You know, there has been a lot of controversy lately (from developers I respect who should know better) about the news that Visual Studio .NET 2002/2005 will "mostly work but be unsupported" on Windows Vista. They claim that the answer "Just move your environment to Virtual PC and develop on VS.NET 2003 there" is unacceptable, claiming that virtualization is "slow, even on great hardware". Are the people complaining really going to be moving to Vista anyways? Or do they just like having stuff to complain about? Hmmm, I wonder…

First off, who is still developing on Windows XP in the first place? Most developers I know work on Windows Server 2003. It's faster, more responsive, and is more locked-down… plus you can develop and test on the same machine with IIS 6 built-in. You can say "well, my shop can't afford that many license of Windows Server", but every Microsoft shop should have at least one MSDN subscription. It's the single most cost-effective way to build testing environments.

But I digress. The bottom line is, if you're a develpment shop, and you're NOT using virtualization yet, you are wasting valuable time and money. How can I make such a bold and

…