The Unfrozen Caveman Engineer

Ramblings and Pontifications from the world of MBF

MBF Joins the Longhorn Wave

Its been a busy month.  We've been working furiously behind the scenes to sync up MBF with Longhorn.  Our previous plan of record had MBF being released in two phases.  The “business logic” portions of MBF were to release with Visual Studio 2005 (aka Whidbey).  Then the rest of MBF would ship with Longhorn.  

This plan was a compromise from the beginning.   As previous posts have noted, MBF has many interesting parts (SOA, Process...).   However, all of those “interesting” parts were not shipping until Longhorn.  We literally couldn't ship rich SOA support with Whidbey... we had to wait for Indigo.  We couldn't ship the kind of lightweight, embedded process support we need in Whidbey... we had to wait for a future version of the BizTalk Orchestration engine.

The only point of the MBF Visual Studio 2005 release was to enable developers to start coding their business logic.  This is actually a very worthwhile goal.  Business logic represents the largest portion of a business application.  Getting a head start coding the business logic is goodness... even if you have to wait for the Longhorn release of MBF to “finish” the application.

However, as the months have gone by it has become more apparent that collapsing MBF into a single release would be more beneficial for our customers.  By shipping portions of MBF early in Whidbey, we were cementing portions of MBF into a non-Longhorn model.  In case you've been living under a rock, Longhorn is <the> platform for the next decade.  Shipping new bits which aren't aligned with Longhorn is a disservice to ISVs who want to build business applications which will last through the next decade.

Here are some links to stories related to the MBF move to Longhorn.

http://www.informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=19502405

http://www.crn.com/sections/BreakingNews/dailyarchives.asp?ArticleID=49958

Personally, I have mixed feelings on this topic.  Software developers live to ship code.  So delaying the first release of MBF is painful.  However, as a Software Architect, I am absolutely convinced that this was the right choice.  Shipping part of MBF in Whidbey and part in Longhorn would have created a system which spans two technology eras. 

 

 

Published Monday, May 10, 2004 10:54 AM by timbrookins

Comments

 

Frans Bouma said:

I have a question: the MBF bits which were scheduled after whidbey, were the right moment to release Objectspaces as well. Now MBF isn't on the radar for the Whidbey timeframe, is Objectspaces also delayed or not?
May 10, 2004 11:56 AM
 

Frans Bouma's blog said:

May 10, 2004 12:57 PM
 

Louise Sandler said:

For my benefit as a first time reader, what is MBF?
May 10, 2004 11:58 AM
 

Chris Garty's Weblog said:

May 11, 2004 12:56 AM
 

Chris Garty's Weblog said:

May 11, 2004 1:00 AM
 

Chris Garty said:

Thanks for the update. This is sad news. However, it is great to hear that this cost will allow the framework to be stronger and more cohesive.

- Chris
May 11, 2004 12:09 AM
 

Christian Nagel's OneNotes said:

May 11, 2004 2:51 AM
 

Gary Short said:

May 11, 2004 3:59 AM
 

Ramblings by PeterI said:

Interest stuff over at Tim Brookins blog , apparently MBF has been pushed out to the Longhorn phase of development. This really does make me wonder who's in charge of the strat
May 11, 2004 6:42 AM
 

Michael Platt's WebLog said:

May 11, 2004 11:36 PM
 

Jeff Talley said:

One of the linked CRN articles says that Green is now scheduled to release with Longhorn, as well. This is significant because Green was originally scheduled to come later than MBF, not at the same time.

This further blurs the line between Green and MBF in my mind. I had been under the impression that we would work with MBF for at least a year or two before Green was delivered. If we are getting both at the same time, then the role of MBF will almost certainly be as the "customization" piece of Green, more than anything else.

This is not necessarily a bad thing, but it does change the landscape dramatically, in my mind.

MBF is destined to become the 800 pound gorilla of business frameworks, but Green will be the 1600 pound gorilla of ERP applications. MBF is the engine; Green is the whole Ferrari. We must consider them both.
May 12, 2004 2:44 PM
 

Geek Noise said:

May 12, 2004 11:11 PM
 

Theil's WebLog said:

May 18, 2004 5:00 PM
 

ToDotNet said:

May 22, 2004 5:26 AM
 

Chris Garty's Weblog said:

May 23, 2004 11:50 PM
 

Chris Garty's Weblog said:

May 23, 2004 11:54 PM
 

dianying xia zai said:

http://www.dmoz.net.cn/ wangzhidaquang
http://www.86dmoz.com/ jingpingwangzhi
http://www.kamun.com/ mianfeidianying
http://movie.kamun.com/ dianyingxiazai
http://music.kamun.com/ MP3 free download
http://www.pc530.net/ diannaoaihaozhe
http://www.5icc.com/ duangxingcaixingxiazha
http://www.dianyingxiazai.com/ dianyingxiazai
http://www.yinyuexiazai.com/ yinyuexiazai
August 1, 2004 10:13 AM
 

Chris Garty's Weblog said:

August 24, 2004 10:39 PM
 

Chris Garty's Weblog said:

August 24, 2004 10:44 PM
 

The Unfrozen Caveman Engineer MBF Joins the Longhorn Wave | Paid Surveys said:

May 29, 2009 4:48 PM
 

The Unfrozen Caveman Engineer MBF Joins the Longhorn Wave | garden decor said:

June 14, 2009 3:00 AM
Anonymous comments are disabled

© 2009 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved. Terms of Use  |  Trademarks  |  Privacy Statement
Microsoft
Page view tracker