, __FILE__ and a few other things). I recommend a phase in approach when migrating to this new environment. Don't jump into this environment.If you want to do real C/C++ programming, you need at least the professional edition. The Visual C++ .NET 2003 Standard edition doesn't do optimization, but the professional environment does do optimization. Sadly, you can't get just the C/C++ compiler. Fortunately, there are more optimization options in this compiler, and it has buffer security checks, which I have found useful a couple of times.
The HTML editor doesn't create 100% valid strict HTML 4.01, but it's a better HTML editor than MSVC 6. It also makes it easier to edit basic CSS.
I haven't used all of the nifty features of this environment, but it's a decent improvement over MSVC 6. It's way better than MetroWerks CodeWarrior 5, at least with regards to price (current CodeWarrior version is 8.0, but 5.0 had some stability issues when I used it). I can't compare it very well to Eclipse, since I haven't used it that often (I like Eclipse, which is freely available at http://www.eclipse.org/). CygWin is a little difficult to use at times, but the price is right (free).
Overall I recommend Microsoft Visual Studio .NET 2003 Professional. If you're a casual C/C++ programmer, look elsewhere. This will probably be too pricey for you. If you're a professional programmer, you should consider getting this software. If you're a professional Windows programmer, you need this software because this is the future of Windows programming.
.NET - .GET 
2002-09-26
This studio is leagues beyond the last. Microsoft is easing the burden of developers by simplifying distributed application development using .NET. Sure, for instance, you can go in and manually write the low level COM interface connectors if you prefer to have the "stick shift" control and specific performance attributes etc., or you can rely on the built in functionality of .NET and speed the development process.
It seems that with this platform there is a bit of a learning curve even for the most experienced developers because of the great differences. But the online help is dynamic and useful when you get stuck on something.
Visual Basic is not Visual Basic now. They seemed to have completely renovated the way VB works.
The Common language Runtime (CLR) makes it possible to create solutions by interweaving any of the languages included with the studio. I believe there is a way to import 3rd party or future MS designed languages as well. So if one language is better at a specific task, then you can switch to it.
The integrated development environment (IDE) is meant to maximize developer productivity. In using it, I haven't experienced the contrary. I must mention that I do like the flexibility of working on web applications in .NET. You can use a grid layout like a form builder, or the flow layout like a web page editor.
I noticed a couple of funny things so far, but not worth mentioning. It takes some getting used to, but this is certainly worth it.
Best Yet 
2002-09-11
I have been using Visual Studio for a long time (VB for 10 years, VC++ for 5 years). This is the best yet. Sure, the .NET platform is slow in taking off, but it is a MAJOR improvement and will take a while. The new IDE is used by ALL the languages and is fantastic. The debugging tools are an order of magnitude better. The online documentation is essential (make sure you load the whole thing, you will usually need it). Even the IntelliSense is improved. For VB long-timers, this version is probably a bigger improvement than any others, including the transitions of 16-to-32-bit and from interpreted to compiled. Software productivity is almost certain to explored -- once it catches on. The hype is real, but it will take time. This is what it was like before the Web took off -- the people in the know just "knew" it would happen, it is just a matter of time. Be on the front of the wave.
Great start for this new "version"!! 2002-09-10
Visual Studio .NET is a superb, next-generation development tool. At its heart is the .NET Framework, a runtime engine and class library that enables rapid application building for both Windows and Web applications. The runtime engine handles housekeeping tasks, like memory management, while also providing fine-grained security and version awareness. The class library reduces the code needed to build rich applications. Visual Studio .NET also provides a slick visual environment, with features like tabbed and docking windows, dynamic online help, and automatic code completion and hints.
The common runtime is language-neutral so, for example, Visual Basic programmers can use components written in C# and vice versa. Other languages, such as COBOL and FORTRAN, can plug into Visual Studio, and Microsoft provides a version of the Java language called J#.
Overall, Visual Studio .NET is a radical break from the past for Microsoft. C# is an entirely new language, aimed at C and C++ programmers looking for something safer and more productive. Visual Basic .NET is a new twist on the old Microsoft favorite, losing compatibility with earlier versions, but gaining full object orientation as well as access to all the .NET libraries. These two languages, along with J#, have full support for the visual design tools in Visual Studio .NET. Also included is JScript .NET, Microsoft's version of JavaScript, although this comes without a form designer. Visual C++ is similar to earlier versions and is the only compiler included that can build old-style Windows executables. With a compiler switch, it can also target .NET, making it particularly flexible.
Visual Studio .NET has two distinct form designers. Windows Forms are for traditional Windows applications, but managed by the common runtime. Web Forms are ASP.NET pages, which means they run on Web servers and work over the Internet. Microsoft has made designing and coding Windows Forms and Web Forms as similar as possible so that both types of applications can share components and much of the complexity of coding Web applications is kept hidden. Another key feature is Web services, which lets developers create an XML interface for an application so that it can be called across the Web or from any platform or language. XML support generally is strong, with a range of classes for parsing and transforming XML data. There is also a visual designer for XML Schema.
There are a few points against Visual Studio .NET. One is that, like earlier versions, it only creates applications that run on Windows. Web applications are a partial exception, in that they support cross-platform clients, but deployment requires a Windows Web server. Another factor is that, with its multiple compilers and mountains of documentation, Visual Studio .NET eats up gigabytes of disk space, and the IDE tends to be slow with less than around 384 MB RAM. Serious developers will take this in stride, but casual users could have difficulty. Fortunately, the applications created have more modest system requirements, although Windows 95 is not supported. Finally, developers coming from earlier editions face a lot of learning due to radical changes in both Visual Basic and ASP.
Despite these minor issues and a steep learning curve, Visual Studio .NET is an extremely versatile, sophisticated, and capable development tool. --Tim Anderson, Amazon.co.uk
True Object Oriented IDE from Microsoft 2002-05-08
As a java developer, who got a little curious, I wanted to see what Visual Studio.net (professional edition) offers to a developer. During installation, the first thing that I noticed is the 2 gig disk space that the professional edition requires. After the installation, I test drove the IDE and I have to admit that I was not disappointed with Visual Studio .NET. Here is why.
Well-Integrated IDE: -
This is by far the best suite of Microsoft languages and tools. It contains the new Visual Basic .NET, which is totally object oriented and also Visual C# .NET that I found easy to use. The ASP .NET really captured my vote at how easy it was to create asps. The Visual Studio .NET provides thousands of .NET framework classes making a developers life easy and simple.
The similarity to the J2EE framework indicates that that the .NET framework has the capabilities of delivering object oriented enterprise applications. A downside is that, Windows .Net servers and windows operating systems are automatically included into the application environment. This environment may not be desired in all circumstances.
Web services: -
XML Web services are built on XML, SOAP, WSDL, and UDDI specifications and can be built or consumed by your application without having to write the plumbing code yourself. The tools does it for you. All I had to do was to define my function that I want exposed as a web service and it was automatically deployed for me. I like that in an IDE.
Great Documentation and User interfaces: -
Trust Microsoft to woo you with good looks. The user interface is very intuitive and limiting my reference manual lookups. Even when I needed help, all I had to do was open up my help window and I had access to context sensitive help all the time. Microsoft has done a very nice job there.
Unfulfilled wishes :-
Built-in UML modeling. No architecture is complete without models. MS Visio 2002 integration is made available but I don't have a copy of that installed to see whether there is code synchronization with the models. I think that not providing this feature severely limits the use of vs.net as an IDE of choice for enterprise apps.
Another feature conspicuous by its absence is a built-in automated unit-testing framework, something similar to JUnit testing framework.
Finally, I think that this is a very powerful IDE and it is very developer friendly. For those that are open to any technology, Windows .NET servers and Microsoft Visual Studio .NET is definitely a viable option.
True Object Oriented IDE from Microsoft 2002-05-08
As a java developer, who got a little curious, I wanted to see what Visual Studio.net (professional edition) offers to a developer. During installation, the first thing that I noticed is the 2 gig disk space that the professional edition requires. After the installation, I test drove the IDE and I have to admit that I was not disappointed with Visual Studio .NET. Here is why.
Well-Integrated IDE: -
This is by far the best suite of Microsoft languages and tools. It contains the new Visual Basic .NET, which is totally object oriented and also Visual C# .NET that I found easy to use. The ASP .NET really captured my vote at how easy it was to create asps. The Visual Studio .NET provides thousands of .NET framework classes making a developers life easy and simple.
The similarity to the J2EE framework indicates that that the .NET framework has the capabilities of delivering object oriented enterprise applications. A downside is that, Windows .Net servers and windows operating systems are automatically included into the application environment. This environment may not be desired in all circumstances.
Web services: -
XML Web services are built on XML, SOAP, WSDL, and UDDI specifications and can be built or consumed by your application without having to write the plumbing code yourself. The tools does it for you. All I had to do was to define my function that I want exposed as a web service and it was automatically deployed for me. I like that in an IDE.
Great Documentation and User interfaces: -
Trust Microsoft to woo you with good looks. The user interface is very intuitive and limiting my reference manual lookups. Even when I needed help, all I had to do was open up my help window and I had access to context sensitive help all the time. Microsoft has done a very nice job there.
Unfulfilled wishes :-
Built-in UML modeling. No architecture is complete without models. MS Visio 2002 integration is made available but I don't have a copy of that installed to see whether there is code synchronization with the models. I think that not providing this feature severely limits the use of vs.net as an IDE of choice for enterprise apps.
Another feature conspicuous by its absence is a built-in automated unit-testing framework, something similar to JUnit testing framework.
Finally, I think that this is a very powerful IDE and it is very developer friendly. For those that are open to any technology, Windows .NET servers and Microsoft Visual Studio .NET is definitely a viable option.
Very nice features, but value is ratio of quality and price 
2002-05-03
If you want a features list, go to the site - everything it says it can do it does, but the cost is an odd complement for the features. Is it worth the ease and intigration for the extra 900 dollars over Visual C++ 6.0? I'm not that sure, but I think you might rather take the extra hour or so to create a window with API or MFC than earn the extra money - then again, it might be because I haven't graduated highschool yet. Hopefully that will not bring up any prejudices, as I did make sure I attempted at all the options, and I must say I am happy with the product, but would I recommend paying the toll? No - although the server tools and language integration (I can now work with a friend who uses Java), the cost is very steep.
Excellent design work 2002-04-03
The concept of the virtual machine is nothing new. The design of .NET would solve many problems associated with DLL and COM. Programs compiled with .NET is slower because Just-In-Time compiler must compile the code before the execution. Loading time for new application appears to be around 2 - 4 seconds in my system(K7 700MHZ). The initial execution memory requirement for a very small program appears to be around 6 - 12 MB. The memory requirement drops down to 1MB soon as you minimize the app (some type of memory clean up kicks in) The class library is object oriented, and all examples are in either C# or VB. If you are a C++ user, it will require some additional learning time.
The developing and debugging environment is easy to use. The debugger even let you trace the compiled x86 assembler code. Learning the system takes few days (very easy, but there are many objects) and experienced programmer can be productive in a week.
