Coffeehouse Thread

19 posts

Visual Studio 2005 Extensions for WCF and WPF

Back to Forum: Coffeehouse
  • User profile image
    JChung2006

    http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=F54F5537-CC86-4BF5-AE44-F5A1E805680D&displaylang=en

    So when is this going to be done?  They haven't updated the CTP since November.  Is there not going to be an RTM version of this because of the impending release of Visual Studio 2007 aka Orcas?

  • User profile image
    DCMonkey

    From your link:

    "This is the last release of this technology that will be in the form of a set of extensions for Visual Studio 2005. Any new technology in this space will be included in CTPs of the next full version of Visual Studio which is currently code named “Orcas”. The Visual Studio Orcas CTP releases will include some of the technology available in this CTP."

  • User profile image
    JChung2006

    Thanks.  I really need to read more carefully...

  • User profile image
    nojetlag

    So means to get the latest release people have to exchange the stable VS2005 environement for a CTP version of the next version of Visual Studio, not really a good solution for people that want to develop for WPF with current VS2005.

  • User profile image
    irascian

    Isn't this really just yet another example of the Vista version of an application not being available yet. Given that Vista went RTM in November it's pretty poor show that we're looking at a year's wait for RTM of the Vista release of Visual Studio. Oh well at least we have OneCare and Expression, or more accurately Expression Web. 

    And while Channel 9 bravely bash on with the "Why vista is wonderful" marketing without ANY of the downsides being highlighted, out in the real world people finding their new PCs have Vista pre-installed are getting rather frustrated with the lack of basic software. Here's the latest from the BBC: Net Firms Tackle Vista Headache

    Bottom line: Vista is suitable for "early adopter" developers, but not Joe Public, some three months after it went RTM. One year after RTM we MIGHT finally have the development tools (VS "Orcas" and the Expression products) we need in Vista editions.

    The rot of shipping beta feature-incomplete software started with VS2005 (what a mess the whole Web Application Projects thing was) and now seems to be a way of life for Microsoft Sad 

  • User profile image
    Jack Poison

    If you get tired of Microsoft, there is always Adobe Flex and Apollo.

    Runtime is already present on most machines, full multiple OS support (not just Mac Safari), a rich runtime, and lots of support.

    After saying that, I'm wondering, HOW does Microsoft think WPF/E will truely compete Flex/Apollo?

    I think they're grasping at straws, too little, too late.

  • User profile image
    rhm

    Jack Poison wrote:
    

    If you get tired of Microsoft, there is always Adobe Flex and Apollo.

    Runtime is already present on most machines, full multiple OS support (not just Mac Safari), a rich runtime, and lots of support.

    After saying that, I'm wondering, HOW does Microsoft think WPF/E will truely compete Flex/Apollo?

    I think they're grasping at straws, too little, too late.



    The Adobe stuff is just as doomed IMO. If people care about running everywhere, they will use AJAX techniques in the browser. Macromedia massively enhanced Flash prior to the Adobe acquisition, but really the only thing that's seen use is the video playback function.

    I'm seeing WPF/E as a way to run a subset of WPF applications on Windows Mobile/CE/whatever the overall brand of non-x86 Windows is, in much the same way as the .NET Compact Framework lets me run a subset of Windows Forms applications on WM devices. If they think people are going to deploy WPF/E apps over the web they are mistaken - over the intranet or to specific users maybe, but not over the web to all and sundry like AJAX applications are.

  • User profile image
    jsampsonPC

    I tried four times last night to install this, and it kept saying "This crap has closed...we'll try to find a solution. In the meantime, you're screwed." Well, not verbatim, but close enough Smiley

    I dunno!

  • User profile image
    fdisk

    Oh, come on. So what if the tools lag a year behind? You'll all buy them anyway. The market figures show it. You guys are devoted until the very end.

    Remember: The WOW starts now. And aren't you wowed?

    The other day I thought about picking up a copy of VS2005. After reading a lot of posts here, I don't know anymore.

  • User profile image
    irascian

    fdisk wrote:

    The other day I thought about picking up a copy of VS2005. After reading a lot of posts here, I don't know anymore.


    VS2005 is more than safe to pick up now that we're fifteen months on from its RTM. Just make sure you install SP1 and you're good to go. Install AJAX for ASP.NET 1.0 on top if Atlas is your thing.

  • User profile image
    Jack Poison

    fdisk wrote:
    Oh, come on. So what if the tools lag a year behind? You'll all buy them anyway. The market figures show it. You guys are devoted until the very end.

    Remember: The WOW starts now. And aren't you wowed?

    The other day I thought about picking up a copy of VS2005. After reading a lot of posts here, I don't know anymore.


    VS 2005 SP1 isn't bad at all: you did the right thing by waiting. Shoot, don't waste your money, download the express editions. That way, if you'd PO'd about it, you have only lost time, not $$$.

    But, you're 100% right: people will jump on the MS bandwagon anyway: it's a safe bet. They'll eventually get 'good enough' and no one has ever been fired for staying the course with Microsoft, or so I heard.

    Microsoft started to lose me when it screwed me and my bandwidth around with my 360 Extender after upgrading to Vista. No warning, no nothing. Just an error message which wasn't even the correct message (if you suddenly have insuficient bandwidth, shouldn't it say that and not that you have an improperly configured firewall?) Funny how the little things break the proverbial camel's back.

  • User profile image
    JohnAskew

    I really don't share the negativity.

    Some people have expectations that are not realistic.

    Vista security issues are new things to get used to. Network, bandwith, etc.

    Compilers always lag behind OS changes, especially something as special as Vista and WPF.

    Meaningful growth does not come without pain.

    Chill out.

  • User profile image
    rhm

    fdisk's post is a blatant troll. Don't bother with it.

  • User profile image
    fdisk

    rhm wrote:
    fdisk's post is a blatant troll. Don't bother with it.
    No, there is truth in it. People will pick the latest version of Visual Studio regardless of how it initially installs (or doesn't). The fact that Microsoft isn't shipping working tools with a just-launched-operating-system-they-spent-five-years-working-on is unexcusable. How is anybody supposed to build anything if things don't work right? And yes, I have installed VC++ 6.0 before, and it went just fine. But I was looking to move on to something a little more current. I'm actually also considering picking up a copy of XP SP2 from a store because I only have a "recovery partition" version of XP. That doesn't do me much good if the hard drive fails.

  • User profile image
    Jack Poison

    JohnAskew wrote:
    

    I really don't share the negativity.

    Some people have expectations that are not realistic.

    Vista security issues are new things to get used to. Network, bandwith, etc.

    Compilers always lag behind OS changes, especially something as special as Vista and WPF.

    Meaningful growth does not come without pain.

    Chill out.



    Sure there are growing pains.. But I think approprate error messages  (or generally appropriate) are very important. If you can't get an error MESSAGE right, what's that say about other things?

    As to my bandwidth issue, it's only with Media Center. I'm doing the same exact thing as I did with MCE 2005, on the SAME equipment, but will not play video because all of the sudden I MIGHT need HiDef (to which there is no CableCard equipment yet for Vista anyway!). Shouldn't there be some sort of warning if there was a jump in requirements? I"m not seeing anything even in documentation about it. How about an option "play at your own risk"?

    They dropped the ball, plain and simple. They've been doing that a lot lately. Hyping a lot of things as new, then they aren't..

    Case in point, go check out Paul Thurrott's site on Office 14..
    http://www.winsupersite.com/faq/office14.asp
    Now, substitute "2007" with "2003". Sounds like the same thing, over and over again.

    I really wish MS could impress me. But, you can only take "I'm sorry, it will be better next time" so many times before waking up and realizing you're better off with someone else.

    EDIT: Maybe someone could reply back on this thread (or a new one) and give me a good reason why I should stick with MS technologies after all of these so-so releases. Whether it be VS 2005 / Vista / WPF/E, etc. The way I see it, if I want to be on the cutting edge, I better not stick with Microsoft. Disagree?

  • User profile image
    JohnAskew

    I disagree.

    WPF is enough reason for me.

    Good luck.

  • User profile image
    Dr Herbie

    Jack Poison wrote:
    

    EDIT: Maybe someone could reply back on this thread (or a new one) and give me a good reason why I should stick with MS technologies after all of these so-so releases. Whether it be VS 2005 / Vista / WPF/E, etc. The way I see it, if I want to be on the cutting edge, I better not stick with Microsoft. Disagree?


    I don't think it matters which set of technology you use; being on the cutting edge is always painful.
    Bear in mind that the WPF & WCF extensions are still pre-release, so I think that expecting them to be stable and bug-free is unrealistic.

    Herbie

  • User profile image
    Jack Poison

    Dr Herbie wrote:
    

    I don't think it matters which set of technology you use; being on the cutting edge is always painful.
    Bear in mind that the WPF & WCF extensions are still pre-release, so I think that expecting them to be stable and bug-free is unrealistic.

    Herbie



    herbie,
    I think you're correct in the cutting edge idea, although it seems like Flex / Apollo have been out longer. (March 2004, if the Wikipedia is to be believed). That's three years ago, Microsoft.

    As to the extensions, aren't they production now? I thought as of Vista, they are no longer pre-release. If this is correct, then I do expect WPF and WCF to be stable. Maybe not bug-free (no software is bug-free).

    JohnAskew,
    Good luck to you as well. I wish you could have given me a more compelling reason. It would be really cool if I can convert my company's main product to Flex/Apollo, rather than the impending WPF conversion. Maybe if more people would do the same, Microsoft would get off their hump and start being innovative for once.

Comments closed

Comments have been closed since this content was published more than 30 days ago, but if you'd like to continue the conversation, please create a new thread in our Forums, or Contact Us and let us know.