April 21, 2006
Visual Studio 2005: Unstable and Highly RecommendedHigh Expectations
DDJ: Another hypothesis that I was going to forward, but I think you've preemptively shot it down, is that maybe Visual Studio 2003 set expectations artificially high. In a lot of ways, Visual Studio 2003 was just a massive service pack for Visual Studio .NET. It's logical that 2003 was very stable because it didn't introduce very many new features. It was mainly a big cleanup of the original Visual Studio .NET. However, even so, compared to the original Visual Studio .NET, Visual Studio 2005 is less stable.
DDJ: I think some people would say some of these issues aren't technically stability problems. Instead, it's working as designed, the proverbial, "It's a feature!" For example, if the user control throws an exception at design time, or if there's an error in the designer generated code because you've changed the control and that code is no longer valid, then the WSOD, by design, is what you're supposed to see. Do you feel that this is really stability problems, or are things working as designed, but the design isn't really adequate in some areas?
DDJ: Is there any way, today, to obtain the hotfix without actually picking up the phone and calling PSS?
DDJ: There was a petition. I looked up on the MSDN Product Feedback center this morning, and there was a recommendation that Microsoft not ship Visual Studio 2005. The recommendation was, "Have a Beta 3. It's not ready to release." I don't know when the voting closed on that feedback, but this morning, it had something like 230 votes. For something on the MSDN Product Feedback center, that's a lot. Writers for trade publications picked up on it and wrote articles saying that Microsoft's customers feel that it's not ready. On the other hand, all we had to look at were CTPs, and with CTPs, all bets are off. They are a snapshot, but the quality of a CTP is unlikely to accurately reflect the quality of the final product. Did people see this coming? Should Microsoft have known? Did Microsoft know that the quality wasn't going to be near that of 2003?
DDJ: Let me get other people's impressions on that. Given what we know now, if you had to make the call to ship back in November, would you have pulled the lever to ship it? (silence)
DDJ: Let me maybe make a distinction. Are we talking about something that's a tool problem, or is it the tool and the Framework? In other words, is it an issue where the development environment is unstable, but the underlying .NET Framework is solid, so that you can have very high confidence that the applications that you build against the .NET Framework will run well, and be stable for your customers, even if the tool that you're using to build them gives you grief?
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|