I quote from the MSDN site (http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp url=/library/en-us/dnvs05/html/VSTmSysvsVSS.asp):
The desktop-based nature of Visual SourceSafe 2005 lends itself well to scenarios where team members may need occasional remote access to files. However, it is not intended for day-to-day usage by a geographically distributed team. The same is true of the parallel development capabilities of Visual SourceSafe. The basic file sharing that it supports is ideal for teams who need occasional collaboration; it is not intended for scenarios where a high degree of parallel development is required.
Team Foundation Server picks up where Visual SourceSafe 2005 leaves off in these respects. Its server-based nature is ideal for geographically distributed teams. Team Foundation Server's communication algorithms were designed to account for latency between distributed sites. It also provides a caching proxy to minimize network traffic between these sites. To support highly parallel development scenarios, Team Foundation Server provides robust data storage with SQL Server 2005, atomic operations, and sophisticated branching and merging capabilities.
Reading the above it is clear to me that as a small ISV (actually as Two seperate ISV's working from one set of offices) with heavy usage with regards to parallel development and with people needing to work regularly off site that Team Foundation Server is the best/safest option. But we can't have it. Despite having bought the server it needs to sit on while using it in beta. We are not in a position to afford the very expensive Team System so how do we move forward with regard to SourceSafe That's quite apart from the fact that all our staff do architecture, design, development and test so we now have no idea of what to use at all.
Sourcesafe on beta 2 with Team System has been flaky for us to say the least and we were all looking forward to the release as this would ease our burden, but now
We haven't used just plain SourceSafe 2005 as we've been using Team System in beta, I have grave concerns that we are going to loose work and time in production now, just as we'd been planning to move all our production over to 2005. Is plain sourcesafe going to be up to the job
What about Sourcesafe now too?
nateraaaa
It is nice to see someone voice the same issues I hear in muted groups throughout the 2005 launch events. I am excited about all of the new changes in visual studio and I also understand the primary goals in the release of team server, however, the cost to benefit ratio was not there.
The difficult part about the new strategy is that it does not affect large corporations with the funds to charge what they wish. This directly affects the small ISV's who have to battle the very real threat of oversea competition.
I too had to come up with a matrix when .net studio was first released. At that time we decided to wait to deploy and upgrade as a result of the higher cost. Until a platform stabilizes the ROI is not acceptable.
I have watched numerous presentations talk about the benefits of the strategy. But very few discuss the development software costs hemorrhaging at the seams with each new press release.
Tom
Kheyfets Herman
Of course, now you lose all your historical information, which makes SCM useless. Suggesting VSS is plain bad business. VSS always has been a half-assed product, not meant for production work.
I'm in the same boat you are in, herb... Keep in mind that Certified Partners WITH ISV Competency will receive VS 2005 Team Edition for Developers. Once Team Foundation is released in Q1 2006, They (MS) will be making available a "workgroup" edition, licensed for 5 users of Team Foundation Server that will be made available for free to Certified Partners. Not sure how this works with Empower users, since the Empower program is basically a 2 year lease on software.
I gave up my Perforce license because I was told by Partner support that we would be receiving Team Foundation Server. Unfortunately, that didn't come true, after of course, the update period for my relicensing had lapsed for Perforce. Team Foundation Server workgroup edition will have to work for me. Granted it is limited to 5 users, and my company is right on the edge of that...but I don't anticipate new developers in at least the next year, so I think I'll be fine.
If you aren't satisfied with that solution, I would suggest looking at Perforce. It is a great product, though slightly expensive. If you can't swing that in your budget, I would next look at either Vault from Sourcegear (Eric Sink's company)...they are in the 4th version, I believe. Or you could go the free route and try out Subversion (I have no experience with this product).
I'm still waiting to get my hands on VS 2005 Team Edition and I'm a Certified Partner with ISV Competency. It wasn't in my November shipment, even though Partner support said it should be. They had no ETA as to when I can get it. I can't download it from MSDN Subscriber Downloads, because they've only posted the Trial version. I'm glad that retail customers can get their hands on it, but us, higher paying Certified customers are being shafted.
Regards,
todd
Ted Carron
Hi Eric,
sounds good, but is still too expensive in various situations. In my situation I had to decide currently NOT to use Team Editions and Team Foundation server. The main reason is its current pricing and exclusion from Empower subscriptions. The other reason is some uncertainity concerning the overhead it might involve. We will re-evaluate it later and probably use it when we can afford it.
Now, for your understanding, more about my concrete situation.
As a small software development and consulting company we recently decided to change our business model and to develop a new software based on the experiences and ideas we have got over the last 15 years. I'm not just talking about some software development, I'm talking about entirely restructuring and reforming an existing and running business. This also involves a complete realignment of our partner relations.
This is not an easy job and requires a strong engagement of my team since we have rather limited personnel and financial resources available.
We are now in the situation that I have a team of three fulltime developers, each having at least 10 years experience in software design, and each able to do all the tasks involved, from problem analysis and architectural software design to code development and testing. In other words, rather than having an architect, a developer and a tester, I have three extremely skilled professionals, each wearing the hat of an architect, a developer or a tester when it's required.
In this case, to take any advantage of the Team Foundation this automatically leads to the Visual Studio 2005 Team Suite Edition for each member in the team.
Now regarding the costs for this project, I simply cannot afford the money Team Suite costs compared to the Professional edition with MSDN Premium.
We currently have the following situation. 1. We have one existing MSDN Universal subscription which we transited to Team Edition for Software Developers. 2. We registered to the Empower program for the additional licences we need to jump start the project.
Due to the information we have got in the past we already decided NOT to use the Team Foundation server. We have excellent existing tools and processes. Besides the costs it's probably better for us to use the existing tools than learning new things and maintain a Team Foundation server we don't necessarily need. In my opinion, in a small team there is a lot that can be done equally good enough and without unnecessary overhead just using Microsoft Office, MS Project, Sharepoint and Visual SourceSafe.
What I miss much more than the Team Foundation server are some of the tools integrated in the Team Suite editions, like much better integrated architectural design and testing support. This are the biggest issues we have come across in the past.
If we could get the tools to a much more affordable price (with or without Team Foundation server) I would be the first who goes for it. But as I said before, in our current situation it's far too expensive.
Below you will find two tables where I compare the expected costs for Professional Editions and Team Suite Editions over the next three years.
This makes a difference of $ 23'480 over the next 3 years and is definitely too much.
I'm aware that the goal of Empower is to become a certified partner and that appropriate partners will have other conditions for the Team editions. However, I cannot use this as an argument to raise funding.
My vote: rethink the inclusion in Empower subscriptions and leave the rest as is.
Peter
kumar_deep
I would be suprised if your client cares which source code control system you use. The end product is more important
Perhaps this will serve as a lesson to MS, not to pull the common bait and switch tactic.
Brett W
cronic76
Thanks for the link though, I'll follow it. I don't actually yet buy the whole open source thing, but it looks like I have to at the very least give it a much closer look.
It would be nice though to understand just why MS have done this about turn on the very people they wanted to buy into their products and who they wanted to also persuade their clients in turn to buy into MS. This leaves a very bad taste indeed.
Larry Blake
Team System is made by Microsoft, but that does not necessarily make it the best tool for the job. They made it free to try and get people used to it. But there are lots of other tools out there, if you don't want to use Team System. Some are free (Subversion). Here is a commonly used commercial tool:
http://www.sourcegear.com/vault/index.html
Jean STURMA
Hello,
My name is Eric Lee, and I'm the product manager responsible for both VSS 2005 and Team Foundation Server 2005. A sometimes challenging position to be in :)
Pleaese let me address a few things in this thread. First off, let me try to clear the air with regards to source control from Microsoft. As you know, until the release of Team Foundation Server 2005, Visual SourceSafe has been the only source code control solution from Microsoft.
Visual SourceSafe has been an easy to use, productive source control system for many of our customers over the past 10 years. Unfortunately, the needs of our customers have grown faster with respect to source control than we have been able to accomodate it. While Visual SourceSafe is great within a certain scope, there are many aspects of it that make it challenging for today's larger teams and today's more complex projects.
That is where Team Foundation Server 2005 comes in. In a perfect world, we would be able to offer it at the same price point as Visual SourceSafe and also provide the level of innovation that Team Foundation Server adds to the market.
Unfortunately that is not the case in this release; we built Team Foundation Server 2005 to satisfy the needs of today's Visual SourceSafe customers, as well as the largest, most dynamic enterprises. For example, Team Foundation Server 2005 Workgroup Edition was designed and priced (free with MSDN Premium) for teams up to 5. That same technology supports our internal use of Team Foundation Server, which includes 500 developers, 1/2 million source files and 60K+ work items. The innovations that we built to support this require us to use a different pricing and unfortunately more complex licening strategy than Visual SourceSafe.
All that said, pricing is still key :) Let me offer you some options for using Team Foundation Server 2005 that may not be all that clear for smaller ISV's such as yourself.
1. Absolutely the most important thing to do explore your volume licensing options (http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/default.mspx). Even as a small ISV, you may be surprised at the discounts that volume licensing gives you.
2. If you are a team of 5 or less, you will get a TFS Workgroup Edition with a purchase of a VSTS client edition + MSDN Premium subscription. This may suite your needs entirely.
Apologies that I can't give you a shorter answer, I'm travelling internationally at the moment, but I'll keep an eye on this thread; please respond if you have any questions and I'll get back to you as quickly as I can.
Thanks!
Eric.