Scott Guthrie has announced that Visual Studio 2008 and .NET 3.5 are now available for download and provides a tour of some of the new features. “Visual Studio 2008 and .NET 3.5 contain a ton of new functionality and improvements. Below are links to blog posts I’ve done myself as well as links to videos you can watch to learn more about it.”
Visual Studio 2008, .NET 3.5 Released
85 Comments
-
2007-11-20 3:58 pm
-
2007-11-20 7:06 pm
-
2007-11-20 7:54 pm
-
2007-11-21 1:09 am
MollyCAgreed.
And besides “LING to SQL” and “LINQ to XML”, Microsoft has also created LINQ to Objects, which gives LINQ the ability to query any collection or object that implements IEnumerable. And there are already third party LINQ providers specializing in querying particular data (web queries, RSS feeds, etc).
And of course, there’s PLINQ (Parallel LINQ) that automatically runs queries on multiple cores/cpus.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/msdnmag/issues/07/10/PLINQ/default.aspx
LINQ rocks.
-
2007-11-21 6:58 pm
-
2007-11-22 8:09 am
-
2007-11-20 3:51 am
2007-11-20 12:13 pm
-
2007-11-20 1:14 pm
2007-11-20 3:47 pm
2007-11-20 12:43 am
-
2007-11-20 1:48 am
-
-
2007-11-20 3:12 am
-
2007-11-20 2:00 am
-
-
-
-
2007-11-20 8:59 am
-
2007-11-20 11:54 am
-
-
-
-
-
2007-11-21 1:21 pm
-
2007-11-20 2:27 am
-
2007-11-20 3:03 am
-
-
2007-11-20 8:24 am
-
-
2007-11-20 1:02 pm
-
2007-11-20 1:23 am
-
-
2007-11-20 10:36 am
2007-11-20 1:47 am
-
2007-11-20 4:45 am
gilboaI use vi
*, **– Gilboa
* Even under Windows; Compared to VS.NET2K5 vim+ctags is like comparing a cargo 747 to a SR-71. You may do more with VS.NET2K5 but once you get the hang of it, vim is 1000 times faster…
** I write C code, so anything beyond VC6 is an over-kill for me. Sadly enough our IT department doesn’t see it that way.
-
2007-11-20 7:09 am
-
2007-11-20 3:58 pm
-
-
-
-
2007-11-20 10:34 am
-
-
-
-
2007-11-21 3:14 am
-
2007-11-20 3:54 pm
-
2007-11-20 8:15 pm
2007-11-20 10:53 am
2007-11-20 8:54 pm
-
2007-11-23 11:51 pm
I am REALLY looking forward to the css/javascript support. I don’t think I have seen CSS done that well in an editor before, and 2k5s css is kind of lame.
LINQ looks hela-cool, but I’m already hooked on the excellent opensource http://www.subsonicproject.com/ for my object persistence needs. And while some of the control updates look nice, I just bought the devexpress ASPxperience set last week (and am completely in love).
I think you put this comment on the wrong article…
He was talking about the CSS & Javascript intellisense, but I have a feeling you knew that anyway.
He was talking about the CSS & Javascript intellisense, but I have a feeling you knew that anyway.
All the poster mentioned was CSS and JavaScript support, and quite frankly, Internet Explorer, Microsoft’s development tools and proper, standard support of ECMA(Java)Script and Cascading Style Sheets are absolute polar opposites.
The hint of irony and sarcasm was absolutely spot on, and pretty well done.
Quite frankly, I’m distinctly underwhelmed by yet another new version of .Net that no normal person can keep up with. Microsoft simply have too many MSDN lunatics producing too many development tools no sane person can keep up with.
I wonder if there is a way to develop a web browser that has a plug in architecture for the CSS. That would allow CSS to improve asynchronous to IE releases, or any browser release… and if it was an Open Source project, we might see some significant improvements in support all together.
So many people would have so many different versions of plugins installed that you’d go nuts trying to write anything that worked for anyone.
And no, I doubt it. Open source is not the magical solution to all problems, no matter what some would like you to think.
Quite frankly, I’m distinctly underwhelmed by yet another new version of .Net that no normal person can keep up with. Microsoft simply have too many MSDN lunatics producing too many development tools no sane person can keep up with.
Haha, so true. I recall listening to an episode of the .NET Rocks podcast recently, and they were talking about how it used to be possible (like back in the early days) for a person to know pretty much everything there was to know about a PC.
But now days, it’s getting pretty much impossible just to keep track of everything in the .NET Framework itself. Makes me wonder if the people coding the .NET Framework ever sleep
But now days, it’s getting pretty much impossible just to keep track of everything in the .NET Framework itself. Makes me wonder if the people coding the .NET Framework ever sleep
You specialize in certain areas and that’s it (for example, ASP.NET). For other stuff you use MSDN/Help. You don’t get to claim you’re an expert on everything.
“But now days, it’s getting pretty much impossible just to keep track of everything in the .NET Framework itself.”
The key to any software developer’s job is knowing how to read documentation, and knowing where to look for said documentation. The rest comes with experience. I’ve been a professional .Net dev for 6 years now, and still run into new BCL classes on a weekly basis.
Concepts are always the most important part of the job, followed very closely by the tools you use.
Quite frankly, I’m distinctly underwhelmed by yet another new version of .Net that no normal person can keep up with. Microsoft simply have too many MSDN lunatics producing too many development tools no sane person can keep up with.
Huh? Where have you been? It’s about frameworks & developers. Windows has been a platform that people *WANT* to program for, because Microsoft is constantly going out of their way to come up with better ways to solve business problems.
Would you rather have a K&R compiler, and a VT220? Oh sure it’d be easier, but is it realistic in 2007?
I agree… with out the extensive framework, implementing solutions would take a lot longer and be a lot buggier.
yeah, sometimes it is not “real” development because you are simply using tools that do the heavy lifting, but so what? is a carpenter not a real carpenter unless he/she uses a hand saw and a traditional hammer rather than a power saw and a nail gun?
Yeah, the framework is huge, but isn’t that what MSDN is for? If you do not know how to do something, look it up.. you think doctors… even specialists can keep it all in their head?
the split between windows and Open Source has already lead to a specialist split. .Net will probably lead to a few more specializes… just like a rough carpenter specializes in getting the frame of a structure up fast and efficiently and a finishing carpenter focuses on putting up the trim and other small carpentry jobs, you will see specialties in development work. Sure, either carpenter can do teh work of their counterpart, but they can’t do it as well or efficiently, so is true today with open source and .Net developers.
Microsofts support of javascript is worse then mozilla, but better then anything else. And as of IE7, their CSS support is pretty much where everyone else is
Anyone with half a brain can keep up with it, the last release was 3 years ago.
Edited 2007-11-20 03:58 UTC
Microsofts support of javascript is worse then mozilla, but better then anything else. And as of IE7, their CSS support is pretty much where everyone else is
Simply not true. Their JavaScript support has always diverged wildly, and the CSS support in IE7 solves none of the incompatibilities. CSS3 is simply not going to happen, and there are still parts of CSS2 that haven’t been fixed.
Anyone with half a brain can keep up with it, the last release was 3 years ago.
Worrying about five different versions of .Net to target, with more on the way presumably, is not solving anyone’s problems.
“Worrying about five different versions of .Net to target, with more on the way presumably, is not solving anyone’s problems.”
FUD. Target whatever version you want. Just get the client to install the version you use. You know, you can have all the .net versions installed without any problems.
FUD. Target whatever version you want. Just get the client to install the version you use. You know, you can have all the .net versions installed without any problems.
If only it were that easy. Not only do you need to test with that version, or test with all versions, .Net and your application do not stand by themselves. There is a veritable panoply of dependencies to take care of in addition to .Net, in addition to worrying about what framework is installed, installing a new framework if the one you want isn’t there or simply assuming things are compatible. WinForms or Avalon? God knows. Why should one even need to pick? Hell, installation on Linux is beginning to look attractive!
This isn’t FUD. This is happening today, and has been for some time. As Joel Spolsky once said about this, it’s not 1990 any more.
Yep, at least on Linux the package managers will download all your dependencies for you.
It’s too bad Vista is still stuck in the last century for package management. I really thought MS would fix that.
“If only it were that easy. Not only do you need to test with that version, or test with all versions, .Net and your application do not stand by themselves.”
I dont get your point? You write a lot of nonsense, impossible to respond to.
What dependencies? The dependecies (external libraries etc) i in my application? If a version of library not exists on the system, i simply put it in the gac. The gac manages all the different versions of that library, and i just load the one i need.
You are right its not 1990 anymore, and its not 1995 anymore either. Luckily dll-hell is non-exisiting in .net, if you do things the “Correct way”(tm).
And yes it is fud, i strongly belive you yourself has had a big dose of it. You arguments point suggest it.
I dont get your point? You write a lot of nonsense, impossible to respond to.
That’s because you have no clue what I am talking about, or what you are attempting to talk about. You know what? I rather suspect you do know ;-).
What dependencies? The dependecies (external libraries etc) i in my application?
If you take that attitude then you start losing a stable target to port to – rapidly. Bundling everything with an application, including the entire framework your application runs on, is not an option, especially when other applications installed on a target machine may well use the same software. Apple users think app folders are so cool. Yer, right? Watch what happens when people actually develop for your platform and are sharing many of the same components.
When you use .Net and Microsoft’s development tools any time soon, you’ll find that if someone uses Avalon, although it may well run on Vista, you’re going to have to give serious thought as to how it will run on XP and 2000 and what you will install to do it. If you use WinFX, as the development tools and literature now gears you towards using, where does that leave you in terms of deployment? You may well choose not to use it, as most aren’t. I mean, the following is a slide from a presentation I have seen myself:
http://weblog.infoworld.com/udell/gems/WinformsVsAvalon.jpg
That’s just fricking insane.
You are right its not 1990 anymore, and its not 1995 anymore either. Luckily dll-hell is non-exisiting in .net, if you do things the “Correct way”(tm).
DLL hell is still very much around. It’s just called dependency hell now. You’re reading way too much marketing literature, and that above decision diagram is not the correct way by any stretch of the imagination.
And yes it is fud, i strongly belive you yourself has had a big dose of it.
It’s called everyday usage, and I can bet you anything it is talked about in every Microsoft development circle and has been for years.
None of your arguments “stick”. I have used .net in a couple of years since 1.1, and i am still using it, both for win and web-developement.
I have never had, seen anyone or read about anyone having issues with using different versions of assemblies, or the framework itself. If there was problems, it was because of not following instructions.
I find it pretty funny you say i read to much marketing, and then afterwards you point me to a ancient marketing-slide. I am pretty sure that slide is insanely old, and it is _not_ correct. Avalon runs fine on xp.
Come with some sources for your points
Duckie said:
> I have never had, seen anyone or read about anyone having issues with using different versions of assemblies, or the framework itself. If there was problems, it was because of not following instructions.
Ok, I’ll disclose that I’m a Java guy (both Rich Client and J2EE), but have written C# apps in the past. I have a friend who worked on a $NZ20 million (around US$15 millions) project for the New Zealand government that failed because they had trouble with getting all their assemblies built properly across the development team. They were a very experienced and dedicated team. Perhaps the project was too ambitious but “assembly hell” was a real issue for them. In contrast, we take a slightly different approach with our Java apps and while you have to be very mindful about different versions of JARS using the Java classloader, you can actually avoid some of the problems the .NET guys were confronted with. In very large applications .NET still has scalability problems.
f only it were that easy. Not only do you need to test with that version, or test with all versions, .Net and your application do not stand by themselves. There is a veritable panoply of dependencies to take care of in addition to .Net, in addition to worrying about what framework is installed
Dude you pick a framework to develop against and thats the one you want the end user to have, you don’t need to test with multiple versions.
External dependancies in addition to the .net framework are on a ‘per application’ basis and your requirements and development decisions will influence this. If you use a ton of COM interop and depend on older ActiveX/COM servers then yes you might have some tough deployments, but again that is up to you as a developer on the best route to take.
This isn’t FUD. This is happening today, and has been for some time. As Joel Spolsky once said about this, it’s not 1990 any more.
What is happening today? I’m not sure I follow you.
My most recent .net application was a simple deployment. I verified during installation that the 2.0 version of the framework was installed and then I copied my entire application to a single folder and ran it. Not a single issue.
I think you might be making things far more complicated than they need to be for yourself.
You could say that about their javascript (or jscript as they call it). However, just because document.all exists, doesn’t mean document.getElementById doesnt exist. I have had more problems with javascript and safari then javascript and ie.
As for CSS3, nobody supports it because its not that great a spec. CSS2 suppport is better, while not all of the rendering bugs were fixed in IE7, some of them were.
You get that with any VM language. (java is FAR worse)
Sorry but IE7’s javascript and css is still behind both Mozilla and Opera and probably webkit/khtml at this point too (CSS support at least, not sure about JS).
Very funny.
First off, anything generated by VS.net 2k5 not only validates XHTML 1.0, but is totally cross browser. I have yet to have an issue with a built in ASP control rendering significantly different in firefox and ie. So any implications on poor standard support is completely unfounded, the code generation is on par with dreamweaver, and far better then anything else I have seen.
Granted, javascript intellisense isnt exactly revolutionary. However, look at the way it handles css here http://weblogs.asp.net/scottgu/archive/2007/07/25/vs-2008-web-desig…, and tell me what other environment comes even close?
Actually, while it might not be your cup of tea, Netbeans 6 (at rc1 and out at the end of the month) has a very nice interface to CSS. Bet you haven’t tried NB6.
I’d be inclined to say StyleMaster has been doing that for years, but obviously StyleMaster isn’t an HTML editor, solely CSS. Anyone looking for a powerful CSS editor though that develops with tools other than VS.net, or develops on OS X, should probably check it out.
N.B. I bought the 4.x version at least a year or two ago*, and it seems I’m still up to date (free upgrades), though whether they’re planning a new major release or not anytime soon I don’t know.
http://www.westciv.com/style_master/product_info/index.html#xray
Off-topic, but the logo was designed by Jon Hicks of Firefox/Thunderbird/Miro fame 🙂
* (edit) – 14 Dec 2005 21:32 to be precise, feh.
Edited 2007-11-20 12:50
Anyone else get the feeling that a ms dev saw Ruby on Rails, and copied almost the exact functionality into vs .net in the form of linq? They’ve played it off as being so unique, when almost everything they have come up with is already in ruby on rails.
While most “zomg Microsoft steals from everyone I cut myself”-type posts like this have no basis in reality whatsoever, this actually has some fact behind it:
http://rubydotnet.googlegroups.com/web/Home.htm
http://www.codeplex.com/irony
Well, Microsoft’s business practice is along those lines. It’s not really a bad thing. Other people do the research, bring stuff to market, and ultimately fail, or half-succeed. Microsoft watches, polishes and produces a better product based on what the competition has done. It’s great business practice, and it does often produce good consumer products (not all of MS’s software is garbage). I wouldn’t call it stealing. It is more like refining. And we desperately need that in the software world.
While most “zomg Microsoft steals from everyone I cut myself”-type posts like this have no basis in reality whatsoever, this actually has some fact behind it:
http://rubydotnet.googlegroups.com/web/Home.htm