Without wanting to be over negative about this post, I can't help thinking this is actually an own goal on behalf of Linetime.

Sure, while the Windows Client and Web services with .Net Framework certification gives the impression of all things .NET, a little digging on Google suggests otherwise.

Windows Client - Doesn't actually require a .Net application to get this certification, in fact I would suggest that any vendor could get this certification without too much work.

Web Service + .Net framework - in its simplest form, expose and consume a web service using the .Net Framework - WOW, Ground breaking stuff.

Am afraid that neither of the above suggests a completely rewritten from the ground up application.

Managed Code certification fits considerably better with a complete re-write in .NET. Any takers on this one ?

Further info for anyone interested in link below.

http://www.lionbridge.com/NR/rdonlyres/E58BCE6D-1AD5-45D0-AB9A-CB2194D8DE8F/0/PlatformTestAppSpec096.pdf

Apologies in advance for any spelling or gramatical errors in this post, was busy removing the wool from my eyes.

I think I am correct in saying that IRIS Law Business has at least the same certification and obtained it by passing the Windows Client and Managed Code parts.

That would pretty much indicate what you are saying then correct? A complete re-write from the ground up.

If this is true then it would certainly indicate a re-write from the ground up.

Given the amount of vendors who claim to have .Net products it seems a little strange that no one is owning up to said Microsoft certification.

There's .NET and ther's .NET ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_CLI_languages

My last dev team only thought I was half joking when I said we were going back to COBOL

what was the point of that post

Hey IP address 79.75.113.156 - for someone who says they don't like this blog, you've been doing a lot of anonymous posts recently

Love to know how you tell what IP address the poster is using?

Because that's probably Charles posting the IP address.

Log files, I love 'em.

And now we all know the Anonymous user is using a Tiscali account ...

Anyone who thinks that an accreditation from Microsoft actually means anything (other than a bit more money heading towards Seattle) is kidding themselves. It certainly has precious little to do with the quality of the product, and I'd tend to be rather suspicious of a vendor who stressed their accreditations over, say, customer testimonials.

Hang on, first of all it was 'why arn't vendors saying they have passed certifications' now its 'you should be suspicious of vendors that do'.

Before this, vendors hadn't gone out of their way to publicise the fact that they had qualified for them. This is likely because they know full well it isn't exactly rocket science to pass them and only did it to get MSDN subscriptions etc.

These certifications mean precisely nothing to customers; if they were something more substantial like 'designed for x' etc then fair enough but they are not. Any products that can't actually conform to these though I would be seriously worried about!

Any takers for products that can't pass these then?!