A "Live" Version of Visual Studio?

After seven years in developer division marketing, I'm making a transition into the product team to work as a program manager to help define what a "Live" version of Visual Studio might look like. If you think about Office Live and Windows Live, you can see that "Live" is coming together to mean "software that is smarter when it's online and back-ended by a set of services." I think most developers get this concept intuitively -- that software can (and should) be better when it's online. Already in Visual Studio 2005 there are features where we've begun to look at this kind of linking. Some examples:

  • CodeZone-integrated help. When you search help in VS now, you can search the locally-installed .hxs files, the documentation on MSDN, and a set of sites from our CodeZone community. The search is cleverly dispatched to these sites, and returned and aggregated in the IDE. I've heard several people tell me that this help works exceptionally well -- better in many cases than the Microsoft help.
  • The Community menu. Pull down the community menu to ask a question and it runs a search from within the IDE against the VS and .NET newsgroups.
  • The Start Page. OK, I may be stretching here, but the Start page is dynamically refreshed based on online content.

So I've started imagining what the world could be like, and with very little effort I've come up with some ideas. But before I spill the beans on those I'm interested in what other folks would like to see in a "Live" version of Visual Studio.

Comments (44)
  1. Greg Duncan says:

    To me, "Live" means connected to others…

    I’m thinking "distributed team" Live features. Features in the IDE that help you work with your team, no matter their location.

    1) For example, think an IM presence like feature, where when you have a Solution open in the IDE, you can see everyone else on your team who also have the same project open.

    Kind of like Presence w/ Context. Not just that they are online but online and in the same project. i.e. in your same context…

    2) Or something like a "Sync’d IDE’s"

    I see my teammate/buddy is in the same project I’m on (or I see that he isn’t and I ask him to open a project… maybe including a VSTS Project link?).

    I then click on the "SYNC IDE’s" button (and my buddy agrees), and then open a class…

    Now we are both on the same code, in the same location in the code, etc…

    Heck add shared editing… So either one of us could edit the code.

    A P2P IDE. Now talk about team coding.

    3) A Windows Live Messenger Shared Folders kind of thing where I can click on a Solution and select a "Send Solution to Buddy" option.

    All in all, making it easier for me to work with others on a given project…

  2. tzagotta says:

    I am not really not interested in Internet-based "rich" content being integrated into the IDE. What is the value of that integration, relative to just finding the same content with a web browser? I’ve already turned off those features in VS2005 because they have a poor signal-to-noise ratio, and they slow down searches too much. I use local searches for some topics, and Internet search engines for when I can’t find what I want in my local MSDN content or want to find information about a more broad concept.

    It is really important that Visual Studio stay focused on core functionality and not get all distracted with novel ways to serve content.

    Deeper help content is always a value add, especially more examples and more descriptions. But that can/should be available both online and locally.

    I agree with Greg, the focus of Visual Studio "Live" should be to help me work with my workgroup, whether that is in my building or around the world. Quick and easy sending/sharing source and other relevant files is important. Sending files via IM now is tedious, especially because I can’t just send a folder/directory without having to ZIP it up first.

    It might be nice if the project’s files were available in a central store and/or synchronizable as Greg suggested. In this case, there would have to be support both for local stores (i.e., network share) and Internet stores. Many folks won’t want their source code stored on servers they don’t physically control (us included).

    I would like to see some file locking controls that don’t rely on a VCS. For example, if one other developer and I are working on a new feature together, we want to be able to quickly lock and unlock files (ensure mutual editing exclusivity) without having to commit them into the VCS. We don’t like to use a VCS for this purpose because the files may not be tested yet, and shouldn’t be exposed to the larger community.

    I think a Live version of VS should have some better way to get VS bugfixes/patches faster than waiting months and months for the next SP. But obviously the user still needs to keep control over what version of the tools is in use.

    Finally, I think that a lot of thought needs to be given to the online/offline scenarios discussed with Windows smart clients. Developers may do the majority of work when an Internet connection is available, but it is important that productivity not go to zero when the connection is not available.

    With some more thought and interaction with others, I’m sure I could think of more input, but I need to time-limit my comments right now. Maybe you want to consider setting up a group of folks to provide you input, and/or work somewhat interactively to give you thoughts/ideas, like maybe just a simple mail list.

  3. johnmont says:

    I’ve wondered about some of these ideas — particularly about things like MSN Messenger integration and the "sync IDEs" as you call it — for something akin to pair programming but without the physical presence. I’ve also wondered about student/homework scenarios — I’m sitting at home doing my CS assignments, get stuck, and can call up my classmates in IM who are online for help.

    And I love "send solution to buddy!"

  4. johnmont says:

    Your comment about staying focused on core functionality is definitely heard in our division. Right now, I’m a team of one looking for the key scenario we need to enable — not just looking for a "Live" checkbox, but really something that’s useful. One of those things is soemthing you mention: ship faster. In all my conversations with my management, I’ve emphasized my desire to ship more interesting stuff more quickly and they have wholeheartedly agreed — thinking weeks and months, not months and years.

    One piece of feedback we’ve gotten from a huge number of people is that documentation needs to get "better" — with richer samples, the ability to correct errors more quickly, and so on. I think you’ll be pleasantly surprised in the coming months, but since that’s not my project, I’m not going to say more.

  5. aruiter says:

    Excellent idea to have a live version of VS. Here are some ideas that come to mind…

    (1) Creating an integrated Windows Error Reporting (WER) service.

    (2) Creating online functionality so the software team can host a beta portal thru which beta users can post bug reports, etc. In fact the WER service could be part of that.

    (3) Having a hosted test and debug environment for ASP.NET apps.

    (4) Having the entire foundation server hosted, which would save a lot of work setting it up for the ISV/SI and also enable new scenario’s for licensing. For example, SIs would be interrested in renting a foundation server for the duration of the project and charging the cost to the project, rather than licensing the complete software in the current licensing schema.

    (5) Providing an online globalisation envrionment where Microsoft links the translation software companiesn to translation services, which could be located anywhere in the world. This could create a marketplace for translation services where the ISV would pay per translated word.

    (6) Integating the controls toolbar with an online market place for controls so that developers can more easily find and purchase controls from third parties.

  6. Xepol says:

    to me, live means screwed when the net is down.

    Not interested in depending on features than can disappear as fast as my internet or suddenly transmute in to extra pay services or spyware (could you imagine a webservices based spell checker??? Someone has, be sure!).

    And if I pay for it and depend on it, I better have it 7-24, not just when the net is clear, the lines are up and the server monkey is happy.

    Yes, you can infer that I think web services are intersting "oddities" which should be kept as far away from mission critical code as possible. My compiler is critical to my mission.

  7. johnmont says:

    I love these ideas — I’ve collected a bunch myself, like the idea of the Toolbox that integrates with known 3rd-party VSIP plugins. Same with the translation stuff — Microsoft has some amazing machine translation technology that we use today on our docs and we could look into that. Thanks!

  8. johnmont says:

    I’m hoping it doesn’t mean "screwed when the net is down." I’m hoping that it’s more like Outlook or RSSBandit (my RSS reader) — when the net is there, it’s smarter. But message heard loud and clear that if you’re going to pay for it, it has to be available/reliable.

  9. AndrewSeven says:

    There is a limit to how much you can push into on application window before clean degrades into busy.

    I don’t use any of the built in web browser stuff in VS, I find it disrupts my experience. When I choose view in browser, I want to see it in a browser, not in some window that covers up the thing I’m working on. Being a bit of an extremist, I don’t enable help to launch on F1 either; slow and disruptive. I can find things fast on MSDN using Google

    I know there are usefull Web-enabled things in VS, but they get in the way of the essential things. Paired and related applications might be a thing to consider.

    I really liked having a nUnit as a separate app, I had tried the addin that runs inside VS but went back to the separate window. In trying team system and tests. There are an enormous number of different kinds of child windows; I quickly thought that it would be nice to have a separate test-runner app just to enable using ALT-Tab (test-dev) and CTRL-TAB (Dev code1- dev code2)

    One feature that would be nice:

    When a file is checked out, have a option to IM the person who has it checked out.

    I’ve done this kind by checking who has it checked out then knowing that they are in my contacts. Today someone came to see me because he mis-read "last checkin" and thought I had the file checked out.

  10. Brandon Cirella says:

    I definitely think the intergretion of some kind of IM system would be useful, being a CS student myself.

  11. C_J says:

    I agree totally with tzagotta and xepol – VS has to keep working if the

    net is down or even if you don’t have a connection to the net ever. Not

    everyone lives in the US where bandwidth is cheap and ubiquitous, and

    that’s apart from the speed and security issues.

    I like to have my IDE stable – no features that are suddenly going to

    appear and disappear, or change in functionality unless I evaluate them

    first and am happy with them.

    So if you stick to non-core functionality (like linking to 3rd party

    components), or functionality that is intrinsically internet-related

    like team support, then it just *might* be okay. But it would have to

    be fully configurable so that if you can’t use those features, or choose

    not to, they don’t get in the way of what you’re actually using VS for –


  12. tzagotta says:

    John, you’re comment "if you’re going to pay for it…" is interesting.

    What exactly are we talking about here – how much of a departure from current licensing models? Now, I purchase a perpetual license for VS for a fixed amount, or I subscribe to MSDN. What price model is being thought about for "Live"?

    I think this is important to discuss up-front, first to set expectations, and secondly, to determine if the cost model is so far off as to not be palpable by customers.

  13. absolutely a hosted team foundation server workspace/Groove/Office Live Meeting

    probably a huge code snippets database …

    perhaps additional code analysis tools

    perhaps paid code reviews/test from trusted partners

  14. Xepol says:

    well, actually I find any RSS reader (be it bandit or otherwise) useless with the net is down. Its sole purpose is to find sites to surf too. If I can’t get new feeds, there is no point to firing it up, and if I can’t get to where the feeds point to, again no point in firing it up. Basically, if my net is down, rss bandit is less useful than briefcase in win95.

    Any email app runs a close second there. If I can’t get new email, chances are it has not served me well. If I can’t send my replies, again, I have not been well served. Without a live connection, outlook becomes an archive of old attachments I probably don’t need. In the case of a "live" email app like hotmail, without internet, well, I don’t even have it do it?

    So I guess that sums up my feeling about "live" style applications. If I have to go outside my machine to get basic work done, and my net is down, I’m dead in the water.

    People talked about how it would be wonderful to go to websites to use applications hosted on servers instead of having to install them locally. They talked about how you could always have the latest version without having to deal with network wide upgrade issues. I simply laughed, realizing that when the net was down, so was business. When a new version fired up, chances were, as new activeX pieces or java pieces trickled into your business’s machines, the bigger your company was, the more likely you were to be nuked by the "upgrade" traffic alone.

    Nope, give me a local app that I can deterministically deploy and control every time.

    That said, yes, it is nice to have something like the start page track new articles like an RSS viewer. I don’t need it to get my work done, it’ll update when I am up and it can concentrate my work and browsing into a single app. People who like firefox will obviously feel differently there (so no one is really happy!). Chances are, however, that I’ll ignore it all and just go straight to my project every time.

    I have, in past, envisioned an integrated browser for my delphi IDE to search the freeware/shareware component sites, but I doubted that I would use it more than twice a year. As such, I found that even I could not justify investing my free time on a project like that. I’ve had similar urges for gotdotnet and VS, but again, I just don’t do both at the same time enough to justify investing free time in the project.

    The idea that MS will pay to invest time in such a project makes me wonder if they’ve done a cost/return analysis on it themselves (even intagible returns values seem to pale)

    ah well. Ought to be interesting to see what evolves.

  15. johnmont says:

    "What exactly are we talking about here – how much of a departure from current licensing models?" I don’t actually know yet — we haven’t even figured out *what* we’re going to build, so I’m a little premature saying what it might cost. I was mostly asserting that, if you’re going to pay, you deserve some kind of clear SLA (service level agreement). But until I know more about what we’re going to build, I’m going to have to table the question of how much we might (or might not) charge.

  16. johnmont says:

    "I have to go outside my machine to get basic work done, and my net is down, I’m dead in the water." I’m pretty sure that none of the scenarios I’m contemplating would 100% require the network up. Or you could just turn off pretty much all the features we’ve talked about. But the unnetworked application these days is a very lonely application. 😉

    As for doing the ROI analysis, I’m doing it now and it actually looks pretty good. I’m thinking less about revenue and more about customer satisfaction. Let’s take one example: wouldn’t it be nice if we could update the documentation to remove errata seamlessly? A documentation service could be very useful to a lot of people and would help raise customer satisfaction.

  17. tzagotta says:

    I’m personally against having critical content, like my OS, Office Apps, and VS2005, running on a remote server. As a business owner, I would prefer to continue to incur the costs to have those installed and managed locally. I think that google and others are stirring up the water a bit, with the notion of hosted apps. It may be good for some things, but it is not good for everything. I really hope that VS doesn’t morph into this sort of thing. It doesn’t seem reasonable to me at all.

  18. johnmont says:

    I don’t think I’ve said that VS is going to "morph" into anything. I’m talking about adding features, not taking features away.

  19. lynn says:


  20. Xepol says:

    "unnetworked application these days is a very lonely application" -> One day, I may have to describe the fun of running a data center and a production center in 2 different countries, one of which is a poor island nation where everyone shares a single T1 for access (when up at all) and the joys of keeping databases consistant between centers… I’ve seen what happens when you try to use the internet for vital application infrastructure <shudder>. If it can be turned off, it isn’t vital. In fact, I gotta wonder if I’ll ever use it (the "today’s news" in the borland IDE was one of the first things I turned off whenever I would reinstall my system on my bimonthly routine)…

    "wouldn’t it be nice if we could update the documentation to remove errata seamlessly?" Let me download small delta files, at my discression. The thought that you are changing documents on my machine at will is more than marginally disconcerting. I hate unmarked revisions.

    "A documentation service could be very useful to a lot of people and would help raise customer satisfaction." You mean like if I already have an MSDN subscription, or just visit the MSDN website??

    The MSDN site is already pretty central for me. Good help references, lotsa videos, tutorials, examples. Why would you clutter and over complicate my IDE just to give me something I already have in a much simpler format? Heck, I can even attend online seminars (which is nice, but you don’t get all the cool MSDN-bling like at the live events, still hoping for MSDN coffee cups one tour btw, pass it along!)

    Based on how this thread has flowed, I wonder if you are just talking about a different delivery mechanism for the MSDN site – which already works just fine. Is there going to be something really revolutionary that would make it worth it?

    Or devolutionary, like gutting the msdn site to drive pay services? I doubt that this would even be seriously discussed. If it was, it would kill sooo much developer good will that any such idea should be killed before ever being conceived!

    So, are we talking an square wheel or fire here do you think?

  21. I liked "aruiter"’s ideas.

    We obviously use VS.NET, but are also VSIP partners, so I have two angles.

    When an exception occurs in our product DLL/EXE on a customer PC – Windows already intercepts it and asks if they’d like to send the info to MS (if we don’t otherwise intercept it). As developers we’d love a way to automatically capture and have the appropriate information available from VS.NET LIVE.

    Note: this would require some correlation between the version of the code the client is running and the version of the code in VS.NET LIVE.

    As VSIP we provide an alternative team system – CVSNT / CVS Suite. If VS.NET LIVE could connect to a version repository on cvsnt.org, SourceForge, or even the developers own PC then that would be a great team feature.

    If the developer wanted to ensure offline access to the code then they could sync the VS.NET LIVE version of their code to their own PC using the GPL/Free CVSNT client or the commercial one…

    Finally as a vendor the ability to offer services for sale to developers via VS.NET could be good, however if it’s so OTT or irrelevant that the users "tune out" then it’d be self defeating.

  22. Steve says:

    Please, no more *live* content in the IDE itself. What’s really needed in VS are the basic stuff – e.g. refactoring & customizable syntax coloring. Compared to other IDEs my colleges are using (e.g. IntelliJ for another part of the project), VS2005 feels so 90’s. Sigh.

    Whatever new features is planned for VS, please keep in mind that most of its users are professional developers working on real production code. They want features that can get their job done (test coverage), not widgets to IM their fellow students on a course project. To them, live mean lively performance, lively productivity, and lively expectation when they click that icon to launch the IDE.

    We understand that your job is to get your division on board with the *live* bandwagon. We don’t envy you. It’s a TOUGH job. Not every software product can be turned into a service revenue model. If it’s ok, we, your loyal customers, will gladly pay the annual MSDN Service fee instead of the Subscription fee. But please leave our most basic tool out of the *live* initiative. Thank you.

  23. kevin d says:

    i wouldn’t mind seeing something that facilitates some common processes.

    for example

    – hosting an integrated source control system over the internet. (preferrably one with really well done change sets 🙂

    – allowing a reviewer to mark up/comment on another’s code without modifying the underling code – similar to MS Word’s comments

    – very basic whiteboarding, where i can share a file or group of files with someone else, and even control the arrow on their installation

  24. TDD c0d3-m0nk3y says:

    I like the idea of distributed pair programming in a shared IDE – live messenger is a sound idea to support this but I have used VoIP products such as Teamspeak very successfully in the past to allow multi-channel voice comms between distributed team members. Perhaps a voice comm option would leave fingers free for typing?

  25. David van Leerdam says:

    If ‘Live’ is al about replacing the various additional services for different Microsoft customers, I think Visual Studio Live should be the replacement of the current MSDN subscriptions.

  26. Massif says:

    What about the ability to host the "Live" Visual studio yourself? I know many companies would probably want to be able to adopt this kind of solution running from their Intranet.

    Aside from that, little things like optional "Live" code, which contains the latest edits, or the ability to revert to the last checked in code. That way you can very quickly check to see if someone’s edits are going to cause you problems.

    For me, "Live" has to mean collaboration, not necessarily communication – there are already quite good tools for that, and many teams are physically close enough to shout anyway. Stuff like Snippets shared automatically with your team / company. Plus we’d be talking about Team System, rather than the plain old IDE – who would need live feedback from the team more than the project managers – and getting testing results back to the entire team instantly would be awesome. I could probably go on for longer…

  27. tzagoota: "I’m personally against having critical content, like my OS, Office Apps, and VS2005, running on a remote server"

    If only everybody did backups….

    For me the big attractions of hosted applications are that you don’t have to be sitting in front of the same PC to do the job – and you (hopefully) get a well managed (and therefore highly available) service benefiting from economies of scale.

    Shared editing/review across the internet coupled with conferencing would be top of my list.

    I’d also like to see a protocol & implementations for sharing trouble ticket data between organisations. Although somewhat satellite to VS’s main functionality, wouldn’t an implementation in VS be synergistic?


    (who already uses sourceforge.net extensively)

  28. Matt Phillips says:

    If ‘live’ means making the IDE work fast in normal use I’m all for it.

    The VS.Net 2005 IDE is just way too slow. And I mean in normal development.

    And why would you want to search online help and get a load of badly written and erroneous articles by inexperienced or niaive developers. Much better to spend the effort on making the built-in help correct.

    Microsoft seem to be looking to abdicate their responsibility for writing comprehensive and in-depth help that’s frequently updated, and relying on the community instead. For example, I challenge you to to find anything in the MSDN for VS2005 that explains assembly version numbering for Asp.Net projects.


  29. Keith Kenny says:

    Does this mean subscription software?

    Does this mean someone else can change the software I am using? What happens if I don’t want the changes?

    The start page in VS2005 slows thigns down and the last thing I want in VS2005 for it to get EVEN SLOWER.

    I use VC6 for small jobs because it loads and runs so fast.

  30. Brian O'Byrne says:

    There are two ways I might think of a ‘Live’ version of an IDE:

    1: Echoing some of the comments above: an IDE with more tools for collaboration. More / better version control options, shared design workspaces in a netmeeting-like format etc. Lots of ways to make it easier for two or more people on two or more different continents to work on the same code with a minimum of fuss. This would also support teleworking (developers working from home) and communication between the office and people on-site.

    2: Modular deployment and installation: Allow me to decide how much of the IDE I want to install from the office server. If I am a designer I don’t need the compiler and debugger on my workstation. As a tester I might want the version control system and design docs, but not the editors, compilers & debugger. As a developer I might want the C# & WinForms stuff, but not ASP.Net.

    Have a central server for the office (not dependent on the Internet, just the LAN) that dispenses bits of the IDE to different users as they need it. Support hot-desking.

    If you got the first suggestion right I’d buy it tomorrow. The second option is for a larger shop than I have at the moment.


  31. Xepol says:

    Hey, using third party servers is fine, if you don’t mind third parties having access to your code.

    I, however, mind. AND I get around the problem with Virtual PC and a portable hard drive. My dev environment can follow me EVERYWHERE I go, and I compromise a LOT less than you do, because every single bit of my environment follows me. My test data, it comes. My support apps? They’re right here too. My bookmarks? Right here.

    Is the IDE configured right? Yup, because it is always MY IDE, not someone elses.

    I don’t need a network connection, just a USB port.

    Trust me, if you have to work with the same project in multiple locations, it is the ONLY way to fly.

    And I get the added bonus that my dev environment is totally isolated from the live environment at all times. I don’t go live until I specifically take code outside my VPC.

    Sort of the complete opposite of Live, huh? And yes, as long as I do backups, I never ever have to worry about being seperated from my data, because hardware failure is the only serious barrier I would have (except for being stupid enough to leave it in a backpack in the back of a cab, but I’m not a DOD employee with topsecret documents or nuclear launch codes, so I tend to pay attention to where my stuff is!)

  32. Matt Phillips says:

    How do you stop the start page dynamically refreshing? It’s most annoying.

    I’ve taken to starting VS.Net by clicking on (a short cut to) the solution file just so as I can bypass it.


  33. John says:

    We don’t need or want any more dilution of MSDN. I don’t want to search online to find answers – I only do it when MSDN craps out (and that’s happening more and more every day). Further, this smacks of MS moving to a subscription model just to use the latest dev tools. I say to hell with that. I’ll change professions before I pay a yearly fee just to compile a C++ application.

    BTW, this blog doesn’t reach squat in terms of developers that would provide usable feedback. Why don’t you post the same question on sites like CodeProject? Over 2.5 million users is what I would call a decent cross-section of the developer community.

    And yeah, I know this sounds like I’m getting all pissed off before anything happens, but I’ve been doing C++ with MSVC since abandoning Borland C++ 1.5), and I think MS has been screwing developers since MSDN started requiring MSIE to view help. This just looks like it’s just another mile down that same stretch of road.

    Thanks, but no thanks.

  34. PAC says:

    The whole idea scares me a lot more than it excites me. Given the plethora of viruses, "spyware" and trojans the idea of my mission critical files having any contact whatsoever with the internet leaves me quivering.

    Perhaps if I had a decent level of assurance that there would be no back doors left open I’d feel different, but as someone who recently got hit with the WMF virus the idea of adding a few obscure, interesting abilities to my development environment at the possible cost of security does not sound very attractive…at all.

    Thinking in those terms, I’d be curious to know how many people over the years really got any value out of having the abiltiy to insert an SETABORTPROC function inside a graphics file balanced with the number of people who spent countless hours trying to recover from malicious exploiters.

    VS Live may at one level sound like a cool idea…but at what cost?

    I’m a lot more interested in solid, reliable, simplified tools and help than grandiose all encompassing solutions. In fact, I’m desperate these days.

  35. Mark says:

    I completely agree with Steve’s assessment, and personally believe that "live" concepts tend to slow down the overall development experience considerably.

    I’m a big fan of Visual Studio, and while it continues to get more powerful with time, I also feel that VS2005 is a major step backward in overall responsiveness (and yes, I use cutting edge hardware). You can configure *some *of the pain away, but the out-of-box experience is painfully sluggish.

    I, too, would pay more for the VS product itself to avoid having it become sluggish and bloated with "live" concepts.

    Please, MS – stay focused on helping developers accomplish the day-to-day tasks of developing good software.

    Man, remember when you hit F1 back in the old versions of Visual Studio? Those help files popped up in half a second. Now, it takes forever, especially if VS2005 decides that the content you need is better fetched from the web. Ugh.

  36. Hans D. says:

    I have seen third-party services that offer online repositories of code snippets, and I think that would be interesting. And I think a scaled-down version of the Team development stuff – sort of like sending a postit note to a coworker, that pops up when she opens the project – would be a nice feature for the Pro version. As far as the requiremnt to be online goes, I think others have stated the problems well – there must be a graceful fallback if the internet is not available.

    My #1 wish? Improve MSDN search, so it’s at least as effective as doing a google search for an API.

  37. superloc says:

    I haven’t read the whole discussion, so I don’t know if there’s anything already mentioned. Here are some current ideas:

    1. A blogging feature integrated within VS: This goes beyond comments in code and other documentations, since the dev’er can talk freely about what’s going on with his work at a high level. That way the whole team can keep track of progress and pretty much everything. It’s different than his/her other blogs, say blogs.msdn.com, because it’s attached/related to a specific on-going project. Why does it have to be integrated into VS? Hmm, for now I think the reason is that it can be archived and saved in VS Team Foundation server or VSS.

    Also, we can go further by adding audio/video blog features to text blog.

    2. A Live Meeting feature: Obviously because there’s a need to communicate with your teammates from other remote locations (Global Distributed Development.) Why does it have to be integrated into VS instead of using stand-alone/existing Live Meeting? I can’t answer this right now.

    3. Make VS Live accessible from Mobile device: We all want to write some line of codes while being stuck in traffic, or waiting at the airport, or even in the restroom. =)

    I thought there’s more, but that’s all I could think of right now.

  38. Murph says:

    Can I just point out that I hate the way the help works in Office 2003? It goes crawling off to the web and utterly fails to return the information I want (office help has been getting steadily less useful to people who already have a clue for years…)

    I haven’t got to VS2k5 yet but the same problem exists when searching the web (generically or MSDN) when I have problems – lots of results but very few answers…

  39. I am becoming increasingly frustrated with the assumptions of working live, which have now gone to the extent of having to wait a minute or so for Windows Explorer to display local folder content when the Internet is not connected (because it tries to ping all .URL files in the folder – even though I am not using thumbnail view) and having applications for which there is no documentation whatsoever when the Internet is down.

    My concerns:

    1. I want my data to be safe on my local machine and not accessable to anyone else (unless I permit it), and I do not want it to be lost when I can’t keep up a subscription fee between jobs or a remote service provider goes belly up.

    2. I want the software I use to create my data to accessible indefinately in case I need to go back to past projects.

    3. I want my IDE to be fast and responsive and uncluttered and only go out to the Internet when I want it to. Particularly when working on confidential projects where monitoring incidental Internet activity could give information away.

    4. I want my work environment to be fully customisable and not be restricted to some other developers idea of fixed working folders and preferences (anyone else fed up with how everyone is abusing the ‘My Documents’ folder with their own manadatory ugly default working folders lately? I organise my work by *project*, not by *application*, thank you).

  40. Micah says:

    I have to second Mark’s comments. Integrating online functionality, even if it’s automatically disabled when no connection is available, just slows down the workflow. Ever tried using help in the new versions of Office while connected to the internet with a modem? Don’t even bother! The mantra for VS Live should be "First, do no harm."

  41. Kevin Tunis says:

    I just noticed Scoble’s post mentioning John Montgomery’s post about &quot;Live Visual Studio&quot;; John is interested…

  42. Kevin Tunis says:

    I just noticed Scoble’s post mentioning John Montgomery’s post about &quot;Live Visual Studio&quot;; John is interested

Comments are closed.

Skip to main content