Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Visual Studio for Mac

msdn.microsoft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

421–430 of 435 posts

Re: Visual Studio for Mac

#421

Post by bardworx »

brazzledazzle wrote: post #415
bardworx wrote: post #390

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm thinking along the same lines. If you're interested in other tests/simulations and I can run them side by side and report back. Today I've ran 2 VMs, about 20 tabs, a large project loaded into an IDE and two shell sessions without any noticeable slowdown.

I appreciate the offer, thanks. If you have a desktop VM (Windows or OS X) laying around I'd be interested in how responsive they are with enough of them running to make things interesting. They tend to be the most demanding/least tolerant VMs I have to deal with. But don't bother unless you're really into it.

Should be fun.

I have a MS Win 7 VM for I.E. testing. It's downloaded from MS so there wouldn't be any variance. I'll run a few of them today and get back to you.

Re: Visual Studio for Mac

#422

Post by SonicSoul »

grandalf wrote: post #386
SonicSoul wrote: post #348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

yes. it's not needed if you're building a JavaScript app with Sublime text. But compiled environments such as .Net take a lot of cpu and memory. It's not uncommon to have 2-4 visual studios open which can take up 10 gigs of ram. Couple that up with continuous build/unit test frameworks and 5-10 VS add-ons and you need a powerful machine to make it responsive

I'd argue that some of what you describe should probably be an anti-pattern, or is at least a byproduct of very fast, cheap CPU power. Emacs has worked for years on much lower-end hardware and has been used to build some very elaborate systems. These days a typical developer laptop is 5x more powerful than the system the code will be used on (mobile device, virtual server, etc.)

I do not disagree with anything you said. The only reason for powerful developer workstations is that each second of delay is compounded when you use your machine as a tool. I do use lightweight tools but Visual Studio is still extremely powerful and not easily replaceable (I've been using it every day for past 10 years). Visual Studio is NOT fast. Especially when you add ReSharper into the mix. You could go on arguing about what is the best IDE and if ReSharper is necessary. The fact is that lots of people still use it and a powerful machine is needed today to make those responsive

Re: Visual Studio for Mac

#423

Post by tracker1 »

coredog64 wrote: post #355
tracker1 wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am in a similar situation... I bought my current MBP and will use it until it dies more than likely, but not sure if I'd buy another Mac. The touchpad on the MBP is second to none, which is what kept me this time but there's a massive premium there. I use Mac, windows and Linux daily... And honestly the Mac is the most odd ui of the three for me. Having bash is pretty nice as is homebrew... I'm really hoping MS put…

I just bought a Magic Trackpad 2 and am using it with Windows 7. It requires the purchase of a $10 utility to get all the fancy stuff (scrolling, right click), but it's not bad.

Got a link to said utility? I'd love to have one at work (windows)... Currently using a mouse, the apple trackpad is so good though, only device I don't miss a mouse with.

Re: Visual Studio for Mac

#424

Post by Nullabillity »

adamlett wrote: post #334
tw04 wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It kind of is... this reminds me very much of moving from a blackberry to an iPhone. Sure, the features of the iPhone were great, but for my (at the time) primary purpose of using the device for sending emails, it as a MASSIVE step backwards. I could touch type nearly as fast on a blackberry as on a regular keyboard. Moving to a touchscreen meant I had to look at the screen while typing. It slowed me down tremendousl…

It's an interesting comparison, but IMO not that apt. Going from a physical keyboard to a touch screen, something is definitely lost (even though much is also gained). The removal of the function keys will at worse force people to memorise different hot keys (any reason why the number row could not serve the same purpose exactly as well?), and at best it will make providers of IDEs and other productivity software rev…

> any reason why the number row could not serve the same purpose exactly as well?

Then you lose the ability to change the code while you're debugging it, or end up with a modal UI. No thanks.

Re: Visual Studio for Mac

#425

Post by jeremyhu »

SyneRyder wrote: post #267
givinguflac wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It sounds like you're basing this argument on hearsay and not personal experience (shocker.) I have various audio setups with different macs and interfaces and no OS update has broken anything with my setups since 10.6 era.

I don't think that's fair. Even major audio companies were warning customers not to upgrade to Sierra for months due to compatibility issues. Here's iZotope's page about compatibility with their audio plugins - if you bought it more than a couple of years ago, it won't work on Sierra: https://www.izotope.com/en/community/blog/product-news/2016/... Personally I had to spend a few hundred dollars upgrading my audio sof…

That page indicates what versions of those plugins are certified by the vendor to run on Sierra. That doesn't mean that older versions won't run, it just means they haven't been certified to do so.

I've been running software on Sierra that is only certified by the developer for Snow Leopard through Yosemite, and it still runs just fine for my needs. Apple puts a lot of effort into binary compatibility.

Re: Visual Studio for Mac

#426

Post by NEDM64 »

jmkni wrote: post #116
coldtea wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> WRONG. The removal of a dozen keys from an already gimped keyboard is decidedly anti-developer. I am a developer and I could not care less about function keys. Why the duck would developers need function keys? Even for Vim, the age-old advice is to remap Esc so that you keep your hands on the home row. A flexible multi-touch strip of context-aware keys can do much more things -- e.g. map debugger step moves when I'…

If I'm debugging in an IDE or through a browsers developer tools, I absolutely use the function keys to step through/into/out of code. What should I do instead? Serious question.

No you don't, because this is a Mac, and macOS doesn't use the F keys ever.

If you're using Windows, the F keys appear on the Touch Bar. /story

Re: Visual Studio for Mac

#427

Post by adamlett »

Nullabillity wrote: post #424
adamlett wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's an interesting comparison, but IMO not that apt. Going from a physical keyboard to a touch screen, something is definitely lost (even though much is also gained). The removal of the function keys will at worse force people to memorise different hot keys (any reason why the number row could not serve the same purpose exactly as well?), and at best it will make providers of IDEs and other productivity software rev…

> any reason why the number row could not serve the same purpose exactly as well? Then you lose the ability to change the code while you're debugging it, or end up with a modal UI. No thanks.

Do modifier keys (control, alt, command, fn, shift) fall under your definition of modal UI? If so, how do you deal with the fact that your keyboard doesn't (I'm guessing) have dedicated keys for cut, copy, and paste? I think its safe to assume that everybody uses those significantly more often than they step through a program with a debugger.

Re: Visual Studio for Mac

#428

Post by madeofpalk »

zmarty wrote: post #403
danielhooper wrote: post #340

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> because they're using terabytes of samples in each project. This is beyond hyperbole.

Not true, I work with projects where each minute of video is 8 GB. Multiply that with 100 or 120 and you are pretty much at 1 TB.

Just a wild idea here, but maybe a laptop isnt the best solution for you?

Re: Visual Studio for Mac

#429

Post by 72deluxe »

FroshKiller wrote: post #214
72deluxe wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, and the ability to find call references (who is calling this function, where is it used) from the drop-down menu is really helpful. I miss the ease of access to that sort of functionality in Visual Studio.

Maybe I'm not using the same version of Visual Studio as you are, but Find All References is right there on the context menu when I right-click in VS.

Yes it is there for me, but the functionality is different on Xcode as it will find all references when you open the menu, so you can see the results straight away. One less click (and perhaps one less popup hidden "find symbol results" pane in VS).

That was what I was highlighting, not the fact that Visual Studio somehow doesn't have that functionality.

Re: Visual Studio for Mac

#430

Post by bardworx »

brazzledazzle wrote: post #415
bardworx wrote: post #390

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm thinking along the same lines. If you're interested in other tests/simulations and I can run them side by side and report back. Today I've ran 2 VMs, about 20 tabs, a large project loaded into an IDE and two shell sessions without any noticeable slowdown.

I appreciate the offer, thanks. If you have a desktop VM (Windows or OS X) laying around I'd be interested in how responsive they are with enough of them running to make things interesting. They tend to be the most demanding/least tolerant VMs I have to deal with. But don't bother unless you're really into it.

My hypothesis was that the computer "runs" better because of faster RAM and processor but because the system has 8GB, it can't be pushed __too__ much.

Testing: 1x headless Linux w/ 1 CPU core and 512MB RAM 2x MS Windows 7 with display, 2/ 1CPU core and 512MB RAM each. IDE consuming ~987MB RAM 6x Chrome Tabs open 3x Safari Tabs open Apple Mail.app Other misc software running in the background.

Physical Memory 8GB Memory Used: 5.96GB Cached Files: 2.03GB

Each VM being added increased SWAP. With one headless, SWAP was at ~50MB. Adding WIN7 VM with display brought it up to 251MB, adding a third VM with display brought it to 550MB.

CPU Usage peaked at ~70% when adding VMs with some delays in response when browsing simultaneously.

All VMs running, mocking around a VM and running minor tasks in background (comprising and decompressing junk data) brought usage to about 30%, CPU usage never peaked past 50% without additional load.

Conclusion: I'm actually really happy with the laptop. The whole dongle hell really doesn't exist, in fact I was able to remove cables from my desk. Before, I had to plug in 1 power cable, one thunderbolt/DP, one USB...now all three are going into a single dongle and one cable to computer.

For external HD, I've been using the Samsung SSD USB3 to USB-C for about a year so that made life easier.

Prior, I had to carry an ethernet adapter for remote work, which was replaced by an ethernet adapter of a different kind.

General USBs, thumb drives, etc are plugged into my monitor (which has a hub) just as before, no difference.

If this laptop started at $200 less, I'd say this is a very adequate laptop for work purposes, including running VMs.

Post reply on HN