• The Washington Capitals
  
  unveil their new jersey tonight, though they have a picture on their web site. I’ve got mixed feelings, though I’m trying to reserve judgement until I see it “in action”. I like that they’re back to the traditional Caps colors. But the Caps have jersey change fatigue. They only had the screaming eagle jersey for twelve years, and they swapped out the blue jersey for the black one (that started life as a third jersey) somewhere along the line.
• Lawrence Lessig hangs up his IP spurs to go after the deep corruption of the political process. He points out that after a decade focusing on IP, he’s learned all he is going to about these issues so he decided (among other reasons) that it was time to start fresh learning about something new. I keep telling my kids that “always keep learning” is one of the secrets to life. This move by Lessig is the embodiment of that principle. Good for him. (via John Lam)
• My old team keep chugging along. They’ve recently added “special coverage” sections on Agile Development and Enterprise Architecture.
• Miguel de Icaza details the three week “hackathon” (his words, not mine) they went thru to get a working version of Silverlight on Mono – aka Moonlight – in time for ReMix 07 in Paris. It’s an impressive engineering achievement, to say the least. Also, it’s nice to see the folks from Microsoft France invite Miguel to come be a part of their keynote. (via Larry O’Brien)
• Rob Bazinet points outVisualSVN in response to my question about SVN clients other than Tortoise. Like AnkhSVN, VisualSVN snaps into Visual Studio. However, where AnkhSVN is a native SVN implementation, VisualSVN depends on Tortoise. Scott Bellware wrote “VisualSVN takes a novel approach to bringing SVN into the Visual Studio IDE… it brings Tortoise into the IDE!”. So it still sounds like Tortoise is the SVN client everyone cares about.
• Scott Berkun details a variety of immature development and management methodologies, including Development By Denial (DBD), Cover Your Ass Engineering (CYAE) and my personal favorite Asshole Driven development (ADD). Scott Hanselman suggests looking around and making sure you’re not said asshole. I tend to be somewhat…how should I say it?…strong willed about the direction projects I work on should take. My current project is about driving a paradigm shift to service orientation, and I don’t think you can’t drive that kind of change without being somewhat strong willed. It’s a thin line between strong willed and asshole and hopefully I come down on the right side of that line more often than not.

• Google announces Gears, a browser plugin for taking your web application offline. Developer docs are also available. TechMeme has lots more, but obviously this is yet another significant bow shot in the upcoming unified client platform war. By my count, there are four horses in this race: Microsoft with .NET and Silverlight, Adobe with Flash and Apollo, Google with AJAX and Gears and Sun with Java and JavaFX. Did I miss anyone? (via Dare Obasanjo and Scott Hanselman)
• Alex James writes that REST is about intent and shows a pseudo-code sample posting multiple changes to a single endpoint as a way of demonstrating your intent that they be applied atomically. Andres Aguiar left a comment saying that Astoria does something similar. Personally, I like that model for transactions better than the transaction factory approach Jon Udell describes. But either way, you’ve moved beyond simple CRUD style services and into the world of protocol. Surfacing intent via protocol aligns with what Tim described as making the protocol explicit
• Windows Live posted new beta versions of Writer, Mail and Messenger. I’ve been on an internal build of the new Writer for a while and I’ve really been impressed. There’s also a new Provider Customization API, so I can’t wait to see what the DasBlog folks do with that.
• Scott Guthrie’s LINQ series continues, this time covering how to build the LINQ to SQL data model. Looks like they used the DSL toolkit to build the LINQ to SQL data model designer, cool!
• Martin Fowler digs intoracc, a yacc-esque compiler compiler for Ruby. Looks interesting as a internal DSL example (better than the now-canonical rake example). But why is the sexy new language on the block using old school CFG’s instead of new hotness PEG’s?
• Speaking of Martin, he writes about the opportunity Ruby presents to Microsoft, building on Scott Hanselman’s concerns that Microsoft is losing the Alpha Geeks. Sam Gentile also weighs in, suggesting that Microsoft is at the crossroads. Frankly, I don’t work in evangelism anymore so I’m going pass these links along without comment except to say that Scott, Martin and Sam are all folks I have much much respect for.

• Dare reached a similar conclusion about Silverlight and Apollo that I did. But newly minted Adobe RIA evangelist Ryan Stewart writes that calling Silverlight vs. Apollo the next platform competition is overblown. However, he then reiterates my point that MSFT is moving in on Adobe’s traditional stronghold (aka the web) while Adobe is moving in on MSFT’s traditional stronghold (aka the desktop). The upshot is that both companies are trying to deliver a unified “client” platform that spans desktop, devices and browser. That sounds like “platform competition” to me.
• Apparently I’m missing the this years compiler dev lab. 😦 John Lam is there, with slides from his talk on the DLR. Miguel de Icaza is there, with fairly extensive notes. Hopefully they will post talks like they did last year.
• Speaking of languages, Scott Hanselman explains why he thinks Ruby is “the tits”. Personally, on the scale between “I can’t see where Ruby is such hot shit” and “Ruby is the tits”, I’m somewhere near the middle, leaning towards tits. I love the expressiveness of Ruby’s syntax, but I miss the static typing. Call me over the hill, but I like the compiler catching mistakes at compile time. I realize it’s not for everyone, but I like what I like.
• This talk about Ruby’s expressiveness reminds me of something Larry O’Brien said in the wake of the IronRuby announcement: “I am surprised by the IronRuby announcement. I really thought we were going to see some form of Ruby#:Ruby::C#:Java. Although I’m happy, I was actually hoping to see a new language.” The expressiveness of Ruby that Scott describes (which is to say, not all of Ruby’s expressiveness) would be completely achievable in a statically typed language. Personally, I’d like to see that language…
• My birthday is past, but I want a Lego Ice Cube Tray. (via Geekdad)

• 3D Printing is going to be huge. According to the NYT, we’ll be looking at around $1,000 for one within four years. For the impatient, check out Fab@Home and build one right now.
• It’s been a while since I experimented with the P2P stack in Windows, but it looks like it’s getting the managed treatment in VS “Orcas”.
• The managed Ruby hits keep on coming. Last week was DLR and IronRuby. This week it’s a new drop of Ruby.NET which includes VS integration.
• Looks like Sun is trying to get back into the Ajax/Flash/Silverlight fray with JavaFX Script. I wrote over a year ago that “In platform portability, Flash has succeeded where Java failed.” I can’t help but believe JavaFX is too little too late. Also, it’s yet another Java technology name that sounds like it’s been blatantly copied from MSFT. JDBC, JSP, JDO … What’s next? JINQ? (via TechMeme)
• Steve Maine has a great series of posts on the new Web Programming Model that’s coming in .NET 3.5 and is currently being previewed as part of the BizTalk Services SDK. But it was his Balancing reach and rich post that I found most illuminating. The first version of WCF feels hopelessly bound to the WS-* view of the world, which makes it difficult to incorporate alternative messaging models into the same programming model. I’ve run into this trying to use SSB with WCF. In the next version, that WCF / WS-* marriage looks like it’s getting a little more open. In my current role, I’m not so interested in the web programming model, but I am very interested in how they are integrating these alternative models.

While I was crusing the zoo with the family on Monday, everyone else was focused on the big announcement coming out of MIX. Short version of the press release: the next version of Silverlight contains a small, cross platform CLR. As you might imagine, this is somewhat significant. Check out reaction from TechCrunch, Sam Gentile and Scott Hanselman.

A year ago, I wrote “Where else should the CLR live?” At the time, I was talking about XNA (which had just been announced) though I was aware of the plans around what I think is now officially called CoreCLR (got the name from Scott’s post). The first time I heard about this, it literally floored me. Part of me is surprised that in the year since then the news didn’t leak and no one figured it out. I mean, doesn’t it seem sorta obvious, in retrospect, that a Silverlight should run on CLR? I mean, if we can shrink the CLR down to fit on a watch, getting it into the browser seems like a no-brainer. On the other hand, it’s such a huge departure from “Windows, Windows, Windows” that I wonder if most people had (have?) a hard time wrapping their mind around it.

(Actually, in searching for CoreCLR, I discovered this post from last summer basically confirming “the CoreCLR team working on the Macintosh version of the MiniCLR that’s going into WPF/E”. So it did leak, but it seems to have been met with significant skepticism and didn’t make much news. )

Now that you know all about Silverlight and CoreCLR, go back and re-read my Virtuous Cycle of Virtual Platforms post. Especially the last paragraph (complete with the bad grammar):

If the end user isn’t committed to a virtual platform like Flash, then who is? The developers who build software for that virtual platform. This is Virtuous Cycle of Virtual Platforms between the platform and developers instead of the platform and users. In the old model, developers go where the users are. In the new model, users go to where developers are. And developers go where they can be most effective.

Silverlight vs Flash looks to me like the next big platform war competition. It’s just getting started, so you can’t say with any certainty which platform will be “most effective”. But early Silverlight reviews are pretty impressive. TechCrunch’s Michael Arrington wrote that Silverlight “makes Flash/Flex look like an absolute toy”. That doesn’t erase Flash Player’s head start in the RIA space, but it certainly makes catching and surpassing Flash sound feasible. I suspect most people didn’t think that sounded at all feasible last week.

Of course, while catching Flash may sound feasible, Microsoft is a long way from achieving that goal. While the point of my earlier post is that that market penetration doesn’t provide much advantage in the virtual platform market, Adobe does derive significant advantage from shipping nine versions of Flash while we haven’t quite shipped the first version of Silverlight yet. Also, while I’m fairly sure the number of .NET developers far exceeds the number of Flash developers (anyone have hard numbers?), I would also expect that the number designers using Flash far exceeds the number of designers using Expression (given that MSFT only just shipped Expression on this week). I believe an important facet to the Silverlight / Flash platform competition will be a race to woo the competitor’s core constituency. Can Microsoft woo more designers with Expression than Adobe can woo developers with Flex? We’ll see.

I’m also curious to see how people’s perspective of Adobe’s Apollo project changes in the wake of the Silverlight/CoreCLR announcement. From my perspective, both Microsoft and Adobe are trying to unify web and desktop development. Not surprisingly, each is trying to unify around the model where they’re stronger: Apollo takes the web development paradigm (Flash, HTML, AJAX and JavaScript) to the desktop while Silverlight takes desktop development paradigm (WPF, CLR) to the web. I’m sure you can guess which paradigm I think will be more successful, but how will the market react? Again, we’ll see.