VS2005 Not ready for prime time

Discussion in 'ASP .Net' started by CMM, Feb 8, 2006.

  1. CMM

    CMM Guest

    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.
     
    CMM, Feb 8, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. There is a case where the background color isn't displaying as configured,
    so Microsoft listed another way to set the background color. That sounds
    like a work around to me.
    Sure VS isn't perfect, but what is? It's far better than its ever been, and
    its the best all around web development tool I've used.
    Intellisense is seemingly everywhere in VS2005 now - so much that it stuck
    out to you when you discovered a couple spots where it still doesn't exist
    yet. I applaud Microsoft's efforts to date and eagerly await future
    versions that are even better.

    --
    I hope this helps,
    Steve C. Orr, MCSD, MVP
    http://SteveOrr.net


    "CMM" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >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.
    >
    >
    >
     
    Steve C. Orr [MVP, MCSD], Feb 9, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. CMM

    Guest Guest

    I agree with Steve. VS 2005 is much better than previous versions as well
    as any other dev tool. I notice that many would rather focus on the few
    bugs, which any software has, than the vast features and improvements that
    make our lives easier.

    Thanks,

    J


    "Steve C. Orr [MVP, MCSD]" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > There is a case where the background color isn't displaying as configured,
    > so Microsoft listed another way to set the background color. That sounds
    > like a work around to me.
    > Sure VS isn't perfect, but what is? It's far better than its ever been,
    > and its the best all around web development tool I've used.
    > Intellisense is seemingly everywhere in VS2005 now - so much that it stuck
    > out to you when you discovered a couple spots where it still doesn't exist
    > yet. I applaud Microsoft's efforts to date and eagerly await future
    > versions that are even better.
    >
    > --
    > I hope this helps,
    > Steve C. Orr, MCSD, MVP
    > http://SteveOrr.net
    >
    >
    > "CMM" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >>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.
    >>
    >>
    >>

    >
    >
     
    Guest, Feb 9, 2006
    #3
  4. CMM

    CMM Guest

    Something is always better than nothing. Right? I agree with that.

    But, I'm not an apologist like a lot (all?) of you "MVP's." I love Visual
    Studio and .NET in general. I wouldn't be using it if I didn't. But, I'm not
    going to sit here and say that Visual Studio 2005 lives up to the HYPE... or
    that I expected something a little more *polished* from a company with
    Microsoft's resources and their development resources....
    You say you "eagerly await future versions that are even better." Well,
    unless you speak up, it'll be over a year before you do and they'll make you
    pay for it.... and at the same time they'll probably force you to have to
    refactor your code for good measure. Just so you can get a stupid little bug
    fix that shouldn't have been there to begin with.

    VS2003 was extremely well-polished. Probably because it was a "patch" of
    VS2002. VS2005 REINFORCES the old Microsoft stereotype that they NEVER get
    it (even close to) right the first x.0 release.

    P.S. I wasn't talking about Intellisense. I was talking about the Property
    Editor. The CssClass property behaves like it doesn't know your page is
    linked to a Stylesheet. The Resource Name / Resource Key field in the
    Expressions editor for choosing localized strings acts like you don't have a
    whole stack of resource files in App_GlobalResources (I know it works better
    with Page by Page resource files... but that's not a reason... that's a
    flaw).

    In fact the dialog box involved in the latter is actually BUG-RIDDEN. As
    after you enter stuff once into it and go back, voila drop-down works as
    you'd expect. Change something and try to click OK... "huh OK is disabled?
    What's going on?" Spend a few minutes using the Expressions editor for
    localization and you'd know what I mean.
     
    CMM, Feb 9, 2006
    #4
  5. 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" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >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.
    >
    >
    >
     
    Karl Seguin [MVP], Feb 9, 2006
    #5
  6. CMM

    CMM Guest

    In the end, VS2005 is fantastic. But, the apologists that gush over
    everything that MS does do the platform a huge disservice. MS isn't doing us
    a favor by creating these tools. We pay them money for it (and some of play
    A LOT of it!!! in the area of $4000 and more a year).
     
    CMM, Feb 9, 2006
    #6
  7. CMM

    CMM Guest

    I agree. The CLR work done for .NET 2.0 is phenomenal.

    However, the IDE and Designer (WinForm,WebForm, and even the XML
    designer.... wait, we DON'T HAVE an XML designer do we?) teams were not that
    awake. People gush over the new intellisense stuff and code "visualizer"
    like they've never heard of a QuickWatch window or the Immediate Pane. The
    TableAdapter is a fine idea... but in the hands of the of the Designer team,
    it was decided this should be tightly coupled in the SAME FILE as the
    Dataset albeit in a different namespace (huh????).... making
    TypedDatasets+TableAdapters use over physical (as in Remoting) n-tiers
    impossible (i.e. Dataset alone passed through tiers, TableAdapter only in
    the middle tier). Is this 1998 again?

    I too am hoping for more frequent updates rather than marketing driven and
    hyped up releases (MS: "Introducing Visual Studio 2006!.... give us $3000
    because it corrects everything we promised for Visual Studio 2005!")
     
    CMM, Feb 9, 2006
    #7
  8. re:
    > P.S. I wasn't talking about Intellisense. I was talking about the Property Editor. The CssClass
    > property behaves like it doesn't know your page is linked to a Stylesheet. The Resource Name /
    > Resource Key field in the Expressions editor for choosing localized strings acts like you don't
    > have a whole stack of resource files in App_GlobalResources


    What I would suggest, CMM, is that you file your
    comments at the MSDN Product Feedback Center:

    http://lab.msdn.microsoft.com/productfeedback/

    That is the best way to try to get features you want into upcoming versions
    of Visual Studio, or to get things which aren't working as well as they should, fixed.




    Juan T. Llibre
    ASP.NET MVP
    ASPNETFAQ.COM : http://www.aspnetfaq.com
    ==================================
    "CMM" <> wrote in message news:...
    > Something is always better than nothing. Right? I agree with that.
    >
    > But, I'm not an apologist like a lot (all?) of you "MVP's." I love Visual Studio and .NET in
    > general. I wouldn't be using it if I didn't. But, I'm not going to sit here and say that Visual
    > Studio 2005 lives up to the HYPE... or that I expected something a little more *polished* from a
    > company with Microsoft's resources and their development resources....
    > You say you "eagerly await future versions that are even better." Well, unless you speak up, it'll
    > be over a year before you do and they'll make you pay for it.... and at the same time they'll
    > probably force you to have to refactor your code for good measure. Just so you can get a stupid
    > little bug fix that shouldn't have been there to begin with.
    >
    > VS2003 was extremely well-polished. Probably because it was a "patch" of VS2002. VS2005 REINFORCES
    > the old Microsoft stereotype that they NEVER get it (even close to) right the first x.0 release.
    >
    > P.S. I wasn't talking about Intellisense. I was talking about the Property Editor. The CssClass
    > property behaves like it doesn't know your page is linked to a Stylesheet. The Resource Name /
    > Resource Key field in the Expressions editor for choosing localized strings acts like you don't
    > have a whole stack of resource files in App_GlobalResources (I know it works better with Page by
    > Page resource files... but that's not a reason... that's a flaw).
    >
    > In fact the dialog box involved in the latter is actually BUG-RIDDEN. As after you enter stuff
    > once into it and go back, voila drop-down works as you'd expect. Change something and try to click
    > OK... "huh OK is disabled? What's going on?" Spend a few minutes using the Expressions editor for
    > localization and you'd know what I mean.
    >
     
    Juan T. Llibre, Feb 9, 2006
    #8
  9. CMM

    CMM Guest

    "Juan T. Llibre" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > What I would suggest, CMM, is that you file your
    > comments at the MSDN Product Feedback Center:


    I have...for one or two at least... they end up right back here as "Vote"
    post. This was more of a general "gripe" post than any one suggestion. Just
    had to vent. :)

    --
    -C. Moya
    www.cmoya.com
     
    CMM, Feb 9, 2006
    #9
  10. 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:...
    > 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" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >>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.
    >>
    >>
    >>

    >
    >
     
    Kevin Spencer, Feb 9, 2006
    #10
  11. CMM

    CMM Guest

    > 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" <> wrote in message
    news:%...
    >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:...
    >> 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" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>>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.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>

    >>
    >>

    >
    >
     
    CMM, Feb 9, 2006
    #11
  12. > 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.


    You have to look for the stuff that is added to VS.Net 2005 to see it. None
    of it is obvious or flashy. But there's tons of it there. Refactoring alone
    is a huge improvement. Intellisense is improved tremendously. The "Surround
    With..." command and Code Snippets are also very useful. Those are the
    things that spring to mind right off the bat, but there are literally dozens
    of features that maximize coding time. Take some time to read the "What's
    new" articles in the SDK sometime, you may be pleasantly surprised.

    > 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.


    I don't know what you're looking at, but you must be looking in the wrong
    place. The CSS editor is excellent for working with external style sheets,
    and the Intellisense comes right out of the DTD for CSS. As for XML, well,
    XML can be almost anything, dozens of different "flavors." I'm not sure what
    you expect the IDE to be able to do graphically with any type of XML you
    might want to edit. If you just want to talk about XML as a base language,
    it's got great Intellisense for editing XML code. But in addition, you
    should check out the XSD tools and even more importantly, the XSL editor and
    debugging tools. You can even step through an XSL document while parsing and
    do watches with it. I've used the heck out of both of these.

    Considering the number of XML flavors out there, I believe Microsoft honed
    in on the most important ones, and supports them very well.

    --
    HTH,

    Kevin Spencer
    Microsoft MVP
    ..Net Developer
    We got a sick zebra a hat,
    you ultimate tuna.


    "CMM" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >> 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" <> wrote in message
    > news:%...
    >>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:...
    >>> 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" <> wrote in message
    >>> news:...
    >>>>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.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>>

    >>
    >>

    >
    >
     
    Kevin Spencer, Feb 9, 2006
    #12
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Replies:
    0
    Views:
    689
  2. Joenco
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    749
    Joenco
    Jul 3, 2003
  3. Ron Garret

    Is wsgi ready for prime time?

    Ron Garret, May 17, 2007, in forum: Python
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    405
    Graham Dumpleton
    May 18, 2007
  4. Jeremy Fischer
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    212
    Jeremy Fischer
    Jan 16, 2005
  5. Replies:
    5
    Views:
    358
    Bader Senussi Z
    Nov 10, 2012
Loading...

Share This Page