Inside Visual Studio 2005 Team System 156
An anonymous reader writes "ZDNet has posted a top 10 list of things you need to know about Visual Studio 2005 Team System. From the article: Everybody talks about collaborative development tools, and heaven knows you can't surf the major developers' for 10 minutes without getting hit by banners trumpeting the latest. We can't fault Microsoft for wanting a piece of that action; but we need more than just a collaborative environment."
New here? (Score:5, Funny)
We can't fault Microsoft for wanting a piece of that action
you must be new here...this is slashdot
we can fault Microsoft for anything...Re:New here? (Score:1)
Ain't that the truth, brother, all too often. If anyone can be accused of knee jerk reactions, its us. Let's give it a try, I'll give you a few words, you try this experiment, what is your reaction:
1. Gates
2. Stallman
3. CEO
4. Sun
5. Microsoft
6. OSS
Ten to one, most SD'ers went into knee-jerk mode (one direction or the other) on each. Logic be damned.
You forgot... (Score:2)
Jerk.
Re:VS overhead (Score:2)
If you are looking for "bare metal" optimization, then neither Java nor
Right tool for the right job, and all that jazz.
Re:VS overhead (Score:2)
Now, if you want to build a nice GUI application that does tons of things for you, and uses an extensive framework of code that's pre-written and debugged, then perhaps you won't mind the overhead of a runtime libra
Oh, I get it (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Oh, I get it (Score:5, Funny)
part of the plan to grow over-arching applications (Score:1, Informative)
there are many more.
Re:Oh, I get it (Score:2)
Re:Oh, I get it (Score:1)
A challenge (Score:1, Flamebait)
OK, here goes: does anyone here actually work on an application that uses so-called web services? I've heard so much hype about these things in the past few months that anyone would think desktop applications or client-server over a network were dead. Given the high-tech city I work in, it's therefore slightly surprising that I've never encountered a genuine (as-in, not a toy, not a prototype) web service in use, other than possibly via a couple of Big Name Companies that could use any architecture they wan
Re:A challenge (Score:1)
Re:A challenge (Score:2)
Re:A challenge (Score:2)
They're out there, it's not just a myth.
Bob
Re:A challenge (Score:2)
Yes, in fact! I rarely get to answer that kind of question on slashdot...
We use web services in our application to serve documents to several types of clients across the web (straight DHTML ASPX page,
Re:Yup, Check This Out (Score:2)
http://www.sci-s.com/id-management.htm [sci-s.com]
Re:A challenge (Score:3, Informative)
For example, my favorite public-facing web service has got to be the USPS address correction web service [usps.com], but if a company were to exploit this API, any press they create for it would probably read "Company ABC in partnership wi
Re:A challenge (Score:2)
I find them highly useful, and building functional web services with VS
Re:A challenge (Score:2)
Re:A challenge (Score:3, Insightful)
Google maps API.
Sure, it doesn't use
And let's not forget the Google Ad Words API. And others, like specialized search services.
Re:Oh, I get it (Score:5, Insightful)
The submission article is TERRIBLE in every way. Loaded with buzzwords and nonsensical meaningless drivel, it was made for the sole purpose of getting hits. I wish I could mod down a front page story.
View the presentation [microsoft.com] from the Launch 2005 event and you'll get much more useful information than the tripe submission.
As one aside (quoted from the linked article): "There are far, far too many nuts-and-bolts geniuses out there who can rewrite DaVinci's Codex in T-SQL, but who think two-dimensional client-server architecture is good enough for Internet apps. To build decent apps today, and Internet apps in particular, you need more than an idea, more than good tools, more than an application-level design; you need an application architecture, a high-level framework that carefully addresses your applications' intended functionality within the context of your hardware, network, and data-source infrastructure -- and, worse yet, too many IT managers who know the buzzwords but don't yet really understand this. "
I find this humorous, because many of the designs that have crashed and burned terribly are the over-designed, n-tier, architectural astronaut abortions that were pushed on an unsuspecting public. On flip side, many of the designs that have pervaded and succeeded at tremendous levels of scale could best be described as "some scripts that hit a database". Slashdot, for instance. Wikipedia...Digg...I could go on.
Re:Oh, I get it (Score:3, Insightful)
Thanks for the lesson, professor. Ignoring the nonsensical caching comment, the point was indeed that applications start simple (scripts hitting a database), and organically scale out from there. The vast majority of real-world success stories evolved this way. They didn't start with a couple of managers and an arch
Re:Oh, I get it (Score:3, Interesting)
How long did it take
A better question, from a pragmatic, real-world perspective, would be "What did supporting CSS get them?". For the vast majority of readers, it isn't different from the classic table model at all (in fact it's a bit quirkier). I like CSS layout, but using Slashdot and CSS as an example is inane - they didn't support CSS because there was no practical reason to, other than a lot of Standards Astronauts beating on their door about their lack of C
Re:Oh, I get it (Score:2)
Try actually thinking for a second before you post.
Team System is overkill bloat (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Team System is overkill bloat (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Team System is overkill bloat (Score:2)
Then you're glad you made daily backups of the repository, revert and continue as usual.
Re:Team System is overkill bloat (Score:1)
Re:Team System is overkill bloat (Score:2)
After the last failure, I restored the Berkley system, took complete dump, upgraded to latest version of svn, and loaded the dump to FSFS back-end.
Haven't had any problems with the latest version yet, and hopefully won't have either.
Re:Team System is overkill bloat (Score:2, Interesting)
And that is untrue of Visual SourceSafe, Rational ClearCase, CVS, or any other source control system how, exactly? If it stores in a DBMS of any sort (be it directories/files, a single monolithic file, or any other storage medium not composed of Magic Pixie Dust(tm) it can become corrupt. Heck, you could simply go old-school and tar up your project each day and run into corruption, causing you to have to roll back to a days-or-weeks-old backup.
So let's take your statement and s/Subersion/SourceSafe:
Sou
Re:Team System is overkill bloat (Score:2)
I haven't tried Subversion yet but do plan to but for a front end, unless you go all CLI, the GUI has a long way to go to catch up with Microsoft's VSS.
If you havent tried it, then how can you comment on it? Use TortoiseSVN [tigris.org] as a GUI and it is excellent. Integrates with windows explorer, so every explorer window is completely aware of the subversion status of your files. Personally since most of my latest development involves eclipse I am using some SVN plugins for eclipse which are also excellent.
At least one thing is missing... (Score:1, Funny)
Re:At least one thing is missing... (Score:1)
Re:At least one thing is missing... (Score:2)
I have been using it for around a month on and off, and boy, there are sub bad bugs. VS 2003 is much more stable. Unfortunately my client wants their web-applications coded in ASP.Net /
The 2.0 framework is fine, but VS 2005 has some SERIOUS usability issues. SP1 is scheduled for June, so VS 2005 is crippled till then.
Me no likey.
A
it's still a tool (Score:5, Funny)
To build decent apps today, and Internet apps in particular, you need more than an idea, more than good tools
OK I need more than a tool.
Team System is addressing this shortfall in its Team Edition for Software Architects with a tool called Application Designer, a graphical workhorse for solution architecture.
So you give me a tool.
Huh?
Re:it's still a tool (Score:1)
Failed Miserably on Test-Driven Development (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah, and splits architects from testers (Score:2)
What kind of organisation does this represent? I guess it reflect's microsoft world view. But it doesnt match that of OSS applications.
Re:Yeah, and splits architects from testers (Score:4, Funny)
Yup, in that scheme Developer gets gcc, CVS and eleven text editors, while Architect and Tester are eliminated in favor of Noisy Fanboy, who just gets a web browser.
Re:Yeah, and splits architects from testers (Score:2)
In order to facilitate rational discussion.... (Score:2)
Yes, but is it Firefox or Opera?
Re:Yeah, and splits architects from testers (Score:2)
While funny, your comment is inaccurate.
Architect has all the features of Developer and Tester as well as the extra tools for architects to use. And while they may LOOK powerpoint-like, they're far more powerful.
Developer has all that Tester has and all that a developer needs, including the ability to SEE but not CHANGE the architecture of the project they are working on. Developers don't need to change the architecture, so they don't get the tools to do so.
Finally, Tester is just that, one meant fo
Re:Yeah, and splits architects from testers (Score:2)
All I knew was that MSDN Universal sent me a note telling me I had one to choose between the three, my time had expired the previous week with no warning and that I was going to get professional by default.
if architect is the superset, then I dont see why I shouldnt have been given that.
Regarding your tester comment, yes, they are undervalued. And making them run tests and record results is part of the reason, that is grunt work for which machines can do themselves. Everyone should be
I see your point and disagree (Score:2)
Architects need to write tests because otherwise they write specifications that are untestable. and the tester gets the blame. Also, the test suite forms part of the formal definition of system behaviour.
I have problems @work with various W3C and OASIS Web Services specs that were written by committees of architects (WS-Addressing, WS-RF
Re:Failed Miserably on Test-Driven Development (Score:2)
Re:Failed Miserably on Test-Driven Development (Score:2)
Bulky? Loaded? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Bulky? Loaded? (Score:2)
Re:Bulky? Loaded? (Score:1)
So you would be happy with emacs? Me, I'm a Vi person.
Re:Bulky? Loaded? (Score:3, Funny)
Looks like your grammar checker is broken also.
Re:Bulky? Loaded? (Score:2)
But more seriously I agree and disagree with your main point about the bloatedness of IDEs. I'm a huge fan of Eclipse
unification theories disproved (Score:4, Interesting)
I think the problem is that no unification theory holds. I software development, from a team perspective, from design to implementation to testing... regardless of what model you follow... the development team is most effective when they are not constrained by a tool.
In my current work environment, the company tried to standardize on one web server, one IDE, one OR mapper... it failed miserably. The reality is we have 4 web servers, a multitude of IDEs, and tons of different technologies that are fitting specific needs. Even on the Microsoft platform.
I do not doubt that the team tools are cool for collaboration. But they are going to be pushed into organizations that already have team tools, or ways of doing stuff.
Right tools for the right job? Most Rose managed projects I know fail. Who uses all the lifecycle stuff in JBuilder 2005? Is anyone tired of development environments that take gigs?
One Company (Score:3, Insightful)
Superfluous! (Score:5, Insightful)
All this rubbish cruft in Visual studio these days. It's from the people that broght you Visual SourceSafe-Studio integration. Windows only, MS centric, homogenous coding standards, catering to the lowest common denominator of programmer in an effort to make coding more quantifyable for management. Basically, it's all just tools for making windows developers even more lazy than they already are, and to make project managers think they're more in control of their projects because of all the shiny graphs, network tools and printed reports.
Expect coding standards to drop in line with their usage.
Re:Superfluous! (Score:1)
Re:Superfluous! (Score:3, Insightful)
It must be nice working on a small team. Even then, since when was bug tracking, requirements tracking, or iteration task tracking superflous? Working on teams with dozens of people located in multiple locations around the world these features are almost critical.
Re:Superfluous! (Score:2)
Perhaps you'd like to think about what you're saying slightly before you post it. Bug/Work Item tracking, project management, EVM, teams working at different locations, team members working from home are all extremely good reasons to want these collaboration tools.
And then you saddle your post with a pile of anti-MS rhetoric to make it sound authoritative. Yes VSS is a pile of junk. Strangely it is Windows
Re:Superfluous! (Score:2)
There's a need, but is it being met by the current software products? Are all these project managment tools really work all the effort it takes to aquire, implement and learn to use them? In a lot of cases, you may be a lot better off if you simply stick with email. See Linus and the Linux Kernel.
More importantly, should these tools be integrated? Are you then simply fitting the tool around what you already accept are broken development p
Scary Reading! (Score:5, Informative)
But I looked at that web page: Codex, T-SQL, inscrutable jokes about woodpeckers, meta-models, Da Vinci, Biztalk Server 2004, Visio and text whose individual words I understand and yet whose sentences I can't grasp. I must be some kind of dinosaur ('dragon' if you live in Kansas) from an age gone by. Uh...uh...uh...>panic!...I've no clue what they're talking about. Does that mean I'm not collaborating properly? I didn't even realize. This is so awful. What can I do? Obviously just talking to people isn't enough.
Re:Scary Reading! (Score:5, Interesting)
Ah, I understand. My friend, I was once like you. Then I discovered that it's not talking to others that matters. It's what you say that counts! Fortunately, the web is a wonderful thing, and people like these [bullshitbingo.net] have kindly provided resources to help you navigate this troublesome area more successfully. Good luck to you.
Re:Scary Reading! (Score:2)
Re:Scary Reading! (Score:2)
Please step into my office; it's time for your "performance review". :-)
Re:Scary Reading! (Score:2)
Re:Scary Reading! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Scary Reading! (Score:3, Insightful)
Problem with the "Sophisticated Tools" paradigm (Score:3, Insightful)
That being said...
I've seen a fair number of high-power tools offerred that do everything from soup to nuts, UML, Code generation, integrated testing, etc, etc, etc. It's been my sense that to fully leverage these tools you kind of have to buy in all the way, you can use their architect tools, but you need to put a fair amount of effort into learning the tool, and then you're not developing in C# or whatever, but in the tool. You're then also locked into the constraints imposed by the tool.
Every sophisticated tool I mess with these days seems like it has this issue, and I guess it's structural- you have a simple core surrounded by proprietary extensions that in theory offer a lot of power and in practice require a huge buy in of time to leverage the extensions. For example, most java application servers have all kinds of built-in goodies (e.g. Jboss) but whenever I've worked with them I've seen almost no use of the proprietary stuff. Same for web frameworks, most projects I've seen don't leverage the frameworks nearly as well as they could. This indicates to me that the learning curve is too high and that in practice it's not realistic to expect that people can master and fully utilize proprietary tools in addition to languages, patterns, and other necassary knowledge.
To be fair, I don't work in the Microsoft universe, and it may be a bit more realistic to expect tool buy-in in a world where there's one major tool vendor.
The problem is... (Score:3, Informative)
...as long as the underlying system for a single guy at his desk isn't up to scratch, it doesn't really matter how good the collaboration aspects and high-level funkiness are.
We've been working with VC++2005 since the early betas, and it's been very hit and miss. On some systems it runs fine, but on others ("possibly those without hyperthreading processors" is the closest we've got to a pattern so far) it can go into a trance for literally minutes while it faffs around updating all that clever Intellisense it does on-the-fly these days.
Add to that a debugger that really does run code orders of magnitude slower than a properly compiled version when you step through it, and you've got a serious problem with the two main tools in VC++. Worse, these are things that were fine back in VC++ 6, and rapidly went downhill when MS started relying on .Net and a multi-language framework for the dev tools a few years ago, which isn't exactly a great recommendation for all this new technology MS want us to use.
In other words, the TS stuff is all very well, but until the fundamental problems with the single-user everyday stuff are fixed, it's rather academic at this point. Several of my colleagues never "upgraded" from VC++6 to any of the earlier .Net versions because the basic functionality wasn't up to the job, and the same is in danger of happening this time, too.
Re:The problem is... (Score:1)
Re:The problem is... (Score:1)
The Emperor has no clothes (Score:1)
I am also still using VS 6. I have code to ship, I don't have time to futz around with compilers that have more bugs than I do.
It was always said that Visual Studio C++ is bullet-proof because that's what MS uses to build their own products. If they're not using VS.NET to build the Windows operating system itself, then it will never be as solid.
Re:The Emperor has no clothes (Score:2)
The thing is, the more recent versions of Visual C++ should be great for non-.Net programmers, too. The quality and standards compliance of the compiler itself, optimisation options, debugger enhancements, support for high-performance code via things like OpenMP and Profile Guided Optimisation -- all these things should be useful to non-Windows-specialists like me. It's just that the bugs and u
Re:The Emperor has no clothes (Score:2)
I'm afraid you've been misinformed. You can develop standard C++ without any .Net (or MFC or anything else) in all recent versions of Visual C++, and the recent compilers are among the most standards compliant around. Microsoft cunningly hired a couple of the big names in the C++ world a couple of years back, which hasn't done their PR any harm.
As for the use of .Net, consider this: Microsoft wants us all to use .Net, since it's so much more productive, secure, etc. And yet, it's not willing to bet either
Re:The Emperor has no clothes (Score:2)
I understand what you are saying, but I don't think its entirely fair. Certainly we have much better construction materials and techniques than thousands of years ago, but we don't tear down the great wall of China just to see if we can do it better/faster. When
Re:The Emperor has no clothes (Score:2)
Sure, but we do use them for building new walls and repairing existing ones. We also reinforce or outright replace some key structures with better materials as they become available.
I'd be interested to see any up-to-date information you've got about things like Office 12. In the past, there was certainly a lot of hype
Got a free beta (Score:1)
The funniest thing is that I wanted to switch to Windows back from Ubuntu (seriously!). But now that evil idea is gone...
GForge? (Score:2, Informative)
JBuilder (Score:4, Interesting)
A Java mindset? (Score:4, Interesting)
It's probably actually a good thing that MS is including it. That being said, "it's about time" went throught my mind more than once while reading the article.
-Pete
Re:A Java mindset? (Score:2)
Channel 9 (Score:3, Informative)
I'm surprised at myself for liking these videos. I keep going to Chan.9 more than once a day. It's great to get a peek behind the scenes at MS development.
Say what you will about the Team System feature (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't know why some people are complaining about this software, its the best MS has come out with yet. Intellisense in any version takes a big hit on performance, the bottom line is, would you build a house with a hammer or a shoe. I can't understand why anybody would develop software for a living with an underpowered system! Complaints about VS underperforming can easily be resoled by simply upgrading to an Athlon64 or Opteron system.
I've noticed only a few minor usability issues, but these are things that have plagued every release of a VS product, little gaffs which may be annoying, but are infrequent and do not interrupt productivity.
Overall, the environment is much more streamlined, even menu items seemed to be intuitively placed within easy reach for quick access. They finally implemented region support within C++ files, so you can micro manage large classes by separating chunks of related code into sections that can be hidden, and finally outlining preserves its state when you save and reload the file.
When it comes to intellisense, NO OTHER development tool comes close to the speed that VS does. Sure, your CPU usage might spike to 100% for the first few minutes after openning up a project, but a list of class methods and members always pops up instantly when you type a . or -> and text completion is fast. When I was playing around with XCode, I though that it didn't have ANY intellisense like functionality until one day I just happen to notice it took about 10 - 20 seconds for XCODE to show a list of object methods or offer a suggestion for word completion.
The Team collaboration is the buzz word of the day for MS. It is their major focus to get people to upgrade to VS2005. I honestly can't see us using it. Its a small office and we are a pretty tight development team. At most, the Community menu item that appears allows you to bitch to MS about software bugs and feature requests.
But why anybody wouldn't upgrade to 2005 is beyond me. VS2002 was clearly a beta and VS2003 was its patch, but VS2005 is altogether a markedly improved and mature product, finally integrating tight ANSI and ISO C++ standards along with at least recognizing insecure standard library calls and dramatically improved STL support with better debugging support of STL objects. Within the first week, we found numerous minor bugs that could cause the odd random crash in our software simply by compiling the software with VS2005. We also came across multithreading issues due to better optimization of the compiled code allowing for faster program execution that caused race conditions or deadlocks. Something VS2002 or VS6 wasn't making us aware of.
In any regards, if you develop Windows software for a living, not using VS is a detrement. Sure there may be other decent tools if you develop cross platform apps, but using a 3rd party development suite to develop Windows tools only shows your not serious about Windows software development. We are already looking at XAML and Windows Presentation Layer development because we can get the latest beta tools directly from the horses mouth, other development systems are only guessing what XAML will actually become and making a half assed attempt at offering a retail package before Vista is released.
Finally, MS integrated embedded device development in the IDE that allows you to emulate the device virtually, complete with a skin to look like a phone or PDA screen. They have had these tools in some external install, but integration in the IDE is key to getting more and better software written for mobile platforms. I may even get a PocketPC to start learning how to develop for the mobile platform.
Say what you will about MS, Windows, an their other software, but they actually know how to write a decent development platform.
Re:Say what you will about the Team System feature (Score:2)
Assuming you're referring to things like my post earlier in the discussion when you talk about underperforming Intellisense, please allow me to clarify. If your IDE locks up for several seconds on a 3+ GHz machine with 2+ GB of RAM and a fast hard drive, then your IDE is broken. I don't care how clever the Intellisense is, if it takes so long to use it that my productivity goes below that of a cheap text editor.
If the "little gaffs" include things like removing the browse toolbar they had in VC++ 6, then
Re:Say what you will about the Team System feature (Score:2)
Know your tools before you critique (Score:2)
First of all, doesn't your proclamation to use the fastest computer apply equally to macs?
Now secondly (and far more importantly) what makes you think the delay is the computers fault? XCode has, in preferences, a way to set a delay before suggestion. Th
collabware conundrum (Score:2)
I've been trying to test TFS' SCM capabilities (Score:2, Interesting)
I can't migrate my company's Visual SourceSafe repository. The built-in analyze tools to repair corruption lock up before they do anything useful. VSS corrupts by nature. Since my repository is
Cost? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Cost? (Score:1)
All i have to say about MSVC++ compiler is that... (Score:1)
To paraphase a graphic so many of us have seen... (Score:1)
Oh, Ned, you are a vi man!
I am curious (Score:1)
Re:I am curious (Score:3, Interesting)
In fact, I believe that the source control in VSTS is actually based off of the internal source control system that's been in use in Microsoft in a while - similar with the bug/work item tracking portion of VSTS. These two tools already have had significant work and lifetime, just as internal tools so far. So having them as V1 is a little misleading.
The work item tracking s
Re:I am curious (Score:2)
That's a lot like saying that the new source control system is better than printing out your source code and storing the paper in a big pile to be retyped every morning. I should hope that the new system is better than SourceSafe. Visual Studio is a pretty slick environment, but linking it into VSS is just embarrassing. It's like having a really nice house and a well maintained yard and then putting Astroturf on
I too am curious (Score:3)
Re:I too am curious (Score:2)
CRT on a Glass table (Score:1)
Now that is some cutting edge software company.
Woodpecker jokes? (Score:2)
Clue me please!
Alternative (Score:2)
VS8 has so many problems (Score:2)
Broken compiler
- Complicated floating-point code will many times result in bad code generation without warning. Sometimes, the x87 register allocation algorithm f
Re:"Inside Microsoft Visual Studio 2005 Team Syste (Score:1, Insightful)