• Status: Solved
  • Priority: Medium
  • Security: Public
  • Views: 257
  • Last Modified:

any incentive to keep projects at older versions of Visual studio?

if you have VS 2010, is there any incentive or need to have an older version at the same older version.

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms185327.aspx
Vs 2010 can upgrade older projects (which I assume will be VS 6, VS 2003/5/8). so why would any one still keep their old version, if all versions can be kept and run from Vs 2010? (if there are no references problems)

0
25112
Asked:
25112
3 Solutions
 
speak2abCommented:
Except if what you have is a VB6 I see no reason not to upgrade to 2010 especially if you consider the added functionalites that comes with 2010. I have kept an older version of my 2008 for a long time but after reading your post I realised I have not even opened it not even once since i installed 2010. So from my experience i see no reason not to upgrade, however if you decide to keep the old one, I don't expect you will need to worry about conflicts anyway.
0
 
25112Author Commented:
so there is no incentives to keep it in the older versions at all, right, even 2008?

because all or most of them will work in 2010 and since code is not updated, only the solution is upgraded, it will be smooth.

but i have seen quiet a few companies that still keep their VS 2003 and 2005 environments.. is it because they have just not taken the time to analyze this much?
0
 
binaryevoCommented:
Upgrading should be pretty seamless in most cases.  Many companies, I have learned, have a fear of change.  Combined with their lack of resources and time spent analyzing their mitigated risk, are the two most common reasons ive found that clients just leave an old solution.  Some organizations think that if its working then let it be.  I think your spot on with wanting to upgrade...  
0
 
speak2abCommented:
so there is no incentives to keep it in the older versions at all, right, even 2008?
Yes there is no incentive to go backwards.

but i have seen quiet a few companies that still keep their VS 2003 and 2005 environments.. is it because they have just not taken the time to analyze this much?
I would suppose it is a practical thing to do for individuals and organisations alike because a new version can be unstable and you don't want to b biting your fingers in regret because you unistalled a tested and stable version you are used to.
0
 
TommySzalapskiCommented:
but i have seen quiet a few companies that still keep their VS 2003 and 2005 environments..

Cost may be a thing too. I still have Office 2003 because it works and I don't feel like buying a new version.
0

Featured Post

Get your Disaster Recovery as a Service basics

Disaster Recovery as a Service is one go-to solution that revolutionizes DR planning. Implementing DRaaS could be an efficient process, easily accessible to non-DR experts. Learn about monitoring, testing, executing failovers and failbacks to ensure a "healthy" DR environment.

Tackle projects and never again get stuck behind a technical roadblock.
Join Now