11 ms·

Visual Studio 11 Beta released

55 points by bratao 15y ago

acqq 15y ago
Highlights of the less obvious but the most serious problems: - By intentional design(+), it can't produce an executable which runs on Windows XP, because "you" really don't want the applications that run on the 50% of all PC's of the world, http://www.tomshardware.com/news/Windows-XP-Windows-7-market-share-April-2014-Legacy-OS,14611.html http://www.tomshardware.com/news/Windows-XP-Windows-7-market... - Keyboard macros are removed, because "you don't need them." Oh yes, and they changed the color theme to distract the attention of the developers population from the mentioned serious problems. Thank you, Microsoft. +) They had to remove the code which already existed in their DLLs to achieve this and also to stop shipping you the procedure to build your own versions of the same DLLs.
- pavlov 15y ago
  XP is over ten years old. To develop for ancient platforms, one can keep using the ancient tools. Apple is actually worse in this regard, because a copy of Xcode from 2005 produces binaries that don't work at all on new Macs anymore. Windows 8 can at least run anything developed using Visual Studio 6 on Windows XP.
  - acqq 15y ago
    You are mixing up something. It's not about old VS code not running on "new PCs" it's about the newly compiled executables not running on 50% of PCs right now! See also: http://social.msdn.microsoft.com/Forums/en-SG/vcgeneral/thread/e2f43b8e-a620-4c52-878c-8b546252af45 http://social.msdn.microsoft.com/Forums/en-SG/vcgeneral/thre... "Windows XP Embedded or Windows Embedded Standard 2009, both based on Windows XP Pro binaries will get security updates until Jan 8, 2019" If 50% of all PCs run Windows XP as we speak, do you really consider it "ancient?" Do you think they will really stop delivering updates, even if they wish?
    - pavlov 15y ago
      It is ancient. Someone who is still using XP has a computer that's more than five years old and has never upgraded. For most new app development, these users are not a very appealing target market -- if they don't buy computers nor upgrades, do they buy software either? But I'm sure there are business cases where it makes sense to target such users (even GeoWorks and OS/2 are still around, after all, so there's someone interested in software that runs on 486 boxes).
      - radicalbyte 15y ago
        > It is ancient. Someone who is still using XP has a computer that's more than five years old and has never upgraded. Or they work for a corporation who can't upgrade to a decent OS because they invested heavily in IE6-only web applications which their business runs on.
      - dagw 15y ago
        if they don't buy computers nor upgrades, do they buy software either? Many of our customers (mainly large companies and government departments) have pathetic computers, never upgrade (and in fact downgrade any new computer purchased to XP) and buy the cheapest hardware you can imagine, yet spend huge amounts on software. I don't have any stats on hand, but at a guess I'd say at least 50% still use XP.
      - romaniv 15y ago
        Someone who is still using XP has a computer that's more than five years old and has never upgraded. Or, they assemble computers from scratch and don't want to shell out extra cash for an upgrade, especially considering that Windows 7 is slower, has compatibility issues with older software and has made questionable "improvements" to UI.
      - huhtenberg 15y ago
        I run XP on my 3 month old super-duper Lenovo. It might be "ancient", but it is not obsolete.
      - nikanj 15y ago
  - ComputerGuru 15y ago
    I'm a Windows and Mac developer, and I'll tell you why Apple isn't worse: their users don't hold on to old versions. With free or 30 dollar major OS upgrades, upgrades that are consistently better than their predecessors (or at the very least (Lion?) not noticeably worse!), great and constant innovation to make the upgrades compelling and appealing, smooth/streamlined and automated "SP" deployments over the net, and many other things that I won't bother listing, they ensure that their users are, by and large, using the latest version of their OS. They can break compatibility every time, for all I care. But when Windows 7 (or for all we know, Windows 8 too) provides no real enhancements over XP (at the very least, in the eyes of a consumer) except bloat and a confused interface, then and only then do I complain about how "evil" they are for (possibly purposely, if you look into the details of the hack I posted in another comment, you'll see why) breaking support for older operating systems.
    - stonemetal 15y ago
      their users don't hold on to old versions. Tell that to my G5 Mac Pro. :(
      - vetinari 15y ago
        I'm sure there is an amount of 10.5 users... (Looking at my old PB12.).
    - veyron 15y ago
      "They can break compatibility every time, for all I care." that's why apple won't find much traction in the business world. backwards compatibility is very important. You want to write software once, not have to continually update to migrate it to the latest OS
      - tomjen3 15y ago
        Does it matter? They make plenty of money anyway and the company stock is doing better than those who attempt to go for the enterprise market. Sometimes it seems that the business world assumes that everything revolves around it.
- ComputerGuru 15y ago
  I haven't downloaded it yet, but I assume you're referring to the same limitation VS2010 (w/ the latest SPs) had with exes not running on Windows XP. Assuming it's the same, then adding this ASM file to your project should solve the problem: https://github.com/NeoSmart/UtfRedirect/blob/master/UtfRedirect/XP%20RTM.asm https://github.com/NeoSmart/UtfRedirect/blob/master/UtfRedir...
  - acqq 15y ago
    No, executables made with Visual Studio 2010 run on Windows XP SP3. They don't run on Windows 2000. See: http://tedwvc.wordpress.com/2010/11/07/how-to-get-visual-c-2010-mfc-applications-to-run-on-windows-2000/ http://tedwvc.wordpress.com/2010/11/07/how-to-get-visual-c-2... There is an in-depth overview of all the things MSFT have removed to prevent the compiled executables from running on Windows 2000. These things still existed in VS 2008, it's not that they had to develop them.
    - ComputerGuru 15y ago
      http://connect.microsoft.com/VisualStudio/feedback/details/526821/executables-built-with-visual-c-2010-do-not-run-on-windows-xp-prior-to-sp2 http://connect.microsoft.com/VisualStudio/feedback/details/5...
      - acqq 15y ago
        Reading comprehension needed: Me: "Executables made with Visual Studio 2010 run on Windows XP SP3." You: post the link to the article titled "Executables built with Visual C++ 2010 do not run on Windows XP prior to SP2" Note the SP numbers and the word "prior" please. Anyway, I know what I write since I have to support Windows 2000 for the projects I'm involved and I have to use Visual Studio 2008 for that. Do you compile any native executables for Windows platforms?
        ComputerGuru 15y ago
        I did not see the "SP3" there when I replied, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. And I'm going to ignore your personal attacks and insults. Regardless, "No, executables made with Visual Studio 2010 run on Windows XP SP3. They don't run on Windows 2000" and "No, executables made with Visual Studio 2010 run on Windows XP SP3. They don't run on Windows XP SP2" are entirely different statements.
- funkah 15y ago
  You make it sound so sinister, but this is how progress is made. As an example, OS X is so good now because Apple had the courage of their convictions to make breaks with the past. I don't think it makes sense to expect an IDE released this year to support Windows XP. They changed the UI chrome because that's what they always do. You make these people sound like Gargamel for Christ's sake. They're just trying to make software.
  - acqq 15y ago
    I absolutely don't expect the new VS IDE to run on XP but I certainly expect to be able to compile my program to an executable which can run on 50% of all PC's of the world.
    - tylermenezes 15y ago
      They're trying to force those people to upgrade. I don't know if that's a good idea, but that's clearly their intent.
    - funkah 15y ago
      OK, and I don't expect that. XP is obsolete, and if people want new software they can upgrade. If they don't, well, XP appears to be working just fine for those folks, doesn't it? This is how we move forward.
      - bh42222 15y ago
        >This is how we move forward. This is how a monopolist forces us to move forward. Good for them. Not so good for us.
        moonchrome 15y ago
        AFAIK tools to develop for XP are free (VS express). They are certainly pushing you in their direction, but it's not an ultimatum by any standard.
        recoiledsnake 15y ago
- RyanMcGreal 15y ago
  As Spolsky so brilliantly puts it [1], the MSDN Magazine Camp has overturned the Raymond Chen Camp in its insistence that API stability and backwards compatibility are passe. [1] http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/APIWar.html http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/APIWar.html
- to3m 15y ago
  Everybody is talking about lack of support for Windows XP. Seems a little premature, but I've no doubt that XP market share will decrease over time. Nobody is talking about lack of keyboard macros. And yet, keyboards will be the primary programmer input device for a while yet. So it sounds like MS have done their research on this one ;)
  - acqq 15y ago
    Yes, I'm really afraid that if the dumbing-down trend continues I'll be able to spend even less time in their new IDE. Visual Studio 6 (released 1998) has keyboard macros, as well as every version that followed, until now, when VS 11 from year 2012 doesn't? I've read somewhere that they "measured" that too few developers use macros. I guess they use metrics which you have to accept to be sent to Microsoft, and that the very same people who use macros simply do not want to have the IDE sending metrics over Internet at the times they don't control. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_Lie_with_Statistics http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_Lie_with_Statistics Disclaimer: I do use macros, that's the first thing I add whenever I install Visual Studio. It seems that unless something changes, I won't be able to use them on VS 11.
krambs 15y ago
Running it now, and definitely feels much snappier than 10. Waiting on VS10 was one of my biggest gripes.
- ditoa 15y ago
  Yeah 2010 was quite painful compared to how fast VS08 was. VS11 is not back to VS08 speeds but it is a good improvement over 2010 thank god. The big problem now is this new UI. I find it much harder on my eyes than previous versions. I didn't like the glossy/plastic look 2010 had and while this is a step away from that look it is more of a huge leap in a random direction rather than returning to a softer, cleaner look. Today has been quite disappointing with Win8 CP and VS11 leaving a nasty taste in my mouth after the first bite.
  - acqq 15y ago
    If you have problems with the theme colors of VS 2010 you can use the free "Visual Studio Color Theme Editor" extension: http://visualstudiogallery.msdn.microsoft.com/20cd93a2-c435-4d00-a797-499f16402378/ http://visualstudiogallery.msdn.microsoft.com/20cd93a2-c435-... I use it to get the colors which match the rest of my Windows environment. Still pity they don't read the Windows settings by default.
highace 15y ago
Does this beta have an expiry date? As in, if I upgrade am I going to be surprised by it deactivating in ~3 months time?
- acqq 15y ago
  This is a beta version of the product which will sell for around 10 thousand pounds in the UK (it's an "Ultimate Edition"). Can you really expect it won't have an expiration limit? I expect it has the limit though I still haven't found out what it is. Anybody knows?
  - zxoq 15y ago
    If it's like the old VS betas it will last for 180 days.

55 points by bratao 15y ago

acqq 15y ago

Highlights of the less obvious but the most serious problems: - By intentional design(+), it can't produce an executable which runs on Windows XP, because "you" really don't want the applications that run on the 50% of all PC's of the world, http://www.tomshardware.com/news/Windows-XP-Windows-7-market-share-April-2014-Legacy-OS,14611.html http://www.tomshardware.com/news/Windows-XP-Windows-7-market... - Keyboard macros are removed, because "you don't need them." Oh yes, and they changed the color theme to distract the attention of the developers population from the mentioned serious problems. Thank you, Microsoft. +) They had to remove the code which already existed in their DLLs to achieve this and also to stop shipping you the procedure to build your own versions of the same DLLs.

pavlov 15y ago
XP is over ten years old. To develop for ancient platforms, one can keep using the ancient tools. Apple is actually worse in this regard, because a copy of Xcode from 2005 produces binaries that don't work at all on new Macs anymore. Windows 8 can at least run anything developed using Visual Studio 6 on Windows XP.
- acqq 15y ago
  You are mixing up something. It's not about old VS code not running on "new PCs" it's about the newly compiled executables not running on 50% of PCs right now! See also: http://social.msdn.microsoft.com/Forums/en-SG/vcgeneral/thread/e2f43b8e-a620-4c52-878c-8b546252af45 http://social.msdn.microsoft.com/Forums/en-SG/vcgeneral/thre... "Windows XP Embedded or Windows Embedded Standard 2009, both based on Windows XP Pro binaries will get security updates until Jan 8, 2019" If 50% of all PCs run Windows XP as we speak, do you really consider it "ancient?" Do you think they will really stop delivering updates, even if they wish?
  - pavlov 15y ago
    It is ancient. Someone who is still using XP has a computer that's more than five years old and has never upgraded. For most new app development, these users are not a very appealing target market -- if they don't buy computers nor upgrades, do they buy software either? But I'm sure there are business cases where it makes sense to target such users (even GeoWorks and OS/2 are still around, after all, so there's someone interested in software that runs on 486 boxes).
    - radicalbyte 15y ago
      > It is ancient. Someone who is still using XP has a computer that's more than five years old and has never upgraded. Or they work for a corporation who can't upgrade to a decent OS because they invested heavily in IE6-only web applications which their business runs on.
    - dagw 15y ago
      if they don't buy computers nor upgrades, do they buy software either? Many of our customers (mainly large companies and government departments) have pathetic computers, never upgrade (and in fact downgrade any new computer purchased to XP) and buy the cheapest hardware you can imagine, yet spend huge amounts on software. I don't have any stats on hand, but at a guess I'd say at least 50% still use XP.
    - romaniv 15y ago
      Someone who is still using XP has a computer that's more than five years old and has never upgraded. Or, they assemble computers from scratch and don't want to shell out extra cash for an upgrade, especially considering that Windows 7 is slower, has compatibility issues with older software and has made questionable "improvements" to UI.
    - huhtenberg 15y ago
      I run XP on my 3 month old super-duper Lenovo. It might be "ancient", but it is not obsolete.
    - nikanj 15y ago
- ComputerGuru 15y ago
  I'm a Windows and Mac developer, and I'll tell you why Apple isn't worse: their users don't hold on to old versions. With free or 30 dollar major OS upgrades, upgrades that are consistently better than their predecessors (or at the very least (Lion?) not noticeably worse!), great and constant innovation to make the upgrades compelling and appealing, smooth/streamlined and automated "SP" deployments over the net, and many other things that I won't bother listing, they ensure that their users are, by and large, using the latest version of their OS. They can break compatibility every time, for all I care. But when Windows 7 (or for all we know, Windows 8 too) provides no real enhancements over XP (at the very least, in the eyes of a consumer) except bloat and a confused interface, then and only then do I complain about how "evil" they are for (possibly purposely, if you look into the details of the hack I posted in another comment, you'll see why) breaking support for older operating systems.
  - stonemetal 15y ago
    their users don't hold on to old versions. Tell that to my G5 Mac Pro. :(
    - vetinari 15y ago
      I'm sure there is an amount of 10.5 users... (Looking at my old PB12.).
  - veyron 15y ago
    "They can break compatibility every time, for all I care." that's why apple won't find much traction in the business world. backwards compatibility is very important. You want to write software once, not have to continually update to migrate it to the latest OS
    - tomjen3 15y ago
      Does it matter? They make plenty of money anyway and the company stock is doing better than those who attempt to go for the enterprise market. Sometimes it seems that the business world assumes that everything revolves around it.
ComputerGuru 15y ago
I haven't downloaded it yet, but I assume you're referring to the same limitation VS2010 (w/ the latest SPs) had with exes not running on Windows XP. Assuming it's the same, then adding this ASM file to your project should solve the problem: https://github.com/NeoSmart/UtfRedirect/blob/master/UtfRedirect/XP%20RTM.asm https://github.com/NeoSmart/UtfRedirect/blob/master/UtfRedir...
- acqq 15y ago
  No, executables made with Visual Studio 2010 run on Windows XP SP3. They don't run on Windows 2000. See: http://tedwvc.wordpress.com/2010/11/07/how-to-get-visual-c-2010-mfc-applications-to-run-on-windows-2000/ http://tedwvc.wordpress.com/2010/11/07/how-to-get-visual-c-2... There is an in-depth overview of all the things MSFT have removed to prevent the compiled executables from running on Windows 2000. These things still existed in VS 2008, it's not that they had to develop them.
  - ComputerGuru 15y ago
    http://connect.microsoft.com/VisualStudio/feedback/details/526821/executables-built-with-visual-c-2010-do-not-run-on-windows-xp-prior-to-sp2 http://connect.microsoft.com/VisualStudio/feedback/details/5...
    - acqq 15y ago
      Reading comprehension needed: Me: "Executables made with Visual Studio 2010 run on Windows XP SP3." You: post the link to the article titled "Executables built with Visual C++ 2010 do not run on Windows XP prior to SP2" Note the SP numbers and the word "prior" please. Anyway, I know what I write since I have to support Windows 2000 for the projects I'm involved and I have to use Visual Studio 2008 for that. Do you compile any native executables for Windows platforms?
      - ComputerGuru 15y ago
        I did not see the "SP3" there when I replied, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. And I'm going to ignore your personal attacks and insults. Regardless, "No, executables made with Visual Studio 2010 run on Windows XP SP3. They don't run on Windows 2000" and "No, executables made with Visual Studio 2010 run on Windows XP SP3. They don't run on Windows XP SP2" are entirely different statements.
funkah 15y ago
You make it sound so sinister, but this is how progress is made. As an example, OS X is so good now because Apple had the courage of their convictions to make breaks with the past. I don't think it makes sense to expect an IDE released this year to support Windows XP. They changed the UI chrome because that's what they always do. You make these people sound like Gargamel for Christ's sake. They're just trying to make software.
- acqq 15y ago
  I absolutely don't expect the new VS IDE to run on XP but I certainly expect to be able to compile my program to an executable which can run on 50% of all PC's of the world.
  - tylermenezes 15y ago
    They're trying to force those people to upgrade. I don't know if that's a good idea, but that's clearly their intent.
  - funkah 15y ago
    OK, and I don't expect that. XP is obsolete, and if people want new software they can upgrade. If they don't, well, XP appears to be working just fine for those folks, doesn't it? This is how we move forward.
    - bh42222 15y ago
      >This is how we move forward. This is how a monopolist forces us to move forward. Good for them. Not so good for us.
      - moonchrome 15y ago
        AFAIK tools to develop for XP are free (VS express). They are certainly pushing you in their direction, but it's not an ultimatum by any standard.
      - recoiledsnake 15y ago
RyanMcGreal 15y ago
As Spolsky so brilliantly puts it [1], the MSDN Magazine Camp has overturned the Raymond Chen Camp in its insistence that API stability and backwards compatibility are passe. [1] http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/APIWar.html http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/APIWar.html
to3m 15y ago
Everybody is talking about lack of support for Windows XP. Seems a little premature, but I've no doubt that XP market share will decrease over time. Nobody is talking about lack of keyboard macros. And yet, keyboards will be the primary programmer input device for a while yet. So it sounds like MS have done their research on this one ;)
- acqq 15y ago
  Yes, I'm really afraid that if the dumbing-down trend continues I'll be able to spend even less time in their new IDE. Visual Studio 6 (released 1998) has keyboard macros, as well as every version that followed, until now, when VS 11 from year 2012 doesn't? I've read somewhere that they "measured" that too few developers use macros. I guess they use metrics which you have to accept to be sent to Microsoft, and that the very same people who use macros simply do not want to have the IDE sending metrics over Internet at the times they don't control. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_Lie_with_Statistics http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_Lie_with_Statistics Disclaimer: I do use macros, that's the first thing I add whenever I install Visual Studio. It seems that unless something changes, I won't be able to use them on VS 11.

krambs 15y ago

Running it now, and definitely feels much snappier than 10. Waiting on VS10 was one of my biggest gripes.

ditoa 15y ago
Yeah 2010 was quite painful compared to how fast VS08 was. VS11 is not back to VS08 speeds but it is a good improvement over 2010 thank god. The big problem now is this new UI. I find it much harder on my eyes than previous versions. I didn't like the glossy/plastic look 2010 had and while this is a step away from that look it is more of a huge leap in a random direction rather than returning to a softer, cleaner look. Today has been quite disappointing with Win8 CP and VS11 leaving a nasty taste in my mouth after the first bite.
- acqq 15y ago
  If you have problems with the theme colors of VS 2010 you can use the free "Visual Studio Color Theme Editor" extension: http://visualstudiogallery.msdn.microsoft.com/20cd93a2-c435-4d00-a797-499f16402378/ http://visualstudiogallery.msdn.microsoft.com/20cd93a2-c435-... I use it to get the colors which match the rest of my Windows environment. Still pity they don't read the Windows settings by default.

highace 15y ago

Does this beta have an expiry date? As in, if I upgrade am I going to be surprised by it deactivating in ~3 months time?

acqq 15y ago
This is a beta version of the product which will sell for around 10 thousand pounds in the UK (it's an "Ultimate Edition"). Can you really expect it won't have an expiration limit? I expect it has the limit though I still haven't found out what it is. Anybody knows?
- zxoq 15y ago
  If it's like the old VS betas it will last for 180 days.