Quite the contrary

In his post about the opening keynote at TechEd, Ryan Gregg observes:

“Visual Studio 2005 Team System looks like a very useful integration that will probably upset a lot of third party vendors.”

It's quite the contrary, Ryan. I think Team System is going to create a wealth of opportunities for third party vendors to create all sorts of tools. I expect an explosion of third-party tools similar to the explosion of third-party controls that occured when Visual Basic arrived on the scene. Please take a look at the extensibility white paper that Allen Clark wrote. It covers the various ways that third party vendors can build on Team System.

Comments (3)

  1. Ryan Gregg says:

    After hearing more details about the Team System, I think you’re right. It looks like there is a lot of room for extensibility and expanding the Team System concept. However, it is going to potentially cause concern among ISVs who work with solutions targeting those features. They’re certainly going to have to adapt to the new Team System environmnent.

  2. You can say many good things about Microsoft (i can think of a few 100 wonderful things M:S has done in last decade) but friendlieness to vendors extending their products is a crock of shit. Microsoft is not very helpful to vendors that want to team with them. Big vendors they gouge for money in a "MS Wins vendors lose" tactics. Little vendors they either crush by:

    1. cherry picking the best extended features for a next release instead of letting the little guy have some edges

    2. overcharging vendors for promo support

    3. involving them in premature marketing

    4. Forcing them to do everything MS employees asks no matter how unreasonable and limiting their teamship and contacts within MS and support if the vendor doesn’t do exactly what they want

    5. Many employees are dishonest, withholding and secretive to these vendors on key points and do so with no penalties from MS management – MS employees and management hear, speak and see no evil of the bad apples within and just gush and pontificate about all their good apples making it impossible for MS to clean the 1% of teh bad people that make the other nice 99% look like shit and scum.

    6. Make it impossible for flefgling vendor to retain staff IQ by cherry picking the bets from their company for MS staff and leaving some companies that could have innovated as partners for years with MS toothless and gutted.

    MS has a long history for the last decade and still in the last 6-12 months shows every concrete evidence of a few bad apples treating their potential small and large business partners like Dirt accidentally, carelessny and thoughtlessly. No vendor wants near MS for any reason. Thats why theire si almost no 3rd party addin Market for MS that is strong. Almost none.

    MS employees and management like you please continue hearing, speak and see no evil and no bad apples in yoru company. Don’t be surprised when those bad apples kkep great things from happening GOOD APPLES like you want to see. Good apples in a large org have more responsibilities than being just good – they need to do some policing, whistle blowing and internal objections for when bad guys inside the company swing the might of the company to crush vendors (who are helping MS) rather than grow them. Crushing is for enemies not friends – big leaders can be directed to crush without thinking by bad apples and then the good appples wonder why vendors are so upset as the good guys didn’t help that happen.

    Good soldiers in Vietnam needed to stop and report bad soldiers or the whole uniform and army and leaders are tainted with the stench of the worst members if they don’t weed them out and punish them internally and remove them before external forces force them year later, or they are forgotten about by the people who didn’t see it and the crushed/dead tell no tales…

Skip to main content