find one single example of that, no matter how many folks we ask. The only developer who chimed in, Mr. Jeeves, made an exaggerated claim that turned out to be untrue.

That's what I'm asking for, specifically, here. Another fellow specifically posted a thread with that title. I've combed the net and trade publications. There are no details of any .NET success.

P.S. -- MS-only folks don't like me because I use Java, and talk about Java. This seems to "insult" them, as you've said.

And I can live with that.

Believe it or not, I have *no* problems discussing with anyone else. Look around at the other threads I participate in. We have polite, adult conversations. I criticize Oracle, Sun, Apple, and many others. We discuss it, and have no problems.

It's only the MS-only folks who react this way.

Consider. Above, I said,

The American software industry -- from Oracle to MS to Sun -- has in the past sold a bunch of software that was a pretty poor-quality product, as every other industry measures quality.

I say that kind of thing all the time. In one thread, I went on and on about how I feel that Oracle is the absolute worst quality software out there -- in one case, to make an Oracle installation y2k compliant, we had to apply almost a hundred patches.

Now oddly enough, no Oracle or Sun people jumped on my case -- just MS folks.

I talk about how I don't like Apple's, and think they're overpriced. Mac fans don't jump on my case. I talk about how I don't think Linux is ready for the desktop. Linux fans don't jump on my case.

And on, and on.

It's the MS-only folks who seem incapable of dealing with the slightest criticism.

Wonder why?

No, there isn't any evidence that you're willing to believe. Because you don't believe anything good about MS. I see a list of dozens of places using it and I dont write them off as "MS partners being paid to lie". I've worked for MS partners they didn't pay us for anything, your "payment" for being an MS partner is you get the goods first, we were working with Exchange for almost a year before the first beta came out. That's what you get for being a partner, the ability to ship your add-on or whatever at the exact same time as the MS product you're working with because you developed in parallel. This really sucked when they'd rewrite MAPI from the ground up on us, that's why we called it the bleeding edge. You even accused Jeeves of being paid to say he used .Net, until you decided he lied in his time frame.

Would you for once in your life actually listen to someone. I'm an MS only person. You insult me. Not because you use Java, how much I care what language you use and 2 bucks will buy a cup of coffee (hey I just realized that's a pun in this case). You insult me because you say stupid things and make rediculous blanket statements that have no grounding in fact, and you insult me by creative misquoting, word twisting, and outright ignoring things that violate your preconceptions. It's insulting that you pretend you want information but you turn all information away and then act hurt when everybody gets sick of your crap. It's insulting that you tell people what they think, shave time off their estimates and just generally wander through these threads like you're the latest Stroustrop and we should all kiss your butt.

Hah, then you go so far as to lie. I've been on enough Mac threads to know that those guys let NO hit on their baby go unpunished. You can't even slam System 7 (IMHO the single worst GUI OS ever, and the one that made me forever a Macbasher, I used to defend them but I'll never forgive Apple for releasing 7 and making me a liar) without them screaching that it was better than any version of Windows (which anyone that's ever printed a 40 page document under System 7 knows that chissel and tablet would be prefered). So no, i ain't buyin' that.

I've been on enough Mac threads to know that those guys let NO hit on their baby go unpunished.

On those threads, MS-only folks outright insult and flame the Mac users from their first post.

As you've said, when you have trouble with the whole world, maybe you're the problem.

I, and most people, have no problem discussing with fans of Mac and Linux and Unix and Java and the rest.

Yet you MS-only folks have *tons* of trouble with fans of Mac and Linux and Unix and Java and the rest. Every thread you participate in burns to the ground in a flame fest, almost always started by an MS-only person. Ya'll directly insult, call names of the lowest sort, act like children -- and then take offense at the slightest negative comments from the other side.

Again, I seem to have no problems with anyone else. You guys have the exact same problems you have with me with everyone else.

Consider it.

Heck, one of the funniest things -- ya'll like to call me an Sun 'shill', but I'm loud about saying I think Sun boxen are overpriced and don't deliver on the bang-for-the-buck. I don't like Solaris at all, and refuse to use it, it's too labrynthine.

The common thread here, then, is the MS-only crowd. Ya'll have issues to deal with.

But why is it I can say in my posts that MS has shipped some products that clearly sucked and none of your hated MS salesmen even say boo about it? It would seem on the surface to be the same message. Except where I let it drop at that you keep going and accuse those who use MS of being dupes and making bad business decisions. You see you're not satisified with just criticizing MS, you have to turn it on the users and the people that make their living as VARs and OEMs in the MS world. And of course there's your refusal to consider evidence to the contrary.

This was a very typcial Harr thread. Starts off ith a long article which you add a request for information to at the end. People start providing that information. You tell them that information is invalid for whatever crack pot reason you come up with. The people that started off thinking this was gonna be a discussion are now irritated because it turns out it's a soapbox and contrary opinions will not be tolerated. They try to defend their position. You insult their integrity professionalism and ability, telling them they're dupes or they're lieing or they're a liability to their company. They get mad. And by post 75 you're whining about how the MS people can't take any criticism.
I don't doubt things don't get ugly when you criticize Oracle or Sun, probably because you're willing to hear contrary evidence that supports them. But you're not willing to hear that when it comes to MS, and in refusing to hear it you always turn things personal.

But why is it I can say in my posts that MS has shipped some products that clearly sucked and none of your hated MS salesmen even say boo about it?

Because you're an established MS-only person, you're "on the reservation".

It isn't what is said, obviously (just like my comment wasn't insulting, but *I* insult you by my daring to speak), it's who says it, with MS-only folks. Just like B2k follow me to threads about things like music and continues to insult and flame me. It isn't what I've said about music, it's that I'm "off the reservation", a 'Java' guy that threatens his 'MS-only' world.

Look above -- I've complimented .NET a few dozen times here. Didn't matter to you, or any of the rest of the MS-only folks. This entire thread was to be an up-beat, positive discussion about .NET. But I posted it, so in come the flames.

Try that with a different screen name they don't know, and watch what happens. Heck, B2k obviously has a full-time job combing the boards for any negative re

Once again you completely ignore absolutely everything in the post except the one sentence that doesn't stand up well on it's own.

And don't even try to say the Macheads wait for MS only people to insult them. As I said, and you ignored, I can't even get away with pointing out System 7s amazing flaws, I never hit the user I could care less, I only hit the product I could give a crap about the user. And in come the guns. I've seen those Machead tearing the crap out of Windows and MS defenders for upward of 30 posts before one of us even posts on the thread. They're really good at making up attacks, those are funny posts to read, these people are arguing with themselves.

The threads I see burn to the ground are the ones with you in them... and the Mac threads. I've seen threads go strong for 200 posts, then you show up and by 275 it's the same old crap. I never called you any kind of shill. I have considered it Dom, you forget I've spent the last two months as a self imposed reader only on these threads. Most I just stop reading once I see you're there, I know how the rest is gonna go. the ones without you are great though. Free-wheeling exchange of information, people actually willing to believe each other, no one being accused of working for MS. They're beautiful. Then a dark stench rises out of Mordor and it's instant flame war.

No. Because I don't insult the user. Just that simple.

You've never complimented .Net. I called you on this before. The best you can muster is half assed praise followed by withering criticism of all who would use it until it's at least 2 years old (with no explanation as to why MS would solve the bugs in something nobody is using).

when I took philosophical logic the teacher taught me something very handy. He said whenever you hear someone say "but" you can completely ignore what came before it. What people do when they're pretending to be nice is they throw hardly meant praise out in front then say "but..." and tell you what they really think. Later in managerial communications they pretty much taught us the same thing, told us all about conditional praise (praise mixed with criticism) and they drove home that when giving that we should never use the word "but" because people have learned what that really means.

Every time you've said anything good about .Net the next word in your post was "but".

Once again you completely ignore absolutely everything in the post except the one sentence that doesn't stand up well on it's own.

Hardly. The entire post doesn't stand up well.

Seriously, maybe you just can't see it for some reason, but you and the other MS-only folks literally begin the Mac and Linux and Unix and Java threads with flames. Therefore your responses are flames. I, and pretty much all the folks who aren't MS-only, don't seem to have that problem and can discuss at length the things we don't like about Macs (if I hate MS's 'integrated' approach to things, can you *imagine* some of the choice comments I have for Macs?).

And I'm an in-your-face honest kind of guy. But I don't have any problem with them.

MS-only folks lead with flames, and then take offense the slightest negative comment by anyone who likes non-MS technologies.

If I *had* to guess, I'd say the reason is they feel any non-MS tech threatens their 'MS-only' world. An MS-only person's fortunes live and die with MS. So a competing technology is literally a threat to them.

And when you see any other tech as a 'threat', you react the way MS-only folks do.

Every time you've said anything good about .Net the next word in your post was "but".

You can't read, then?

Many of my posts above were complimentary to .NET.

And *I* am using it, so how could I, as you tried to put words in my mouth, give "withering criticism of anyone using it"?

Do I also criticize myself?

I don't flame them, and as I said I've seen those threads go on a long time with nothing but Macheads on them. They seem to really like the flame wars, if they don't get somebody hitting the Mac in the first 10 posts or so they'll start posts with things like "the Widiots will probably say..." then they'll attack back against their imaginary flame post. It's a serious sign of mental disfunction. Most of the raw insults from the Macbashers (it is a flame war after all) usually revolve around the liberal imagery Mac puts in its commercials. I think those are pretty funny, though like all flames pointless. Just how long are we supposed to sit idly buy being called "widiots" before we remind them that the new iMac looks like a desklamp with a thyroid condition?

You're not an in your face honest guy. You're somebody with an entrenched position who can't stand to see his sacred cows tipped. If you were an in your face honest guy we'd get along. I can always get along with those people even when I disagree with them about everything. I like straight shooters because I know I can trust them. I can't even trust you to not misquote me and mock your new definition of what I said. You're not a straight shooter, you might have been once, but your hatred of MS has eaten that away.

If you were an in your face honest guy we'd get along.

I don't have any problems with anyone else. Ya'll have the same problems with anyone who uses non-MS tech.

The analysis shouldn't be hard for you to do.

I just went back looking at some of your posts, and I have a question -- you seem to have responded to posts that were directed to Mr. Jeeves on several occasions. And you picked up his water here, and ran with it like nothing I've ever seen before.

Is there some connection between you two?

I can't read. Really. Let's see, here's your tag in post 1 of this thread:

For discussion purposes.
I do believe that in the long run, upgrading to .NET and C# is a must for anyone using current MS technologies.
For Java developers, it's an expensive step backwards, of course.
But if you're MS-only, in spite of the cost and pain, .NET is going to be a major step forward.
Once the bugs are worked out, once .NET server is finally released and then debugged, eventually .NET will be a net plus.

so what do we have here. Faint praise at best, calling .Net good for an MS product, BUT it's buggy and shouldn't be used until MS release and then debugs it (that's cute, the ever popular MS releases beta code slam, very subtle how you put it in there). Doesn't take a lot of reading comprehension to see that you used the exact same sentence structure both my logic teacher and communications teacher warned against. That's how you started the thread, and now you pretend you were looking for information, but you weren't (see I used it too, deliberately, because you didn't mean the request for information) you were looking for a soapbox. B2K called it in the air: "damning with faint praise".

No, I don't have any problems with people that give MS honest criticism. I give them fuel, having worked for a MS partner I know crap about MS you can only dream, you I attack because you're insulting and obnoxious.

I'm not running with Jeeves' water, I'm running with my water. I'm sick of your crap and I'm sick of my self enforced exile from tech threads because of you. I'm back and I'm gonna point out every falsehood, every blanket insult, every rude insinuation until you either get off FR or clean up your act. If I see it I'm giving it a big red flag and if you don't like it you can actually start to do what you say you want to do: participate in reasonable discussion and fair exchange of information. If you're a good kid I'll even give you some behind the scenes dirt that you can really crucify MS with.

B2K called it in the air: "damning with faint praise".

That's almost exactly what I've said about Java, before the 1.2 release.

None of the Java folks felt that was 'damning with faint praise'.

That's a perfect example of MS-only folks not caring *what* is said, but who says it.

It's a brand new release. And the MS-only folks consider it 'damning' to say that a new release should be tested heavily before mission-critical use.

That's pathetic.

A new release needs the bugs worked out. You said as much yourself. But when *I* say it, it's an insult.

Because with you, it's who says it, not what is said.

When you have a problem with the whole world, maybe you're the problem.

Seriously, what is your relationship to Mr. Jeeves?

A friend of yours? An alternate screen name? You've answered posts directed at him on a number of occasions, and you're carrying a *big* bucket of his water here.

By all means, join B2k in making a project out of following me around. It makes me seem far more important than I really am.

I mean, if two MS-only folks have decided to waste their time just to attack me simply for being a Java developer, I *MUST* be making an impact!

But you don't say it should be tested heavily before mission critical release. You say it shouldn't be used until MS fixes it, you even throw in a zinger about them releasing bad code.

It's an insult when you say it because you include great lines like "any honest appraisal would show .Net isn't ready for primetime", thus telling anyone who has appraised it and thinks it's ready that they're either dishonest or incompitent. When I say it I say it's gonna have some lumps but they can be dealt with. See the difference in style. You tell people they're wrong, I tell people what they already know. You're insulting, I'm honest. You make enemies, I make friends.

If you say so. Considering how little I've posted on tech threads in recent months I'm having a hard time accepting I've done anything "on a number of occasions". his name isn't that familiar to me (well it is now) so he's not in my memory as friend or foe (or fun guy to read, that's where B2K is in my personal list, we've actually seriously butted heads a few times, but you weren't on those threads).

I'm far too lazy to do the multiple account thing, I'm big into cookies and automatic logins, just makes things simpler. Back in the old BBS days I even kept the same handle on every board, who am I now is just not a question I feel like pondering before making a post. Actually even now I'm discostu just about everywhere, one of the keys to surviving when you're absent minded is to minimize the amount of stuff you have to remember.

I don't attack you because you develop in Java. I actually like Java, though I think the sandbox is a little limiting. I attack you because you lie. Stop lieing I'll be on your side, if B2K keeps giving you crap then I'l hound his butt. The only impact you're making is on the keyboard industry, many keyboards have died fighting your BS, luckily they're cheap (actually Office Max in Tucson has keyboards right now that are $10 with a $10 dollar rebate, can'tget much cheaper than that).

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.