Re: VS 2005 questions

Thank you for the information, it is very helpful. It is a shame that we
can't use VS 2005 for a few years, but at least our developers can prepare
for it.

It is true that "all you have to do is upgrade to the .NET 2.0 Framework,"
but it isn't as simple as it sounds.

We could easily update our own servers, but there is no point in that
because the applications must be hosted on military servers over which we
cannot have any control. We cannot run their applications on our servers
because 1) it is a horrendous security risk to run mission-critical
applications on servers you don't control, especially when you are the
military, and 2) government contracts only run one year at a time.

We cannot force an upgrade on the US military, because they have millions of
users, and the tiniest bug in a patch or a new product would cripple military
operations worldwide. They legitimately need a protracted testing process.
Microsoft software is among the most mission-critical for them, so they can't
afford the risk of quick adoption. If you were in their position, you would
be just as cautious.

It is a shame that that there is no switch or configuration setting in VS
2005 that allows developers to write backwards compatible code for the 1.1
Framework, because then developers could adopt VS 2005 more quickly. By the
time we are able to adopt it, you'll be up to VS 2007 (or whatever).

Microsoft needs to take into account that there are consumers who
legitimately cannot update software as critical as the .NET Framework without
at least a year of internal testing. The way Microsoft has this set up, the
tool is linked to the framework, so we cannot adopt VS 2005 until our client
adopts .NET 2.0. It isn't wise for Microsoft to set the upgrade path as an
all-or-nothing deal like this. If VS 2005 were not linked to .NET 2.0, you'd
get half an update. Now you get none.

This was not a good plan.

By linking the tools to the deployment environment you have gummed up the
whole update process and you have lost business.

Ken

"Kevin Spencer" wrote:

> Hi Ken,
>
> > 1. Can VS 2005 write code that is compatible with 1.1? If not, we cannot
> > update our tools.
>
> No. However, the .Net 2.0 framework is all that is needed on the machines
> your apps will run on.
>
> > 2. Can VS 2005 write applications that use SQL Server 2000? If not, we
> > cannot update our tools.
>
> Of course. ADO.Net can connect to any data source.
>
> > 3. Can VS 2005 live on the same bootable partition as VS 2003? If not, we
> > have difficulty updating our developers' skills.
>
> Absolutely. I've been doing just that for over a year now, with successive
> versions of VS.Net 2005. No problemo.
>
> > 4. Can SQL Server 2003 and SQL Server 2005 live together on the same
> > bootable partition?
>
> Do you mean SQL Server 2000? I'm not aware of a 2003 version. In any case,
> AFAIK, yes. They have to use different TCP ports, however.
>
> --
> HTH,
>
> Kevin Spencer
> Microsoft MVP
> ..Net Developer
> A watched clock never boils.
>
> "Ken" <Ken@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:85011036-A187-431B-AA08-CB71EE1CA1A0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Our clients are government agencies with several million users. They use
> > Framework 1.1 and SQL Server 2000. That cannot be changed. Microsoft
> > envisions an abrupt upgrade of 1.1 to 2.0, SQL Server 2000 to 2005, and VS
> > 2003 to 2005 all in the same day. However, that is not possible in the
> > real
> > world. The clients are going to stay at 1.1 and SQL Server 2000 for the
> > foreseeable future.
> >
> > 1. Can VS 2005 write code that is compatible with 1.1? If not, we cannot
> > update our tools.
> >
> > 2. Can VS 2005 write applications that use SQL Server 2000? If not, we
> > cannot update our tools.
> >
> > 3. Can VS 2005 live on the same bootable partition as VS 2003? If not, we
> > have difficulty updating our developers' skills.
> >
> > 4. Can SQL Server 2003 and SQL Server 2005 live together on the same
> > bootable partition?
> >
> >
>
>
>
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Support for optional parameters
    ... programming language, but THE central programming language of the .Net ... Office being THE cash cow at Microsoft, well, forgive me for restraining my ... The success of the VSTO initiative and the success of Office are two ... >> sure it comes in handy for a few developers out there from time to time. ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.framework)
  • RE: New DC 2003 R2 with SBS2003 replication problem. Need Help !
    ... SBS domain and you get some KCC errors on SBS. ... Step-by-Step Guide to Adding and Managing Additional Servers in a Windows ... Microsoft CSS Online Newsgroup Support ... newsgroups so that they can be resolved in an efficient and timely manner. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)
  • Re: Multiple copies of the Language Bar
    ... Microsoft CSS Online Newsgroup Support ... This newsgroup only focuses on SBS technical issues. ... Hi, thanks for the response. ... Both the Windows 2003 Standard servers and the SBS2003 are all at ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)
  • Re: 4.4.7 NDRs on sent email - messages remain in STMP queue until expiry
    ... the free email servers seems very hit and miss. ... This issue occurs may because the Symantec Antivirus Corporate Edition ... Microsoft Exchange Server servers or on Microsoft Windows SMTP servers. ... Please collect the MPS Report for Exchange: ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)
  • Re: Penetration of ASP.NET - Developers continue to use VB6 & ASP
    ... and how Microsoft has lost control of the ... >: preferred API. ... a Windows server but don't require Windows clients, ... people and it's certainly good enough for developers, ...
    (microsoft.public.inetserver.asp.general)
Loading