I take Visual Studio very seriously. I spent more time in Visual Studio than in anything else, so potentially any problem in there can easily ripple out to the rest of my life. Thus, when things break for me (i.e., removal of database diagrams, ASP.NET compilation model mess up, etc.), I really, really worry.

What I'm slowly accepting is that as much as Visual Studio/.NET/etc. matters to me, it matters to the respective product teams even more. So I should be able to lay back, relax and enjoy my time 'till my eyes roll back and the next version ships, right?

It's sort of like the Year 2000 issue. I knew a lot of end users (say, people owning electrical devices), who were moving to the mountains, stocking up on supplies, preparing for The End, etc. , while saying stuff like “the power grid has microchips that can't handle the year 2000”. These people also wouldn't know what a power grid was if one landed on their head. Did they really think that the electric companies (or any company) wasn't at least as concerned as they were? As if having their grandma spouting nonsense was going to get the attention of the CTO of the local power company?

That said, I'm of the strong opinion that I'm not an idiot, and at least somewhat clued in as to what to expect from certain products :). A few things have gotten me hyper during the last year, but I believe the product teams have handled or are in the process of handling most of them. So I have to wonder if somehow me + n other people “overreacting” is what drove these changes, or the product teams just woke up one morning and said “hey, this sucks”. At least with Ladybug, ahem, the MSDN Product Feedback Center, we should be able to get a bit more insight on what really goes on with certain issues. What I'd really like to see is a bit of explanation with each resolution -- if something's a Won't Fix, knowing the reasoning behind it can go a long way in soothing users.