Does CVS work from within Visual Studio, integrated as well like SourceSafe?
Unfortunately being in the UK, US products have not gone done in price (I think I have read somewhere PC's can cost $500 less if you buy them in the US rather than the UK. Visual Studio.NET Pro costs £855 ($1,537) in the UK, $989 in the US - why the huge difference
(apart from exchange rates)?
The poor US$ helps exports from the US but harms imports to the US from Europe and Japan. US products cost us the same in the UK, but make the US companies more. It's cheaper to fly to America, buy Visual Studio (or a PC), and then fly back.
Is there a Visual Studio just for Web Development (no Win Forms, but supporting both C# and VB.NET)?
Dreamweaver MX costs $370 in the US, £350 ($629) in the UK. So it is a lot cheaper for Web Development.
The closest .NET IDE (only?) to Visual Studio is
SharpDevelop. Doesn't have ASP.NET support and so is probably nowhere near Visual Studio in terms of features. Pretty good though considering it is Open Source - also compiles for Mono as well as Microsoft.NET.
It is expensive if you are non-profit, which is why some companies are using languages like Python (which has a basic free IDE). What about the Eclipse IDE as well?
costs $295. Not for VB.NET or C# but works for Python/Perl/Tcl/PHP/XSLT (Open Source languages). It shows that IDE's can be a lot cheaper.
What profit is made on Visual Studio, is it 80% like it is for Windows/Office? IMHO anything that makes that much profit is overcharged for (I suppose you could argue for value for money).
I don't care if its integrated or not. I'm not that lazy. IJW like its supposed to. <grin />
I can't speak about the UK markets other than suggest maybe it would be cheaper to buy from the US, pay the conversion and have it shipped.
I use Komodo alot because VS.NET doesn't debug XSLT very well. I still frequently find myself using TextPad for VB.NET. Having said that, I'm happy to pay the $1500 per year to renew my MSDN subscription, since it makes me very, very product to have all of