>>The technology in question is not Web Services, or ASP.NET, or XAML, or anything else; it is an object oriented replacement for Win32 that will help the computing industry move to 64 bit.
>>
>>This is a huge undertaking, and as I have said, it is not "there". I don't expect it to be for a another five years.
>>
>>How that fact justifies any of the FUD in the article in question is beyond me.
>
>I have been in the code writing business for long enough to have seen more than a few things come and go and the marketing hype for all of it is more or less the same.
>
>I think your statement that it is not "there" yet and don't expect it to be for another five years is probably one of the points he is shooting for. Five years Mike? That is a very long time by which time .Net will have been out for about 7 or 8 years. At the speed at which things change in the IT world this is a long time.

It is a long time.

Is it too long? That depends. What is the technology in question? If it is ASP.NET then it is too long. But if it is a complete rewrite of the Win32 API, 7 or 8 years doesn't sound like an unreasonable cycle for the biggest enhancement of the most popular software ever (the Microsoft OS).

Does it?

And if that is one of the points Grimes is shooting for, then why doesn't he say "I'm cynical because I invested heavily as a tester for technology for which the testing cycle has no end in sight and it has been entirely unprofitable for me"?

Why does he blame his problems on Microsoft?

My point is that he has some personal issues and he's not dealing with them very effectively.