VC++ .net 2005
Author
I have the VC++ .net 2003 version, and now seeing more and more code on the net using v8.0. So I am getting tired of not being able to click a .sln file and have the project open. So what I was wondering is VC++ .net 2005 worth getting now with Vista so close to coming out, will there be a newer version soon? I have the standard version of VC++ .net 2003 so how will that compare to the VC++.net 2005 free edition? What about the upgrade version, can you install the upgrade version without a previous version installed? Will it just ask for my serial number? I am looking at it from the stand point that if I lose my HD I don't want to install my older version just to install v8.0. Thanks
There are always new versions of the VS tools every couple of years - it's one of Microsoft's most heavily updated products. So don't let that worry you.
Vista will certainly change some things, but I have no doubt that VS2005 will be able to cope with Vista development just fine. Hell, if you're masochistic, you can do Windows XP development with VC6, so it'll probably be alright [wink]
Chances are you won't miss much going to the Express edition, unless you do a lot of enterprise-scale database work or stuff like that. Just pick up EE anyways, and if you find you're missing too much important stuff, shell out for the Standard edition; but there's certainly no need to pay first just because you think you might not get something you want/need in the free version.
Visual Studio upgrade packages require you to insert an install disc from one of the eligible upgrade products in order to install the upgrade. You do not need to actually have the old version installed, but you do need to own a copy.
Vista will certainly change some things, but I have no doubt that VS2005 will be able to cope with Vista development just fine. Hell, if you're masochistic, you can do Windows XP development with VC6, so it'll probably be alright [wink]
Chances are you won't miss much going to the Express edition, unless you do a lot of enterprise-scale database work or stuff like that. Just pick up EE anyways, and if you find you're missing too much important stuff, shell out for the Standard edition; but there's certainly no need to pay first just because you think you might not get something you want/need in the free version.
Visual Studio upgrade packages require you to insert an install disc from one of the eligible upgrade products in order to install the upgrade. You do not need to actually have the old version installed, but you do need to own a copy.
Author
Thanks ApochPiQ for the info. I like that fact that I don't have to install the older version to install 2005. This would have been annoying to wait around for the 2003 version to install as it takes awhile. I don't do any database coding, just games and 3D GFX... I own my copy so that isn't a problem. Now with the upgrade IIRC you get a copy of the MSDN library? I have one from 2003, but would be nice to have an update. I am assuming if I get 2005 and when Vista comes out I am going to get that also, I will be able to use the newer UI in 2005? Thanks
Not sure what you're asking... the Vista UI is "for free" for any Windows program. The tools you use to write the software are utterly and completely irrelevant.
Author
Quote:Original post by ApochPiQ
Not sure what you're asking... the Vista UI is "for free" for any Windows program. The tools you use to write the software are utterly and completely irrelevant.
Yeah I know that, :) I was wondering if AERO will update the UI gfx to make it look better even though its 2005 software that runs on XP and looks like XP now... Hope that clears up what I am after.
Of course... writing software in one UI style doesn't lock the program into using that style forever. Otherwise, all the software I wrote on my old Windows 2000 workstation would look like crap for all my XP customers [wink]
There are some cases where really-really new stuff is not turned on by default because of changes in the actual Windows API; but those are usually rare and fairly special functionality. The vast majority of apps will look right at home, because Windows will automatically take care of the skinning and such for you.
There are some cases where really-really new stuff is not turned on by default because of changes in the actual Windows API; but those are usually rare and fairly special functionality. The vast majority of apps will look right at home, because Windows will automatically take care of the skinning and such for you.
Author
Quote:Original post by ApochPiQ
Of course... writing software in one UI style doesn't lock the program into using that style forever. Otherwise, all the software I wrote on my old Windows 2000 workstation would look like crap for all my XP customers [wink]
There are some cases where really-really new stuff is not turned on by default because of changes in the actual Windows API; but those are usually rare and fairly special functionality. The vast majority of apps will look right at home, because Windows will automatically take care of the skinning and such for you.
Skinning would have been a good choice for a word to describe what I was looking for. Reason I ask is Vista is new and with the whole new UI/Skins I was concerned that you may need to code for it specifically vs. the old code would just look like XP in Vista to be compatable.
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
