Sign in to follow this  

should I "upgrade" to microsoft vs 08?

This topic is 3478 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

If you intended to correct an error in the post then please contact us.

Recommended Posts

I've been using mvs 05 for a while now, and it is what I'm using for my current project. It took me quite a while to adjust coming from vs 6, but I think it was for the better. My question is, should I get the new 08 version? Are the major changes? (Please excuse my laziness, I figured some of you have already experienced this, so I should just ask) Thanks for any comments and help in advance 2d

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'd say that it's not worth it unless there's a specific feature that you want to use, and clearly there isn't. Starting your next project with it wouldn't be a bad idea though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
.NET 3.5 and C# v3, the ability to choose your .NET target platform, LINQ, C++ improvements and additions, new MFC features with the VS2008 features pack... It's worth upgrading, and it won't be a pain because the IDE itself has hardly changed at all. For example, you can easily import VS2005 settings and solutions in VS2008 without any trouble.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by Jan Wassenberg
Quote:
C++ improvements and additions

hehe, I am very curious as to what "C++ improvements" you have encountered in VC2008.


The optional library pack which includes tr1 is only available for VS2008.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by Jan Wassenberg
Quote:
C++ improvements and additions

hehe, I am very curious as to what "C++ improvements" you have encountered in VC2008.
Multicore compiles are a godsend for largish codebases that aren't split into very many project files. Other than that, VS 08 seems pretty much the same for C++ work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well as others have already stated the changes from 2005 to 2008 are subtle compared to going from VC6 to 2005/2008.
Having used VS2005 and 2008 mainly for C++ I can't really find any compelling reasons other than TR1 support to upgrade.
There's also supposed to be performance improvements and bug fixes with C++ but I couldn't tell and if anything I'm mad that they got rid of code snippets for C++.
If you are a C# programmer there really are pretty good reasons to upgrade like language enhancements (C#3 & VB9 compilers) and LINQ.
Plus you can now download and browse the source code of the .NET Framework libraries, in 2008.
Anyways here's Microsoft's reasons to try to get you to upgrade:
Visual Studio 2008 Professional Edition: Top Reasons to Upgrade

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by jbadams
While there are plenty of improvements you'll find that the change from 05 to 08 isn't as great as from VS6, as the interface is largely unchanged.


I wonder, at a point in the (near) future, if the DirectX SDK will no longer support VS 2005?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks for all the feedback. I'm a C++ programmer. Yeah I read elsewhere that Microsoft has continued it's trend of not supporting C++ very much. There subtle way of getting us to use C#.

I think I'm going to go ahead and get 08 though. Upgrade isn't that much comparatively, and some of the additions for C++ sound useful.

Thanks again.

2d

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by 2disbetter
I think I'm going to go ahead and get 08 though. Upgrade isn't that much comparatively, and some of the additions for C++ sound useful.


It's probably worth mentioning that, if you sign up for Microsoft's various newsletters, you get alerted to their various give-aways. I've picked up Vista Ultimate, Office 2007 Professional and VS2008 Standard & Professional this way.

In particular, they seem to give away Visual Studio like it's going out of style. On the other hand, if you're needing this for some sort of deadline or if the money's not an issue, then waiting for a chance to get it free probably isn't the best way to go about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by implicit
The lack of support for Win9x/NT was a deal breaker for us when I looked into upgrading to 2k8.
Has anyone figured out a practical way of getting around this?


Upgrading your OS ISN'T practical? Do you work for the government or something?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by Nypyren
Quote:
Original post by implicit
The lack of support for Win9x/NT was a deal breaker for us when I looked into upgrading to 2k8.
Has anyone figured out a practical way of getting around this?
Upgrading your OS ISN'T practical? Do you work for the government or something?
No, I meant that the standard library in 2008 doesn't support older Win32 versions. And I don't know the pitfalls involved in trying to an older or alternative version, but I was hoping that someone might have tried it.
There's an awful lot of 98/ME machines and NT workstations still out there, and you've got to wonder what new functions are important enough to drop for these systems from the standard library.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You could consider using an operating system that wasn't written in the middle ages.

[EDIT] Jeez, you walk away for five seconds to do some actual work and a half dozen posts sneak in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by Rydinare
Quote:
Original post by Jan Wassenberg
Quote:
C++ improvements and additions

hehe, I am very curious as to what "C++ improvements" you have encountered in VC2008.


The optional library pack which includes tr1 is only available for VS2008.


Pretty moot, many of us have been using Boost for years, TR1 is pretty much a subset of boost, it may perform better and there are some usability improvements but I wouldn't say its a good enough reason to upgrade (...unless you don't use boost already, in which case you're strange [smile]..)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by implicit
Quote:
Original post by Nypyren
Quote:
Original post by implicit
The lack of support for Win9x/NT was a deal breaker for us when I looked into upgrading to 2k8.
Has anyone figured out a practical way of getting around this?
Upgrading your OS ISN'T practical? Do you work for the government or something?
No, I meant that the standard library in 2008 doesn't support older Win32 versions. And I don't know the pitfalls involved in trying to an older or alternative version, but I was hoping that someone might have tried it.
There's an awful lot of 98/ME machines and NT workstations still out there, and you've got to wonder what new functions are important enough to drop for these systems from the standard library.


If you want to support those guys forever, you will have to continue using older and older tools. There's nothing inherently wrong with that; you just miss out on all the new, cool stuff (but so does your customer).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by Nypyren
If you want to support those guys forever, you will have to continue using older and older tools. There's nothing inherently wrong with that; you just miss out on all the new, cool stuff (but so does your customer).
Or you can work around the standard library somehow and still use the new compiler. There's no way in hell that it actually *needs* Win2k+ features to support the standard C library, it's got to be an artificial limitation designed to kill off Win9x.
The point is that if you're writing the 107th Bejeweled clone then you'd expect it to run on six year old hardware and software, from back when WinME was still standard. You know that rusty old PC standing in a corner that you're relegated to surfing and playing casual games on when another family members is occupying the new machine..
If you need the latest and greatest DX10 features and you're doing something worthwhile with them then it's not unreasonable to cut down your potential market. But an awful lot of software don't have a good technical reason for not supporting older systems, except for the additional testing costs and workarounds for stunts like this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by implicit
But an awful lot of software don't have a good technical reason for not supporting older systems, except for the additional testing costs and workarounds for stunts like this.


Er - cost is a pretty good reason - and not supporting a 8-10 year old OS is another pretty good reason. Particularly when something like < 1% of users still run Win 98 / 2k (Steam Hardware Survey). And just because you're writing a clone of an old application, doesn't mean you have to Target an old OS. If people want to play a clone of an old game, then chances are they have the game already, or it won't run on a new OS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you need to maintain older OSes, what's to say you can't keep copies of both an earlier version of VS and 2008 projects? You can do most of your development in 2008 and occasionally try the VS2005 to make sure it hasn't broken anything.

As for targetting Win9x, if it's within your control, you really shouldn't. [smile]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by pookemon
Er - cost is a pretty good reason - and not supporting a 8-10 year old OS is another pretty good reason. Particularly when something like < 1% of users still run Win 98 / 2k (Steam Hardware Survey).
Right, cost is the main reason not to bother. Anyway Steam isn't exactly aimed at casual gamers. The statistics for the average Solitaire (say) players would look a bit different.

Quote:
And just because you're writing a clone of an old application, doesn't mean you have to Target an old OS. If people want to play a clone of an old game, then chances are they have the game already, or it won't run on a new OS.
Well, I'm actually writing a graphics library designed with good compatibility and performance on old systems in mind. A library for games targeting non-gamers, you know the usual mix of puzzle games and arcade ports designed for your mom to play. And more often than not on outdated and poorly maintained computers to boot. I've seen so many parents with hand-me-down computers and families with the last generation's PC still around that it just isn't funny, maybe that's a local phenomenon or I've just been unlucky but I doubt it.

Granted nowadays this market is mostly made up of ad-supported flash game portals, but then I wouldn't get to write optimized blitter code for those.

Quote:
Original post by Rydinare
If you need to maintain older OSes, what's to say you can't keep copies of both an earlier version of VS and 2008 projects? You can do most of your development in 2008 and occasionally try the VS2005 to make sure it hasn't broken anything.
Because it's a pain in the ass? I've been meaning to get around to setting up a real build system which can emit project files for all of the old Visual Studio versions, as well as any other compilers/operating systems we want to support.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by Rydinare
If you need to maintain older OSes, what's to say you can't keep copies of both an earlier version of VS and 2008 projects? You can do most of your development in 2008 and occasionally try the VS2005 to make sure it hasn't broken anything.

As for targetting Win9x, if it's within your control, you really shouldn't. [smile]

Yeah these days with terabyte harddrives there really is no reason you couldn't install both. Actually that's what I have to do since XNA only supports VS 2005:(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I would not say that Win9x is totally dead, and as for the Steam survey, who was surveyed more or less guaranteed that it would say Win9x was dead (Steam dropped support for Win9x a year ago).

At any rate, my mother in law uses Win98, the program she uses work under it and her hardware is older (800Mhz Duron). For lots of people I cannot imagine telling them to upgrade their hardware and OS just to use new stuff where there old stuff works just fine.

Heck my desktop still has a Win98SE boot option ... I do have older games that don't really work under XP (or Vista for that matter) I even have some old software that I like (Cakewalk Pro Audio 5.x) that is Win9x only, and the upgrade to Sonera is very, very pricey and I prefer the old interface much more.....

for folks that have their machine setup already, why do they need to upgrade and replace every couple of years? the machine still works, the software still does what they want it to, to them it seems like an incredible waste of money... and cruelly enough, these are the folks that a part of "casual game market", which is the place for lots of growth... one does not need a very fast box to play the majority of casual style games... and lots of older games still available for purchase are fine on very, very old boxes: Quake1,2,3, Unreal, Unreal Tournament, Diablo2, Warcraft3, Serious Sam, Starcraft, Command and Conquer 1,2, Red Alert, ... and some not so old games like Darwinia too... just go to a video game shop, go to the bargain bin and one will find a fair number of games that are for older hardware, and a good number of them are pretty good, and in some ways have better entertainment value that the new big games (I'd take Diablo2 over many of the current action RPGs out there now)

sorry, rant over...


at any rate for Microsoft, they need to push their newer OS's, and one way to do that is to not support the older OS's in their development tools target list... sometimes the reasons are genuine technical and other times they are not...

though I have to confess that MSVS 05 and 08 make me sick after a while, I used them at work, but they had performance issues and intellisense was flaky... and for 08, you had to be careful on your project options to make sure it did not become a Vista only project.

After using, MSVS, Code Warrior, Eclipse and countless other IDE's, I have decided that my favorite IDE is (cringe) emacs! lets me fit more source on one page than any other IDE and does not get in my way to get stuff done.... and don't even let me get started on Symbian development with Carbide, now that is trash. Under Windows, I have been happy with MinGW, with boost, and emacs as my IDE... that is cheap, but it helps keep the code more easier to port off of Windows (projects from MSVS are a real pain to port off of Windows, as the environment encourages one to use all sorts of non-portable MS and Windows only stuff.... don't get me started on C++/CLI)

damn, another rant.

sorry, guess I am grouchy today.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This topic is 3478 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

If you intended to correct an error in the post then please contact us.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this