|
I am a student of petroleum university of Iran.Thanks for your helps for your lovely codes.
I hope you continue this relation.
thank you goodbye.
|
|
|
|
|
Ouch! Why not charge $99 for the Express versions and then drop the price on the Pro version? Most serious programmers would want the Pro version, but $549 is quite pricey for an upgrade.
|
|
|
|
|
Because the express versions are USELESS. Nobody would pay $99 for that.
------- sig starts
"I've heard some drivers saying, 'We're going too fast here...'. If you're not here to race, go the hell home - don't come here and grumble about going too fast. Why don't you tie a kerosene rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001
|
|
|
|
|
While waiting for Visual Studio 2005 ready to shipped (it's back-order world-wide) I'm using Express. It's limited, I agree, but you can still use it for personal need.
Limitation are not that much, do you compile for 64bit processor?, having source-control system?
Compare visual studio version[^]
-- modified at 11:46 Thursday 15th December, 2005
|
|
|
|
|
mistert25 wrote: Ouch! Why not charge $99 for the Express versions and then drop the price on the Pro version? Most serious programmers would want the Pro version, but $549 is quite pricey for an upgrade.
Because $549 is chicken feed to the target market for the VS 2005 professional edition. Or at least that's how Microsoft's market research see it. I know I can recoup the investment with four days work so it is a no-brainer... of course getting the work in the first place is another matter 
Microsoft have never really found the best way to target the market for the hobbyist-amateur-very small business programmer who really only wants to use the tools for gaining experience and doesn't have the financial structure to support the investment.
This has always been the case in the past, when I first started out I had to save my pennies for a long time before I could afford Borland C++ 4.5 for my own personal use. And then I had to save a lot of money again to get my first MSDN universal subscription. It seemed unfair at the time that getting the experience needed to be a better developer cost me so much money... but the investment has paid off many times over since then.
Michael
CP Blog [^] Development Blog [^]
|
|
|
|
|
I'm not impressed with Team suite. It seems to me that they have taken everything that the open source community has already created, namely: Subversion, NUnit, NAnt and put a Microsoft wrapper around it and expect us to pay an arm and a leg for the privilege. I dumped Source(un)safe along time ago for Subversion and Tortoise and I can say that my team has been very happy with the results.
Team Suite? No thanks, I've been using Subversion for the past 18 months and I'm very happy with it thanks.
Stano.
|
|
|
|
|
We paid for four copies of the Pro Edition at work, and then sat through a video presentation of Team Suite with MS. They wanted us to spend another $12000 on Team Suite.
There's no way we're going to spend that kind of money because we won't make it back. We're a defense contractor and the military POC is responsible for fulfilling software requests with federal money. Since we don't actually sell anything (we just write software for whoever needs it), it's just more money down the tube for the Army.
We could go the OSS route, but nobody on our team has the time to put it together and set it up - we're too damn busy writing code.
------- sig starts
"I've heard some drivers saying, 'We're going too fast here...'. If you're not here to race, go the hell home - don't come here and grumble about going too fast. Why don't you tie a kerosene rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001
-- modified at 5:54 Friday 9th December, 2005
|
|
|
|
|
How complicated is it to create a tightly integrated production pipeline with these open source tools? Any tips/links?
The info I've found concentrates on each specific tool, whereas I really need to know about high-level interop between them all.
I want to be able to write like this in VS:
//TODO(who:Jonas, prio:2, time:4, cat:bug) Fix psd parser!
and it should automatically sync with MSProject (or the open source alternative) and my ToDoList.
I'd like to see VS tracking the time I spend in different projects/files and sync that automatically with the project management system as well.
How do I get this in the open source world?
|
|
|
|
|
It took me ages to be able to get the powers that be to get me a MSDN Professional subcription. With VS2005 beta 2 there was a profiler in the IDE, but with the RTM it's gone 
I don't need any of the Team Server stuff, I use CVS and I'm a one man programming team.
I'm feeling a bit bummed out.
-- modified at 20:04 Thursday 8th December, 2005
|
|
|
|
|
We just can't figure out what to do.
Team Edition is too expensive for anyone here to justify and has lots of extras but it would most closely duplicate what we have here with VS 2003 Enterprise with Visual Source Safe.
Also, many of our team work on projects by ourselves and fulfill many roles, so we would want elements of each Team role version at different times. Getting all the roles/features that we will need from time to time is too great a cost.
We are seriously considering considering a lower end version (Standard or Professional)and then gain the extra capabilities through open source software, especially for the source code control (Subversion). We may even throw out Visual Studio in favor of better tools from Borland or others and try Mono related environments to see if those are capable enough for us.
MS wants to have the high end market that Compuware and others have had, but MS doesn't seem to be supplying broad enough tools in the low end now. MS seems to have over thought this and not considered that the tools should be very available and inexpensive in order to drive adoption.
It may be buh-bye Microsoft for us.
Peter Kryszak
-- modified at 13:40 Tuesday 6th December, 2005
|
|
|
|
|
PeterK_ wrote: Team Edition is too expensive for anyone here
Maybe banks need to come out with special financing options for people who wanna buy it 
|
|
|
|
|
I cant start to explain what team system can do for a company.
once you get all the systems up and running & everyone gets adjusted to the processes it introduces, you can very quickly generate large scale applications, where all the I's are dotted and t's crossed. it makes so many things trackable, and integrating so many technologies that it makes the thought of *not* using team system seem like an opportunity cost loss. TS streamlines end to end application lifecycles.
/bb|[^b]{2}/
|
|
|
|
|
That's all very well, but if your company gags on the price tag (and many have, from what I've seen) the MS solution won't help you a bit.
Another issue is that key parts of Team System (e.g Unit Test and Round trip modelling) just don't work with native code (this was confirmed to us by MS reps at the London launch event on 14th November). For the many teams doing primarily native code development, that reduces VSTS almost to a source control, bug tracking solution rather than the all-encompassing process it is designed to be - and for that, the cost is even less attractive.
Anna ![Rose | [Rose]](https://codeproject.freetls.fastly.net/script/Forums/Images/rose.gif)
Currently working mostly on: Visual Lint 
Anna's Place | Tears and Laughter
"Be yourself - not what others think you should be"
- Marcia Graesch
"Anna's just a sexy-looking lesbian tart"
- A friend, trying to wind me up. It didn't work.
|
|
|
|
|
I think this gets closer to the real problem with Team System for smaller organizations: too many extra features and too high a cost in order to get good source control and support for those who wear many hats.
Peter Kryszak
|
|
|
|
|
our company has 5 developers (making for almost half of our company's total employee count), and we've found it makes that much of a difference.
If you dont think its cost effective, you must not have seen it in action, or else you're not selling enough software / solutions to make it viable (in which case it isnt necessary to begin with).
I'm seriously considering purchasing my own copy for personal use.
/bb|[^b]{2}/
|
|
|
|
|
I'm a contractor at a US city. Money is not abundant for us but we have to serve more than 10,000 employees and millions of citizens. It is usually much easier to get time to develop some capability than it is to buy a product.
Peter Kryszak
|
|
|
|
|
MadHatter ¢ wrote: If you dont think its cost effective, you must not have seen it in action, or else you're not selling enough software / solutions to make it viable (in which case it isnt necessary to begin with).
Its not that it may not be cost effective, simply that many companies will not (however much their dev team tries to persuade them of its value) spend that much on software per user.
At the last company I worked for it took us 4 years to persuade them to buy an MSDN Pro subscription for the entire team (15 people), so there's no way in hell they'd fork out £7k each for the full VSTS subscription...
As I said before, MS has missed an opportunity here by only targetting the enterprise. Don't get me started on the lack of native code support in VSTS either.
MadHatter ¢ wrote: I'm seriously considering purchasing my own copy for personal use.
You've got £7k to spare to spend on software? 
Anna
Currently working mostly on: Visual Lint
Anna's Place | Tears and Laughter
"Be yourself - not what others think you should be"
- Marcia Graesch
"Anna's just a sexy-looking lesbian tart"
- A friend, trying to wind me up. It didn't work.
|
|
|
|
|
so the team foundation server is around 3k (USD).
developer, arch., and tester subscriptions are around 5.5k (USD) each. not everyone needs to have one of these (although it would be easier). this cost drops down to around 3k (USD) if you have a current subscription and renew it.
to me, having the ability to cut arch. dev. test, deployment, and maint. cost of a product internally pays for whatever the cost of migrating to a truely innovative system.
and again, its not that I have 10k laying around, its that I see great value in this product that I see myself loosing money by not using it.
/bb|[^b]{2}/
|
|
|
|
|
As a small shop we each work on multiple roles (depending on the product I'm an architect, developer, tester PM and of course Managing Director) so we'd each need a full subscription - and for the first yeasr that is £7,222.11 (Grey Matter price) each!
Given we've only just started selling our first product and have no venture capital we simply can't afford it - no matter what the productivity benefits may be!
To add to that our work is mainly unmanaged code, and for the VSTS reduces to largely a bug tracking/source control solution (the architect and tester capabilities sell unmanaged code a long way short). For that, the price tag is even less worthwhile I'm afraid. 
Anna
Currently working mostly on: Visual Lint
Anna's Place | Tears and Laughter
"Be yourself - not what others think you should be"
- Marcia Graesch
"Anna's just a sexy-looking lesbian tart"
- A friend, trying to wind me up. It didn't work.
|
|
|
|
|
That's exactly the core of the problem. The pricing is set for the Enterprise, but there is no equivalent package in the product line-up for smaller teams.
Anna
Currently working mostly on: Visual Lint
Anna's Place | Tears and Laughter
"Be yourself - not what others think you should be"
- Marcia Graesch
"Anna's just a sexy-looking lesbian tart"
- A friend, trying to wind me up. It didn't work.
|
|
|
|
|
I totally agree with the stuff above. Also at the same time Sun is releasing it's top notch developer tools for free on Java's 10th anniversary - this might be one of the reasons why Java is as popular as it is (i.e. the tools are either free or cheaper).
I personally wouldn't need the teaming options but Code Analysis, Unit and Stress Testing integrated (although I love NUnit) and design of distributed applications are a great benefit (no more 3rd party crummy tools like Borland Together).
I have to agree that this is a leap backwards from VS2003's full editions that Microsoft's ISV partners has got before. Team System is of course better, but definitely not worth price tag of over 10.000 USD - me and my customers can't afford it.
|
|
|
|
|
Perhaps the guys here need to wait a while for NTeam. Though I suspect it too will be .NET-centric, not native code-centric.
Kevin
|
|
|
|
|
So, what's the difference between VS 2005 c++ express and the other versions?
The only thing that's mentioned on the MS site is that it doesn't have MFC or ATL, or the profiler. Is that it?
|
|
|
|
|
http://msdn.microsoft.com/vstudio/products/compare/default.aspx[^]
------- sig starts
"I've heard some drivers saying, 'We're going too fast here...'. If you're not here to race, go the hell home - don't come here and grumble about going too fast. Why don't you tie a kerosene rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks.
What does "User experience...Streamlined" mean?
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
