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 10 years ago.
We have built an application on the ASP.NET 4.0 platform. We need to go live in the next two weeks and I want to find a host that will offer the RTM of .NET 4.0. Any ideas of any hosts that have plans to offer the newest version shortly after Monday's launch? I see a bunch with RC1 hosting, but I can't find any hard dates for offering the RTM.
I have a site on DiscountASP.Net and they upgraded services on 4/8 for a "soon release" of .Net 4.0.
EDIT as of 4/14/10: DiscountASP.Net now supports .Net 4.0 in production.
Take a look at orcsweb.
They have VS2010 and ASP.NET 4.0|RC Program - FREE Hosting.
Maybe they'll have the RTM soon.
Noone will give you hard dates - because of possible issues and the amount of work the update may require POTENTIALLY.
THat said, I would expect the known and already named players to start offering ASP.NET hosting with 4.0 ASAP. ASAP may be within days. But if you are a large host, a couple of testing days may be really - hm - justified. I personally plan to go to 4.0 ASAP (as in: as soon as I get my hands on it), but - then - I only run 2 web servers and a couple of other severs internally that need it.
Check out Reliable Site as far as I can see they will be supporting 4.0 very soon(or have it installed already).
ASP and ASP.Net 4.0 Hosting
Support for the latest .Net releases
including Asp.Net 1.1, 2.0, 3.5, AJAX,
Asp.Net 3.5 SP1, and ASP.Net 4.0.
Addon module support for ASP.Net MVC
2.0 and IIS URL Rewrite. Fully secured, and always quick.
Related
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.
Will the side-by-side installation of these 2 versions of Visual Studio interfere with each other if installed on the same machine?
VS11 comes with a "go live" license and you can install it side-by-side with VS2010. Be careful though since VS11 installs the .NET Framework 4.5 which is not a side-by-side install. When you install .NET Framework 4.5, it is an in-place upgrade of 4.0 which means you are replacing the 4.0 DLLs with the new 4.5 ones. There aren't supposed to be any compatability issues, but with any in-place upgrade there may be some subtle ones that pop up.
I have installed both of them and they live with absolute peace :) VS 11 supports side by side installation with vs 2010 officially, so install it, you won't have any problem.
Also as a side note, VS 11 is in beta stage, but it's very stable. I've switched to VS 11 from the day it went public and found no bug yet.
I have installed it, there was no problem. But since I uninstalled VS 11, 3.5 winforms project with images defined on form doesn't work properly any more. When loading buttons images, exception "Could not load assembly System.Drawing 4.0" is thrown. Since I mainly develop web applications and they run fine I didn't bother more with this.
I know at a minimum it will break StructureMap and I've read others have compatibility issues.
The .net 4.5 release is an In-place upgrade.
This means that the binaries for .net 4.0 will be REPLACED by the binaries for .net 4.5.
Microsoft has attempted to mitigate the problems this causes by making a "Target .net 4.0" feature. But this is very different from the targeting previous versions of .net (which have been side by side since .net 2.0).
Because it is a in-place upgrade, "Target .net 4.0" cannot really target it. The best they can do is try to manually remove some "features". They have done this (Scott Hanselman had a blog post covering this).
But don't let this fool you into thinking you are really using .net 4.0. Any bugs fixed by .net 4.5 will be fixed on your development machine and not for your users.
So if you are developing an application "targeting .net 4.0" and you have .net 4.5 installed then you are at risk. If you accidentally use a fixed bug, it will not break for you while debugging.
When you deploy your app to a machine running only .net 4.0 (ie windows xp) then those bugs are not fixed for your user.
For all intents and purposes, those fixed bugs are now "Hidden Bugs" (for developers that still need to target .net 4.0.
The best part is that it does not matter if you use VS 2010 or VS 2012. Once .net 4.5 is installed the bugs are hidden.
See this post for more details: http://social.msdn.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/wpf/thread/c05a8c02-de67-47a9-b4ed-fd8b622a7e4a/
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.
I've noticed Visual Studio 2010 is a lot slower than my Visual Studio 2008 IDE, I've found several nice tips and optimization suggestions for VS2008, however I want to know if people have any tips for VS2010
Two parts to the answer:
First, I'd really appreciate if you could download this diagnostic tool to take traces. It isn't a fix, but it'll help us improve the product. If you send me an email (noahric at msft), I can send you instructions and find a place for you to upload these traces. Same goes for anyone else reading this question/answer; the more traces, the merrier.
Other than that, there are a few things you can try:
In Tools->Options->Environment->General, turn off "Automatically adjust visual experience based on client performance", and turn off the rich client visual experience.
You can also try turning off hardware graphics acceleration (from the same location). I've found plenty of cases where the performance is better with software rendering.
If you are working with really large solutions, try the solution load manager. It lets you disable auto-loading of projects within a solution.
Do you have any extensions installed? If you do, you can try disabling them.
Run fewer instances of VS at once. I personally run quite a few at a time, but I've heard plenty of reports where people run enough instances of VS to exhaust virtual memory.
I hate to be a contrarian, but I just turned ON "Automatically adjust visual experience based on client performance" and VS2010 Ultimate is now almost as fast as VS2008.
I previously had that setting clear and had "Use Hardware Graphics Acceleration if available" checked.
I've been seriously contemplating going back to 2008 because of the awful performance of 2010.
I have a Precision Workstation with:
Quad-Core Xeon # 3.40GHz
16Gig RAM
3x15K 300 Gig SAS drives
NVIDIA Quadro FX 1700
Running Server 2008 Standard SP2
The machine is not underpowered, and if I open a very large solution with VS2008 (it's also installed), with multiple instances of VS2010 open, it opens almost instantly.
I'm starting to think there is an incompatibility issue with the FX 1700 in VS2010.
Maybe this problem is very config. dependent.
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 10 years ago.
We are starting a new software project. We are 5 developers, located in US and Asia.
We have a server hosted in the US and we plan to use it. We can set a SVN repository on it. It's a Linux server.
Our requirements are the following:
Windows good client. We develop on Windows (Visual Studio).
Private working space on Windows for each developer.
Good bug tracking. Integrating to SVN. Working on the server or on the client.
What do you suggest? Please specify names of SVN client and bug tracker.
If you are working in a similar approach - please specify pros & cons.
TortoiseSVN is pretty good as a Windows SVN client.
For the SVN clients, there are two you should consider:
* TortoiseSVN is a SVN client the has shell integration, meaning it itegrates with Windows Explorer.
* AnkhSVN intergrates with Visual Studio.
As far as I know, they are not mutually exclusive, so you could use both.
For the bug tracker with SVN integration, there are three free open source bug trackers you should look at:
* BugTracker.NET - which you'll have to run on a Windows machine. (I'm the author of BugTracker.NET)
* Trac
* Redmine
Trac is very widely used. The most common general criticism of it is that it is oriented to a single project.
Redmine was written to be a better Trac than Trac. It handles multiple projects. The most common general criticism of it is that it is very slow.
BugTracker.NET theoretically has its flaws, but it is very fast. I've been using trac a bit hunting for old bugs in the Sourceforge.NET and CKEditor trackers, and I think the BugTracker.NET search is way, way better than Trac's. So my personal complaint about Trac would be the weakness of its search.
If you want to explore commercial bug trackers that integrate with Subversion, then I'd start with FogBugz.
Another thumbs up for TortoiseSVN.
I'd also recommend installing WinMerge which integrates with Tortoise. It's vastly superior to Tortoise's built in merge.
I have always liked Trac.
Some of our developers had problems with AnkhSVN, so now we use TortoiseSVN and VisualSVN to integrate it with Visual Studio. The integration is not necessary if you take care when renaming and deling files, but I think it's nice to be able to do it directly in Visual Studio when you're refactoring class names and therefore renaming files.
Note that VisualSVN costs about 50 $ per license.
For SVN client I would recommend TortoiseSVN.
For bug tracking Bugzilla.
Redmine has the features you need, plus project & document management, time tracking, forums and wiki.
As for SVN client, I also recommend TortoiseSVN.
EDIT: Redmine can be installed as a VMWare appliance, so setting it up should be easy.
Depending on your exact needs I would recommend the following:
Subversion Client
Either Tortoise SVN, which integrates nicely with Windows Explorer or Ankh SVN, which integrates nicely with Visual Studio.
Bugtracker
Most bugtrackers advised in this topic are free and/or open-source but since your question does not state that as a requirement I would suggest Atlassian Jira or FogBugz since they are (imo) definately the best bugtrackers around.
Tortoise SVN is a great windows shell-based client.
Found problems with Ankh SVN (integration with visual studio).
As for bug tracking - OnTime is good and highly configurable (and has client exposure).
As for Windows client you can use Tortoise SVN and if you want to use it straight from VS you have AnkhSVN. Tortoise integrates with Windows Explorer so it can work with any projects, Ankh can be a bit easier to use from Visual Studio as you won't have to switch to Windows Explorer to commit changes but it will work only with VS projects.
You can easily integrate SVN repository with Trac or JIRA. JIRA is more advanced but you have to buy it, trac is available for free.
Have a look # Jtrac
we have been using this to track bugs in our small inhouse project.
For SVN, TortoiseSVN and for bug tracking onTime is good.
We are using the both right now. Ontime can't really integrate well with SVN. But as OnTime is full configurable, we have create custom svn revision field and fill it when we close an item. In the SVN clientSide, we add in the commit comment the ID of the item (bug or feature).
The advantage with onTime in comparison to a bugtracker like Bugzilla or BugTracker .Net is that OnTime isn't only a bug tracker. It's a Project Software Management. You can add your hours, generate report, buid wiki, he full supports Scrum with great burn down chart generation, adn so on.
I had good experiences with tortoise and trac. Now I am using three different installations of Fogbugz (2 free hosted and one at my full time job)
I have not used many other systems.
If you have the ability to spend money, I'd recommend fogbugz, otherwise go with trac, or the others recommended here.
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 10 years ago.
Mole visualizer for WPF in Visual Studio is a great tool for debugging WPF apps. What I want to know is, is there a visualizer tool with Mole like functionality for general .Net debugging. I find the built in watch capabilities to be a little fidly.
Thanks
Since MOLE version 3.0, the tool has been able to work with all types of Visual Studio projects. See here for more information about the tool and how to get the latest version.
Mole 2010 works for all .net objects. I just used it for a winforms app and a WCF service and it works great.
They've got a free demo if you want to check it out http://www.molosoft.com
Cheers!
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.