<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="http://blogs.technet.com/utility/FeedStylesheets/rss.xsl" media="screen"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"><channel><title>Tech Ed 2004</title><link>http://blogs.technet.com/michael_platt/archive/2004/04/27/120914.aspx</link><description>Tech Ed this year is being touted as much more architecturally focussed than ever before with a special architect track so I though I would go and have a look at what sessions I would go to at Teched . First of all there are a terrifying number of breakouts</description><dc:language>en-GB</dc:language><generator>CommunityServer 2.1 SP1 (Build: 61025.2)</generator><item><title>re: Tech Ed 2004</title><link>http://blogs.technet.com/michael_platt/archive/2004/04/27/120914.aspx#120919</link><pubDate>Tue, 27 Apr 2004 12:21:00 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">d5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:120919</guid><dc:creator>Johnny Hall</dc:creator><description>I'm intrrigued as to why there doesn't appear to be a ny sessions about the Microsoft Business Framework.  Any idea?&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;I'm interested in how this fits in with SOA, ObjectSpaces, and ShadowFax.  It seems odd there's no mention of it.</description></item><item><title>re: Tech Ed 2004</title><link>http://blogs.technet.com/michael_platt/archive/2004/04/27/120914.aspx#120934</link><pubDate>Tue, 27 Apr 2004 13:14:00 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">d5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:120934</guid><dc:creator>Michael Platt</dc:creator><description>Well in general when we don’t have large scale public sessions on something if they are further out than the scope of the event (eg 1-2 years). &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;With regard to the specifics of MBF I have no idea why there is no mention of it in Tech Ed 2004 :)&lt;br&gt;</description></item><item><title>re: Tech Ed 2004</title><link>http://blogs.technet.com/michael_platt/archive/2004/04/27/120914.aspx#120937</link><pubDate>Tue, 27 Apr 2004 13:20:00 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">d5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:120937</guid><dc:creator>Johnny Hall</dc:creator><description>It's my understanding that the first release of MBF is with Whidbey and the second is with Orcas.  There was at least one session at the PDC.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Thanks for answering though.  Maybe I should ask Tim?</description></item><item><title>re: Tech Ed 2004</title><link>http://blogs.technet.com/michael_platt/archive/2004/04/27/120914.aspx#120941</link><pubDate>Tue, 27 Apr 2004 13:27:00 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">d5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:120941</guid><dc:creator>Michael Platt</dc:creator><description>Orcas is Longhorn timeframe and so out of scope of Tech Ed.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;By all means ask Tim, I'll be interested to see what he says!</description></item><item><title>re: Tech Ed 2004</title><link>http://blogs.technet.com/michael_platt/archive/2004/04/27/120914.aspx#120955</link><pubDate>Tue, 27 Apr 2004 14:07:00 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">d5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:120955</guid><dc:creator>Johnny Hall</dc:creator><description>&lt;a target="_new" href="http://weblogs.asp.net/tims/archive/2004/04/16/114640.aspx#120946"&gt;http://weblogs.asp.net/tims/archive/2004/04/16/114640.aspx#120946&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Thanks again!</description></item><item><title>re: Tech Ed 2004</title><link>http://blogs.technet.com/michael_platt/archive/2004/04/27/120914.aspx#130211</link><pubDate>Wed, 12 May 2004 11:36:00 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">d5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:130211</guid><dc:creator>Chris Garty</dc:creator><description>Tim Brookins' recent post should clear up the confusion about the silence surrounding MBF: &lt;a target="_new" href="http://blogs.msdn.com/timbrookins/archive/2004/05/10/129124.aspx"&gt;http://blogs.msdn.com/timbrookins/archive/2004/05/10/129124.aspx&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;I think the architectural focus is in line with the maturing of the industry. Software engineers are simply moving 'up the stack'; doing more assembly and less building. It seems quite natural to move to higher levels of abstraction since we have been doing it since the beginning; 1GL -&amp;gt; 2GL -&amp;gt; 3GL -&amp;gt; 4GL. I'm sure the move from assembler to C received just as much attention ;)</description></item><item><title>re: Tech Ed 2004</title><link>http://blogs.technet.com/michael_platt/archive/2004/04/27/120914.aspx#133205</link><pubDate>Mon, 17 May 2004 22:56:00 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">d5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:133205</guid><dc:creator>Michael Platt</dc:creator><description>Yes, Tim Brookings' post was what I was alluding too. I had heard that it was going to move into Longhorn but couldnt actually say that as I am not part of the group that owns MBF, hence the :)</description></item><item><title>Team System (Burton)</title><link>http://blogs.technet.com/michael_platt/archive/2004/04/27/120914.aspx#140996</link><pubDate>Tue, 25 May 2004 11:28:00 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">d5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:140996</guid><dc:creator>Michael Platt's WebLog</dc:creator><description /></item></channel></rss>