Others say...

"Reports could be improved"
When I loaded Visual Studio the SQL Server component did not load correctly - only the Configuration manager loaded - on reading the reports on the procedure I was informed that my computer was below the minimum hardware requirements, this despite me running a 2 GHz machine with 512 RAM and plenty of disc space.

A little bit more granularity might help me locate the problem.

"Worst Visual Studio ever Published"
If you are starting from scratch; this may work.

But if you have thousands of lines of C++ code that you'd like to port to the new runtime, forget about this crap.

This code has compiled in Visual Studio 2002 and 2003 with only minor adjustments. Upgrading to 2005 has been basically a brick wall.

I attempted the port. After a few dozen iterations, I started hitting problems with attributed ATL service classes that could not resolve base class references. Code that is executed in the compiled binary in the previous release; but that this new compiler reports as missing. And I still have 89 errors. Since I don't have the source, I cannot fix this with any kind of macro. Nice box you've painted me into Microsoft. The upgrade is not important enough for me to mess with this stuff. I have a deadline end of month.


"Almost enough to get the job done."
Hi all, I've been writing code for over 5 years now and work as a developer for a software company. I'm also MCAD Certified. We use VS.Net 2005 exclusively and the reviews that you will read below about this program sucking are not true. I believe the reason users may think this program sucks is because they don't know how to use it. It's just like anything else, if you don't know how to use the program you won't benefit from its features. Now one thing I will tell you is that when you want to create a Windows Service you WILL need the Professional version of VS.Net 2005 to do that. Other than that I have created atleast 25 web sites ranging from personal sites to enterprise e-commerce, numerous desktop apps that range from single managed apps to apps that use WIN32 API, ie old COM stuff, Class libraries, Server Controls and .Net Remoting objects. So unless you need to create Windows Services this is the package for you.

"Useful product, but still a challenge"
I primarily write in VB/VBA -- not at a really advanced level, mostly focused on data management -- and am trying to make the transition to asp.net. So my comments are directed along these lines.

The IDE itself is generally very good. Layout, menus, etc. are fine, intellisense is fantastic and the error messages are actually pretty useful.

That said, getting asp.net to function the way you want it to (if you're moving from VB) is still quite challenging and time consuming. Some examples -- if you add a database to your project, VS won't recognize it until you exit and restart; changing column widths on a grid view is a bit of a challenge (just google "Gridview column widths" and read away) -- mine wouldn't work until I shut VS down and relaunched; master pages are great, but incredibly finicky -- some of my pages appear with the designated breadcrumb, some don't, go figure; three tier data architecture is incredibly challenging b/c the ObjectDataSource is very picky -- after a few days of playing around with it, I abandoned a three tier set-up for a two tier one. Etc., etc.

MS is doing quite a bit to push people from the COM world into the .Net world and certainly VS 2005 is much more accessible than VS 2003. But when the language itself is still so buggy, the best IDE in the world only helps you to better focus your frustrations. My op is VS for asp.net still has a long ways to go before it becomes nearly as accessible as VB/VBA.

As a follow-up, some of the issues that I cited above are easily addressed by a better understanding of the IDE (i.e., fixing my unfamiliarity with the IDE). However, there are still numerous areas where the separate pieces of asp.net take an inordinate amount of time and effort to fit together properly (the object data source being the best/worst example I've hit). Six mos. of pretty regular use have only reinforced the views that I originally expressed -- very good IDE, an ambitious concept, but one that still needs a fair amount of work.

"Don't know what is wrong with these bad reviewers?!"
I guess the people who wrote all the bad reviews for this product aren't very accomplished visual programmers. One guy said he never even used Visual Studio 2003; what kind of modern programmer has never even tried the main development platform of pcs? What kind of serious programmer never even looks at the latest platform for years and years?? (Visual Studio 2003 has been around for years and was the best platform until 2005). I run an IT dept and VS 2005 will do just about anything any programmer can ask it to do, but many people give up and lash at things without even reading the instructions or knowledge base articles or taking any classes to get caught up on modern technology and methods. VS 2005 isn't perfect but it is the best Windows development platform since Microsoft started making windows. I've been waiting for years for some of the new features that finally came out in this release.