Software Architect == Building Architect?

FL Code Monkey · Guest

I consider myself a fairly accomplished and experienced
C# programmer, but I lack a comprehensive understanding
of systems analysis and architecture design, more
specifically how to build application architectures that
are resilient to expansion / adding features and not so
prone to modification-induced bugs(as my current major
project seems to break in one way or another in seemingly
unrelated ways sometimes when I add a feature).

I am considering taking instructor-led MCSD training for
70-300 to help me learn to blueprint / architect a better
solution.

I guess my questions are:

1) Basically I know how to program some design
patterns and I know the framework fairly well (for most
things I would be using), is 70-300 really going to help
me with blueprinting and designing a resilient
architecture, or am I just hoping for too much?

2) Do you think that the problem would not be solved
by 70-300 and that the problem actually lies in the
programming itself?

3) Is it totally due to a lack of regression testing?

4) Is it a combination of above?

5) Are there any video-based training courses that
you can recommend, since the next instructor-led course I
could find in my area isn't until January?

Thanks

FL Code Monkey

Saga · Guest

Is this a pop quiz? <g>

I can only give my opinion, as your question touch on profound
subjects that may have various points of view.

I have always thought that a good application consists of
planning and programming. I have found it almost impossible
to design an app that didn't get expanded in some way that it
didn't break.

I try to build apps in such a way that1) I plan ahead by designing
scalable interfaces and data sources and 2) I program leaving back
doors for expansion, which has been as simple as not hardcoding
values or as complicated as componentizing functionality.

I too am preparing for 70-300 and what I have read so far presents
a methodology (albeit from an MS point of view) that developers can use
to better plan the project ahead. Although better apps can be developed
through plannnig, it is also important that the coding part of the
project
be done well, with its own planning stage.

Sorry.. no videos to recommend, although that isn't a bad idea, as long
as they don't end up costing $499.99 USD! <g>

Good luck!
Saga

"FL Code Monkey" <anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:53dd01c4c679$53f76080$a301280a@phx.gbl...

Guest

I've seen a lot of systems with a well architected application tier, but
very weak database design and implementation, so you may want to look into
70-229 as well.
WKidd

"FL Code Monkey" <anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:53dd01c4c679$53f76080$a301280a@phx.gbl...

Pieter de Bruin · Guest

Dear FL Code Monkey,

Studying for 70-300 will only get you one thing: MSF. The Microsoft Solution
Framework is MS' methodology to software development.
To actually pass a 70-300 exam you have to know more than that: know MS'
server products, their vision, MSDN articles etc.
The best preparation is doing a project is this area, preferably with an
experienced colleague.

If you're still considering doing 70-300 only by studying, consider Exam
Cram 2's .NET Solution Architectures from Que.

HTH,

Pieter de Bruin
Avanade Netherlands

"WKidd" wrote:

Rich · Guest

I agree that the Exam Cram book is the best study guide for 70-300.

I seem to remember spending a lot of time reading all that stuff about the
MSF - because the MS Study Guide just goes on and on about it. And I read a
lot of MSDN articles about it, too, because that crummy study guide made it
sould like that's what the test was all about.

But it's not. It covers a whole plethora of more specific aspects of .NET -
like .NET Remoting, Interops, Security, even coding standards. The questions
are case studies where they present a scenario and ask questions like whether
the application somebody needs would best be a Windows app, or a web app,
etc. Had some normailzation questions and a few on ORM. There were only a
couple of questions on MSF phases and all that.

The MSF isn't so much about good design as it is about project phases,
roles, deliverables, testing strategies, requirements management, risk
management etc. It's about a project pespective, as opposed to the specifics
of OOD, etc. Personally, what I thought is good about it is that its
flexible in terms of the specific tasks and would be performed by different
people, given the circumstances surround a project.

"Pieter de Bruin" wrote:

Rich · Guest

You're talking about some of the biggest challenges in software development -
things that people have been trying to figure out for decades.

70-300 is not going to help you do anything but get certified. If that's
what you want, go for it. Otherwise, look elsewhere.

"FL Code Monkey" wrote:

Guest

Assuming the role of both architect and developer (and doing an adequite job
of both) is probably not feasible on a large project. In many cases the
fundamental problem is that the project team is not structured or funded
properly.
WKidd

"Rich" <Rich@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:27C8041F-B683-4747-8987-31F63D5819D5@microsoft.com...