[RESOLVED] Why 2005 and not 2003

[Bongo]

Greetings,

I need to give my client reasons why we should use 2005 and not 2003.

Does any of you guys have a reason except. "because its newer or better"?

thanks in advance

[Half]

Just tell him it is faster and can be more secure, almost everyone likes things like that.

[shakti5385]

I think the main difference is that Visual Studio 2003 targets the .NET 1.0 and 1.1 frameworks, while Visual Studio 2005 targets .NET 2.0 (and ".NET 3.0").

Visual Studio 2003 is not supported on Vista, but that may just be a nasty rumor.


With the .Net framework the Language is not really a problem as it is your choice to what language that you choose. In the end when you compile the code it compiles to exactly the same format. As for the Development Packages you will find that Visual Studio .Net was for .Net framework 1.0, the Visual Studio 2003 targets the .Net framework 1.1.... and the Visual Studio 2005 System targets the .Net framework 2.0.

Also not that if you do need to develop applications that use the different Versions of the framework, you can install the Development IDE's on the same machine with out an issue. But the different IDEs can not target the lower or higher versions of the framework. For example if you use .Net 2.0 you need to use Visual Studio 2005 (This includes the Express Editions).

[Slaine]

If you have no reasons then why do you need to develop using 2005?

Use the right tool for the job. If you think 2005 is the right tool then you must allready have a reason.

[Bongo]

If you think 2005 is the right tool then you must allready have a reason.

I dont mind which version for the task i am doing here. My client want to switch from VS6 to 2003 or 2005.

Arguments like it is newer or it is better are not valid for him.

And here starting my problems - I am not a sales person

BTW the task i fullfill here could be made in VB5 but as I mentioned he wants to upgrade.

[jmcilhinney]

.NET 1.1 and VS.NET 2003 do not offer any advantage over .NET 2.0 and VS 2005. They are good products in their own right but there is much more functionality to be had in both .NET 2.0 and VS 2005. VS 2005 can also be used to develop for Vista and .NET 3.0, which the older version can't. Unless there are some backward-compatibility issues to allow for there is no justifiable reason to choose 2003 over 2005 that I can think of. It's like asking if you want a VW or a Ferrari for the same price. The VW will get you where you want to go and you may not even drive the Ferrari any faster, but why would you choose the VW anyway?

[alexandros]

say that if you switch to 2003 there will be no support for it in some years
while 2005 last for more time