Microsoft recants branding excess with model merger Microsoft's long march towards model-based development has seen it integrate its latest effort with the Visual Studio and the .NET Framework teams. The company said it's also scaled back on the wide-ranging use of the phrase "Oslo" to describe the modeling initiative, saying it had "really confused customers". Oslo joins .NET …
Same problem here as Henry. After reading this I am no more the wiser as to what Oslo is or could be, if anything. There's a large blob of buzzphrases in the middle of it (refering to ADO.NET et al). I've seen ADO.NET used for SQL queries and pretty, if rather rigid, tables, and XML has its obvious use as a data interchange format; neither of these are real applications in themselves.
.NET suffered the same PR problem when it was released, because it doesn't do anything by itself - but it does provide an excellent application development framework. Is Oslo another one? Do we really need another one? What are the potential or real applications of Oslo? What, in fact, is it? The article seemed to imply it might be some kind of programming language, but it buzzes too loudly to be penetrable.
I have the feeling that most people would be more likely to use software that has a name a bit more indicative of what it does...I cannot imagine that most people would be likely to think, "Oh, I should check out Adobe Boston, Intuit London or VMware Vladivostok!", unless they are a tourist.
I suppose it could have been worse, though...they've already used "Bob" for something else.
The trouble, here, is that - as with .NET - there was a genuine product (and an idea), here, at one stage, but every secondrate manager in Redmond in charge of a failing business unit has made a grab to get their product rebranded as an 'Oslo' product. Senior Partners - the Bewildered Old men, who haven't really been able to grasp what was going on since they took away the 'peek' and 'poke commands' - nonetheless remain protective of their little fiefdoms, and work tirelessly to shoehorn their product (one that should never have retained its funding in the firstplace), into the latest buzzword-protection envelope, because once within that envelope it automatically becomes 'strategic' and no one can question its viability.
Thus, "Wireless Server 2008" becomes "Oslo Wireless Server 2009", and the meme pool begins to look more and more like a sewer - as into it, is poured yet another muddled explanation as to why "Wireless Server Two-Thousand-and-Real-Soon-Now, hooks into the Oslo paradigm shift". (One bloke I spoke to, from the Redmond Campus, once told me that, as a joke, someone convinced a senior partner that 'Bluetooth' stood for 'Binary Logic Unigram Encoded Throughput in Object Oriented Transmisson Hierarchies', or something... and then let him do a presentation on it. At the end of the presentation, no one spoke up, because the partner was a level 64, or something. Is this story true, or legend? Who knows, but the very fact that people at Redmond still tell this tale to one another probably says something about how the Partners are percieved by those below them.)
Check out
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oslo_(Microsoft_project)
and the word 'Model' is there certainly - but what about View or Controller.
According to Wikipedia SP1 for .NET 3.5 says: 'Two new assemblies for web development, System.Web.Abstraction and System.Web.Routing, have been added; these are used in the ASP.NET MVC Framework and, reportedly, will be utilized in the future release of ASP.NET Forms applications.'
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
