Microsoft Visual Studio 2012 Reviewed
drdobbs.com
drdobbs.com
http://www.hanselman.com/blog/YourColorfulVisualStudio2012Wi...
That said, since they are diverging from any kind of standard look, making the colors customizable is certainly a good thing.
Visual Studio stands out even from other Windows 8 system applications in its usage of the "Metro" style.
VS is still ugly, of course, but it's because the designers copied the ugly Office design -- not because they didn't understand Metro.
Disclaimer: I work at Microsoft, but no longer on the VS team. Also, I have a cold and am in a bad mood.
Edit: I guess I'm just confused about who "Idiots" refers to. The quoted MS employee? The people agreeing with the quote? Everyone in the comment thread?
Also, to be clear: I work at MS and on a couple small parts of VS. I wasn't really part of any of the UI decisions.
Office and Visual Studio are of the new "metro-inspired" UIs that, for very good reasons, cannot migrate away from desktop right now. I'm sure we'll eventually see some of these apps move to more Metro UIs (Office?), but for some they will always be desktop (Visual Studio).
Disclaimer: work for Microsoft, but nowhere near these teams.
Edit: CurtHagenlocher's comment cleared some of the confusion up for me. It's not Metro, it's ... "Windows 8 style". Wait no, that term means Metro too. It's "Office 2013" style.
Is it too hard to make an IDE only with the UI elements Windows offers? How much extra effort does it represent to make an application that's different from the vanilla look and feel of the environment?
"Damn! WTF are they smoking in Redmond!?"
Thankfully I can run all the above in virtual machines. :)
I'll be waiting until the patch this fall[1] before even considering upgrading.
[1]http://blogs.msdn.com/b/vcblog/archive/2012/06/15/10320645.a...
Windows XP 32-bit still has over 13% of market share in a relatively 'advanced' segment of the market. Hardly deserving the sarcasm.
Also, I agree, the reviews aren't hitting the most important points about the new VS. Does it fix all those annoying bugs we've all been struggling with for 10 years? My guess is no (since as I said, most of them have been there for over a decade). Instead of putting time mucking with the look and feel on a tool that is SOLELY used by developers... how about fixing the bugs that cause us to lose hours of time every week? You know, like where VS crashes, or decides it can't load dependencies in installer files, or the horribly slow search, or the occasional complete hang of the UI for 20 seconds, or the fact that a minor change to an installer project completely changes the whole incomprehensible project file? How about those bugs?
But I guess most of this product was just supporting the new metro crap. Shouldn't OS compatibility be the Windows SDK team's problem, and let the Visual Studio guys... like, you know, work on Visual Studio?
And then, those new glyphs in the Solution Explorer, that are making my work a little bit slower. Maybe, that only means that I still need to get used to the new UI. =(
As a developer, the UI only matters to me for first few days or so and then it all just fades away in the background as the focus shifts to the code and the integrated tools. Sad that most of the reviews of VS 2012 that I have seen focus on its UI and color scheme rather than functionality. I doubt the color scheme matters to developers as much. May be to a fashion designer but not developers ...
It's the kind of thing that, after a week or two, our brains will incorporate and ignore, even if we consciously hate it at first.
In general, we don't need icons or buttons or menus to write code, so props to MS for sticking to their guns on this. Sometimes it's better to have a benevolent dictator than a democracy.
I'm very excited to see new kinds of IDEs coming to market, Cloud9...and even LightTable. I think we are almost at the end of the line for SmallTalk-ish IDEs like Visual Studio or Eclipse.