David with glasses? the one who falls asleep allot after 1x beer? aren't you a tester or something?
Anyway, I am more than happy to openly debate and discuss my opinions / remarks but i think the attack posture you took was misguided and definitely not accurate assessment of the situation. Geek fame is over-rated and i make zero profit off having this attention if anything it could have the opposite effect - I only traveled down this path as it puts ? above peoples heads around the WPF/Silverlight future(s), casts a bright light onto the Windows team and their behavior and actually puts the DevDiv marketing team(s) on notice. Its fine to be a DevDiv cheer leader, whatever lights your candle, but don't drink too much of the kool-aid, save some room for some open constructive thinking. Regards, Scott Barnes http://www.riagenic.com On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 5:12 PM, David Kean <david.k...@microsoft.com> wrote: > Actually Scott, we have met. On many occasions. You might remember a little > Aussie activity that your wife (and yourself) had a lot to do with on > Saturdays in Redmond. > > I'll leave the discussions on future versions of products to the marketing > teams. I'll avoid feeding the fire and concentrate on what we, DevDiv, does > best; develop great platforms. > > -----Original Message----- > From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On > Behalf Of Scott Barnes > Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2010 10:56 PM > To: ozdotnet@ozdotnet.com > Subject: RE: Is Silverlight dead ? > > RE: David Kean. > David, we've never meet so i'm guessing you're assuming either the worst or > prefer character attacks vs answering the hard questions ;) like is WPF is > Dead? given you have @microsoft.com how about we spend more energy in > clarifying the remarks instead of ad hominem attacks? - that or learn to > evangelize more effectively :) - as you will note, i've consistently said i'm > a fan of WPF and Silverlight and THUS why the motivation behind what i have > done to draw attention to the reality of the future of both WPF/Silverlight > given the current internal climate. > > > RE: Silverlight is Dead. > Silverlight isn't dead. It's just got question marks above how it will affect > the market and more to the point where this bus is heading so to speak. You > can hear my thoughts on this in a number of podcasts floating around the > place (Sparkling Client will have one up soon and one via Talkingshop > Downunder) > > to quote myself: > > "..way Microsoft to date knows how is to either spend majority of its focus > on convincing developers that Silverlight is the better option.." > > "I'm simply about highlighting the disconnect here and if the Windows > 8 / IE teams of today think that Silverlight / WPF is something they can > deprecate because they dislike people in DevDiv or its current model then > think again, as this is one of those rare moments in time where you have a > hung jury in terms of which of the two is really the best bet..." > > So not sure where David etc are drawing thine inspiration from in declaring i > am flip flopping over my preferences for Silverlight? > given its the whole heart & soul of this whole debate - that and putting > focus back on WPF and asking a big question "Where's this going". > > RE: Motivation. > Again, you can read why i was motivated to post the thoughts i have etc via > my blog. The main reason was to circumvent the "David Keans" > of the Microsoft internal as typically these types of personalities often > will squash left field opinions for fear of throwing the brand itself into > question or constructive criticism. At times these folks really need to get > out of the Redmond bubble, jump on some planes, visit folks at the cubicle > level and not at the TechEd like cheerleader-thons and one can soon realize > fast that what the Redmond postcode thinks vs whats reality are vastly > different. > > > Regards, > > Scott Barnes > > http://www.riagenic.com > >
