Visual Basic .NET 2003 version

  • Thread starter Thread starter EMW
  • Start date Start date
E

EMW

Hi,

Which version (standard of professional) do I need (ms website is not clear
to me) for:
- developing windows based programs
- developing ASPX for internet
- developing windows mobile applications for PDA's

Please let me know, so I can tell my boss what to buy?

thanks,
Eric
 
* "EMW said:
Which version (standard of professional) do I need (ms website is not clear
to me) for:
- developing windows based programs
- developing ASPX for internet
- developing windows mobile applications for PDA's

Please let me know, so I can tell my boss what to buy?
Click to expand...

I recomment not to buy a Standard edition. Instead, buy at least the
Professional edition. The Professional edition is more expensive than
the Standard edition, but upgrading will be easier and the Professional
edition is much more powerful because it doesn't only include a single
..NET programming language.

<URL:http://msdn.microsoft.com/vbasic/howtobuy/choosing.aspX>
 
You must buy Visual Studio Pro 2003. None of the single languages allow
mobile device development.

-Chris
 
Jesus, just stamp MS on your forehead!!

Buy the standard edition unless you really have enough money to buy the
professional edition. All of your desired tasks can be achieved using
VB.NET standard, so why go for more? I think the expression is "living
beyond means" or "sleeping with MS" one of those 2, I can't quite remember!

Nick.
 
No, I beleive that it is tools, like debugging on a Mobile device is not
supported by the standard edition.
--
Bruce Eitman (eMVP)
Senior Engineer
beitman AT applieddata DOT net

Applied Data Systems
www.applieddata.net
An ISO 9001:2000 Registered Company
Microsoft WEP Gold-level Member
 
While I do not disagree with your comments, based on Herfried vague
statements, the requirement to develop for Mobile Devices as Eric requested
is not supported by the standard version. Must use VS 2003 Pro.

--
Bruce Eitman (eMVP)
Senior Engineer
beitman AT applieddata DOT net

Applied Data Systems
www.applieddata.net
An ISO 9001:2000 Registered Company
Microsoft WEP Gold-level Member


Nak said:
Jesus, just stamp MS on your forehead!!

Buy the standard edition unless you really have enough money to buy the
professional edition. All of your desired tasks can be achieved using
VB.NET standard, so why go for more? I think the expression is "living
beyond means" or "sleeping with MS" one of those 2, I can't quite remember!

Nick.
Click to expand...
 
* "Nak said:
Buy the standard edition unless you really have enough money to buy the
professional edition. All of your desired tasks can be achieved using
VB.NET standard, so why go for more? I think the expression is "living
beyond means" or "sleeping with MS" one of those 2, I can't quite remember!
Click to expand...

Sure, all tasks can be archieved without VS.NET at all too, using the
..NET SDK only. But that's IMO not the point. For "professional"
development, the Professional edition is IMO a "must have".
 
Missing templates. Missing Help documentation. Missing all of the CF
assemblies. So no, not just templates. You might be able to patch
something together with the CF stuff from Platform Builder, but you'd still
not get method and namespace filtering in the IDE and you'd have to
command-line build. IMHO it'd be a bigger pain in the ass than it's worth
to try to get anything done, especially since you might actually want to use
the controls not available on the desktop, so you couldn't even use the
Forms editor to do your layout.

-Chris
 
Oh, and the emulators and the debug connectivity apps and tools. So you
couldn't debug with a single-language hack either.

-Chris
 
Hi there,
Sure, all tasks can be archieved without VS.NET at all too, using the
.NET SDK only. But that's IMO not the point. For "professional"
development, the Professional edition is IMO a "must have".
Click to expand...

I totally resent that comment, I regard myself as a professional and I
do *not* posess the "Professional" edition of Visual Studio, so does that
make my software amateurish?

Nick.
 
Sheesh, all sounds like another big con to me, but fair enough, not everyone
is poor like myself!

Nick.

Chris Tacke said:
Oh, and the emulators and the debug connectivity apps and tools. So you
couldn't debug with a single-language hack either.

-Chris


Chris Tacke said:
Missing templates. Missing Help documentation. Missing all of the CF
assemblies. So no, not just templates. You might be able to patch
something together with the CF stuff from Platform Builder, but you'd still
not get method and namespace filtering in the IDE and you'd have to
command-line build. IMHO it'd be a bigger pain in the ass than it's worth
to try to get anything done, especially since you might actually want to use
the controls not available on the desktop, so you couldn't even use the
Forms editor to do your layout.

-Chris


Nak said:
Hi Chris,

Now this would be down to missing templates right?

Nick.

"Chris Tacke, eMVP" <ctacke[at]OpenNETCF_dot_org> wrote in message
You must buy Visual Studio Pro 2003. None of the single languages allow
mobile device development.

-Chris


Hi,

Which version (standard of professional) do I need (ms website is not
clear
to me) for:
- developing windows based programs
- developing ASPX for internet
- developing windows mobile applications for PDA's

Please let me know, so I can tell my boss what to buy?

thanks,
Eric
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
* "Nak said:
I totally resent that comment, I regard myself as a professional and I
do *not* posess the "Professional" edition of Visual Studio, so does that
make my software amateurish?
Click to expand...

It doesn't necessarily, but your productivity may be reduced because
lack of some features.
 
Con? How so? I'm just pointing out that device development isn't really an
option without Studio Pro. The story may change with the release of Studio
'05, but today that's how it is.

-Chris


Nak said:
Sheesh, all sounds like another big con to me, but fair enough, not everyone
is poor like myself!

Nick.

Chris Tacke said:
Oh, and the emulators and the debug connectivity apps and tools. So you
couldn't debug with a single-language hack either.

-Chris


Chris Tacke said:
Missing templates. Missing Help documentation. Missing all of the CF
assemblies. So no, not just templates. You might be able to patch
something together with the CF stuff from Platform Builder, but you'd still
not get method and namespace filtering in the IDE and you'd have to
command-line build. IMHO it'd be a bigger pain in the ass than it's worth
to try to get anything done, especially since you might actually want
Click to expand...
to
use
the controls not available on the desktop, so you couldn't even use the
Forms editor to do your layout.

-Chris


Hi Chris,

Now this would be down to missing templates right?

Nick.

"Chris Tacke, eMVP" <ctacke[at]OpenNETCF_dot_org> wrote in message
You must buy Visual Studio Pro 2003. None of the single languages allow
mobile device development.

-Chris


Hi,

Which version (standard of professional) do I need (ms website
Click to expand...
is
not
clear
to me) for:
- developing windows based programs
- developing ASPX for internet
- developing windows mobile applications for PDA's

Please let me know, so I can tell my boss what to buy?

thanks,
Eric
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Hi Herfried,
It doesn't necessarily, but your productivity may be reduced because
lack of some features.
Click to expand...

I do understand what you are trying to say, but productivity isnt always
down to the software your using, it's down to you, how good you are at
developing ideas with what you have. What's the old saying, "a good workman
never blames his tools". I still don't feel the need for anything other
VB.NET standard at the moment, but that is me *personally* of course, if I
want to write lets say a "plug-in" in C# I will use SharpDevelop, but I very
rarely need to do this, if I find code written in another language I will
attempt to port it to VB.NET.

Some people rely too much on the IDE nower days to do half of the coding for
them, that doesn't make you any better at coding that is for sure.

Nick.
 
Hi Chris,
Con? How so? I'm just pointing out that device development isn't really an
option without Studio Pro. The story may change with the release of Studio
'05, but today that's how it is.
Click to expand...

Surely in this day and age of hi-tech modular programming they could have
included the necessary device development features in each standardized
component. I *personally* don't have the need for it at the moment anyway
but if I did I would be seriously upset if I needed to purchase an extremely
expensive piece of software to add this facility, like why not make a
"VB.NET Mobile Edition" and make it only develop software for mobile devices
then charge like £50 for it?

Nick.
 
I believe that is somewhat the plan in the next version. The reality is
that the CF stuff was a real late addition to Studio 03, and there wasn't
enough time to get it fully tested for inclusion into standard editions.
Same thing with the stand-alone SDK (which would allow integration with
things like SharpDevelop). Believe me, there's a lot of call for this from
the embedded world where the C++ IDE and compilers have been free for some
time. Trying to convince someone they now have to buy a $2000 package is a
tough sell.

-Chris
 
Nick,

* "Nak said:
I do understand what you are trying to say, but productivity isnt always
down to the software your using, it's down to you, how good you are at
developing ideas with what you have.
Click to expand...

I agree. But a good developer + a productive tool will be more
productive than a good developer without the tool.
What's the old saying, "a good workman never blames his tools".
I still don't feel the need for anything other VB.NET standard
at the moment, but that is me *personally* of course
Click to expand...

I understand your point, there are cases in which you don't need the
whole VS. There are many former VB6 developers who don't need more than
the Standard version of VB.NET to get their work done. But there are
developers who want to do more, who want to mix programming languages to
save time by reusing other components and source code.
if I want to write lets say a "plug-in" in C# I will use
SharpDevelop, but I very rarely need to do this, if I find
code written in another language I will attempt to port it
to VB.NET.
Click to expand...

Personally, I would try to keep my code VB.NET-only too, but in VS.NET,
the different programming languages + debugger are integrated. So, it's
a very good programming experience without using additional tools.
Some people rely too much on the IDE nower days to do half of the coding for
them, that doesn't make you any better at coding that is for sure.
Click to expand...

Full ACK!
 
Nick,

* "Nak said:
Surely in this day and age of hi-tech modular programming they could have
included the necessary device development features in each standardized
component. I *personally* don't have the need for it at the moment anyway
but if I did I would be seriously upset if I needed to purchase an extremely
expensive piece of software to add this facility, like why not make a
"VB.NET Mobile Edition" and make it only develop software for mobile devices
then charge like £50 for it?
Click to expand...

I would prefer a standard edition of VS.NET that includes only one
programming language, but enables the user to do all that can be done
with the Professional edition, but only for a single programming
language.
 
Back
Top