|
Although I have VS2010 I am currently only *testing* it.
So far as I use any of the versions my mainstay is still VS2008.
Also, in the "if it ain't broke don't fix it" I still have stuff on VS2005 & VS2003.
Henry Minute
Do not read medical books! You could die of a misprint. - Mark Twain
Girl: (staring) "Why do you need an icy cucumber?"
“I want to report a fraud. The government is lying to us all.”
Why do programmers often confuse Halloween and Christmas?
Because 31 Oct = 25 Dec.
|
|
|
|
|
I think that Visual Studio 2010 is the best. But there is always something to improve. So let us look forward to the next. That's all folks.
|
|
|
|
|
Heribert Bennek wrote: But there is always something to improve. So let us look forward to the next.
the Microsoft sales department couldn't have said it better.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes it's pretty but it's not perfect unfortunately.It behaves much more better VS2008 when working on HD or Full HD displays, but it still has some terrible problems - for example when you select any text in the IDE it starts
blinking (on my full HD display under Win 7) , which is awful reaction. 
Life is a stage and we are all actors!
|
|
|
|
|
Very often this is controlled by the clients needs.
Some clients do not care what version of .Net they use-so long as their product works.
Others, however like to use the latest.
It's best to be prepared to use any of the last two or three releases of .Net.
My signature "sucks" today
|
|
|
|
|
Visual Studio 2010 has a better look, better stability, and less memory/CPU load than any previous version. Did I mention it's faster, too.
|
|
|
|
|
ericdecesare wrote: Visual Studio 2010 has a better look, better stability, and less memory/CPU load than any previous version. Did I mention it's faster, too.
And just because they thought this wouldn't be good enough for us, they even removed the documentation started to reimplement the help system but didn't get the job done in time and delivered a fully unusable documentation. Oh, and for those who know MSDN by heart, they still built in some nice random crashes when working with the WPF editor... 
Let's not be that cynical, though; managed Intellisense is somewhat improved, though not in XAML, and the UI, which I don't really care for, is a bit more shiny, and... oh wait... that's cynical again. I still use VS2010 daily, though. Maybe that's the reason... 
.NET 4, though, is a really, really nice step forward.
|
|
|
|
|
So far, so good, I use it for Winform, WPF, Silverlight and Data centric apps. It runs smooth....
Two heads are better than one.
|
|
|
|
|
I shall let others work out the flaws and problems in 2010 before I move over.
There are always issues with new MS products, so a SP1 or other significant fix must occur before I abandon the previous technology.
------------------------------------
I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave
|
|
|
|
|
I don't understand why so many people use this canned message all the time. If anything it could be attributed to every company.
However, I would caution that not upgrading might cost you in other areas. For example, we had a TFS2005 server go down... lost availability of the RAID array which caused the SQL2005 database to become corrupt. If we hadn't of had a sufficient tape backup, we were stuck with a lengthy data recovery issue. In talking with MS, if we had been up at the 2008 TFS level, they would have been able to recover the data much easier because of significant improvements to the underlying data store. Who knew.
In the end, VS2010 is really nice. Office 2007 however is the dogs breakfast.
|
|
|
|
|
I have to agree with that, we moved to Visual Studio 2008 when it first came and it gave us problems, luckly its use was for internal applications so not too much of a nightmare
Marc Clifton wrote: That has nothing to do with VB. - Oh crap. I just defended VB!
|
|
|
|
|
I do not know that following verison exist
I have never even heard of it
Visual Studio 97
Developer Studio
Life's Like a mirror. Smile at it & it smiles back at you.- P Pilgrim
So Smile Please
|
|
|
|
|
Visual Studio 97 was the first version of Visual Studio.
Developer Studio refers to the IDE shell for Visual C++ 4 which was shared by Visual Fortran IIRC. This shell then added Visual InterDev and Visual J++ in Visual Studio 97.
In Visual Studio 6 InterDev and J++ then moved to the Microsoft Development Environment shell which was the precursor to the current Visual Studio shell.
Kevin
|
|
|
|
|
The real total, at this time is 168 not 98
|
|
|
|
|
66
119
43
13
2
33
1
1
0
2
Responses 155
The actual m_nCount is now: 280, not 155.
Looks like someone forgot to drink their morning tea.
NULL
|
|
|
|
|
Did you saw the line just below Resonses?
Respondents were allowed to choose more than one answer; totals may not add up to 100%
-Saurabh
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, looks like I forgot to drink my morning tea.
NULL
|
|
|
|
|
|
Most probably company policy, licenses, and/or legacy code.
<font face="Helvetica" size="1">Nuclear launch detected</font>
|
|
|
|
|
that's all those C/C++ developers out there.
|
|
|
|
|
Not that my group uses it, but we have projects that are still active and have quite a bit of code "stuck" on VB6. Automatically porting or migrating the code is not as easy as keeping vb.net/c# code up to date. So its there as legacy, but it's still being used to implement fixes or minor enhancements. I wish they would migrate for simplicity sake, but there is no allotted development budget to do so (surprise, surprise). I would expect that to be the reason why there is a blip at version 6.
|
|
|
|
|
We still use that a lot. It's not worth spending a man year to port a million lines of VC6 C++/MFC code to 2008.
John
|
|
|
|
|
John M. Drescher wrote: a man year to port a million lines of VC6 C++/MFC code to 2008
I've done it a couple of times already - it is not that hard at all and the chances are a new compiler will actually reveal bugs that you need to fix anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
Nemanja Trifunovic wrote: chances are a new compiler will actually reveal bugs that you need to fix anyway
So true. And chances are also that new library versions can bring some bugs to the surface, causing incorrect code that passed the test yesterday to fail randomly at customers having that rare system option turned on. And these bugs can be really hard to find.
That said, it's not easy to give a recommendation on the topic.
|
|
|
|
|
I am way more shocked at the 45% number for the beta compiler.
John
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
