New isn't bad but it needs to balance out and if anyone inside the company
actually thinks the large majority of .NET developers are working on "new"
day in day out they probably have a distorted view over the entire
landscape. The reports I used to read / get on developer adoption were
inaccurate and often the surveys were gamed / asked irrelevant questions to
give projection of growth ("Would you consider x new technology vs Are you
working right now with X technology"). For instance we had at one stage 2%
adoption of WPF and 60% adoption of Silverlight out of 10 million
developers.Then the next month the numbers were revised and it was 6 million and the % changed but then when I flew around Australia visiting customers / CIO's etc I'd ask the question how they are doing in terms of adopting the new - answers I got back were "We're looking into it but a core code base is still ASP.NET or WinForms". I also keep tabs with Recruiters and ask the same question today, again WPF is aspirational but typically its WinForms / ASP.NET and lately its gone into a bit of a stall as they aren't sure what Microsoft are doing around adoption / strategies. To me MSDN should be a bout new and old even if they have to separate the magazine into two sections. --- Regards, Scott Barnes http://www.riagenic.com On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 2:33 AM, David Kean <david.k...@microsoft.com> wrote: > To a degree, but I think that’s more of a factor of what people are > working on at the time and what they are comfortable with. For example, our > team writes MSDN articles and we going to be talking about the new features > that we just wrote, not existing areas that haven’t been touched in years. > **** > > ** ** > > *From:* ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto: > ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] *On Behalf Of *Scott Barnes > *Sent:* Saturday, September 28, 2013 5:46 PM > *To:* ozDotNet > *Subject:* Re: MSDN mag**** > > ** ** > > MSDN floats with the DPE tide mark. Its an editorial version of evangelism > and its sole purpose is to get folks onto the new while showing them > bridges from the old to the new. If DPE spend cycles talking to you about > Windows 8 AppStore + JavaScript then MSDN will usually follow.**** > > ** ** > > This is really not a "magazine" for sustaining existing adoption(s) its > really a marketing tool to get you move over to whatever next..**** > > > **** > > --- > Regards, > Scott Barnes > http://www.riagenic.com**** > > ** ** > > On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 3:43 PM, Greg Keogh <g...@mira.net> wrote:**** > > MSDN mag was once something I read cover to cover. Now, I glance > at the front page, maybe read the editorial, then throw it into a drawer > never to be looked at again.**** > > Am I the only one?**** > > **** > > Hell no! I'm fed up with articles about phones, Windows 8, Store Apps, > Javascript and WinRT (mostly telling us what WinRT *can't do*). For years > I was also slowly getting sick of McCaffrey's articles which were getting > so academic that they were useless for real-world developers. So useless in > fact that I was going to email the editors and politely tell them that > although I'm a profound geek, I have absolutely no use for genetic > algorithms, matrix decomposition, adaptive boosting or artificial immune > systems. Even Petzold's relentless articles about perspective graphics and > music synthesis aren't of much use or interest (even though I'm a musician). > **** > > **** > > I have an almost unbroken set of issues going back to May 1993, and in the > last 2 years I have felt the same shift of focus away from core languages, > tools and frameworks into what marketing must think they want us to read. I > scan all pages, but I find I'm increasingly flipping over more and more > pages like you.**** > > **** > > Greg K**** > > **** > > P.S. I'd better go and look in the letterbox.**** > > ** ** >
