So for the fourth time in seven months, I have a new manager. Way way way back and the end of June, I left marketing to be a solution architect. In doing so, I traded in Norman for John as my manager. Things were looking shiny but then Microsoft had a major reorg back in September. These big reorgs often cause small ripples, like the director of Architecture Strategy deciding to move back to a product group. John was promoted to head the team and Gianpaolo was hired to take over John’s previous role as head of solution architecture. Finally, it seemed like things were calming down on the management front, so I was caught off-guard by what happened next.

Last Monday, John offered me a chance to switch roles. We have spun up an Edge Architecture team to focus on the architectural impact of the next generation of computing – what some call “Web 2.0″ – and he thought I would be a perfect fit for the team. I agreed and jumped at the chance. So now I work for Michael Platt. Don’t let the infrastructure focus of Michael’s blog fool you – he incredibly deep on Edge Architecture and I am currently playing catch-up. The strangest thing so far is having to re-orient my thinking for consumer focused systems and away from the enterprise world where I have I’ve gotten the vast majority of my experience and where I have spent my entire Microsoft career to date.

In the immediate future, I’m been dumped into the MIX06 planning process. We have other stuff going on in the MIX timeframe that I’ll get to soon enough. I’m also re-thinking my personal presence. As my career progresses, the moniker “DevHawk” seems more and more outdated. Is it?

I couldn’t blog about the Outlook Integration Sample last week because we were waiting to see if the mainstream media would pick up the news. CNET ran an article about the sample today. There’s also a link to the Customer Explorer case study that was the original inspiration for the Outlook Integration Sample and VSTO Outlook in the first place.

I haven’t seen much in the way of response to my Hi-Fi Models post, but I did come across this great article by Ted Neward on the history of the tumultuous marriage of objects and relational databases, primarily in the context of LINQ. In the context of Code is Model, the following passage from the summary was the most interesting:

While Project LINQ doesn’t purport to be the “final answer” to all of the world’s object-relational mismatch problems, it does represent a significant shift in direction to solving the problem; instead of taking an approach that centers around code generation, or automated mapping based around metadata and type inference, both of which are exercises in slaving the relational model to an object-oriented one, Project LINQ instead chooses to elevate relations and queries as a first-class concept within language semantics and library-based extensions.
[Comparing LINQ and Its Contemporaries – Ted Neward]

When Ted says relations and queries are elevated to “first class concepts” within the language, it makes me think of Stuart’scomment about language fidelity. I’m not sure I would say C# 3.0 is at a higher level of abstraction than 2.0, but I would say that the inclusion of these new abstractions does improve the language’s fidelity. This fidelity improvement does come at the cost of complexity (TANSTAAFL) but compared to the current alternatives, I’m willing to pay that price.

The problem with increasing the language fidelity like this is dealing with the outdated code it leaves behind. You see this today with the addition of generics in the 2.0 CLR. How many hand-coded or generated strongly typed collections are floating around out there from the 1.x days? Lots. (As if 1.x was so long ago!) How much database access code is floating around out there today? An astronomical amount. Every app that touches a database or processes XML will be outdated with the arrival of C# 3.0 and VB 9.0. But the price of converting this outdated code to use the new abstractions probably won’t be worth the time or risk. That means you’re left with maintaining the outdated code while also writing any new functionality with the new language features.

I wonder how DSLs will be impacted by this evolving language fidelity issue? On the one hand, the nature of DSLs is that they have much narrower usage (i.e. one domain) than something like generics or LINQ. On the other hand, I expect DSLs to evolve faster than general mainstream languages like C# can. So I’m thinking the impact will be about the same.

For the past few months, I’ve been heavily involved in a project but I wasn’t allowed to blog about it. Last week, it went live on MSDN so finally the gag is off.

About a year ago, word started to surface about something called Project Elixir which aimed to integrate back end CRM systems with Microsoft Outlook. Part of that effort resulted in the addition of Outlook Managed Add-ins to Visual Studio 2005 Tools for Office. However, the VSTO team’s primary deliverable was an add-in loader that enforced security, enabled shutdown unloading and provided a better startup/shutdown developer experience that IDTExtensibility2. (Check out the VSTO Outlook Architecture document for more details.) While those are important fundamentals that needed to be gotten right, VSTO Outlook doesn’t provide much in the way of tools or guidance for building Outlook add-ins that leverage managed forms and controls or integrate with your back end systems. That’s where the CRM Integration for Outlook sample comes in.

What we’ve built is a sample application that surfaces CRM style data inside of Outlook. Outlook is the natural home for your calendar and your personal contacts. Why not make it the natural home for your customer contacts, activities and opportunities as well? As part of the demo project we’ve implemented:

• Using Windows Forms for editing custom items. Check out this screenshot. The Activity form is a standard managed Windows Forms form, not an Outlook custom form.
• Using a Windows Forms user control as a folder home page. Here’s a screenshot of the “CRM Today” page. Again, that’s a standard managed Windows Forms user control.
• A framework for adding menu items and toolbars. In Outlook, the developer has to manage adding the custom toolbars and menu to each explorer and inspector window themselves. With our sample, we built a framework to handle that for you.
• Using SQL Express as a local cache of CRM data. It turns out that for many scenarios, storing a copy of all the back-end data directly in Outlook is a bad idea. First, it increases the size of the users mailbox, requiring more storage on the Exchange server. Furthermore, any custom data in Outlook has to be synced twice – once from the back end system to Outlook on the desktop, then from Outlook back to Exchange. By minimizing the amount of back-end data stored in Outlook proper, we reduce the mailbox size and sync bandwidth needs. In both the above screenshots, the displayed data is coming out of the local SQL Express instance, not Outlook.
• Having two separate storage locations (Outlook & SQL Express) means having to sync between them. We’ve built a local sync engine that can sync both individual items between Outlook and SQL Express as well as a collection of items between SQL Express and a given Outlook folder.
• Finally, there are some utility classes to make it easier to deal with Outlook folders and items. Of primary note is the ItemAdapter class which provides a pseudo base class for Outlook items (appointments, emails, tasks, etc). Those items all have a set of similar properties and methods, but don’t have a common base class so they can’t be treated polymorphicaly. ItemAdapter uses runtime reflection to implement those common operations without needing to cast to the concrete Outlook item type.

Check out the Architecture Design Guide, as well as the Outlook Customization Guide and the Local Sync Engine Guide up on the Solution Architecture Center. You can also pick up the source code. Also, I spun up a GDN Workspace so we can have a discussion forum and to track bugs and requests.

Going forward, I’m going to be focusing on the remote data sync story for this scenario. Among other responsibilities, I “own” the Data pillar of our Connected Systems model so this dovetails nicely. You’ll note above that while we have a local sync engine in the sample, we don’t have any way to move the data back and forth between the local copy in SQL Express and the remote copy in the CRM back-end. We are working on some guidance around this right now, but we didn’t want to hold up publishing the rest of the sample.

Frankly, it’s been nice to be involved with something so technical after spending time on the marketing team. I’m pretty proud of the project and I look forward to your feedback.

Update: Removed the link to the running demo as it’s been taken off the download site for reasons I am not aware of. If you want the binary and you don’t know how to compile it, drop me a mail.

Gianpaolo took over the Solution Architecture team a few months ago and he rebooted his blog a couple of weeks ago. And he’s active on the afore mentioned Architecture Forums. Subscribed.