Re: VS2005 Not ready for prime time
- From: "CMM" <cmm@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2006 08:01:40 -0500
Microsoft hit the ball right out of the park.
There wasn't much wrong with VS.NET to begin with. I wouldn't call 2005
homerun based on that.
I'd call it a 3-base hit... and almost entirely because of the CLR and
framework classes improvments.
re: ASP.NET, actually, after working with it for a while... creating a new
site from scratch... I actually like the new model. Though upgrading a
previous site is a bit of a hassle... and as I mentioned there are serious
head's scratchers in terms of "follow through" on the part of the ASP.NET
team. Css features are extremely lacking (downright no-frills!). As are XML
editing features (non-existent?). This is extremely confounding to me....
especially in today's day and age.
--
-C. Moya
www.cmoya.com
"Kevin Spencer" <kevin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:%23GIp8KXLGHA.532@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I have to agree with Karl. I haven't done any ASP.Net with VS.Net 2005
yet, but I've been using it for a variety of other projects for over a
year. For everything else, it is an amazing dev environment. From what I've
read in the SDK regarding ASP.Net 2.0, and what I've read in the newsgroups
and Google about ASP.Net 2.0 and the VS.Net IDE for it, I am not exactly
chomping at the bit to dive in.
I believe Microsoft had the right idea with the change from classic ASP to
ASP.Net. It demanded more knowledge of the developer, forcing developers
to become better developers. That's good for everybody. Yes, there were
some issues with it, but simply catering to the deliberately ignorant,
which it sounds like happened with the latest incarnation, and breaking
the original programming model so drastically with so little benefit,
except perhaps in terms of accomodating the deliberately ignorant, well,
I'm not so sure whether the judgment exercised in the case of ASP.Net 2.0
was correctly motivated.
Master Pages are a good idea, for sure. Breaking up the monolithic
assembly was a good idea, but I'm not sure I like the alternative arrived
at. It seems that both one assembly per project, and one assembly per Page
are poor solutions at opposite ends of the spectrum. And why the drastic
change in the assembly locations, extra folders, etc.?
I will adjust and adapt. That is a crucial programming skill. But I do
wonder about this particular technology. Still, as I said, in terms of
everything else Visual Studio.Net 2005 does, and everything else in the
.Net platform 2.0, Microsoft hit the ball right out of the park.
--
HTH,
Kevin Spencer
Microsoft MVP
.Net Developer
We got a sick zebra a hat,
you ultimate tuna.
"Karl Seguin [MVP]" <karl REMOVE @ REMOVE openmymind REMOVEMETOO . ANDME
net> wrote in message news:OmacQVRLGHA.1288@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I've had mixed feelings about VS.NET 2005...There hasn't been anything
horrible, but I have had to adjust more than I should. I still get errors
reported that aren't errors (normally ones that I fixed a few builds
back) but that don't cause problems. I strongly disagree with the high
amount of error aspx files generate for non-build-errors (they should all
be warnings). The new project model has a lot of annoyances (thankfully
we have a beta project that's more to my liking).
As far as features, generics and anonymous functions are a big part of
the daily code i use/write. Many of the new ASP.NET features are fluff
and downright promote HORRIBLE coding practice (i wouldn't make a big
deal about it, but every tutorial out there (especially those from the
ASP.NET team) seem to make use of them).
In the end, I do think some aspect could have been better polished. My
first week in the IDE shouldn't have been as painful, but now that I'm
past it, things are running much more smoothly.
I should also note that I've been running EAPs of resharper, which only
recently started seeing quasi-stable builds.
Personally, all I'm hoping for are more frequent and easy to access
pathes/updates.
Karl
--
http://www.openmymind.net/
"CMM" <cmm@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:e3JNflQLGHA.3460@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I am so disappointed in VS2005. The "little things" wrong with it are
just mind-boggling. Boy, I'll be so mad if I have to wait a year for the
".1" release that fixes all the bugs in this obvious beta product.
This (received today) is just one of the many examples of why ASP.NET
2.0 was totally not ready for prime time.
http://www.kbalertz.com/Feedback_911717.aspx The "workaround" they cite
isn't a workaround AT ALL. They're actually saying... "don't use it."
It's handling of CSS classes sucks (no dropdown for style classes
anywhere... everything has to be inputted manually from memory)... it's
handling of globalization via resources sucks (Global_Resource doesn't
appear in any drop downs and neither does its keys).
It's the "little things" that matter. Not the big hammers and frameworks
(like all the code-behind and project model "improvements" in ASP.NET
2.0). It's the little things that make you scratch your head and make
you waste hours of time trying to figure what YOU'RE doing wrong... when
it's just that the tool you're using is in need of an IMMEDIATE patch
cycle.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: VS2005 Not ready for prime time
- From: Kevin Spencer
- Re: VS2005 Not ready for prime time
- References:
- VS2005 Not ready for prime time
- From: CMM
- Re: VS2005 Not ready for prime time
- From: Kevin Spencer
- VS2005 Not ready for prime time
- Prev by Date: Re: Changing Request.Form collection values
- Next by Date: Re: Checking web site is running or not.
- Previous by thread: Re: VS2005 Not ready for prime time
- Next by thread: Re: VS2005 Not ready for prime time
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading
