>Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates has said that building the company's .Net software architecture is more difficult than "getting to the moon or designing the 747."
>
>http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1104-948838.html
>
>Such absurdity! Bill Gates has no concept of what amount of effort went into either project! Besides in both cases there were two advantages they possessed over the .NET “strategy”.
>
>1. The purpose and goal was well defined.
>2. Excellent Engineering principles were followed.
>
Tom,

I thought that it was an absurd analogy too!
Nevertheless, let's allow that it is true. . .
President Kennedy set the objective on May 25, 1961 and the goal was accomplished on July 24, 1969 (safely back on earth). That was over 8 years!

8 years for a project that was totally "internal" except for publicity in that it did not involve necessary re-education of the masses, it did not involve the wholesale change to every computer on the planet (as Bill wants to do) and it did not involve (much) marketing to obscure the real facts.

Given that it is acknowledged that Mr. Gates still hasn't described the real objectives of .NET and given that Mr. Gates now acknowledges that the marketing hype has been confusing and mis-directed (how can it be anything but when there is no known objective) and given the education/replacement requirements outlined above, it follows that this project should be allowed at least 20 years to achieve its first genuine success.

Marketing has, of course, already proclaimed many "successes" for .NET. Hopefully, on considering Mr. Gate's recent statements and the flow of press articles that have followed his statement, people can surmise for themselves the validity of those "successes".

I close by saying again that I truly admire those people who have jumped into .NET with both feet. I hope, though, that they are prepared to be waterlogged for a very long time.

cheers