Welcome to MSDN Blogs Sign in | Join | Help

Why is it called .NET 3.0?

Why is it called .NET 3.0? Actually, when I first saw the annoucement of .NET 3.0 I had mixed feelings. Here's what I thought:

The good

  • This enforces the .NET brand that now becomes really known and appreciated by many of my customers. This is really perceived as a quality platform.
  • .NET is no longer in its early versions. It becomes more and more mature.
  • This is a perfect continuity with what Microsoft has delivered in the last 5 years.
  • The platform becomes richer and richer and help companies having a better productivity.

The bad

  • This is yet another version of the framework in 5 years
  • This is a new version of the framework that has to be deployed
  • This will cause a side-by-side environment to be set up

What if we had kept the .NET 2.0 + WinFX?

IMHO, maybe we could have presented WinFX as being an optional development framework on top of .NET 2.0. In which case:

  • we don't have to redeploy a new framework
  • we make this change very light
  • we make it optional
  • we show how to increase productivity and user experience by using it!

This, of course, could have caused confusion by adding yet another term on the market ("WinFX"), maybe not.

Here is what Redo thinks about it.

What do you guys think?

UPDATE June 24: There are some quite interesting comments on Soma's blogpost about this very subject. I strongly suggest you go and read them!

 

Published Thursday, June 22, 2006 2:45 PM by alainler
Filed under:

Comment Notification

If you would like to receive an email when updates are made to this post, please register here

Subscribe to this post's comments using RSS

Comments

Thursday, June 22, 2006 9:33 AM by dsutton

# re: Why is it called .NET 3.0?

In my discussions with some of the devdiv guys at TechEd last week, they actually aren't revving the version of the CLR. Thus, it is essentially .NET Framwork 2.0+ or whatever, but the name definitely does not make that clear.
Thursday, June 22, 2006 10:38 AM by David Brabant

# re: Why is it called .NET 3.0?

The good, the bad ... And the ugly: "Oh, you DO really mean that this .NET 3.0 stuff is based on .NET 2.0 Framework? Now, I'm confused. Will future .NET 3.0 Framework be called .NET 2.0++, or what?"
Thursday, June 22, 2006 12:11 PM by tzagotta

# re: Why is it called .NET 3.0?

>>.NET is no longer in its early versions. It becomes more and more mature.

A higher version number only gives the impression of more maturity.  You can't escape the fact that people judge software by the number of problems the experience with it, regardless of how it is labeled.  So I don't think this is a "good."

I agree with most of your "bads," and overall, I think this use of ".NET 3.0" is overall bad.  Microsoft just rolled out .NET 2.0, and now rolling out .NET 3.0 gives the impression that the framework is changing too fast, when in actuality, it is not.  I think Microsoft needs to avoid the Java problem, both the actual problem and the perception problem, of rolling out new versions and updates too often.  In a framework, we want big changes every few years, not lots of little changes every year or two.  Microsoft has so far done a good job in this area with .NET, IMO, with the exception of this latest development.

I think the WinFX name was fine.  What confused people was not the name "WinFX," but the concept of what it is and how it relates to Win32, .NET, Vista, Visual Studio, etc.  Microsoft never really made this very clear, IMO.  Having a thing that is called WinFX that relies on .NET 2.0 would have been no problem at all.  Microsoft solved a non-existing problem, which makes me think there were other motives besides trying to clear up confusion.
Thursday, June 22, 2006 12:11 PM by kevinDwhite

# re: Why is it called .NET 3.0?

I agree. It's bogus & confusing. You blew all that time & money on getting developers to recognize and think about "WinFX". All of that now has to be repeated with an explanation.

"Well it's not *really* a new version of the framework. It's just 2.0 + WinFX"

Then don't call it 3.0! It's an add-on or augmentation. The name should have properly reflected this status.

Microsoft blew it.
Thursday, June 22, 2006 3:25 PM by James Bender

# re: Why is it called .NET 3.0?

The more I think about this re-branding, the more I think it makes sense. One of the criticisms of Java is that is has too many frameworks, and WinFX could have been an indication that it was happening to .NET (even if it wasn't)

The two biggest fears I'm seeing out of my clients is a) a .NET 2.0 to .NET 3.0 learning curve and b) Do I have to upgrade Visual Studio AGAIN?

Once I assure them that Visual Studio will not require an upgrade and that if your developers are worth their salt, they've already played with WinFX and have some idea of what it can do they are much calmer.
Wednesday, July 12, 2006 6:01 AM by Alain's Globosphere

# .NET 2.0 and .NET 3.0 - All about the new name of WinFX

Earlier, in my blogs I was referring to the name .NET 3.0. This name change has brought serious confusion...

Leave a Comment

(required) 
required 
(required) 

  
Enter Code Here: Required
 
Page view tracker