Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 19th Nov 2007 21:16 UTC, submitted by Wyatt Lyon Preul
.NET (dotGNU too) Scott Guthrie has announced that Visual Studio 2008 and .NET 3.5 are now available for download and provides a tour of some of the new features. "Visual Studio 2008 and .NET 3.5 contain a ton of new functionality and improvements. Below are links to blog posts I've done myself as well as links to videos you can watch to learn more about it."
Order by: Score:
Looks fantastic
by google_ninja (2.56) on Mon 19th Nov 2007 22:00 UTC
google_ninja
Member since:
2006-02-05
Fans: 13

I am REALLY looking forward to the css/javascript support. I don't think I have seen CSS done that well in an editor before, and 2k5s css is kind of lame.

LINQ looks hela-cool, but I'm already hooked on the excellent opensource http://www.subsonicproject.com/ for my object persistence needs. And while some of the control updates look nice, I just bought the devexpress ASPxperience set last week (and am completely in love).

v RE: Looks fantastic
by Almafeta (3.36) on Mon 19th Nov 2007 22:30 UTC in reply to "Looks fantastic"
RE[2]: Looks fantastic
by nobody (2.6) on Mon 19th Nov 2007 22:46 UTC in reply to "RE: Looks fantastic"
nobody Member since:
2006-06-02
Fans: 0

He was talking about the CSS & Javascript intellisense, but I have a feeling you knew that anyway.

RE[3]: Looks fantastic
by segedunum (2.88) on Mon 19th Nov 2007 23:25 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Looks fantastic"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06
Fans: 22

He was talking about the CSS & Javascript intellisense, but I have a feeling you knew that anyway.

All the poster mentioned was CSS and JavaScript support, and quite frankly, Internet Explorer, Microsoft's development tools and proper, standard support of ECMA(Java)Script and Cascading Style Sheets are absolute polar opposites.

The hint of irony and sarcasm was absolutely spot on, and pretty well done.

Quite frankly, I'm distinctly underwhelmed by yet another new version of .Net that no normal person can keep up with. Microsoft simply have too many MSDN lunatics producing too many development tools no sane person can keep up with.

RE[4]: Looks fantastic
by modmans2ndcoming (2.84) on Mon 19th Nov 2007 23:51 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Looks fantastic"
modmans2ndcoming Member since:
2005-11-09
Fans: 0

I wonder if there is a way to develop a web browser that has a plug in architecture for the CSS. That would allow CSS to improve asynchronous to IE releases, or any browser release... and if it was an Open Source project, we might see some significant improvements in support all together.

RE[4]: Looks fantastic
by WorknMan (4) on Mon 19th Nov 2007 23:54 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Looks fantastic"
WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13
Fans: 3

Quite frankly, I'm distinctly underwhelmed by yet another new version of .Net that no normal person can keep up with. Microsoft simply have too many MSDN lunatics producing too many development tools no sane person can keep up with.

Haha, so true. I recall listening to an episode of the .NET Rocks podcast recently, and they were talking about how it used to be possible (like back in the early days) for a person to know pretty much everything there was to know about a PC.
But now days, it's getting pretty much impossible just to keep track of everything in the .NET Framework itself. Makes me wonder if the people coding the .NET Framework ever sleep ;)

RE[4]: Looks fantastic
by neozeed (1.52) on Tue 20th Nov 2007 00:06 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Looks fantastic"
neozeed Member since:
2006-03-03
Fans: 0

Quite frankly, I'm distinctly underwhelmed by yet another new version of .Net that no normal person can keep up with. Microsoft simply have too many MSDN lunatics producing too many development tools no sane person can keep up with.


Huh? Where have you been? It's about frameworks & developers. Windows has been a platform that people *WANT* to program for, because Microsoft is constantly going out of their way to come up with better ways to solve business problems.

Would you rather have a K&R compiler, and a VT220? Oh sure it'd be easier, but is it realistic in 2007?

RE[4]: Looks fantastic
by google_ninja (2.56) on Tue 20th Nov 2007 03:50 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Looks fantastic"
google_ninja Member since:
2006-02-05
Fans: 13

All the poster mentioned was CSS and JavaScript support, and quite frankly, Internet Explorer, Microsoft's development tools and proper, standard support of ECMA(Java)Script and Cascading Style Sheets are absolute polar opposites.


Microsofts support of javascript is worse then mozilla, but better then anything else. And as of IE7, their CSS support is pretty much where everyone else is

Quite frankly, I'm distinctly underwhelmed by yet another new version of .Net that no normal person can keep up with. Microsoft simply have too many MSDN lunatics producing too many development tools no sane person can keep up with.


Anyone with half a brain can keep up with it, the last release was 3 years ago.

Edited 2007-11-20 03:58 UTC

RE[2]: Looks fantastic
by google_ninja (2.56) on Tue 20th Nov 2007 04:02 UTC in reply to "RE: Looks fantastic"
google_ninja Member since:
2006-02-05
Fans: 13

Very funny.

First off, anything generated by VS.net 2k5 not only validates XHTML 1.0, but is totally cross browser. I have yet to have an issue with a built in ASP control rendering significantly different in firefox and ie. So any implications on poor standard support is completely unfounded, the code generation is on par with dreamweaver, and far better then anything else I have seen.

Granted, javascript intellisense isnt exactly revolutionary. However, look at the way it handles css here http://weblogs.asp.net/scottgu/archive/2007/07/25/vs-2008-web-desig..., and tell me what other environment comes even close?

RE[3]: Looks fantastic
by StaubSaugerNZ (2.88) on Tue 20th Nov 2007 07:16 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Looks fantastic"
StaubSaugerNZ Member since:
2007-07-13
Fans: 1

Actually, while it might not be your cup of tea, Netbeans 6 (at rc1 and out at the end of the month) has a very nice interface to CSS. Bet you haven't tried NB6.

RE[3]: Looks fantastic
by Vorbisophile (1.35) on Tue 20th Nov 2007 12:36 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Looks fantastic"
Vorbisophile Member since:
2006-01-06
Fans: 0

I'd be inclined to say StyleMaster has been doing that for years, but obviously StyleMaster isn't an HTML editor, solely CSS. Anyone looking for a powerful CSS editor though that develops with tools other than VS.net, or develops on OS X, should probably check it out.

N.B. I bought the 4.x version at least a year or two ago*, and it seems I'm still up to date (free upgrades), though whether they're planning a new major release or not anytime soon I don't know.

http://www.westciv.com/style_master/product_info/index.html#xray

Off-topic, but the logo was designed by Jon Hicks of Firefox/Thunderbird/Miro fame :-)

* (edit) - 14 Dec 2005 21:32 to be precise, feh.

Edited 2007-11-20 12:50

Ruby on Rails
by airwedge1 (2.92) on Tue 20th Nov 2007 00:17 UTC
airwedge1
Member since:
2006-02-22
Fans: 0

Anyone else get the feeling that a ms dev saw Ruby on Rails, and copied almost the exact functionality into vs .net in the form of linq? They've played it off as being so unique, when almost everything they have come up with is already in ruby on rails.

RE: Ruby on Rails
by Almafeta (3.36) on Tue 20th Nov 2007 01:59 UTC in reply to "Ruby on Rails"
Almafeta Member since:
2007-02-22
Fans: 5

Anyone else get the feeling that a ms dev saw Ruby on Rails, and copied almost the exact functionality into vs .net in the form of linq? They've played it off as being so unique, when almost everything they have come up with is already in ruby on rails.


While most "zomg Microsoft steals from everyone I cut myself"-type posts like this have no basis in reality whatsoever, this actually has some fact behind it:

http://rubydotnet.googlegroups.com/web/Home.htm
http://www.codeplex.com/irony

RE[2]: Ruby on Rails
by siride (3.36) on Tue 20th Nov 2007 03:09 UTC in reply to "RE: Ruby on Rails"
siride Member since:
2006-01-02
Fans: 0

Well, Microsoft's business practice is along those lines. It's not really a bad thing. Other people do the research, bring stuff to market, and ultimately fail, or half-succeed. Microsoft watches, polishes and produces a better product based on what the competition has done. It's great business practice, and it does often produce good consumer products (not all of MS's software is garbage). I wouldn't call it stealing. It is more like refining. And we desperately need that in the software world.

RE[2]: Ruby on Rails
by segedunum (2.88) on Tue 20th Nov 2007 10:24 UTC in reply to "RE: Ruby on Rails"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06
Fans: 22

While most "zomg Microsoft steals from everyone I cut myself"-type posts like this have no basis in reality whatsoever, this actually has some fact behind it:

http://rubydotnet.googlegroups.com/web/Home.htm
http://www.codeplex.com/irony


Why are you giving links to Ruby on top of .Net as a response to this?

LINQ == ActiveRecord. End of story.

RE[3]: Ruby on Rails
by miguel (4.44) on Tue 20th Nov 2007 15:58 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Ruby on Rails"
miguel Member since:
2005-07-27
Fans: 12

I know I can always count on Segedunum to get his facts wrong:


LINQ == ActiveRecord. End of story.


I already commented on the vastly different approaches to those two.

As a complement, in general, there are a number of ActiveRecord implementations for .NET that you can use or variations on the theme.

But LINQ is not such a variation.

Another posted commented on LINQ and XPath and XQuery. Although you can certainly do everything XQuery can do with LINQ for doing XML processing, LINQ is not limited to XML.

The "XQuery-replacement" facade is basically using LINQ with a couple of XML construction and query classes. But LINQ is much more powerful, the pieces that make it up are the pieces that are bringing functional language features C#.

Miguel.

RE[3]: Ruby on Rails
by gonzo (3.16) on Tue 20th Nov 2007 19:06 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Ruby on Rails"
gonzo Member since:
2005-11-10
Fans: 2

LINQ == ActiveRecord. End of story.

Wow, this is so wrong. LINQ is FULLY integrated in the languages, it is part of the syntax. That is why it's called "LANGUAGE INTEGRATED.."

You don't understand it and some research on the topic of LINQ is strongly recommended.

Edited 2007-11-20 19:06

RE[4]: Ruby on Rails
by duckie (2.16) on Tue 20th Nov 2007 19:54 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Ruby on Rails"
duckie Member since:
2006-04-10
Fans: 0

LINQ info:
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/netframework/aa904594.aspx

"It extends C# and Visual Basic with native language syntax for queries and provides class libraries to take advantage of these capabilities"

Microsoft already created the providers "LINQ to SQL", "LINQ to XML" + more.

You can create any provider you want, see an example here http://blogs.msdn.com/hartmutm/default.aspx "A LINQ provider for RDF files".

LINQ != activerecord.

RE: Ruby on Rails
by google_ninja (2.56) on Tue 20th Nov 2007 03:51 UTC in reply to "Ruby on Rails"
google_ninja Member since:
2006-02-05
Fans: 13

MS hired the guy who does this http://www.subsonicproject.com/, which is basically rails type scaffolding for .net.

RE: Ruby on Rails
by christianhgross (2.2) on Tue 20th Nov 2007 12:13 UTC in reply to "Ruby on Rails"
christianhgross Member since:
2005-11-15
Fans: 1

Do you have any idea what LINQ is about? It's not a R&R rip off. If anything it is an XPath rip off. The idea behind LINQ is the same idea behind XPath. You can select, filter and continue on with LINQ and XPath.

RE[2]: Ruby on Rails
by jayson.knight (3.04) on Tue 20th Nov 2007 13:14 UTC in reply to "RE: Ruby on Rails"
jayson.knight Member since:
2005-07-06
Fans: 7

"If anything it [LINQ] is an XPath rip off."

From a technical standpoint, it's more of an XQuery ripoff than XPath. The concepts are very similar, but the implementation is completely different.

RE: Ruby on Rails
by miguel (4.44) on Tue 20th Nov 2007 15:47 UTC in reply to "Ruby on Rails"
miguel Member since:
2005-07-27
Fans: 12


Anyone else get the feeling that a ms dev saw Ruby on Rails, and copied almost the exact functionality into vs .net in the form of linq? They've played it off as being so unique, when almost everything they have come up with is already in ruby on rails.


You seem incredibly confused.

LINQ in fact is the exact opposite of what Ruby on Rails does when it comes to databases. Ruby on Rails advocates the use of ActiveRecord, where the classes are mapped into a database.

LINQ takes the exact opposite approach: the database is at the core of an application and they have provided a way to use a SQL-like language to the database from C#. They do not use an OO to RB mapper, instead they try to get you closer to the bone while giving you compiler provided type checking.

That being said, it would be good if Microsoft incorporated the good ideas of Ruby on Rails into .NET. Hopefully the upcoming ASP.NET MVC will go a long way along those lines.

Miguel.

MSDNAA
by ValiantSoul (1.48) on Tue 20th Nov 2007 00:43 UTC
ValiantSoul
Member since:
2005-07-20
Fans: 0

Visual Studio.NET has always been an unbeatable IDE (though lacking in some basic functionalities that IDEs like Eclipse have, such as maximizing an editor). They're intellisense has always been incredibly fast, and even though I'm not a big MS supported (spending most of my time using either BSD or OS X) I can't wait for this to arrive on my MSDNAA.

Good job!

RE: MSDNAA
by atehrani (1.67) on Tue 20th Nov 2007 01:48 UTC in reply to "MSDNAA"
atehrani Member since:
2006-10-20
Fans: 0

I disagree; of all of the IDEs I've used (VS2005, Netbeans, Eclipse, IntelliJ) Visual Studio is the worst. To me it feels like it's years old, every "new" feature people are excited about in VS2008, Java IDE's have had them for quite some time.

RE[2]: MSDNAA
by ValiantSoul (1.48) on Tue 20th Nov 2007 01:50 UTC in reply to "RE: MSDNAA"
ValiantSoul Member since:
2005-07-20
Fans: 0

True, however the thing that VS beats them all with is its speed. If an IDE is going to make me wait and crash a lot (ahem Eclipse), its going to make me less productive, and therefore make less money.

RE[3]: MSDNAA
by siride (3.36) on Tue 20th Nov 2007 03:12 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: MSDNAA"
siride Member since:
2006-01-02
Fans: 0

Man, I am getting so sick of the bugs and weirndesses in Eclipse. It has a lot of cool features and promise, but it really has a knack for crapping out at bad times, getting into confused states and just generally being...weird. For example, I've had it convince itself that it couldn't find java.lang.Object. All I did was start it up. And somehow it got confused. I had to delete the project and create a new one (with existing source of course).

RE[2]: MSDNAA
by Almafeta (3.36) on Tue 20th Nov 2007 02:00 UTC in reply to "RE: MSDNAA"
Almafeta Member since:
2007-02-22
Fans: 5

I disagree; of all of the IDEs I've used (VS2005, Netbeans, Eclipse, IntelliJ) Visual Studio is the worst. To me it feels like it's years old, every "new" feature people are excited about in VS2008, Java IDE's have had them for quite some time.


Yes, but then you have to deal with the fact that you're writing in Java.

RE[3]: MSDNAA
by StaubSaugerNZ (2.88) on Tue 20th Nov 2007 02:26 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: MSDNAA"
StaubSaugerNZ Member since:
2007-07-13
Fans: 1

> Yes, but then you have to deal with the fact that you're writing in Java.

I'm curious about what's so bad about Java? (since C# is much more similar to it than to many other languages and several of the core C# libraries obviously originate from the days when Microsoft had a Java.

Sure checked exceptions and such are a PITA, but it sure beats being hogtied to a single platform (sure it's got 90% desktops, but only ~50% servers, which is where the real consultancy money is). I hate .NET's Hungarian notation (the 'I' in front of every interface has a heritage back to FORTRAN dontyaknow) at least as much as you hate checked exceptions, but at least I can see why you might like .NET without feeling the need to imply it sux completely.

RE[4]: MSDNAA
by google_ninja (2.56) on Tue 20th Nov 2007 03:56 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: MSDNAA"
google_ninja Member since:
2006-02-05
Fans: 13

IMHO java is a good language, but C# is a better one, mostly because having come later, it had the advantage of learning from javas mistakes.

They are really ~90% the same thing.

RE[4]: MSDNAA
by christianhgross (2.2) on Tue 20th Nov 2007 12:19 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: MSDNAA"
christianhgross Member since:
2005-11-15
Fans: 1

Java the language is garbage!

When Java the language came out it was good, yes it was. Now in 2007 it is garbage! Here are some case in points

1) Generics and erasure (yes it will be fixed in an upcoming release, but why do it in the first place.)
2) Just recently the idea of boxing, and unboxing came to Java
3) Java getters and setters are silly.
4) Still have not fixed the fragile base class problem
... and the list goes on...

C# fixed many of these things and then some. I am not saying that Java, and its environment is bad. On the contrary it is good. But Java the language is showing its age in a major way. Java should have included more Groovy or Scala features a long time ago. Java needs a desparate overhaul.

v RE[3]: MSDNAA
by andyleung (1.56) on Tue 20th Nov 2007 02:27 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: MSDNAA"
RE[4]: MSDNAA
by twitter (2.05) on Tue 20th Nov 2007 03:03 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: MSDNAA"
twitter Member since:
2005-07-25
Fans: 1

Since it's impossible for something written in .NET to cause a bluescreen, I'd recommend checking the drivers in that "server" instead of regirgitating "LOLZORZ BLUESCREAN" tripe that no one believes anymore since 1999.

RE[2]: MSDNAA
by google_ninja (2.56) on Tue 20th Nov 2007 03:53 UTC in reply to "RE: MSDNAA"
google_ninja Member since:
2006-02-05
Fans: 13

Java IDE's blow when it comes to UI design, and are average when it comes to web design. VS 2k8 not only gives you a good CSS rule editor, but will show you implied and inherited rules at design time. To my knowledge, it is the only editor to do that.

RE[3]: MSDNAA
by andrewg (2.96) on Tue 20th Nov 2007 08:24 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: MSDNAA"
andrewg Member since:
2005-07-06
Fans: 1

Please have a look at the new Netbeans UI designer formerly called Matisse. Its better than anything I have seen including the VS 2005.

RE: MSDNAA
by gonzo (3.16) on Tue 20th Nov 2007 02:42 UTC in reply to "MSDNAA"
gonzo Member since:
2005-11-10
Fans: 2

Visual Studio.NET has always been an unbeatable IDE (though lacking in some basic functionalities that IDEs like Eclipse have, such as maximizing an editor).

Maximizing an editor? You mean like full screen mode?

It is available in Visual Studio 2008. And it is also in Visual Studio 2005.

Funny.

RE[2]: MSDNAA
by mallard (3.48) on Tue 20th Nov 2007 13:02 UTC in reply to "RE: MSDNAA"
mallard Member since:
2006-01-06
Fans: 1

No, not full screen mode.

He is referring to the nice little feature of Eclipse where you can click a small "maximize" button on a panel and make that panel take the whole window space.

While VS's full-screen mode does hide some of the other panels (still shows the "Pending chekins" panel on mine), it also hides everything else, meaning I can't copy-and-paste from another source, can't quickly switch to an output window, etc. In other words Eclipse has a better UI (and I use VS every day).

RE: MSDNAA
by jayson.knight (3.04) on Tue 20th Nov 2007 13:15 UTC in reply to "MSDNAA"
jayson.knight Member since:
2005-07-06
Fans: 7

"though lacking in some basic functionalities that IDEs like Eclipse have, such as maximizing an editor"

Not quite sure what you mean, but open up VS and hit F11. Is that what you're looking for?

Woohoo!
by siimo (3.12) on Tue 20th Nov 2007 01:23 UTC
siimo
Member since:
2006-06-22
Fans: 0

VS2008 allows you to target specific .NET framework versions for your project:
2.0
3.0
3.5

RE: Woohoo!
by atehrani (1.67) on Tue 20th Nov 2007 01:46 UTC in reply to "Woohoo!"
atehrani Member since:
2006-10-20
Fans: 0

Please note that targeting 2.0 is NOT targeting 2.0 RTM. You will be targeting 2.0 SP1, which (depending on your application) can have significant ramifications.

This blog explains it in detail:
http://blogs.msdn.com/msbuild/archive/2007/10/09/multitargeting-aga...

RE[2]: Woohoo!
by segedunum (2.88) on Tue 20th Nov 2007 10:36 UTC in reply to "RE: Woohoo!"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06
Fans: 22

Please note that targeting 2.0 is NOT targeting 2.0 RTM. You will be targeting 2.0 SP1, which (depending on your application) can have significant ramifications

Ahhhhhhh. Backwards compatibility ;-).

light weight tools
by nivenh (2.8) on Tue 20th Nov 2007 01:47 UTC
nivenh
Member since:
2005-07-06
Fans: 0

i long for a return to the days when dev tool companies made lightweight tools that did the basics and then some REALLY well and really fast.

the "everything you could possibly ever want to do in 100 years" approach is killing me.

RE: light weight tools
by gilboa (2.72) on Tue 20th Nov 2007 04:45 UTC in reply to "light weight tools"
gilboa Member since:
2005-07-06
Fans: 0

I use vi ;) *, **

- Gilboa
* Even under Windows; Compared to VS.NET2K5 vim+ctags is like comparing a cargo 747 to a SR-71. You may do more with VS.NET2K5 but once you get the hang of it, vim is 1000 times faster...
** I write C code, so anything beyond VC6 is an over-kill for me. Sadly enough our IT department doesn't see it that way.

RE[2]: light weight tools
by neozeed (1.52) on Tue 20th Nov 2007 07:09 UTC in reply to "RE: light weight tools"
neozeed Member since:
2006-03-03
Fans: 0

You haven't seen the power of IJW then. I modified a program to use SQL server to store it's data as blobs, with only minor changes... And of course the best part, is that with MSDE I could then have it mirror the database to another machine, and I had instant disaster recovery capabilities.

The real power is in the ease of use of the framework compared to the disaster that is MFC.

Just compare .net remoting to DCOM. It's brilliant.

RE[2]: light weight tools
by PlatformAgnostic (2.72) on Tue 20th Nov 2007 15:58 UTC in reply to "RE: light weight tools"
PlatformAgnostic Member since:
2006-01-02
Fans: 10

How well does vim+ctags work for extremely large codebases? Do you think it will handle 16,000 files?

VS certainly does not and I need a good editor.

RE[3]: light weight tools
by gilboa (2.72) on Tue 20th Nov 2007 16:05 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: light weight tools"
gilboa Member since:
2005-07-06
Fans: 0

I wouldn't open 16,000 files in a single vim session...
Come to think about it; I wouldn't open 16,000 files in -any- editor...

Never the less my ctags currently contains ~50,000 files. (/usr/include; /usr/src/kernels/linux-xxx * 2; a number of versions of my own driver/software/bsp/etc; a number of OSS projects; etc)

- Gilboa

RE[4]: light weight tools
by gilboa (2.72) on Tue 20th Nov 2007 16:07 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: light weight tools"
gilboa Member since:
2005-07-06
Fans: 0

$ cat /usr/include/tags /usr/src/kernels/linux/tags work/XXX/XXX/4.4/tags work/XXX/XXX/4.3/tags | wc -l
857366

- Gilboa

Lack of clue
by chrisjsmith (1.33) on Tue 20th Nov 2007 10:34 UTC
chrisjsmith
Member since:
2007-10-25
Fans: 0

I get the feeling that most people on here are posting false anecdotes and piles of poop rather than factual information.

If you cannot keep up with the developments, perhaps you are in the wrong industry? The developments are incremental over the period of 3 years since Visual Studio 2005. Each feature, and there are ONLY about 4-5 significant language/process changes, should take no more than half an hour to understand and a week or two to be productive in. For the grain in productivity and the general satisfaction coming from these features, perhaps you should be more grateful and spend more time doing some structured learning.

As for the open-source zealots who plug "I can do anything in C and Vim", yes you can but it has a higher miss-rate when it comes to reliability, maintainability, security and general quality control. The productivity is poor as well. I'd rather not waste my life re-inventing the wheel every 8 seconds. Try writing this in C with Vim in 45 seconds (even using any C library:

class A {
public static void Main() {
Dictionary<string, string> x = new Dictionary<string, string>();
x.Add("Key", "value");
Console.WriteLine(x["Key"]);
}
}

RE: Lack of clue
by segedunum (2.88) on Tue 20th Nov 2007 10:48 UTC in reply to "Lack of clue"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06
Fans: 22

If you cannot keep up with the developments, perhaps you are in the wrong industry?

I can tell you don't develop software for customers. Installation and implementation issues take up the vast majority of your time, not development.

The developments are incremental over the period of 3 years since Visual Studio 2005. Each feature, and there are ONLY about 4-5 significant language/process changes

People are installing their applications on Windows target machines, not Visual Studio or .Net.

The productivity is poor as well. I'd rather not waste my life re-inventing the wheel every 8 seconds.

One word: ActiveRecord.

Try writing this in C with Vim in 45 seconds (even using any C library

What are you talking about C for? Have a go at writing that in Python, Ruby or even Java.

RE[2]: Lack of clue
by chrisjsmith (1.33) on Tue 20th Nov 2007 16:44 UTC in reply to "RE: Lack of clue"
chrisjsmith Member since:
2007-10-25
Fans: 0

In reply to various comments:

a) I do develop customer-centric software! Lots of it.

b) ActiveRecord is POOR compared to LINQ. Its performance is horrible, it's impossible to test properly as the reference for the object tier is stored in the data tier and you are working blind at the object tier with the assumption that certain accessors are present. With LINQ, you are assured something is going to work AT COMPILE TIME.

c) Java doesnt' have an equivalent to LINQ. Python has SQLobject which doesn't even remotely compare (different model), Ruby has ActiveRecord which is totally non performant.

d) You don't need Visual studio to compile C# code - what total rubbish. csc.exe is present on ALL .Net installations (runtime!) in C:WindowsMicrosoft.NetFrameworkvWHATEVERcsc.exe and acts the same as GCC does on linux with respect to compilation. You can use cmd's type command and then use csc to compile. Idiots.

Will people stop arguing without facts?

Further rant: I have used Python (Django) and Ruby on Rails for some small projects but they just don't cut it.

RE[3]: Lack of clue
by segedunum (2.88) on Tue 20th Nov 2007 22:27 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Lack of clue"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06
Fans: 22

ActiveRecord is POOR compared to LINQ. Its performance is horrible

There are a great many things in Ruby and Rails that are not very good performance-wise, PDF::Writer being one of them, but ActiveRecord isn't really one of them. Without some discussion about workloads etc. this doesn't really mean anything.

...it's impossible to test properly as the reference for the object tier is stored in the data tier and you are working blind at the object tier with the assumption that certain accessors are present. With LINQ, you are assured something is going to work AT COMPILE TIME.

How often have I heard that one? Getting an Intellisense drop-down box of table names, fields and accessors that the compiler can check and flag at compile time doesn't guarantee you anything ;-). If that is indeed what you mean. This is why we have these things called unit tests, that run and test actual code, and Ruby and Rails has pretty good support for them ;-). Much dynamic behaviour also becomes possible here, which is where Ruby gets its power for Rails development.

You don't need Visual studio to compile C# code - what total rubbish. csc.exe is present on ALL .Net installations (runtime!)

Why on Earth are you talking about Visual Studio and the C# compiler? I am talking about deployment, and the fact that I am installing my application on an operating system, not on half a dozen bloody runtime environments. The one target platform has disappeared, and I don't care how small the changes are.

Will people stop arguing without facts?

Hmmmmmm.

I have used Python (Django) and Ruby on Rails for some small projects but they just don't cut it.

Good for you. You mentioned something about facts?

RE[3]: Lack of clue
by Soulbender (3.6) on Wed 21st Nov 2007 03:14 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Lack of clue"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18
Fans: 15

Will people stop arguing without facts?


Perhaps when you start presenting some?
All you did was present your personal opinions and experiences on various aspects. Nothing wrong with that but it's not facts and does not apply to other people and circumstances.

RE: Lack of clue
by FunkyELF (2.76) on Tue 20th Nov 2007 15:54 UTC in reply to "Lack of clue"
FunkyELF Member since:
2006-07-26
Fans: 0

Try writing this in C with Vim in 45 seconds (even using any C library:

class A {
public static void Main() {
Dictionary<string, string> x = new Dictionary<string, string>();
x.Add("Key", "value");
Console.WriteLine(x["Key"]);
}
}


How about Java using no editor at all?
Did that 45 seconds include starting up Visual studio and creating a new project?

$ cat > Test.java <<EOF && javac Test.java && java Test
> import java.util.*;
> public class Test{
> public static void main(final String args[]){
> Map<String,String> x = new HashMap<String,String>();
> x.put("Key","Value");
> System.out.println(x.get("Key"));
> }
> }
> EOF
Value
$ echo Wow!
Wow!
$

Edited 2007-11-20 15:54

RE: Lack of clue
by bm3719 (2.24) on Tue 20th Nov 2007 20:15 UTC in reply to "Lack of clue"
bm3719 Member since:
2006-05-30
Fans: 0

Try writing this in C with Vim in 45 seconds (even using any C library:

class A {
public static void Main() {
Dictionary<string, string> x = new Dictionary<string, string>();
x.Add("Key", "value");
Console.WriteLine(x["Key"]);
}
}


printf("value");

:)

Visual Studio is always the best!
by casuto (2.16) on Tue 20th Nov 2007 10:53 UTC
casuto
Member since:
2007-02-27
Fans: 0

Visual Studio is always the best!

Another late part of ... Vista?
by JacobMunoz (2.48) on Tue 20th Nov 2007 20:54 UTC
JacobMunoz
Member since:
2006-03-17
Fans: 3

Finally!

A Visual Studio that's actually meant to work with Vista!

Too bad I removed Vista because I couldn't use Visual Studio 2003 OR 2005...

Too little too late.

(for the record, YES both 2003 and 2005 supposedly work, but with an enormous laundry list of incompatabilites which made it worthless to try)

RE: Another late part of ... Vista?
by duckie (2.16) on Wed 21st Nov 2007 07:35 UTC in reply to "Another late part of ... Vista?"
duckie Member since:
2006-04-10
Fans: 0

As you wrote, Visual studio 2005 works fine, if you install the vista-specific updates for it ;-)

.NET Problem
by andyleung (1.56) on Fri 23rd Nov 2007 23:51 UTC
andyleung
Member since:
2006-03-24
Fans: 0

You see, the major problem here is actually Microsoft. I am not Linux geek nor Java guru, I am just talking in general.

When the OS is not stable enough to be in enterprise to serve 24/7, don't even go to the app stability. There is nothing to do with .NET and Java in this case but then when we talk about OS in enterprise, you can only go for non-windows platform, which leaves you Java.

I don't understand why people are saying the language is aging and needs some change or something, honestly, I don't see any points there. I wouldn't argue Java has its own problem but if you are a good developer, you should see that Java, the language itself, actually gives you everything you need for the enterprise.

Besides, .NET a basically a copycat of Java and everybody knows, but the worst part is they copied and made it worst.

I tried C# once and omg...I can feel the major clone of Java with minor difference from Java and have a feeling of "hey, we can't clone 100% because of legal issues, we, Microsoft, already have million number of lawsuit...".

The IDE is not that bad, but a bit bloated, 2003 was pretty good at that time.