VS 2003 and 2005 Service Packs, are you really sure it's good news?

OK first I am like many very pleased that Microsoft (under a lot of pressure!) has finally announced some Service Packs for VS 2003 and 2005.
But I read carefully the post, and I am not totally sure it's perfect.
First a service pack for VS 2003 is scheduled for...April 2006 !?!? Hello Microsoft, you mean a service pack every 3 years and something? At this time, I don't thing I will use anymore VS 2003. I really don't get it, why not now? And does it mean we should expect the same delay with VS 2005? By the way what's about SQL 2005?
Other thing, the hot fixes. This has always been a problem for many, because obtaining a fix by calling a support center is ridiculous and time consuming (don't even mention the phone cost).
After all hot fixes are there to fix bugs, so why can't make them publicly downloadable?
Other grief is the format used for this announcement. I like the blog idea but this should be made public on MSDN, as a kind of contract between Microsoft and their customers, an engagement to say yes we listened and we are willing to help.

2 Comments

  • I think you're overreacting a bit. Service packs take a lot of time to get right, because they have to be tested on a lot of situations. The problem is: as soon as they give out a service pack, they're liable to the license terms coming with it. It's not a hotfix-install-it-at-your-own-risk kind of thing. So they're testing the SPs thouroughly (that's the idea anyway).



    You've probably not noticed it, but in the last couple of days, the developer division made some serious commiting statements, one being the service pack, one other being that hotfixes will be more available (in a reply to my blog entry), at least that's what I read in that reply.



    This is a huge change. It will take time for them to adjust it, but they're now fully aware that they can't get away with not releasing fixes in a regular basis. At least, that's what I read in the public statements made, and I'm glad they're made.

  • Why not now? Probably because they want the opportunity to patch VS 2003 for any issuest that are found due to deployment of VS 2005 and .NET 2. They probably want to wait a little longer to ensure there are no issues caused that need to be patched.

Comments have been disabled for this content.