By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
445,771 Members | 1,669 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 445,771 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

Any VS2005 Beta 2 Issues Come Up Yet?

P: n/a
I haven't installed VS2005 B2 yet.
My main concern is installing VS2005 B2 on the XP Pro machine where VSN2003
already exists.
Am I asking for trouble? Your comments...

<%= Clinton Gallagher
Jul 21 '05 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
16 Replies


P: n/a

"clintonG" <cs*********@REMOVETHISTEXTmetromilwaukee.com> wrote in message
news:%2****************@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
I haven't installed VS2005 B2 yet.
My main concern is installing VS2005 B2 on the XP Pro machine where
VSN2003 already exists.
Am I asking for trouble? Your comments...

<%= Clinton Gallagher

I just did that very thing. As far as Windows apps are concerned, there seem
to be no issues. Web apps, however, are a different story. I can set up a
web project in VS 2005 and it works normally, but VS 2005 seems to have
hijacked IIS on my machine so the instance that was there before, supporting
VS2003 now refuses to start. So, no web apps work in VS 2003. There may well
be a simple fix, but I just installed yesterday and haven't looked into it
yet.
In general, as I'm sure you know, beta software on a production is asking
for it. My test PC is not mission-critical, so I took a chance. If you're
doing serious development with VS 2003, I'd advise against adding VS 2005
Beta.

--
Peter [MVP Visual Developer]
Jack of all trades, master of none.
Jul 21 '05 #2

P: n/a
Thank you Peter.
Surely you're aware that there is a new MMC ASP.NET tab? Check the
properties for an applications. The tab can be used to switch between
versions.

<%= Clinton Gallagher

"Peter van der Goes" <p_**********@toadstool.u> wrote in message
news:uQ**************@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...

"clintonG" <cs*********@REMOVETHISTEXTmetromilwaukee.com> wrote in message
news:%2****************@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
I haven't installed VS2005 B2 yet.
My main concern is installing VS2005 B2 on the XP Pro machine where
VSN2003 already exists.
Am I asking for trouble? Your comments...

<%= Clinton Gallagher

I just did that very thing. As far as Windows apps are concerned, there
seem to be no issues. Web apps, however, are a different story. I can set
up a web project in VS 2005 and it works normally, but VS 2005 seems to
have hijacked IIS on my machine so the instance that was there before,
supporting VS2003 now refuses to start. So, no web apps work in VS 2003.
There may well be a simple fix, but I just installed yesterday and haven't
looked into it yet.
In general, as I'm sure you know, beta software on a production is asking
for it. My test PC is not mission-critical, so I took a chance. If you're
doing serious development with VS 2003, I'd advise against adding VS 2005
Beta.

--
Peter [MVP Visual Developer]
Jack of all trades, master of none.

Jul 21 '05 #3

P: n/a

"clintonG" <cs*********@REMOVETHISTEXTmetromilwaukee.com> wrote in message
news:%2****************@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
Thank you Peter.
Surely you're aware that there is a new MMC ASP.NET tab? Check the
properties for an applications. The tab can be used to switch between
versions.

<%= Clinton Gallagher

As I said, I just installed it. Is the tab you mentioned in VS 2005? If so,
how will that affect VS 2003 web apps? Please educate me.
Jul 21 '05 #4

P: n/a

"Peter van der Goes" <p_**********@toadstool.u> wrote in message
news:uQ**************@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...

"clintonG" <cs*********@REMOVETHISTEXTmetromilwaukee.com> wrote in message
news:%2****************@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
I haven't installed VS2005 B2 yet.
My main concern is installing VS2005 B2 on the XP Pro machine where
VSN2003 already exists.
Am I asking for trouble? Your comments...

<%= Clinton Gallagher

I just did that very thing. As far as Windows apps are concerned, there
seem to be no issues. Web apps, however, are a different story. I can set
up a web project in VS 2005 and it works normally, but VS 2005 seems to
have hijacked IIS on my machine so the instance that was there before,
supporting VS2003 now refuses to start. So, no web apps work in VS 2003.
There may well be a simple fix, but I just installed yesterday and haven't
looked into it yet.
In general, as I'm sure you know, beta software on a production is asking
for it. My test PC is not mission-critical, so I took a chance. If you're
doing serious development with VS 2003, I'd advise against adding VS 2005
Beta.

--
Peter [MVP Visual Developer]
Jack of all trades, master of none.


To mitigate this possibility I use (and recommend) VMWare Workstation. I
use a different virtual machine for .Net 2003, Visual Basic 6 and the test
releases of VB.Net 2005.

I also use blank virtual machines for installation testing and applications
testing. This stuff is great.

Haven't tried Microsoft's Virtual PC yet as Microsoft does not support Linux
in it.

Jim Hubbard
Jul 21 '05 #5

P: n/a
> Haven't tried Microsoft's Virtual PC yet as Microsoft does not support Linux
in it.


Of course you understand there is a difference between being able to run
an operating system in a virtual machine, as opposed to having an
operating system supported by a virtual machine vendor. How often DO
you call support for your virtual machine software? If it is more than
never, maybe you SHOULD consider the other alternatives. (linux users
care about official support from commercial software vendors?)

To make sure nobody gets the wrong idea by your remark, here is a list
of operating systems that are known to work in Microsoft's Virtual PC.
http://vpc.visualwin.com/
Jul 21 '05 #6

P: n/a

"Joshua Flanagan" <jo**@msnews.com> wrote in message
news:uz**************@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
Haven't tried Microsoft's Virtual PC yet as Microsoft does not support
Linux in it.
Of course you understand there is a difference between being able to run
an operating system in a virtual machine, as opposed to having an
operating system supported by a virtual machine vendor.


Sure. The later means that the company has tested their product to be able
to handle the OS in question correctly. Microsoft does not test for or
support Linux compatability - therefore they do not offer any support for
hosting the Linux OS.

If they won't test it, I certainly won't second guess them on it.
How often DO you call support for your virtual machine software? If it is
more than never, maybe you SHOULD consider the other alternatives. (linux
users care about official support from commercial software vendors?)
Never. Worried about my other posts, are you?
To make sure nobody gets the wrong idea by your remark, here is a list of
operating systems that are known to work in Microsoft's Virtual PC.
http://vpc.visualwin.com/


Please note that this is NOT a Microsoft site, and these operating systems
are NOT supported by Microsoft in Virtual PC 2004. As the website
states..."the unofficial list of which OSes work and which don't in
Microsoft Virtual PC 2004".

How could they "get the wrong idea"? I did state that "Microsoft does not
support Linux" in Virtual PC 2004. It seems that only you could have
misconstrued my statements thusly.

Here is a link to Microsoft's Virtual PC site that lists the supported
(officially - which, of course you understand, means that the vendor -
Microsoft - has tested and approves for use with their product) operating
systems -
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/vir...rview2004.mspx....
just so people don't get the wrong idea.

The officially supported operating systems (according to the Microsoft
Virtual PC page referenced above) are MS-DOS 6.22, Windows 95, Windows 98,
Windows Me, Windows 2000, Windows NT 4.01, Windows XP, OS/2 Warp 4 Fixpack
15, OS/2 Warp Convenience Pack 1, and OS/2 Warp Convenience Pack 2.

When you compare that to the supported operating systems in VMWare's
Workstation 5 (http://www.vmware.com/products/desktop/ws_features.html)
which are Microsoft Server 2003, Windows XP, Windows 2000 Professional and
Server, Windows NT Workstation and Server 4.0, Windows Me, Windows 98,
Windows 95, Windows 3.1, MS-DOS 6, Windows Longhorn (experimental), Popular
Linux distributions from Red Hat, SUSE, Turbolinux, and Mandrake, FreeBSD,
Novell NetWare Server 6.5, 6.0, and 5.1, and Novell Linux Desktop 9, Sun
Java Desktop System 2, Sun Solaris 9 and 10 for the x86 platform
(experimental)......you may also come to the conclusion that VMware's
Workstation 5 is more robust and allows more test scenarios than Windows
Virtual PC 2004 and is a better value.

When you are using a virtual machine for testing applications for a user's
environment, using an unsupported OS in a virtual machine to do so is
unprofessional and may produce errors that cannot be reproduced in the
actual operating environment. If you want to appear professional, I
wouldn't recommend it.

Jim Hubbard
Jul 21 '05 #7

P: n/a
No, the ASP.NET tab is not accessible via VS2005.
We'll only see the ASP.NET tab if some version of the DNF 2.0 has been
installed.

Once VS2005 is installed launch Administrative Tools > Internet Information
Services.
Review the Properties for *each* of your 1.1 applications and you will see
the ASP.NET tab where you can use a ListBox to reset the configuration for
that application back to DNF 1.1.

<%= Clinton Gallagher

"Peter van der Goes" <p_**********@toadstool.u> wrote in message
news:Ox**************@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...

"clintonG" <cs*********@REMOVETHISTEXTmetromilwaukee.com> wrote in message
news:%2****************@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
Thank you Peter.
Surely you're aware that there is a new MMC ASP.NET tab? Check the
properties for an applications. The tab can be used to switch between
versions.

<%= Clinton Gallagher

As I said, I just installed it. Is the tab you mentioned in VS 2005? If
so, how will that affect VS 2003 web apps? Please educate me.

Jul 21 '05 #8

P: n/a
BTW I'm already using VPC2004 and I must also say if I had a nickel for
every word that is wasted on nitpicking inane arguements that always seem to
interject themselves into a topic where they are not relevant I would be
stinking filthy rich and would never have to post to a newsgroups again for
the rest of my miserable life.

<%= Clinton Gallagher

"Jim Hubbard" <re***@groups.please> wrote in message
news:LY********************@giganews.com...

"Joshua Flanagan" <jo**@msnews.com> wrote in message
news:uz**************@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
Haven't tried Microsoft's Virtual PC yet as Microsoft does not support
Linux in it.


Of course you understand there is a difference between being able to run
an operating system in a virtual machine, as opposed to having an
operating system supported by a virtual machine vendor.


Sure. The later means that the company has tested their product to be
able to handle the OS in question correctly. Microsoft does not test for
or support Linux compatability - therefore they do not offer any support
for hosting the Linux OS.

If they won't test it, I certainly won't second guess them on it.
How often DO you call support for your virtual machine software? If it is
more than never, maybe you SHOULD consider the other alternatives. (linux
users care about official support from commercial software vendors?)


Never. Worried about my other posts, are you?
To make sure nobody gets the wrong idea by your remark, here is a list of
operating systems that are known to work in Microsoft's Virtual PC.
http://vpc.visualwin.com/


Please note that this is NOT a Microsoft site, and these operating systems
are NOT supported by Microsoft in Virtual PC 2004. As the website
states..."the unofficial list of which OSes work and which don't in
Microsoft Virtual PC 2004".

How could they "get the wrong idea"? I did state that "Microsoft does not
support Linux" in Virtual PC 2004. It seems that only you could have
misconstrued my statements thusly.

Here is a link to Microsoft's Virtual PC site that lists the supported
(officially - which, of course you understand, means that the vendor -
Microsoft - has tested and approves for use with their product) operating
systems -
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/vir...rview2004.mspx....
just so people don't get the wrong idea.

The officially supported operating systems (according to the Microsoft
Virtual PC page referenced above) are MS-DOS 6.22, Windows 95, Windows 98,
Windows Me, Windows 2000, Windows NT 4.01, Windows XP, OS/2 Warp 4 Fixpack
15, OS/2 Warp Convenience Pack 1, and OS/2 Warp Convenience Pack 2.

When you compare that to the supported operating systems in VMWare's
Workstation 5 (http://www.vmware.com/products/desktop/ws_features.html)
which are Microsoft Server 2003, Windows XP, Windows 2000 Professional and
Server, Windows NT Workstation and Server 4.0, Windows Me, Windows 98,
Windows 95, Windows 3.1, MS-DOS 6, Windows Longhorn (experimental),
Popular Linux distributions from Red Hat, SUSE, Turbolinux, and Mandrake,
FreeBSD, Novell NetWare Server 6.5, 6.0, and 5.1, and Novell Linux Desktop
9, Sun Java Desktop System 2, Sun Solaris 9 and 10 for the x86 platform
(experimental)......you may also come to the conclusion that VMware's
Workstation 5 is more robust and allows more test scenarios than Windows
Virtual PC 2004 and is a better value.

When you are using a virtual machine for testing applications for a user's
environment, using an unsupported OS in a virtual machine to do so is
unprofessional and may produce errors that cannot be reproduced in the
actual operating environment. If you want to appear professional, I
wouldn't recommend it.

Jim Hubbard

Jul 21 '05 #9

P: n/a
I installed the Express Editions and all seems to be fine. Web apps work
just perfectly. MSFT did say that the secario of VS20003 and VS Express
were tested side by side with no issues. VS2002 is a different story.

--
TDAVISJR
aka - Tampa.NET Koder
"clintonG" <cs*********@REMOVETHISTEXTmetromilwaukee.com> wrote in message
news:%2****************@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
I haven't installed VS2005 B2 yet.
My main concern is installing VS2005 B2 on the XP Pro machine where
VSN2003 already exists.
Am I asking for trouble? Your comments...

<%= Clinton Gallagher

Jul 21 '05 #10

P: n/a
Agreed. I never intended it to turn into any kind of argument. Jim
stands by his correct statement that linux is not supported by Microsoft
in Virtual PC. I stand by my correct statement that linux works
perfectly fine in Virtual PC, but you won't get an official statement of
support from Microsoft. If we didn't believe in "community support"
(like the non-Microsoft website I referred to), what are we doing
reading and posting in newsgroups?

clintonG wrote:
BTW I'm already using VPC2004 and I must also say if I had a nickel for
every word that is wasted on nitpicking inane arguements that always seem to
interject themselves into a topic where they are not relevant I would be
stinking filthy rich and would never have to post to a newsgroups again for
the rest of my miserable life.

<%= Clinton Gallagher

Jul 21 '05 #11

P: n/a
I'm at the last step of uninstalling Whidbey I ran in VP2004 and can replace
with a Beta 2 instance of VS2005 Standard in the virtual machine - or - if
we want VS2005 Professional we have to install the Team System. I'd really
like to try it out which now changes the entire scope of my question but it
was helpful to learn and let others know your experience.

Any idea which page MSFT confirmed the side-by-side tests? If a blog there
may be another confirmation of other configurations.

<%= Clinton Gallagher


"TDAVISJR" <an*******@microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:Oj**************@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
I installed the Express Editions and all seems to be fine. Web apps work
just perfectly. MSFT did say that the secario of VS20003 and VS Express
were tested side by side with no issues. VS2002 is a different story.

--
TDAVISJR
aka - Tampa.NET Koder
"clintonG" <cs*********@REMOVETHISTEXTmetromilwaukee.com> wrote in message
news:%2****************@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
I haven't installed VS2005 B2 yet.
My main concern is installing VS2005 B2 on the XP Pro machine where
VSN2003 already exists.
Am I asking for trouble? Your comments...

<%= Clinton Gallagher


Jul 21 '05 #12

P: n/a

"clintonG" <cs*********@REMOVETHISTEXTmetromilwaukee.com> wrote in message
news:O$**************@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
No, the ASP.NET tab is not accessible via VS2005.
We'll only see the ASP.NET tab if some version of the DNF 2.0 has been
installed.

Once VS2005 is installed launch Administrative Tools > Internet
Information Services.
Review the Properties for *each* of your 1.1 applications and you will see
the ASP.NET tab where you can use a ListBox to reset the configuration for
that application back to DNF 1.1.

<%= Clinton Gallagher

Oh, OK. Thanks very much for that. However, my situation since installing
VS2005 is that the IIS instance appears to be inoperative. The server is
listed, but attempting to restart the service from IIS Manager gets an error
message indicating that the service could not be started. VS2005 test web
sites work, but on what, I have no idea.
Jul 21 '05 #13

P: n/a

"Peter van der Goes" <p_**********@toadstool.u> wrote in message
news:Or**************@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...

"clintonG" <cs*********@REMOVETHISTEXTmetromilwaukee.com> wrote in message
news:O$**************@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
No, the ASP.NET tab is not accessible via VS2005.
We'll only see the ASP.NET tab if some version of the DNF 2.0 has been
installed.

Once VS2005 is installed launch Administrative Tools > Internet
Information Services.
Review the Properties for *each* of your 1.1 applications and you will
see the ASP.NET tab where you can use a ListBox to reset the
configuration for that application back to DNF 1.1.

<%= Clinton Gallagher

Oh, OK. Thanks very much for that. However, my situation since installing
VS2005 is that the IIS instance appears to be inoperative. The server is
listed, but attempting to restart the service from IIS Manager gets an
error message indicating that the service could not be started. VS2005
test web sites work, but on what, I have no idea.

Update. I uninstalled IIS, then reinstalled and remapped to VS 2003. Now
both VS 2003 and VS 2005 are able to do web apps, so my situation was unique
to the PC in question.
Looks, now, like VS 2003 and VS 2005 are getting along well, so disregard my
initial warning.

--
Peter [MVP Visual Developer]
Jack of all trades, master of none.
Jul 21 '05 #14

P: n/a
One other point need be made about why you were able to load and run an
application when IIS was apparently inoperative is likely due to the
presence of a web server that Microsoft has included with VS2005 products
itself. I don't know much about this.

Apparently in some circumstances, those using the Express products for
example no longer need IIS on the machine. This makes it possible for XP
Home to be used for what they are calling 'hobby' developers using the
Express products.

<%= Clinton Gallagher

"Peter van der Goes" <p_**********@toadstool.u> wrote in message
news:Or**************@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...

"Peter van der Goes" <p_**********@toadstool.u> wrote in message
news:Or**************@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...

"clintonG" <cs*********@REMOVETHISTEXTmetromilwaukee.com> wrote in
message news:O$**************@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
No, the ASP.NET tab is not accessible via VS2005.
We'll only see the ASP.NET tab if some version of the DNF 2.0 has been
installed.

Once VS2005 is installed launch Administrative Tools > Internet
Information Services.
Review the Properties for *each* of your 1.1 applications and you will
see the ASP.NET tab where you can use a ListBox to reset the
configuration for that application back to DNF 1.1.

<%= Clinton Gallagher

Oh, OK. Thanks very much for that. However, my situation since installing
VS2005 is that the IIS instance appears to be inoperative. The server is
listed, but attempting to restart the service from IIS Manager gets an
error message indicating that the service could not be started. VS2005
test web sites work, but on what, I have no idea.

Update. I uninstalled IIS, then reinstalled and remapped to VS 2003. Now
both VS 2003 and VS 2005 are able to do web apps, so my situation was
unique to the PC in question.
Looks, now, like VS 2003 and VS 2005 are getting along well, so disregard
my initial warning.

--
Peter [MVP Visual Developer]
Jack of all trades, master of none.

Jul 21 '05 #15

P: n/a

"clintonG" <cs*********@REMOVETHISTEXTmetromilwaukee.com> wrote in message
news:um**************@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
One other point need be made about why you were able to load and run an
application when IIS was apparently inoperative is likely due to the
presence of a web server that Microsoft has included with VS2005 products
itself. I don't know much about this.

Apparently in some circumstances, those using the Express products for
example no longer need IIS on the machine. This makes it possible for XP
Home to be used for what they are calling 'hobby' developers using the
Express products.


Excellent idea.

Jim Hubbard
Jul 21 '05 #16

P: n/a
Good news!!

"Ballmer said Wednesday that Microsoft has listened to customers who've
demanded better support for non-Windows machines in Operations Manager
software, Microsoft's key management product. Also, he said, the company
will step up support for running Linux-based virtual machines in a service
pack update to its Virtual Server product later this year." (see the whole
story at
http://news.com.com/Microsofts+Ballm...21.html?tag=nl)

It seems that Mr. Ballmer has realized the value of a product like VMware.
Perhaps it was the overwhelming dominance of the virtual machine software
industry by VMWare (even among Windows devotees) that did it. Whatever did
it, I'm glad to see it on the server product. The workstation product users
are still SOL, but they don't really matter.......do they?

Now.....if we can just get good ol' Steve to help us with the Windows issues
(like VB.Net/Visual Basic upgrades and interoperability) we'll be almost as
happy as if they'd cared all along.

Jim Hubbard
Jul 21 '05 #17

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.