4 hours ago, MrChris wrote
evildictaitor, you make it sound as if the customer is the enemy of Microsoft. Of course, Microsoft doesn't have they do anything if they don't want to. They might as well pack their bags and stop developing their products, who's there to judge them. But they want to gain profit. Isn't business about selling your product and satisfying the customer?
You make it sound like Microsoft only has one customer and that customer wants XP support as a backend to Visual Studio. That's not true. Microsoft has bajillions of customers for Visual Studio. All of them want a CRT that is faster, safer and cheaper. Not all of them want XP support as a backend. This means Microsoft is making trade-offs between spending effort making the CRT faster/better/stronger/etc versus adding new backends.
VS2011 is (compared with VS2010) having to support C++11, .NET4.5, ARM for user-mode applications for Win8 and support for Metro.
You might see supporting XP as the only key feature that you'd like in VS2011, but in real life it's pretty low on VS2011's priority list.
I'm glad there haven't been any official responses like "do it yourself if you want it so much", "do it yourself if you think it's so easy", that would literally be considered as spitting in the customer's face. In fact making the CRT run on XP is easy.
That is why nothing I post is an official response. If Charles or blowdart posted what I say here they'd cause an uproar. That's why I keep my non/employment at Microsoft deliberately ambiguous so you can't turn my rantings into a news-story.
In fact making the CRT run on XP is easy.
Again with just saying things. You have no idea how hard it is to make a CRT for XP, you're just assuming that it's easy because it helps your point to make Microsoft sound incompetent. If it's so easy to write your own CRT, just do it yourself. If it's too hard to just do yourself, perhaps it's not so easy for the VS2011 team either.
I don't see why it would be any harder for the VS team than it has been for multiple people who have done it themselves as a proof-of-concept.
What proofs of concept? Also a proof-of-concept is not a fully tested supported product sold for thousands of dollars to millions of customers who need 24/7 support when things go wrong, and where security problems can affect billions of computers.
Could you describe a scenario where VC++11 not supporting XP as a target platform will lead to a more rapid upgrade process among XP users?
I'm pretty sure that this isn't the reason that Microsoft are dropping support for XP, because I don't think they have a sufficiently coherent (or evil) strategy afoot, but the scenario exists anyway:
You're still in the mind-set of "I am a tiny little company, I have no sway over big companies - my competitors will take the market share that I lose".
From evil-Microsoft's perspective "You are one of many thousands of little companies. You and your competitors will eventually upgrade to VS2011, and the company will be unable to purchase either. If they want a new program they will be compelled to upgrade or resort to ever increasingly dirty hacks to keep their company chugging along. In practise this cost will force them to upgrade".