Visual studio 2008, is it worth it?
-
I'm about to embark on a new development cycle for a major product that has winform and asp.net interface. We use Telerik, DevExpress and Infragistics components in it and all are going to have a release within a month or so which will be the one I target for our spring release of our product. They all support VS2005 and we will continue to target .net 2+ so I can't see any compelling reason so far to upgrade to VS2008. Has anyone found a compelling reason for vs2008 in the realm of .net development?
"It's so simple to be wise. Just think of something stupid to say and then don't say it." -Sam Levenson
-
I'm about to embark on a new development cycle for a major product that has winform and asp.net interface. We use Telerik, DevExpress and Infragistics components in it and all are going to have a release within a month or so which will be the one I target for our spring release of our product. They all support VS2005 and we will continue to target .net 2+ so I can't see any compelling reason so far to upgrade to VS2008. Has anyone found a compelling reason for vs2008 in the realm of .net development?
"It's so simple to be wise. Just think of something stupid to say and then don't say it." -Sam Levenson
-
I'm about to embark on a new development cycle for a major product that has winform and asp.net interface. We use Telerik, DevExpress and Infragistics components in it and all are going to have a release within a month or so which will be the one I target for our spring release of our product. They all support VS2005 and we will continue to target .net 2+ so I can't see any compelling reason so far to upgrade to VS2008. Has anyone found a compelling reason for vs2008 in the realm of .net development?
"It's so simple to be wise. Just think of something stupid to say and then don't say it." -Sam Levenson
ReSharper makes both worth more, but I prefer R# 4, which is the only one to 'serve' 2008.
-
I'm about to embark on a new development cycle for a major product that has winform and asp.net interface. We use Telerik, DevExpress and Infragistics components in it and all are going to have a release within a month or so which will be the one I target for our spring release of our product. They all support VS2005 and we will continue to target .net 2+ so I can't see any compelling reason so far to upgrade to VS2008. Has anyone found a compelling reason for vs2008 in the realm of .net development?
"It's so simple to be wise. Just think of something stupid to say and then don't say it." -Sam Levenson
I'd say there's no compelling reason given your scenario.
Kevin
-
The JavaScript debugging is improved, so if you do a lot of IE JS debugging, that might be worth it.
----
You're right. These facts that you've laid out totally contradict the wild ramblings that I pulled off the back of cornflakes packets.
Shog9 wrote:
The JavaScript debugging is improved
Yeah, but you can just use VS 2005 + Firefox + Firebug for free. :)
Kevin
-
Shog9 wrote:
The JavaScript debugging is improved
Yeah, but you can just use VS 2005 + Firefox + Firebug for free. :)
Kevin
-
Shog9 wrote:
The JavaScript debugging is improved
Yeah, but you can just use VS 2005 + Firefox + Firebug for free. :)
Kevin
Kevin McFarlane wrote:
Firefox + Firebug
Unfortunately, they still don't beat IE + VS 2008 debugging for complex web apps. Firebug just crawls in my case where as VS 2008 debugging works well (with some crashes).
Proud to be a CPHog user
-
I'm about to embark on a new development cycle for a major product that has winform and asp.net interface. We use Telerik, DevExpress and Infragistics components in it and all are going to have a release within a month or so which will be the one I target for our spring release of our product. They all support VS2005 and we will continue to target .net 2+ so I can't see any compelling reason so far to upgrade to VS2008. Has anyone found a compelling reason for vs2008 in the realm of .net development?
"It's so simple to be wise. Just think of something stupid to say and then don't say it." -Sam Levenson
Yes, it's definately worth the upgrade. I would actaully say go straight to VS2008 SP1 as well. There have been a lot of IDE improvements (usability features and speed) and improvements in the web development experience as well including better JS and CSS support.
Scott Dorman
Microsoft® MVP - Visual C# | MCPD President - Tampa Bay IASA [Blog][Articles][Forum Guidelines]
Hey, hey, hey. Don't be mean. We don't have to be mean because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are. - Buckaroo Banzai
-
Kevin McFarlane wrote:
Firefox + Firebug
Unfortunately, they still don't beat IE + VS 2008 debugging for complex web apps. Firebug just crawls in my case where as VS 2008 debugging works well (with some crashes).
Proud to be a CPHog user
I have VS 2008 Web Dev but not really used it. VS 2005 had JS debugging but I found it easier to just debug the web page with Firebug rather than having to step into VS. Does VS 2008 improve on that experience? I didn't experience a problem with Firebug.
Kevin
-
I'm about to embark on a new development cycle for a major product that has winform and asp.net interface. We use Telerik, DevExpress and Infragistics components in it and all are going to have a release within a month or so which will be the one I target for our spring release of our product. They all support VS2005 and we will continue to target .net 2+ so I can't see any compelling reason so far to upgrade to VS2008. Has anyone found a compelling reason for vs2008 in the realm of .net development?
"It's so simple to be wise. Just think of something stupid to say and then don't say it." -Sam Levenson
It is too bad you can't do 3.5 development because I LOVE the LINQ to SQL class generator. You just drag your stored procs in design view and Bam! you have methods to call them. But you may as well upgrade, it web development designer / debugging is much improved. SP1 improves performance and adds better js debugging.
I didn't get any requirements for the signature
-
It is too bad you can't do 3.5 development because I LOVE the LINQ to SQL class generator. You just drag your stored procs in design view and Bam! you have methods to call them. But you may as well upgrade, it web development designer / debugging is much improved. SP1 improves performance and adds better js debugging.
I didn't get any requirements for the signature
ToddHileHoffer wrote:
It is too bad you can't do 3.5 development
I can, I investigated it thoroughly and could see no benefit at all to it and in fact many down sides and have chosen not to use it. I have a lot of hand crafted code for getting my objects into and out of the database and performance wise it's much faster. As well we aren't married to MS SQL server as we have a db independant layer between the database and the business object framework so we can support FireBird and MS SQL and whatever else comes along that starts getting wide usage. I'm not big on stored procedures, in fact I'm very much against them but that's a discussion for another thread. :)
"It's so simple to be wise. Just think of something stupid to say and then don't say it." -Sam Levenson
-
ToddHileHoffer wrote:
It is too bad you can't do 3.5 development
I can, I investigated it thoroughly and could see no benefit at all to it and in fact many down sides and have chosen not to use it. I have a lot of hand crafted code for getting my objects into and out of the database and performance wise it's much faster. As well we aren't married to MS SQL server as we have a db independant layer between the database and the business object framework so we can support FireBird and MS SQL and whatever else comes along that starts getting wide usage. I'm not big on stored procedures, in fact I'm very much against them but that's a discussion for another thread. :)
"It's so simple to be wise. Just think of something stupid to say and then don't say it." -Sam Levenson
John C wrote:
I'm not big on stored procedures, in fact I'm very much against them but that's a discussion for another thread.
My ideal world is that database access, XML and JavaScript are all completely abstracted away so that all you ever see is business logic and UI in high level code. :)
Kevin
-
ToddHileHoffer wrote:
It is too bad you can't do 3.5 development
I can, I investigated it thoroughly and could see no benefit at all to it and in fact many down sides and have chosen not to use it. I have a lot of hand crafted code for getting my objects into and out of the database and performance wise it's much faster. As well we aren't married to MS SQL server as we have a db independant layer between the database and the business object framework so we can support FireBird and MS SQL and whatever else comes along that starts getting wide usage. I'm not big on stored procedures, in fact I'm very much against them but that's a discussion for another thread. :)
"It's so simple to be wise. Just think of something stupid to say and then don't say it." -Sam Levenson
Wow, I always use stored procs because it makes for a more secure database. No account except the system admin can update the tables without the logic auditing that is in the stored proc. Maybe you have another way of dealing with this. SP1 has some performance improvements for LINQ that might fix that for you. Even if you don't use LINQ or WCF, some of the new 3.0 syntax features are nice. The implicitly type local variables (E.G. var MyClass = new MyClass()) and auto implemented properties (E.G. public string Name { get; set; }) make programming easier. Anyway, good luck with your project, whatever you decide...
I didn't get any requirements for the signature
-
ReSharper makes both worth more, but I prefer R# 4, which is the only one to 'serve' 2008.
Argh, we moved from Resharper 3.1 to 4 & it's been a complete PITA ever since. I switch it off half the time now coz it's become a resource hog.
But fortunately we have the nanny-state politicians who can step in to protect us poor stupid consumers, most of whom would not know a JVM from a frozen chicken. Bruce Pierson
Because programming is an art, not a science. Marc Clifton
I gave up when I couldn't spell "egg". Justine Allen -
ToddHileHoffer wrote:
It is too bad you can't do 3.5 development
I can, I investigated it thoroughly and could see no benefit at all to it and in fact many down sides and have chosen not to use it. I have a lot of hand crafted code for getting my objects into and out of the database and performance wise it's much faster. As well we aren't married to MS SQL server as we have a db independant layer between the database and the business object framework so we can support FireBird and MS SQL and whatever else comes along that starts getting wide usage. I'm not big on stored procedures, in fact I'm very much against them but that's a discussion for another thread. :)
"It's so simple to be wise. Just think of something stupid to say and then don't say it." -Sam Levenson
John C wrote:
I have a lot of hand crafted code
John C's version of NHibernate? :)
John C wrote:
I'm not big on stored procedures, in fact I'm very much against them but that's a discussion for another thread.
Shot in the dark - SP's tie you to a particular RDBMS?
But fortunately we have the nanny-state politicians who can step in to protect us poor stupid consumers, most of whom would not know a JVM from a frozen chicken. Bruce Pierson
Because programming is an art, not a science. Marc Clifton
I gave up when I couldn't spell "egg". Justine Allen -
John C wrote:
I have a lot of hand crafted code
John C's version of NHibernate? :)
John C wrote:
I'm not big on stored procedures, in fact I'm very much against them but that's a discussion for another thread.
Shot in the dark - SP's tie you to a particular RDBMS?
But fortunately we have the nanny-state politicians who can step in to protect us poor stupid consumers, most of whom would not know a JVM from a frozen chicken. Bruce Pierson
Because programming is an art, not a science. Marc Clifton
I gave up when I couldn't spell "egg". Justine AllenDave Sexton wrote:
Shot in the dark - SP's tie you to a particular RDBMS?
That mostly but they are not any more performant than having the query embedded in the code if they are carefully crafted. I have a translator that automatically accounts for the minor differences between sql dialects.
"It's so simple to be wise. Just think of something stupid to say and then don't say it." -Sam Levenson
-
I'm about to embark on a new development cycle for a major product that has winform and asp.net interface. We use Telerik, DevExpress and Infragistics components in it and all are going to have a release within a month or so which will be the one I target for our spring release of our product. They all support VS2005 and we will continue to target .net 2+ so I can't see any compelling reason so far to upgrade to VS2008. Has anyone found a compelling reason for vs2008 in the realm of .net development?
"It's so simple to be wise. Just think of something stupid to say and then don't say it." -Sam Levenson
I hopped from vs2003, to vs2005 and finally to vs2008. There are some good improvements to the framework like System.Timezone and Visual Studio 2008 SP1 performs much better than any of its predecessors, especially where web development is concerned. Think about it... if your about to embark on a major cycle now, best to bring your tools up to date before you start, especially with all those 3rd party library dependencies. I know from my own experiences that the telerik controls perform a lot better in recent versions. I am certainly glad i did it ;P
---Guy H ;-)---
-
I hopped from vs2003, to vs2005 and finally to vs2008. There are some good improvements to the framework like System.Timezone and Visual Studio 2008 SP1 performs much better than any of its predecessors, especially where web development is concerned. Think about it... if your about to embark on a major cycle now, best to bring your tools up to date before you start, especially with all those 3rd party library dependencies. I know from my own experiences that the telerik controls perform a lot better in recent versions. I am certainly glad i did it ;P
---Guy H ;-)---
Guy Harwood wrote:
There are some good improvements to the framework like System.Timezone
As I said I'm targetting .net 2.0+, I don't want the hassle of having all our customers upgrade to .net 3.5 if they don't have it already and there is really nothing in there of benefit to my end users.
Guy Harwood wrote:
best to bring your tools up to date before you start
I don't think it's a good idea to mess with a working setup unless you absolutely have to or there is some *very* compelling reason to do so. I can't afford the luxury of spending a lot of time playing with it to get it working if there is a problem, it's a huge complex solution with dozens of projects in it and uses just about every project type visual studio supports for .net. Thanks for your input but after reading all the responses and doing some more research there just isn't anything in there worth the risk of lost time for me. I'll stick with it until my 3rd party component vendors force me to upgrade. I think the scales balance in favour of not updating because I can bring far more important things to my end users simply by having more time to work on new features rather than mucking about changing visual studio versions.
"It's so simple to be wise. Just think of something stupid to say and then don't say it." -Sam Levenson
-
ToddHileHoffer wrote:
It is too bad you can't do 3.5 development
I can, I investigated it thoroughly and could see no benefit at all to it and in fact many down sides and have chosen not to use it. I have a lot of hand crafted code for getting my objects into and out of the database and performance wise it's much faster. As well we aren't married to MS SQL server as we have a db independant layer between the database and the business object framework so we can support FireBird and MS SQL and whatever else comes along that starts getting wide usage. I'm not big on stored procedures, in fact I'm very much against them but that's a discussion for another thread. :)
"It's so simple to be wise. Just think of something stupid to say and then don't say it." -Sam Levenson
I also prefer to use other layer of database abstraction instead of relying to the generated LinqToSQL. However, I have more fun using VS2008 just for the C# language feature: > automatic property > lambda function > anonymous type and anonymous function > Linq to IEnumerable > Variable type infer > and many more. It save key stroke and make the code more concise. VS2008 also allow targeting .NET 2.0. So, we should have no problem to maintain existing codebase targeting .NET 2.0. Since all .NET 2.0, 3.0, and 3.5 still using the same CLR engine for 2.0, I can still use all .NET 3.5 specific like LinqToSQL or LinqToXML in .NET20SP1 machine, provided all the necessary dll is copied along. So, 'Go' with VS2008 SP1.
I like you, and I love programming more.
-
Shog9 wrote:
The JavaScript debugging is improved
Yeah, but you can just use VS 2005 + Firefox + Firebug for free. :)
Kevin
Voila :-) Firefox and firebug are the best, ms tries to copy but i rather stick with the real thing. ;-)