Scott Guthrie Backlash | The Coffeehouse

Ian
Proud to be geek ....

I suppose it had to happen sometime:

(http://channel9.msdn.com/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=392303)

Maybe a rant on the issues that following pre-release example code can create is a good thing (after all there is a delicate balance between achieving a base level of quality and just "getting something out there" ). My concern would be that in criticising this particular 'channel' here it might have the knock on effect of prompting some internal criticism and, heaven forbid, then become the subject of some awful internal quality review that ends up mandating something along the lines of 'no example code goes out from a Microsoft employee until it has passed by the quality review board'.

That would surely stifle an awful lot of goodness?

Lets be careful out there.

littleguru
<3 Seattle

Why didn't you just reply that in the original thread?

irascian
Irascible Ian

Hardly a backlash! And more a comment on quality control and the new Microsoft way of providing documentation than of Scott himself - a fundamentally flawed way that loses years of acknowledged benefits of quality control.

FWIW I'm still a fan of "The Gu" - I just think a company culture that continually promotes "hero" development (or writing of tutorials as the main source of documentation by people whose job title is VP with so many other more important things to deal with) over strategic planning and basic quality control is wrong.

Everyone extols the advantages of the "new" world of blogs in this fast-changing world, but while it's fine for the "I need to know what's happening today" it's a real step backwards in terms of the longer term world that most of us in the real world work in.

I remember doing work on WCF just as it went RTM. The Microsoft approach of just releasing information on blogs meant that Google had to be used for pretty much all research. MSDN was just full of disclaimers and place-holders. The trouble was that so much had changed between the beta of WCF when examples and reference material was written this "documentation" did more harm than good. And of course staff responsible for those blogs had all moved on to "the next shiny thing" within Microsoft by the time we hit RTM, and had zero interest in going back and updating the information they put out.

Maybe I'm just over-reacting to recent appalling experiences with: (1) Microsoft's "Hands on labs" at MIX (2) even worse labs at the UK launch event, (3) the Silverlight tutorials and (4) the fact that the MIX08 handout software just didn't work (since fixed via an auto-update, but showing no hands on labs as being available??!!) Not one of these items received negative publicity on any blogs (unless you count the "Comments" section to Scott's blog and discussion I started here on C9) - just endless blog posts about how "great" these things were and how we should all go check 'em out!

Pace
In The Mix...

and when you do go check em out... Mad

I know where you are coming from, its not a rant, its what C9 was intended for, feedback from the community Big Smile

Mucho's Kudo's Irascian!

Ian
Proud to be geek ....

littleguru wrote:
Why didn't you just reply that in the original thread?

I did consider that but when iIthought about it I wasn't really commenting on the specific subject (Scotts' Silverlight 2 demos) just voicing a concern about the potential fragile nature of the way that Microsoft is able to do things these days. Personally I will quite hapilly put up with some grief rather than risk losing it.

and OK, "Backlash" is maybe a bit premature...

wisemx
Live it

gefeazBgdzasas@eggingigatoroman IP) Scott. G. Illume x Nat;

esoteric
λ

Drama Queens. Just be happy there's tutorials on beta software at all.

Maddus Mattus
Do, or do not. There is no try. - Yoda

Don't come to our temple and insult our god!

He will indeed backlash at you with lightnings!

Ian
Proud to be geek ....

Cripes, I didn't anticipate a backlash on the backlash Wink

vesuvius
Das Glasperlenspiel

I believe I used the word Sacrosanct that was still misconstructed as recalcitrant.

irascian
Irascible Ian

esoteric wrote:
Drama Queens. Just be happy there's tutorials on beta software at all.

Ah, but which is better? To be called a "drama queen" for pointing out a whole series of facts and ridiculous discrepancies or to be called "an idiot fan boy" for just resorting to name calling instead?

andrewmyhre

Yeah I have to agree... 2008 is sooo much better than 1998.

esoteric
λ

Being right. Don't expect unconditional sympathy for flaming flawed blogposts about beta software.

vesuvius
Das Glasperlenspiel

esoteric wrote:
Being right. Don't expect unconditional sympathy for flaming flawed blogposts about beta software.

Conversely, don't give the impression that something works (beta or not) when it does not. This whole view of beta versus full release is a rather stagnant one nowadays.

Microsoft have now embraced the CTP/Beta stage as critical to the design and software implementation phase. Were it not for people like Ian, then you would not have SQL Server CTP'ing several times and not being released. Who the hell do you think tests this software? Have they no right to protest when they invest so much valuable time? This type of feedback improves things, your impartiality does not.

If this was just a beta would Mix 2008 have been just about beta software? Visit the mix site now and you will find that a significant proportion of the content is based on people talking about and demoing this beta software. Scott Gu and Hanselman etc are all indefatigably extolling and promulgating the message about RIA/MVC.

Are you a lame duck that just believes everything they are told?

Your stance at present is wholly unbalanced, and lacks lateral thinking!

Ian is completely correct.