Thinking about installing Visual Studio on my Asus eee 1000HE. Since it is not a very powerful machine, I am wondering if I should install 2008 or the new 2010. Looks like there has been a lot of changes done to the UI, etc. Does that mean that it now runs smoother as well? Or is it actually heavier to run?
+3
A:
2010 is much slower on older machines in my opinion. I am running it currently on a Dell 700m with 512MB of RAM and while it does run, it feels sluggish and significantly slower than Visual Studio 2008. (Remember that it is a beta though, I am sure that performance tweaks are forthcoming)
Andrew Hare
2009-06-16 18:11:14
A:
It is a little bit more difficult to judge the performance differences since you are running it in a virtual machine at this time (no stand alone beta out yet).
Edit: If I am incorrect on the inability to run it outside of a virtual machine I apologize and stand corrected.
TheTXI
2009-06-16 18:11:50
It's available as a standalone beta.
Iceman
2009-06-16 18:54:55
Last time I had ever looked into it, it was only as a VPC. Now that I know it's stand alone I'll be able to give it another look. Thanks for the heads up Kevin.
TheTXI
2009-06-16 19:14:20
+5
A:
Considering that VS2010 is currently only available as a CTP release, I'd install VS2008.
Once VS2010 is fully released, without debug information and with optimizations enabled, ask this question and consider using it. For the moment, if you have 2008, use it. I doubt 2010 will be faster on your 'slow' hardware.
gbjbaanb
2009-06-16 18:13:04
It's actually a beta right now, which (at least for MS) is a step beyond CTP. Agree that it's still not ready for everyday usage.
Iceman
2009-06-16 18:54:18
I went here http://www.microsoft.com/visualstudio/en-gb/products/2010/default.mspx and it says CTP, but as you say - that means "still not ready", even if I could "reap the rewards of tomorrow's efficiency today" <pass the sick bag> :)
gbjbaanb
2009-06-16 18:59:52