VS2005 NOT Compatiblke with Vista? Are you serious?!

  • Thread starter Thread starter Squishy
  • Start date Start date
S

Squishy

I tried installing my VS2005 Pro on Vista Ultimate 32 bit RTM today and got
errors stating that VS2005 was not compatible with Vista.

Microsoft......please pull your finger out of my ass and tell me this is a
joke.

It must be a joke....because I also have read that VS2002 and VS2003 will
not be supported on Vista. This clearly violates Microsoft's own terms of
support for these products.

Is this even legal?
 
Should we apply the patch before installing or just ignore installation
errors and apply the patch after?
 
It runs fine if you dont use UAC, if you are a full permission admin it
works perfectly.. the Vista patch fixes some of the UAC issues
 
Spam Catcher said:
The list of unresolved issues is still huge!
Click to expand...

Is there a list of VS2005/Vista issues somewhere?

I assume it is best to avoid using VS2005 on Vista for any production stuff
at this time - correct?
 
According to the information at
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/vstudio/aa948853.aspx, things do not look
as good for Visual Studio 2003 users.

Although I have used VS 2005 since it was available, I still have a number
of web sites where pages were created using VS 2003. I have only changed
two of the sites over to VS 2005, but it now looks like I am going to be
forced to port all of them to VS 2005 if I ever want to change my main
development computer to VISTA. This is not a trivial amount of work.
 
You can always run a VPC with Windows XP and VS2003. Though I'm fairly
sure you'd need two separate licenses for that (or an MSDN subscription
of course).

Jesse

* William LaMartin wrote, On 1/29/2007 5:34 PM:
 
Why do we need to keep going around in circles on this for the last 2 days?
We already established that 2005 installs on Vista and a patch is available,
and that 2003 "can be" installed but may have issues.
Peter
 
And it probably will be rehashed again and again for VB.Net 2003 as well as
future crap when Microsoft disregards developers by making prior versions
incompatible...let me see, VB.Net 2003 has been out 3 years and now it's
incompatible with their new operating system. I think I'll skip Vista and
wait for further Linux development!
 
Well you just do that!


Dennis said:
And it probably will be rehashed again and again for VB.Net 2003 as well
as
future crap when Microsoft disregards developers by making prior versions
incompatible...let me see, VB.Net 2003 has been out 3 years and now it's
incompatible with their new operating system. I think I'll skip Vista and
wait for further Linux development!
Click to expand...
 
I think it's funny how some critics slammed Microsoft for holding up
certain things with crutches such as Windows 9x, Visual Basic 6, etc.
backwards compatibility. But then when Microsoft finally takes a stand
and tries to clean up its act by not letting backwards compatibility
drag itself down they are slammed too. Having a product out for 3
years and then introducing new technology that (perhaps even by
design) might not be 100% backwards compatible isn't necessarily A Bad
Thing. After all we are talking about innovation, security, etc.
 
If you do choose that path, I strongly suggest looking into REALbasic.

REALbasic will allow you (in the $600 professional version) to compile apps
that run on Linux, Mac and Windows from the same source code.

The Linux version (compiles apps for Linux only) is free.

www.realbasic.com
 
Back
Top