|
Graham Cottle wrote: The 2010 and 2012 colour printing functions are awful with huge margins and no control of how it is printed
For years now I've simply copied and pasted into Word, where I can properly preview the results before printing.
Has the added benefit of being able to force page breaks to occur in sensible places.
"If you don't fail at least 90 percent of the time, you're not aiming high enough."
Alan Kay.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes - I have tried that as well, but then I have Word decide to use its own tab settings rather than those I want. Guess I should set up a template I could paste into. Probably save some time as well..
|
|
|
|
|
I, too, use a Word Template (have since 1996), with the font, margins, header, etc. I like.
It has an AutoNew macro that pops up the OpenFile dialog so I can select the file I want, then it handles the rest.
|
|
|
|
|
Hadn't thought of that, but like the idea and will be implementing shortly. It might get me partially out of VS hell where versions which are meant to play alongside each other and don't. Intellisense being the biggest pain when it disappears.
|
|
|
|
|
It seems lot of you use older versions of VS, especially at work.
It there any reason for that? Or there is just no rush for updating?
|
|
|
|
|
I think the problem is that Visual Studio is heavy and slows down computer. VS 2012 is lighter and the usage is more fluent.
|
|
|
|
|
Most improvements are for c#, not c++
|
|
|
|
|
True, but the standards conformance has got better with each release.
"If you don't fail at least 90 percent of the time, you're not aiming high enough."
Alan Kay.
|
|
|
|
|
On the framework/language/compiler level true.
But aren't the general IDE & performance improvements worth updating?
Recently I have been working with VS2010 and it's really heavy and slow comparing to 2012/2013...
|
|
|
|
|
I am using 2008, which is very fast. More importantly it's the last version to support macros, which critical to my productivity
|
|
|
|
|
The problem has a name: "Visual Basic". 
The VS 6 was the last version which has the legacy Visual Basic ("NOT DOT VB")
Press F1 for help or google it.
Greetings from Germany
|
|
|
|
|
2012 is the standard here but WPF ribbon control is broken in it so until I get round to switching it out and using the fluent ribbon I will continue in 2010 for some projects
|
|
|
|
|
In some of the places I've worked the problem is with the purse-keepers (aka Accountants) ... they just can't be convinced that there is benefit in paying out money for upgrading 
|
|
|
|
|
I still use 2010, because there hasn't been anythign I needed enough in teh last three years to make me switch (and the Dark Side view and SHOUTY MENU put me off). If they had fixed some of the bugs I fight with that have been there since VS2005, then I'd have upgraded like a shot, but...
It's possible I'll upgrade to 2015, once SP1 is released - I've met Microsoft's idea of a "release ready" product before! 
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
On the shouty menu front, I stumbled across this[^] today. Had to swap 11.0 for 12.0 but it did work. Not so shouty now are you Mr V Studio? Hah! 
I then moved from the Dark Side to the Light Side (Tools, Options, Environment, General, Color Theme) - which was almost as off-putting. So I opted for the middle of the road "blue" option. It was about then I spotted the "Turn off upper case in the menu bar option" in the same tab 
So overall I think you're right to stick with 2010 for now
|
|
|
|
|
A lot of times it's an issue with taking the time to upgrade and do regression testing. Every upgrade takes time (and time is money), so finding the time to do it is tricky.
|
|
|
|
|
Same here, we have a couple of projects which have been built with VS 2008, 2010. Currently there is no incentive which would justify the effort required for the upgrades.
|
|
|
|
|
You couple that with the frequency of releases of new VS versions... well, there's really no incentive for a business to try to keep up with that.
|
|
|
|
|
Because each new version worsens the experience. Even 2010 is harder to use than 2008.
|
|
|
|
|
Jarek Kruza wrote: It seems lot of you use older versions of VS, especially at work.
It there any reason for that? Or there is just no rush for updating?
It is because we write software targeted for multiple OS versions. If you write something using VS6 for example, your targets will run properly (as long as the support files are installed) from anything from Windows 2000 up to Windows 2020 (whatever).
If you develop using Visual Studio 2012 for example, your code will not work on user machines running Vista or earlier.
I'm retired. There's a nap for that...
- Harvey
|
|
|
|
|
The truth in your words is amazing. Where I work we have very old machines with win2k, the majority of machines with XP and we're moving now to win7, but on an experimental basis.
We don't use .NET so we really don't need fancy new versions of VS.
Geek code v 3.12
GCS d--- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L- E-- W++ N++ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t++ 5? X R++ tv-- b+ DI+++ D++ G e++>+++ h--- r++>+++ y+++*
Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
|
|
|
|
|
At work it's VS2010. As for my own private projects I stick with 2008 and probably will for the duration. I develop almost entirely for the desktop and a little bit of web. All the tools I've bought (my reporting system, etc.) all plug in to it and I'm, frankly, sick of upgrading things all the time. I like the GUI of 2008 best of all of 'em, it's fast and the programs I write run on every version of Windows from XP up. Why cough up any more money, particularly if I'm not overextending this technology now, eh? 
|
|
|
|
|
Biggest speedbump for me is that while the beancounters have bought an MSDN subscription, getting them to buy new versions of Re#er is a royal PITA. The version I have supports up to vs2012; but with that being a v1.0 for the new UI there wasn't much (read any) interest in upgrading to it.
I've played with VS2015; but the preview releases aren't licensed for production, so anyone using one of them *should* also be using an older one.
I've also got a handful of legacy apps still on VS03. For one the newest version is in VS2010; but a 3rd party UI component not working with .net 2.0 (or later) means I need to keep 03 around to do regression testing. The other I'm in the process of trying to upgrade to 2010; current status is Works on My Machine on the production box it's failing. I suspect the problem has to due with that box having locked down security permissions and .net 2+ replacing a single knob that can be turned to trust everything with a finer grained permission system, but need to do more investigation to be sure.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
|
Jarek Kruza wrote: especially at work.
You answered your own question. Rarely have I found a company that keeps abreast (within 1 year, let's say) of the latest software tools. And let's not even talk about keeping developers updated with the latest hardware!
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
Jarek Kruza wrote: It seems lot of you use older versions of VS, especially at work.
It there any reason for that?
You'd have to ask their employers. Generally you can only use what the employer licenses you to.
Kevin
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
