It's difficult to tell what is being asked here. This question is ambiguous, vague, incomplete, overly broad, or rhetorical and cannot be reasonably answered in its current form. For help clarifying this question so that it can be reopened, visit the help center.
Closed 10 years ago.
Can you create mobile applications with Visual Studio 2010 Professional Academic Edition?
Can you create mobile websites with Visual Studio 2010 Professional Academic Edition?
You can create mobile websites with Notepad, if that's what you wanted to use.
Creating a Mobile Website is a matter of designing the website to look good and work on the phone. It has nothing to do with Visual Studio or any other IDE.
The most popular trend today (and something I'm currently studying) is Responsive Web Design. Which is a web design method where a site is designed to work at any resolution and will scale to that resolution without any changes to code. It's kind of brain rewire to get the hang of if you've been designing websites for even a short period of time, but it's extremely fascinating and useful. Responsive Web Design makes use of fluid grids and media. If you want, you could also have an adaptive layout using fixed widths (like colly.com) without the fluid stuff. Responsive web design is generally considered a better approach as it does not assume any particular device dimensions.
Mobile applications however, are not written in any language that Visual Studio Supports. The most popular are:
Android - Written in Java
iOS (Apple) - Written in Objective-C
Visual Studio will work for creating mobile applications designed for Windows Mobile Devices, running any Windows Mobile OS that's ever been released.
Also, as a side note:
Microsoft has discontinued Academic Edition and offers VS 2008 through VS 2012 Beta for free to students with a college email address through Dreamspark, along side some other cool free stuff.
There is also Visual Web Developer, which is free and supports MVC3.
Related
Does anyone have a good solution for testing mobile websites in Visual Studio 2010?
In VS 2008 I used to be able to start up a mobile emulator. That functionality seems to be gone in 2010.
The reason they took it out I'm guessing is that there are NUMEROUS browser implementations for the mobile space. Your best hope is to find a set of emulators for the largest platforms available(IPhone, BlackBerry, Droid...) where you can verify the experience for those users. A single emulator will only do a poor job in gauging the experience for additional users on other platforms.
i agree with Achilles, too many platforms too many devices. if this is a business project you can try http://www.deviceanywhere.com/ (not free). I personally ask friends to visit demo site and test
I really want to upgrade to Visual Studio 2010. But since I do a lot of development for the Pocket PC version of Windows Mobile I cannot. (I develop for a Symbol device that does not support Windows Phone 7, so that is not a option.)
Does any one know any kind of time frame of when Microsoft plans to add support for Smart Device Projects into Visual Studio 2010?
Update: Since this is looking less and less likely without intervention from the users, Please go here and vote for this feature.
Microsoft's current public statement says that, apart from Windows Phone 7 development, there will not be Smart Device Application Development added to Visual Studio 2010.
This obviously raises concerns and has implications for a lot of people, and there are more than a few of us lobbying Microsoft very hard to change that plan and to get them to include some sort of support for Smart Device programming outside of Windows Phone.
I'm hopeful, maybe even optimistic, that their stance will change and that we will get something - even if it's only CF 3.5 targeting actual hardware (i.e. no emulator support) - at some point down the road. Right now they've got all hands on deck trying to get Windows Phone out the door, and until that happens, I wouldn't expect much for resource allocation toward other device features.
So what does that actually mean? In my mind I wouldn't postpone installing VS2010 until they have device support. My guess is it won't happen until early next year at the absolute earliest and realistically I would say mid to late next year if it happens at all. Again, I'm optimistic that it will, but I'm also a realist, so I'm not going to base my business decisions and future on it happening.
Add your support to the following Microsoft Connect Item, it's had quite a bit of interest being the 3rd highest voted suggestion so far.
http://connect.microsoft.com/VisualStudio/feedback/details/595712/no-support-for-windows-ce-and-compact-framework-development-in-vs2010
Through private conversations I've had with the Customer Advocacy Team at MS it would appear that they are really digging their heels in over this. MS reneged on promises to include Smart Device Framework support in VS2010 early on in the product life cycle.
It is really frustrating because at some point the development tools will fragment and you'll end up with having to maintain separate development, source control and build systems for targeting Windows CE. Who is to say that the tools will even work on future versions of Windows either or even if they will live side by side with future versions of VS. Remember this lack of support also hurts people doing unmanaged code on CE too.
MS is doing a great job of remaining silent here, the silence is already causing people to look at alternative platforms. Without a statement of intent no business is going to invest in Windows CE development without knowing the future of the OS and the tools to develop on it.
All recent Visual Studio versions can be installed side by side. You could upgrade now for desktop development, then when smart device support is rolled out, migrate your projects to VS2010.
http://social.msdn.microsoft.com/Forums/en/setupprerelease/thread/fce95ec7-728d-41d1-ab13-74a2fd3a4136
I am forced to have two VS installations side by side. However, another issue - that is causing me more pain is that TFS 2010 doesn't work with VS 2008 - there is a plugin, of course, but there are many issues with it which make it unusable.
So to have source control, I have installed SVN on my machine.
Microsoft once again, has proven that they have no concern for the devs at all. Their tools don't work together, backward compatibility is not there, all of which makes their dev tools a big load of crap.
MS replied to that connect issue:
Hi folks,
In the first quarter of 2013, we plan to provide tooling for Visual
Studio 2012 to create apps for Windows Embedded Compact v.Next. We’ll
be announcing more details in September, including the roadmap for
.NET CF. You can find more details this Fall in the Windows Embedded
Compact website at http://www.windowsembedded.com.
thanks, Doug Turnure Visual Studio PM
Many applications (like StackOverflow) has been written by three developers (a small team), would have been possible to do the same job using VS Express Edition?
Which would have been the real differences? Whcih main feature is "enough" to justify the use of VS full edition?
i ask this question not for curiosity but because I want to understand the difference of VS Express vs not Express for a small team. Differences that go beyond the feature matrix.
Thanks.
You can build a fully functional web site with the Web Developer Express edition. There are things it doesn't support like plugins (so no resharper), but you can develop Silverlight applications (for example).
So it might have taken a little longer, or certain features might not have been developed straight away, but I would say that you could develop something like Stack Overflow using the Express edition.
There are no restrictions on what you can develop.
Microsoft site
This question is unlikely to help any future visitors; it is only relevant to a small geographic area, a specific moment in time, or an extraordinarily narrow situation that is not generally applicable to the worldwide audience of the internet. For help making this question more broadly applicable, visit the help center.
Closed 10 years ago.
Regarding to this post, can visual studio 2010 RC ready for production
I know there is already a duplicate question here, but that was asked when beta were available.
RC is release candidate... means if no major crashers are reported this will be the build that would go out for production. Thus, you may use it at your own risk. But, per Microsoft, do NOT use it for production.
I work for a .NET component vendor (Syncfusion, Inc). We work for long cycles on pre-release code and have been very happy with Visual Studio 2010 RC. We had no trouble moving our code over. IDE integration features worked perfectly. It is a sweet upgrade especially if you are working with WPF, Silverlight or ASP.NET MVC. I would certainly say that Visual Studio 2010 RC is ready for prime time.
I wouldn't start building a mission critical application using .NET 4.0 just yet. I'd use it to see some of the new features and get comfortable with it [as microsoft always love to move things around].
This is an entirely new runtime they've built, so it's a much bigger chance than 2.0 to 3.5.
So, basically, don't bet your career on it just yet but definitely use it.
I've been using VS2010 pre-RC for a few months working on a fairly demanding WPF application. It's ready, and it's awesome; I don't even have VS2008 installed on my machine anymore.
As of the Release Candidate, anyone running Windows XP Service Pack 2 is now locked out of Visual Studio 2010. I cannot upgrade this work computer to SP3 which is a huge pain in the ass as now I cannot use VS2010 unless Microsoft circumvents this dependency on SP3 via a patch.
Many big corporations upgrade their systems very, very slowly and thus Microsoft has locked out a lot of people not able to run SP3 from using it.
As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 11 years ago.
Currently thinking about pitching the argument for us migration from vs 2005 (winforms) to vs 2008 (wpf). My main point being the new UI design features.
I am slightly worried that we will put loads of work into upgrading everything only for us to have to do the same when 2010 comes along? So this leads to also consider skipping 2008 and just adopting 2010 as soon as its released.
Anyone been in the similar situation?
Also any arguments for and against for welcomed.
Cheers.
Personally I think it will be fairly safe to go to 2008 as 2010 is just extensions on top of it and enhancements for Visual Studio design time support for WPF. Therefore, the transition shouldn't be all that complicated. More like a 2005-2008 upgrade of a Win Forms or ASP.NET project, which is a cakewalk.
I find that it is better to upgrade sooner than later, so that you don't get "bogged down" with the existing framework/system. If you continue building on something that you will ultimately replace, it becomes harder and harder to justify to management to move.
I was in the same situation and opted to go down the MSDN subscription route, where I get all the new development tools as they come out. I have a spare machine the I use for 'the next version' of the compiler, that I use for migration testing, thus I at least know what to expect when the decision has to be made. This works well for me, and I guess if you have a decent virtualisation set-up all the better.
New compiler versions didn't break my build, but did hurt many of my automated tests, and add-in productivity tools. Basically. you need regression tests of some kind to ascertain the damage moving to a new version is likely to cause.
Your question doesn't quite make sense to me. Are you asking if you should migrate existing applications from Winforms to WPF? Or do you just want to start making new WPF applications but still work with existing Winform projects?
Either way, migrating from Visual Studio 2005 to 2008 is extremely simple. Existing Winform projects request a conversion which takes a few seconds and has never failed for me (dozens of solutions and 100s of projects converted over the last couple months).
However, this has nothing to do with Winforms and WPF.
If you want to start building WPF apps there is no reason to wait for VS 2010. VS 2008 has excellent support for both application types.
I agree with those suggesting adopting VS 2008 now. One thing to consider though is that WPF comes with a fairly high learning curve. I've had some limited exposure to WPF and Silverlight and am finding them to be a complete "mind change" from the WinForms model. Good luck.
I'd make the jump now if I was in your shoes. It'll minimize the impact of the 2010 jump down the line by getting you used to the many new features you'll already have to get used to. Additionally you'll get to enjoy many months of better performance and features before 2010 is available.
Winforms vs WPF is a world of difference. It's a much bigger change than looking at migrating from 2005 to 2008. I would not have that as the driving reason to upgrade to 2008. I also have no idea of the scope of your project and if WPF is really the best direction to take your product. Or if expression blend is all the tooling you need to get these UIs going.
Instead of pitching the WPF pitch I would focus on the real benefits you can get immediately. With 2008 you have multi-targeting so you can build all the applications you used to build in 2005 and have them target the 2.0 framework. In my experience I find 2008 faster and the refactoring improvements are a great addition. There are a ton of other new improvements in 2008 which you get out-of-the-box and can start using from day 1.
According to Rico the head architect of 2010 you will get even richer multi-targetting with 2010 which will allow you to adopt 2010 earlier and not force you to use CLR version 4 from get go.
At the moment I've made it a practice to upgrade to the latest version as soon as possible. Although for an application developer it's got its own pitfalls, Ex. .Net Framework 3.5 is not found on most computers, and if I ship the bootstrap installer which is 20 MB it insists on an active Internet connection to download the files needed. The full installer is 198 MBs and though I don't like it, I have to ship it along with the software.
For a web developer though the problem is easier to solve, you only have to worry about making it work at the server and things work automatically for the users. So if you're making a web solution I think Migration is easier.
If you're making an application software, I think you should weigh the advantages that migration offers with the changes it will make to your deployment scheme. I don't know how many people will agree with this, but I believe that application developers should be one upgrade behind.
There is an underlying process question here that I think shouldn't be overlooked:
When is the proper time to upgrade development tools and production environments?
On the one hand you could skip 2008 though this leads to the question of when would 2010 be adopted: Upon first release, first service pack release, or some other milestone? This may lead to creating more legacy code if you stay locked in on 2005 using the 2.0 framework and others move onto other frameworks. Even if you switch to 2008, it can still target the 2.0 framework so that that upgrade of the .Net framework may happen separately which some may like. Another key point in this camp is who does the research to evaluate the differences between versions to see which is worth the shift.
On the other, you could suggest that there be a continuous strategy of preparing to upgrade every 3 years or so as the Visual Studio releases of the past decade were roughly 2002, 2003, 2005 and 2008 so far. This would seem to me to be the better approach as there is more of a constant evolution going on rather than staying locked in at all. In this case there may be new features that get used since the new tools come quickly compared to the first case where the shift may be viewed as a large step whereas in this case it isn't that big since you are always looking to move in 2-3 years.
Course as I say this my old work machine has Visual Studio 2003, 2005 and 2008, so I am kind of in that latter camp which makes sense to me. I remember 10 years ago my work machine had NT 4.0, Pentium II 333 MHz processor, 64 MB of RAM and a 4 GB hard drive that had to be 2 partitions as it wouldn't let one partition be that big. Now my work machine has 4 GB of RAM alone, a 2.66 GHz dual core processor and a 160 GB hard drive. Could I in another 10 years have a machine with hundreds of GBs of RAM? While that may seem ridiculous, if I were sharing a machine with a handful of other developers, it may make sense to divide up a huge amount of memory amongst us all.