Coffeehouse Thread

19 posts

Forum Read Only

This forum has been made read only by the site admins. No new threads or comments can be added.

Vista RTM Windows Update & Visual Studio SP1

Back to Forum: Coffeehouse
  • User profile image
    conkerjoe

    Monday evening i was greeted with a "There are new updates available" on the Vista RTM.. woohoooo hopefully they have fixed stuff.
    but the update the made me really gaga is the VS 2k5 SP1..
    500MB of Windows Updates later and i reboot.
    Now every time i open visual studio i get a message saying The Vista SP1 update requires the Visual Studio 2005 Update for vista and to be run with administrative priviledges..

    Has anyone else had a similar experience ?

  • User profile image
    littleguru

    The SP1 for Visual Studio 2005 doesn't target the issues on Windows Vista! To have most of the issues fixed, you need to run VS as administrator. Right click the shortcut and click "Run as administrator". That is what the dialog is pointing out. Btw. everybody who is running VS 2005 SP1 in Vista gets this dialog! And if you would have read the readme for the SP1 you would also got the information, why this dialog is shown.

    The VS team is currently working on a Service Pack for Windows Vista. That one should fix most of the issues in Vista, but it isn't released yet.

    But the current SP1 fixes a lot of issues (that are not Vista related), like the Windows Forms Designer is a lot faster etc.

  • User profile image
    conkerjoe

    Urm what release notes?
    windows update doesnt give release notes....
    Its not the error saying its not compatible.. thats not the one im talking about.. its a new once since i installed the windows update.
    and yes it is running as an administrator.. always has on vista

  • User profile image
    littleguru

    That's the default behaviour with the SP1. Smiley http://support.microsoft.com/kb/928957/en-us

  • User profile image
    Adrian​JMartin

    But it SHOULD at least check if it was launched as administrator and not display the dialog if it is.

    You doubt your mouse skills the first few times you launch it!

  • User profile image
    littleguru

    It has a checkbox to no longer show it... One click and you will never see it.

  • User profile image
    die-Sel

    any idea of a planned release date for SP1  for Vista?

  • User profile image
    Sven Groot

    Here's what I recommend. First, install the VS2005 update for Windows Vista.

    And second:
    Don't run VS2005 as administrator

    Yes, I know it tells you you need to, but really, the number of cases where you actually need it is so small! Try it without administrator permissions first; when you run into an issue, use it with admin permissions for that task, and still without for everything else.

    I absolutely hate that MS is doing this. Part of the reason why we're in such a mess with apps that don't work in limited accounts is because developers run as admins. Trust me, if you develop as a limited user it's much more natural to develop an app that works for a limited user. And now, finally, with Vista's UAC, it seems we might at last get developers to stop doing everything as admin, and what does MS do!? It tells them to run as admin!

    Infuriating!

    The issues that VS2005 has on Vista as a non-admin are the same as the ones it had on XP as a non-admin. I've been running VS as a non-admin for years, even the older versions. I can count the number of times where I needed to divert to an admin account to do something in VS because it wouldn't work otherwise on one hand.

  • User profile image
    littleguru

    I understand Sven here. If you run VS as administrator you could possibly run an addon that has then admin rights and could affect your pc.

    But I had always problems with debugging a simple windows form when not running as administrator. The debugger did not attach properly and my cpu run at 100% cpu for most of the time, while the app run from VS...

    ASP.NET debugging doesn't work with non-admin rights too. VS runs the page and stops immediately afterwards.


    I had only problems when not running as administrator.

    Tongue Out

  • User profile image
    AndyC

    Sven Groot wrote:


    I absolutely hate that MS is doing this. Part of the reason why we're in such a mess with apps that don't work in limited accounts is because developers run as admins. Trust me, if you develop as a limited user it's much more natural to develop an app that works for a limited user. And now, finally, with Vista's UAC, it seems we might at last get developers to stop doing everything as admin, and what does MS do!? It tells them to run as admin!

    Infuriating!



    I couldn't agree more. If anyone, anywhere ought to be running as a limited user it is developers. I genuinely hope that the Visual Studio team are at least embarrased at the fact their flagship product doesn't work under limited rights. It's not like the introduction of UAC was a surprise to them, they had ample opportunity during the development process to do this properly and they clearly didn't.

  • User profile image
    Sven Groot

    littleguru wrote:
    I understand Sven here. If you run VS as administrator you could possibly run an addon that has then admin rights and could affect your pc.

    No, that's not my point here at all. I couldn't care less about security in this case. What I want is for developers to write apps that work when you're a limited user. The best way to guarantee this is to write them as a limited user.

    littleguru wrote:
    But I had always problems with debugging a simple windows form when not running as administrator. The debugger did not attach properly and my cpu run at 100% cpu for most of the time, while the app run from VS...

    I've not seen this. Debugging works fine for Windows Forms apps, native C++ apps, etc. The only real limitation is you can't debug apps running as a different user.

    littleguru wrote:
    ASP.NET debugging doesn't work with non-admin rights too. VS runs the page and stops immediately afterwards.

    If you're using IIS then you'll have the problem I described above; you can't debug apps running as a different user, and IIS runs it as LocalService (iirc). You can make it run as yourself if you really want to (only do this for debugging!); I used to do this with IIS 5.1 an VS.NET 2003, I changed machine.config so aspnet_wp.exe would run as me instead of the ASPNET user. If you use the ASP.NET development webserver in VS2005 this isn't a problem.

    The problem you are describing sounds like something else though. It's caused by protected mode IE. When using protected mode IE immediately relaunches itself as a low integrity process so the one the VS debugger attached to ends immediately. You can get around this by starting IE manually and then attaching to it and the web server using "Attach to process", or by temporarily disabling protected mode.

  • User profile image
    littleguru

    Sven Groot wrote:
    
    littleguru wrote: I understand Sven here. If you run VS as administrator you could possibly run an addon that has then admin rights and could affect your pc.

    No, that's not my point here at all. I couldn't care less about security in this case. What I want is for developers to write apps that work when you're a limited user. The best way to guarantee this is to write them as a limited user.


    I don't see this problem here. I mean if you develop as admin and you ship it to the end user (or do user testing; just by launching the app in Vista) you will immediately see that the user can't run the app, without having major problems...

    In Vista this lazyness doesn't work anymore. The problem until now was that everybody ignored the recommandations given by Microsoft (use the App Data folders, don't write into Windows folders, don't write into the Program Files folder, ...).

    But since Vista doesn't allow it anymore (and group policy is going to disable the possibility to disable UAC in Vista; as most of the company admins understand the advantages of UAC) programs that don't run under Vista properly won't get bought and developed anymore.

    Running VS as user give you only an early feedback if your app runs or not - but it is not required in my eyes.

  • User profile image
    Massif

    littleguru wrote:

    Running VS as user give you only an early feedback if your app runs or not - but it is not required in my eyes.


    But early feedback is the best kind. The earlier the better surely?

  • User profile image
    littleguru

    Massif wrote:
    
    littleguru wrote:
    Running VS as user give you only an early feedback if your app runs or not - but it is not required in my eyes.


    But early feedback is the best kind. The earlier the better surely?


    Perhaps my picture of an average developer is to good. I mean does an average developer not understand that Vista users run by default as limited users? After having seen all these dialogs showing up and asking for administrator rights and after having read how to run an app as administrator... I don't know.

  • User profile image
    AndyC

    littleguru wrote:
    
    Running VS as user give you only an early feedback if your app runs or not - but it is not required in my eyes.


    It's more subtle than that. If you run as a limited user, you are much more aware of the issues that arise and therefore tend to have them in mind when designing/developing. That's why unix based operating systems generally have better behaved applications than Windows.

  • User profile image
    littleguru

    AndyC wrote:
    
    littleguru wrote: 
    Running VS as user give you only an early feedback if your app runs or not - but it is not required in my eyes.


    It's more subtle than that. If you run as a limited user, you are much more aware of the issues that arise and therefore tend to have them in mind when designing/developing. That's why unix based operating systems generally have better behaved applications than Windows.


    ... and that is why I love Vista. Finally devs need to do what they never did: don't mess around in the Windows folder! Wink

  • User profile image
    Sven Groot

    Except that LUAFileVirtualization still lets them get away with some of it.

    I wonder if there's a way to turn that off while developing/testing.

  • User profile image
    AndyC

    Sven Groot wrote:
    

    Except that LUAFileVirtualization still lets them get away with some of it.

    I wonder if there's a way to turn that off while developing/testing.



    Group Policy. Or you can just toggle the virtualisation setting for the process in Task Manager if you want a quick and dirty test.

Conversation locked

This conversation has been locked by the site admins. No new comments can be made.