2003 vs. 2005
-
Having just played around with the hosted vs.net 2005 demo, now I feel like I'm going to have to abandon all I've learned about 2003 and relearn it for 2005. *grumble*. Not so much the coding*, but the UI, the odd quirks, the wierd locations for options. *Although I suppose a lot will change between .net 1.1 and 2.0, that's the kind of stuff I _like_ to learn about. Not a quirky buggy non-standard-UI IDE. I want to see vs.net 2003 SP1, not vs 2005. *phew* [/END RANT] Err, the point of this was: anybody reccomend any books for making the transition?
-
Having just played around with the hosted vs.net 2005 demo, now I feel like I'm going to have to abandon all I've learned about 2003 and relearn it for 2005. *grumble*. Not so much the coding*, but the UI, the odd quirks, the wierd locations for options. *Although I suppose a lot will change between .net 1.1 and 2.0, that's the kind of stuff I _like_ to learn about. Not a quirky buggy non-standard-UI IDE. I want to see vs.net 2003 SP1, not vs 2005. *phew* [/END RANT] Err, the point of this was: anybody reccomend any books for making the transition?
I haven't noticed that great a difference between the two user interfaces. However, the express editions do use a different layout than Visual Studio 2003/2005.
-
Having just played around with the hosted vs.net 2005 demo, now I feel like I'm going to have to abandon all I've learned about 2003 and relearn it for 2005. *grumble*. Not so much the coding*, but the UI, the odd quirks, the wierd locations for options. *Although I suppose a lot will change between .net 1.1 and 2.0, that's the kind of stuff I _like_ to learn about. Not a quirky buggy non-standard-UI IDE. I want to see vs.net 2003 SP1, not vs 2005. *phew* [/END RANT] Err, the point of this was: anybody reccomend any books for making the transition?
I'm of mixed opinion with regards to some of the UI changes in the IDE as well, along with what I think is becoming an overly burdened development environment. I wish it were more modular, so I could plug in only the things I want to see. It's like what they say about Word--only 10% of the features are used by any one person, but that 10% is different for each of us. I, for example, don't really like the task list. Somehow it "gets in the way" rather than making it easier to identify and fix the compiler errors. That said, I also know that every time I upgrade the tools, I go through a mind-resistent period and then everything clicks into place and I become productive again. I usually don't have a "I don't know what I did without this nifty feature" reaction, but I do end up growing accustomed to the tool and its idiosyncrasies. I do wish though, that instead of the software training us, it would be possible for us to train software the software. Though, when you think about it, the software is just a vehicle. Watch out for those Redmond brain control designers. So, on that note (and thinking about that "boy named Google" thread), is anyone planning on naming their kid "Xaml"? Marc My website Traceract Understanding Simple Data Binding Diary Of A CEO - Preface
-
Having just played around with the hosted vs.net 2005 demo, now I feel like I'm going to have to abandon all I've learned about 2003 and relearn it for 2005. *grumble*. Not so much the coding*, but the UI, the odd quirks, the wierd locations for options. *Although I suppose a lot will change between .net 1.1 and 2.0, that's the kind of stuff I _like_ to learn about. Not a quirky buggy non-standard-UI IDE. I want to see vs.net 2003 SP1, not vs 2005. *phew* [/END RANT] Err, the point of this was: anybody reccomend any books for making the transition?
I work in both daily and often have [several isntances of] both open simultaneously. I found the transition quite easy. In my experience 2005 is awesome. The biggest problem I have it trying to do 2005 things in 2003. Anyone who thinks he has a better idea of what's good for people than people do is a swine. - P.J. O'Rourke
-
I'm of mixed opinion with regards to some of the UI changes in the IDE as well, along with what I think is becoming an overly burdened development environment. I wish it were more modular, so I could plug in only the things I want to see. It's like what they say about Word--only 10% of the features are used by any one person, but that 10% is different for each of us. I, for example, don't really like the task list. Somehow it "gets in the way" rather than making it easier to identify and fix the compiler errors. That said, I also know that every time I upgrade the tools, I go through a mind-resistent period and then everything clicks into place and I become productive again. I usually don't have a "I don't know what I did without this nifty feature" reaction, but I do end up growing accustomed to the tool and its idiosyncrasies. I do wish though, that instead of the software training us, it would be possible for us to train software the software. Though, when you think about it, the software is just a vehicle. Watch out for those Redmond brain control designers. So, on that note (and thinking about that "boy named Google" thread), is anyone planning on naming their kid "Xaml"? Marc My website Traceract Understanding Simple Data Binding Diary Of A CEO - Preface
Marc Clifton wrote:
That said, I also know that every time I upgrade the tools, I go through a mind-resistent period and then everything clicks into place and I become productive again.
I thought I was the only one that happened to :-)
Marc Clifton wrote:
So, on that note (and thinking about that "boy named Google" thread), is anyone planning on naming their kid "Xaml"?
We're not pregnant yet, but I'll bring it up, and see what she says. Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++
-
I'm of mixed opinion with regards to some of the UI changes in the IDE as well, along with what I think is becoming an overly burdened development environment. I wish it were more modular, so I could plug in only the things I want to see. It's like what they say about Word--only 10% of the features are used by any one person, but that 10% is different for each of us. I, for example, don't really like the task list. Somehow it "gets in the way" rather than making it easier to identify and fix the compiler errors. That said, I also know that every time I upgrade the tools, I go through a mind-resistent period and then everything clicks into place and I become productive again. I usually don't have a "I don't know what I did without this nifty feature" reaction, but I do end up growing accustomed to the tool and its idiosyncrasies. I do wish though, that instead of the software training us, it would be possible for us to train software the software. Though, when you think about it, the software is just a vehicle. Watch out for those Redmond brain control designers. So, on that note (and thinking about that "boy named Google" thread), is anyone planning on naming their kid "Xaml"? Marc My website Traceract Understanding Simple Data Binding Diary Of A CEO - Preface
Marc Clifton wrote:
I usually don't have a "I don't know what I did without this nifty feature" reaction,
What about the new debug visualizers? Those are sweet.
Picture a huge catholic cathedral. In it there's many people, including a gregorian monk choir. You know, those who sing beautifully. Then they start singing, in latin, as they always do: "Ad hominem..." -Jörgen Sigvardsson
-
Marc Clifton wrote:
I usually don't have a "I don't know what I did without this nifty feature" reaction,
What about the new debug visualizers? Those are sweet.
Picture a huge catholic cathedral. In it there's many people, including a gregorian monk choir. You know, those who sing beautifully. Then they start singing, in latin, as they always do: "Ad hominem..." -Jörgen Sigvardsson
-
Yup - they saved me a lot of trouble a little while ago. I wrote a bitmap visualizer and a graphics path visualizer that really helped me debug an image processing algorithm.
-
I work in both daily and often have [several isntances of] both open simultaneously. I found the transition quite easy. In my experience 2005 is awesome. The biggest problem I have it trying to do 2005 things in 2003. Anyone who thinks he has a better idea of what's good for people than people do is a swine. - P.J. O'Rourke
-
Having just played around with the hosted vs.net 2005 demo, now I feel like I'm going to have to abandon all I've learned about 2003 and relearn it for 2005. *grumble*. Not so much the coding*, but the UI, the odd quirks, the wierd locations for options. *Although I suppose a lot will change between .net 1.1 and 2.0, that's the kind of stuff I _like_ to learn about. Not a quirky buggy non-standard-UI IDE. I want to see vs.net 2003 SP1, not vs 2005. *phew* [/END RANT] Err, the point of this was: anybody reccomend any books for making the transition?
You certainly won't need to abandon all you've learned - the transition is reasonably painless. In fact, for me it was more a case of "finally this works as it should". cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
-
I'm of mixed opinion with regards to some of the UI changes in the IDE as well, along with what I think is becoming an overly burdened development environment. I wish it were more modular, so I could plug in only the things I want to see. It's like what they say about Word--only 10% of the features are used by any one person, but that 10% is different for each of us. I, for example, don't really like the task list. Somehow it "gets in the way" rather than making it easier to identify and fix the compiler errors. That said, I also know that every time I upgrade the tools, I go through a mind-resistent period and then everything clicks into place and I become productive again. I usually don't have a "I don't know what I did without this nifty feature" reaction, but I do end up growing accustomed to the tool and its idiosyncrasies. I do wish though, that instead of the software training us, it would be possible for us to train software the software. Though, when you think about it, the software is just a vehicle. Watch out for those Redmond brain control designers. So, on that note (and thinking about that "boy named Google" thread), is anyone planning on naming their kid "Xaml"? Marc My website Traceract Understanding Simple Data Binding Diary Of A CEO - Preface
Marc Clifton wrote:
I wish it were more modular, so I could plug in only the things I want to see. It's like what they say about Word--only 10% of the features are used by any one person, but that 10% is different for each of us.
Shhh.. They might hear you! Do you really want VS.NET looking like the new MS Office? ;) Rocky <>< Latest Post: SQL Server 2005, Major Enhancements! Blog: www.RockyMoore.com/TheCoder/[^]