Why .NET will conquer the world

COMMENTARY--.NET clearly bears a strong resemblance to Java. Itoffers many of the same features, while addinginteresting additions of its own (code metadata,versioned assemblies, etc). Microsoft, however, isbetter positioned to create a cross-market softwareunification framework than Sun Microsystems ever was(or is). This will result in a rapid expansion in.NET's popularity which eats into Java's market shareas it grows to take over the development world.

		Demystifying .Net Part I--Clarifying the .Net message Part III--Why .NET will benefit other platforms

There are a number of reasons for this:

1. The breadth of Microsoft's market presence. You would be hard pressed to find a software marketwhere Microsoft does not have a strong presence. Theyhave a popular database in SQL Server, a game consolein XBox, handhelds that run PocketPC, server anddesktop operating systems, a software library thatincludes business workhorses such as the Office suite,and CRM solutions through its Great Plains division (purchased by Microsoft over a year ago), just to name a few.

Granted, other companies, notably IBM, operate inmultiple software markets. IBM has not turned all ofits products into Java products, however, whileMicrosoft plans to migrate their entire productlibrary to .NET. The reason so many Microsoftstandards have become de facto development standardsis that Microsoft uses those technologies internally. COM's popularity was driven by the degree to whichMicrosoft used COM in its own products. This made ita business requirement for competitors to support COM,simply because their products would look lessfeature-rich without the reusable, cross-language COM functionality offered by Microsoft products.

With .NET, Microsoft has the ultimate software andhardware unification platform. Once all ofMicrosoft's product line is unified around .NET,companies that fail to become at least compatible with.NET will find themselves at a competitivedisadvantage. This extends beyond the Windowsuniverse. .NET will exist on non-Microsoft platformsdue to Microsoft's SharedSource CLI (a.k.a. "Rotor"), the efforts of Ximian(through its Monoproject) and dotGNU. Hooking intothe pool of Windows developers will be a competitiveadvantage on alternative platforms, which will serveas an incentive that drives .NET adoption far beyondWindows.

2. The CLR is standardized through the ECMA.
Though this only defines core functionality (excluding.NET notables, such as ASP.NET, WinForms and ADO.NET,to name a few), it also leaves room for more to bestandardized as a result of an internationalnegotiating process among interested parties. Thishelps to undermine the impression that .NET is just aland grab by Microsoft. It means that companiesbesides Microsoft have the power to guide the base.NET standard, something important to companies suchas IBM who, though committed to Java, would prefera standardized infrastructure over one where acompetitor (Sun) has the final say.

In addition, there are economic advantages to asmaller core standard. Companies are free to writewhatever classes they feel best suits the needs oftheir product without being constrained by aheavyweight standard controlled by another company. This creates product differentiation potential, whichis a reason why companies would favor .NET.

Another benefit is the opportunity a smaller corestandard creates for class library competition. TheJava model ensures that every vendor conforms to alarge class library "blessed" by Sun. In contrast,the .NET model allows individual implementations tocompete on their merits, all built on the same simpleand standardized core. The distinction is subtle, butserves as another reason that companies will favor.NET.

3. Microsoft's development tools.
Microsoftis in the singular position of being the leadingdevelopment tools vendor for its own developercommunity. Visual Studio lies at the heart of itstools effort. Every iteration of Visual Studioincludes support for Microsoft's latest technologyinnovations, with the aim of making use of that newtechnology as simple as possible for developers. Visual Studio.NET follows the same strategy, making itsimple to write .NET versions of everything from GUI applications and ASP.NET web sites to Windows services (formerly NT Services) using the same development tool.

Visual Studio's role in driving .NET adoption shouldnot be underestimated. Though few companies will beanxious to rewrite their software in the current sloweconomic environment, they won't have to. One of thekey advantages of .NET over Java is simplified native invocation through P/Invoke. In the meantime, Visual Studio's current success ensures that .NET is considered for any new development. Given the lifespan of most custom software (short and task-specific), this is the pebble that could cause an avalanche.

4. Microsoft generates revenue from .NET.
This gives .NET a competitive advantage in the battlefor mindshare with Java. Sun generates little fromJava beyond its ability to tempt developers away fromthe Microsoft camp. Few of Sun's Java products arestrong revenue generators, whereas Microsoft has arange of .NET-compatible products (development tools,server products, desktop applications, etc.) fromwhich they can generate revenue. That revenue will bespent to make alliances with third parties to support.NET, as well as invested back into .NET to move theplatform forward.

Contrast that with Sun's attempt to drive J2EEpopularity by including its formerly fee-basedproducts in Solaris. Though that will probably helpto boost J2EE popularity among those who purchaseSolaris systems (Solaris is one of the most popularoperating systems upon which to run a J2EE server), itremoves yet another means for Sun to generate revenuefrom Java's success. Microsoft has the flexibilityto offer lots of .NET products for free (IIS willalways be free with its server OSes) simply becausethey have so much revenue-generating .NETinfrastructure they can sell.

Conclusion
Software benefits from seamless interoperability withother types of software. This is particularly true ina world where networks are ubiquitous and computingdevices extend far beyond the traditional computer. In such a market, breadth is a very good thing. Itcreates innovations in software design (Netscapedidn't dream up a "componentized" web browser reusablein third-party apps, an operating system company did).

Even more important, it gives a company the knowledgerequired to ensure that diverse software productsinteroperate seamlessly.

Microsoft is simply the best positioned to make a cross-platform, cross-market unification technology such as .NET work correctly because Microsoft is involved in all the markets which could benefit from unification. Java might have been that unification technology (based on Java's early popularity among Microsoft developers), but, right or wrong, Sun's lawsuits ensured it wasn't. Today, even if Sun managed to convince every OEM to ship with Java pre-installed (or got the courts to make that happen), it would not change the fact that ALL of Microsoft's products will eventually be ".NETtified," nor erase the knowledge Microsoft has in-house regarding the unification needs of disparate markets. Companies targeting non-Microsoft platforms will still have an interest in plugging in to the wider Windows development community (which will be .NET-oriented, thanks to Microsoft's efforts), and can do so easily through Microsoft's Shared Source CLI, Ximian's Mono and dotGNU.

.NET will conquer the world. Yet, as I'll shownext week, even dyed in the wool Unixophiles willlearn to love .NET.

This is Part II of 3 commentaries on the future of .Net. Read Part I, "Clarifying the .NET Message" and Part III , "Why .NET will benefit other platforms."

John Carroll is a software engineer who lives in Switzerland. He specializes in the design and development of distributed systems using Java and .Net. He is also the founder of Turtleneck Software.