10

The main advantage is the use of ReSharper and other add-ons but we need to make a convincing argument for the purchase of Visual Studio 2012 Professional. We are currently using Visual Studio 2012 Express for Windows. It is quite good but is hard to switch from using the full Professional version in the past.

So far the team has compiled the following list:

  1. Extract Interface function missing. Very useful for clean SOLID code.
  2. No add-on support. Can’t install StyleCop or productivity tools. AnkhSvn, Spell checker, Productivity PowerTools, GhostDoc, Regex Editor, PowerCommands.
  3. The exception assistant is limited in Express edition. This is a big annoyance. See http://www.lifehacker.com.au/2013/01/ive-given-up-on-visual-studio-express-2012-for-windows-desktop-heres-why/
  4. Different tools provided by MS like certificate generation.
  5. Possibility of create a Test project based on source code.

We do server development in C# so any web add-ons or anything else is useless.

The reason I am asking is I am sure that people have been in the same position. What approach did you use and can you think of additions or ammends to the above list?

Thanks,

Sam Leach
  • 441
  • 4
  • 13
  • 2
    Note that Ultimate version is even better. After using Visual Studio 2010 Ultimate for years, I find Visual Studio 2012 Professional I have at workplace quite limited (especially for testing and modeling). – Arseni Mourzenko Jul 01 '13 at 07:45
  • A big thing for me in VS2012 which I don't *think* 2010 had was the SSDT project. Allowing for database management via a project, updates handled in 1 `dacpac` file and also allowing database version control in your TFS. – Lotok Jul 01 '13 at 08:24
  • @James: I'm not sure I understand. I always developed database schemas in Visual Studio 2010 (with the benefit of having the schema under version control and being able to deploy it in one click). See also http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ff678491(v=vs.100).aspx – Arseni Mourzenko Jul 01 '13 at 09:11
  • @MainMa My mistake then, I thought it was just brought in with 2012. – Lotok Jul 01 '13 at 09:21
  • 10
    I wouldn't take a .Net job if they didn't have at least Professional on an MSDN subscription. If they don't take your tools seriously it's the same thing as not taking you seriously. I'd make your case and say that the full version is required by you to do your job, and if your boss refuses go find another job where they value their developers instead. – Keith Jul 01 '13 at 10:23
  • This be useful: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2298308/business-case-for-resharper – Kramii Jul 01 '13 at 11:35
  • 3
    @Keith, that's rather closed minded but I understand your point. VS Express is surprisingly productive. This is a startup. The job could still be awesome. We're probably going to get VS Pro, the company is 3 months old - we have to justify the cost. – Sam Leach Jul 01 '13 at 12:07
  • This question appears to be off-topic because it is a polling type question that won't have a definitive answer to the question. –  Jul 01 '13 at 13:01
  • @SamLeach - that does change things, but as it's a startup you have some equity right? Otherwise you have all the risk and none of the benefits. Assuming that you do have equity then you should be at the table for the cost/benefit analysis of whether VS Pro is worth it, and if the answer's no then it's because you and the other partners agreed to it. – Keith Jul 01 '13 at 13:16
  • 1
    I don't have equity. :( – Sam Leach Jul 01 '13 at 13:26
  • 5
    Wait - you're a startup? Then Visual Studio and other good stuff should be free, or very cheap, through [Microsoft BizSpark](http://www.microsoft.com/bizspark/Default.aspx). If your company is less than 5 years old and making less than 1 million US $ a year, you qualify. – MarkJ Jul 01 '13 at 20:04

1 Answers1

33
  • Calculate how much hours you save with this per week.
  • Multiply the amount with your workweeks per year.
  • Multiply this with the amount of money they pay you per hour.
  • Subtract the price of VS2012 Prof. from the result.
Manoj R
  • 4,076
  • 22
  • 30
K..
  • 606
  • 6
  • 18
  • 6
    +1 given that VS seems to have at most a two yearly release cycle you can probably do the calculation over two years instead – jk. Jul 01 '13 at 08:04
  • totally convinced with this answer – Ali Jul 01 '13 at 08:07
  • 1
    @jk The last VS was 2012, the next VS is 2013. I think they're moving to yearly releases. – Keith Jul 01 '13 at 10:13
  • @Keith yep you are right they do seem to be moving to a yearly cycle, but a longer period could still be used on the assumption that the business won't necessarily update every year... – jk. Jul 01 '13 at 10:23
  • 2
    What about when customers are getting charged by the hour? In that case it's harder to make an argument that upgrading is financially viable. – MatsT Jul 01 '13 at 13:15
  • @MatsT in that case the case is even simpler: if the customer wants to use it, buy it or lose the contract. If the contract is not worth more in net profit than the purchase cost, it might be best to lose the contract. – jwenting Jul 01 '13 at 13:52
  • 1
    @jwenting - I don't see how that answers MatsT. The customer usually doesn't care what software you use to do the development, so long as you're using the technologies you agreed on. I can't think of any reason a client would insist on Resharper being used, for instance. – Bobson Jul 01 '13 at 14:51
  • 6
    @MatsT - Deliberately working slower in order to charge the customer more is a *very* shady business practice, and that's effectively what you'd be doing in that case. – Bobson Jul 01 '13 at 14:54
  • @Bobson depends on the customer and the product. If they already have an investment in a specific technology, they'll want you to use that same technology, not something else. Try selling something based on MS SQL Server and ASP to a company that's heavily invested in Oracle and see what happens. – jwenting Jul 02 '13 at 05:07
  • @jwenting - That's the `so long as you're using the technologies you agreed on` part. The technology matters, the development tools don't. – Bobson Jul 02 '13 at 13:24
  • @Bobson in this case there's no difference as each version of Visual Studio is needed for developing a specific version of .NET application. – jwenting Jul 02 '13 at 13:30
  • @jwenting - You can compile down to older versions of VS. But the point was more that it didn't matter if you had VS Express or VS Ultimate, or whether or not you used Resharper. – Bobson Jul 02 '13 at 18:07