|
code
newsgroups
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Is VB6 still alive and well?Hi all,
I am still using VB6, I guess I am very behind the time. But it really works very nicely for what I do. Is it still alive and well out in the development world? I figure, after 2 versions of vb.net, may be it's time to move to vb.net? Thanks for sharing your thoughts. Ben "Ben" <NoSpam@NoSpam.com> wrote in message Boy are you asking for trouble! There has been a lot of discussion of this news:uTUW$gzVFHA.2692@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl... > Hi all, > > I am still using VB6, I guess I am very behind the time. But it really > works very nicely for what I do. > Is it still alive and well out in the development world? > I figure, after 2 versions of vb.net, may be it's time to move to vb.net? > Thanks for sharing your thoughts. > > Ben > > very topic, not all of it friendly or well-informed. Search the archives for this group for the past month or so and you'll get an earful. Be warned that there are some .Net-haters who put it down every chance they get without knowing whereof they speak. \ Fact is that VB6 and VB.Net (or VB 2005 as it is now called) are two very different things. You cannot think of VB 2005 as an upgrade to VB6 in the same way that VB6 was an upgrade to VB5. VB6 remains an active and relevant tool with the one fly in the ointment being that MS has stopped supporting it. What exactly this will mean, no one knows. Some doom-and-gloomsters are predicting that MS will sabotage the operating system to intentionally break VB6 apps and force people to move to .Net (this will be done by remote control from Bill Gates's flying saucer, of course). VB 2005 is a great tool with an amazing class library and true object oriented capabilities. It's not that easy to learn, however. My approach has been to stick with VB6 where appropriate and use .Net otherwise. -- Peter Aitken Remove the crap from my email address before using. Peter, without wishing to get into an argument on this subject, I feel your
stance here is simply diluting the real message, and obscuring the fact that real commercial problems do exists. It's hard enough to get this message across in the industry, and to MSFT in particular, without the message being misconveyed like this. I don't hate .Net! If there was a way we could move our huge code base without having to double our resources, and without breaking our company, then we would. The real issues come down to money, dollars, not technical difficulty. I've "been around the block a few times", meaning I have the experience to use any tool or language. However, we have a large, non-trivial code base that has been tested, documented, and installed in a significant customer base. We also have employees who's salaries have to be paid, and competitors that we have to stay ahead of. Most small companies 'go under' anyway because it's difficult enough to get to this stage. Having MSFT make it even more difficult is just so sad. If you use .Net and you like it then great! Go in peace!. However, please have sympathy for those of us who have a lot more worries on our shoulders than simply 'which language do I like best'. Tony Proctor Show quote "Peter Aitken" <pait***@CRAPnc.rr.com> wrote in message news:OnHSGszVFHA.2960@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl... > "Ben" <NoSpam@NoSpam.com> wrote in message > news:uTUW$gzVFHA.2692@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl... > > Hi all, > > > > I am still using VB6, I guess I am very behind the time. But it really > > works very nicely for what I do. > > Is it still alive and well out in the development world? > > I figure, after 2 versions of vb.net, may be it's time to move to vb.net? > > Thanks for sharing your thoughts. > > > > Ben > > > > > > Boy are you asking for trouble! There has been a lot of discussion of this > very topic, not all of it friendly or well-informed. Search the archives for > this group for the past month or so and you'll get an earful. Be warned that > there are some .Net-haters who put it down every chance they get without > knowing whereof they speak. \ > > Fact is that VB6 and VB.Net (or VB 2005 as it is now called) are two very > different things. You cannot think of VB 2005 as an upgrade to VB6 in the > same way that VB6 was an upgrade to VB5. VB6 remains an active and relevant > tool with the one fly in the ointment being that MS has stopped supporting > it. What exactly this will mean, no one knows. Some doom-and-gloomsters are > predicting that MS will sabotage the operating system to intentionally break > VB6 apps and force people to move to .Net (this will be done by remote > control from Bill Gates's flying saucer, of course). > > VB 2005 is a great tool with an amazing class library and true object > oriented capabilities. It's not that easy to learn, however. My approach has > been to stick with VB6 where appropriate and use .Net otherwise. > > > -- > Peter Aitken > > Remove the crap from my email address before using. > > On Fri, 13 May 2005 13:52:18 +0100, "Tony Proctor"
<tony_proctor@aimtechnology_NoMoreSPAM_.com> wrote: in <uCLyZq7VFHA.3***@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl> Show quote >Peter, without wishing to get into an argument on this subject, I feel your Well spoken, sir. Thank You.>stance here is simply diluting the real message, and obscuring the fact that >real commercial problems do exists. It's hard enough to get this message >across in the industry, and to MSFT in particular, without the message being >misconveyed like this. > >I don't hate .Net! If there was a way we could move our huge code base >without having to double our resources, and without breaking our company, >then we would. The real issues come down to money, dollars, not technical >difficulty. I've "been around the block a few times", meaning I have the >experience to use any tool or language. However, we have a large, >non-trivial code base that has been tested, documented, and installed in a >significant customer base. We also have employees who's salaries have to be >paid, and competitors that we have to stay ahead of. Most small companies >'go under' anyway because it's difficult enough to get to this stage. Having >MSFT make it even more difficult is just so sad. > >If you use .Net and you like it then great! Go in peace!. However, please >have sympathy for those of us who have a lot more worries on our shoulders >than simply 'which language do I like best'. > > Tony Proctor --- Stefan Berglund
Show quote
"Stefan Berglund" <keepit@in.thegroups> wrote in message I do not disagree with what you are saying. But as regards your and others' news:u78a81hglvi1genqh62ttd3ds51ofhid6n@4ax.com... > On Fri, 13 May 2005 13:52:18 +0100, "Tony Proctor" > <tony_proctor@aimtechnology_NoMoreSPAM_.com> wrote: > in <uCLyZq7VFHA.3***@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl> > >>Peter, without wishing to get into an argument on this subject, I feel >>your >>stance here is simply diluting the real message, and obscuring the fact >>that >>real commercial problems do exists. It's hard enough to get this message >>across in the industry, and to MSFT in particular, without the message >>being >>misconveyed like this. >> >>I don't hate .Net! If there was a way we could move our huge code base >>without having to double our resources, and without breaking our company, >>then we would. The real issues come down to money, dollars, not technical >>difficulty. I've "been around the block a few times", meaning I have the >>experience to use any tool or language. However, we have a large, >>non-trivial code base that has been tested, documented, and installed in a >>significant customer base. We also have employees who's salaries have to >>be >>paid, and competitors that we have to stay ahead of. Most small companies >>'go under' anyway because it's difficult enough to get to this stage. >>Having >>MSFT make it even more difficult is just so sad. >> >>If you use .Net and you like it then great! Go in peace!. However, please >>have sympathy for those of us who have a lot more worries on our shoulders >>than simply 'which language do I like best'. >> >> Tony Proctor > > Well spoken, sir. Thank You. > huge code base - and it's a big but - all I have seen so far is a bunch of fretting and hand waving about all the bad things that may happen in the future. No one has provided the smallest shred of evidence that MS is doing anything to cause problems with VB6 apps down the road. And please don't bring up the terminally silly example of Format. Yes, there MAY be problems down the road - and there MAY NOT! Many people are actively berating MS for things that they are worried might happen. Get it - MIGHT? I fail to see the commercial problems you are worried about. Maybe you can explain. But I too have an installed VB6 code base and have yet to see the slightest problem. I tell clients the situation and my opinion that their VB6 apps will probably continue to work fine for many years but that I cannot be sure because of MS. Then it is their decision whether to migrate to .Net or not. They may be annoyed at the situation but not at me because it is clearly not my doing.Either way I still have their business, either continuing to maintain the existing apps or working on a .Net migration. suppose it's theoretically possible that a client will get fed up and move to Java or something, but that has yet to happen. As for competitors, they are in the same boat as you. Then there's the matter of .Net. Some people, including you, seem to understand that the quetion of whether .Net is a good tool is totally separate from MS dropping VB6 support. Others cannot make this simple distinction, however, and are continually bashing .Net - about which they apparently know almost nothing - just because they are unhappy with the VB6 support situation. That's how I got involved in this thread, tired of seeing ignoramuses knock .Net when they do not know it. -- Peter Aitken Remove the crap from my email address before using. <whisper> (you've got to remember, Peter, some of the people in this group
are over 2,000 years old.) </whisper> Show quote "Peter Aitken" <pait***@CRAPnc.rr.com> wrote in message news:uT5HN0KWFHA.1508@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl... > "Stefan Berglund" <keepit@in.thegroups> wrote in message > news:u78a81hglvi1genqh62ttd3ds51ofhid6n@4ax.com... >> On Fri, 13 May 2005 13:52:18 +0100, "Tony Proctor" >> <tony_proctor@aimtechnology_NoMoreSPAM_.com> wrote: >> in <uCLyZq7VFHA.3***@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl> >> >>>Peter, without wishing to get into an argument on this subject, I feel >>>your >>>stance here is simply diluting the real message, and obscuring the fact >>>that >>>real commercial problems do exists. It's hard enough to get this message >>>across in the industry, and to MSFT in particular, without the message >>>being >>>misconveyed like this. >>> >>>I don't hate .Net! If there was a way we could move our huge code base >>>without having to double our resources, and without breaking our company, >>>then we would. The real issues come down to money, dollars, not technical >>>difficulty. I've "been around the block a few times", meaning I have the >>>experience to use any tool or language. However, we have a large, >>>non-trivial code base that has been tested, documented, and installed in >>>a >>>significant customer base. We also have employees who's salaries have to >>>be >>>paid, and competitors that we have to stay ahead of. Most small companies >>>'go under' anyway because it's difficult enough to get to this stage. >>>Having >>>MSFT make it even more difficult is just so sad. >>> >>>If you use .Net and you like it then great! Go in peace!. However, please >>>have sympathy for those of us who have a lot more worries on our >>>shoulders >>>than simply 'which language do I like best'. >>> >>> Tony Proctor >> >> Well spoken, sir. Thank You. >> > > I do not disagree with what you are saying. But as regards your and > others' huge code base - and it's a big but - all I have seen so far is a > bunch of fretting and hand waving about all the bad things that may happen > in the future. No one has provided the smallest shred of evidence that MS > is doing anything to cause problems with VB6 apps down the road. And > please don't bring up the terminally silly example of Format. Yes, there > MAY be problems down the road - and there MAY NOT! Many people are > actively berating MS for things that they are worried might happen. Get > it - MIGHT? > > I fail to see the commercial problems you are worried about. Maybe you can > explain. But I too have an installed VB6 code base and have yet to see the > slightest problem. I tell clients the situation and my opinion that their > VB6 apps will probably continue to work fine for many years but that I > cannot be sure because of MS. Then it is their decision whether to migrate > to .Net or not. They may be annoyed at the situation but not at me because > it is clearly not my doing.Either way I still have their business, either > continuing to maintain the existing apps or working on a .Net migration. > suppose it's theoretically possible that a client will get fed up and move > to Java or something, but that has yet to happen. As for competitors, they > are in the same boat as you. > > Then there's the matter of .Net. Some people, including you, seem to > understand that the quetion of whether .Net is a good tool is totally > separate from MS dropping VB6 support. Others cannot make this simple > distinction, however, and are continually bashing .Net - about which they > apparently know almost nothing - just because they are unhappy with the > VB6 support situation. That's how I got involved in this thread, tired of > seeing ignoramuses knock .Net when they do not know it. > > On Sat, 14 May 2005 13:49:51 -0400, "Peter Aitken"
<pait***@CRAPnc.rr.com> wrote: >...Yes, there MAY be problems Yes, but many believe it would be a lot more difficult (if not>down the road - and there MAY NOT! Many people are actively berating MS for >things that they are worried might happen. Get it - MIGHT?... impossible) to get fixed after the fact. Not an unreasonable assumption IMO. Hence the "ounce of prevention" approach. Get it? :-) -Tom MVP - Visual Basic (please post replies to the newsgroup) "Tom Esh" <tjeshGibber***@suscom.net> wrote in message Apart from the rounding problem and the various issues getting VB apps tonews:564d81pfedfja5bam7005d2l01mkhutj94@4ax.com > On Sat, 14 May 2005 13:49:51 -0400, "Peter Aitken" > <pait***@CRAPnc.rr.com> wrote: >> ...Yes, there MAY be problems >> down the road - and there MAY NOT! Many people are actively berating >> MS for things that they are worried might happen. Get it - MIGHT?... > > Yes, but many believe it would be a lot more difficult (if not > impossible) to get fixed after the fact. Not an unreasonable > assumption IMO. Hence the "ounce of prevention" approach. Get it? :-) conform to XP themes there is this attitude: http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1495504,00.asp I'm not saying that security should not be an overriding concern but that when (not if) things change in future OS releases, whether it be for security concerns or just a side effect of some other change, the effect on legacy applications is hardly likely to be positive. The best we can hope for is neutral. What we have to expect is negative. Using a supported language with supported tools is certainly a better position to be in than the alternative. The only question is what language is going to be supported long-term and VB.Net is certainly far down the list of likely candidates. Putting on blinders and hoping that things might not change is living in a fool's paradise. Things have changed, things are changing and things will change in the future. Within the sphere of the support environments the changes may be positive but within the sphere of all applications being used they may be show stoppers. A business can't wait until that happens before being ready to handle the changes. -- Reply to the group so all can participate VB.Net: "Fool me once..." On Sun, 15 May 2005 06:03:13 -0700, "Bob Butler"
<tiredofit@nospam.com> wrote: > Entirely reasonable :-)>.... A business can't wait until that happens before >being ready to handle the changes. -Tom MVP - Visual Basic (please post replies to the newsgroup) "Ben" <NoSpam@NoSpam.com> wrote in message Boy... threads like this can go on... and on.... and on <g>.news:uTUW$gzVFHA.2692@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl... > Hi all, > > I am still using VB6, I guess I am very behind the time. But it really > works very nicely for what I do. > Is it still alive and well out in the development world? > I figure, after 2 versions of vb.net, may be it's time to move to vb.net? > Thanks for sharing your thoughts. > > Ben Check out this thread. Similar questions were asked. VB.NET is the "New Coke" of the computing world http://groups.google.co.uk/group/microsoft.public.vb.general.discussion/browse_frm/thread/c8d6a7fa24f9dff7/9563f985a327bd7a?q=%22new+coke%22+-dotnet+group:*.vb.*&rnum=1&hl=en#9563f985a327bd7a Here's a VBWire poll.... Which version of VB do you primarily use: Visual Basic Classic (6.0 and earlier): 47% Visual Basic .NET: 25% I dumped VB and went to C#: 17% I don't use VB: 12% http://vbwire.com/ Here's an article.... The Slow Brain Death of VB.NET http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/000235.html fwiw, VS'05's the first .Net release that I'm actually looking forward to. The "VB" they've included this time is actually starting to look like VB. It'll never be VB5/6 though so you can kiss literally billions of lines of code and countless tips/tricks/samples good bye. -- Ken Halter - MS-MVP-VB - http://www.vbsight.com DLL Hell problems? Try ComGuard - http://www.vbsight.com/ComGuard.htm Sign up now to help keep VB support alive - http://classicvb.org/petition Please keep all discussions in the groups.. "Ben" <NoSpam@NoSpam.com> wrote in message For new project move as soon as possible. For existing projects it might be news:uTUW$gzVFHA.2692@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl... > Hi all, > > I am still using VB6, I guess I am very behind the time. But it really > works very nicely for what I do. > Is it still alive and well out in the development world? > I figure, after 2 versions of vb.net, may be it's time to move to vb.net? > Thanks for sharing your thoughts. worth staying with vb6. I'd strongly advice going to C# instead of vb.net unless you are a home user simply because C# is aimed at the professional. Our whole shop moved from vb.net to C# and it took no time to get the hang of it. Everyone at work now laughs about how we actually sat down and weighed up the pros and cons of using C# over a period of weeks only to find everyone got the hang of it in around a day. Moving from vb6 to vb.net or c# is a bigger step but not that difficult. Once you've moved and used it for a while you'll understand why vb was ditched. Michael Excuse me Michael, you sound like a Bill Gate informacialist. Not that it
matter anyway. Show quote "Michael C" <mculley@NOSPAMoptushome.com.au> wrote in message news:ec7TFzzVFHA.2616@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl... > "Ben" <NoSpam@NoSpam.com> wrote in message > news:uTUW$gzVFHA.2692@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl... > > Hi all, > > > > I am still using VB6, I guess I am very behind the time. But it really > > works very nicely for what I do. > > Is it still alive and well out in the development world? > > I figure, after 2 versions of vb.net, may be it's time to move to vb.net? > > Thanks for sharing your thoughts. > > For new project move as soon as possible. For existing projects it might be > worth staying with vb6. I'd strongly advice going to C# instead of vb.net > unless you are a home user simply because C# is aimed at the professional. > Our whole shop moved from vb.net to C# and it took no time to get the hang > of it. Everyone at work now laughs about how we actually sat down and > weighed up the pros and cons of using C# over a period of weeks only to find > everyone got the hang of it in around a day. Moving from vb6 to vb.net or c# > is a bigger step but not that difficult. Once you've moved and used it for a > while you'll understand why vb was ditched. > > Michael > > "Michael C" <mculley@NOSPAMoptushome.com.au> wrote in message Will that new understanding give you a clue as to why 6 million VB users news:ec7TFzzVFHA.2616@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl... > Once you've moved and used it for a while you'll understand why vb was > ditched. were ditched along with VB and all of their code? gag... here we go again. Too many threads already. -- Ken Halter - MS-MVP-VB - http://www.vbsight.com DLL Hell problems? Try ComGuard - http://www.vbsight.com/ComGuard.htm Sign up now to help keep VB support alive - http://classicvb.org/petition Please keep all discussions in the groups.. "Ken Halter" <Ken_Halter@Use_Sparingly_Hotmail.com> wrote in message Once you get into using .net you see how broken vb6 was. I agree they did news:eP1s3E0VFHA.612@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl... > Will that new understanding give you a clue as to why 6 million VB users > were ditched along with VB and all of their code? gag... here we go again. > Too many threads already. dump vb6 users but that is a different story. There is no question .net is *far* superior to vb6. Michael
http://www.googlefight.com/index.php?lang=en_GB&word1=VB6+sucks&word2=VB.net+sucks
http://www.googlefight.com/index.php?lang=en_GB&word1=VB.net+improves+on+VB6&word2=VB.Net+does+not+improve+on+VB6 <g> -- Show quoteRandy Birch MS MVP Visual Basic http://vbnet.mvps.org/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Read. Decide. Sign the petition to Microsoft. http://classicvb.org/petition/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Michael C" <mculley@NOSPAMoptushome.com.au> wrote in message news:utGL3M1VFHA.3540@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl... : "Ken Halter" <Ken_Halter@Use_Sparingly_Hotmail.com> wrote in message : news:eP1s3E0VFHA.612@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl... : > Will that new understanding give you a clue as to why 6 million VB users : > were ditched along with VB and all of their code? gag... here we go again. : > Too many threads already. : : Once you get into using .net you see how broken vb6 was. I agree they did : dump vb6 users but that is a different story. There is no question .net is : *far* superior to vb6. : : Michael : : What amuses me is that there is actually a url called "googlefight". <g>
- Kev
http://www.googlefight.com/index.php?lang=en_GB&word1=c-sharp+sux&word2=vb6+sux
Nice site, BTW :-) Show quote "Randy Birch" <rgb_removet***@mvps.org> wrote in message news:Ob%23wQ61VFHA.3620@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl... > http://www.googlefight.com/index.php?lang=en_GB&word1=VB6+sucks&word2=VB.net+sucks > > > http://www.googlefight.com/index.php?lang=en_GB&word1=VB.net+improves+on+VB6&word2=VB.Net+does+not+improve+on+VB6 > > <g> > > -- > > Randy Birch > MS MVP Visual Basic > http://vbnet.mvps.org/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Read. Decide. Sign the petition to Microsoft. > http://classicvb.org/petition/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > "Michael C" <mculley@NOSPAMoptushome.com.au> wrote in message > news:utGL3M1VFHA.3540@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl... > : "Ken Halter" <Ken_Halter@Use_Sparingly_Hotmail.com> wrote in message > : news:eP1s3E0VFHA.612@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl... > : > Will that new understanding give you a clue as to why 6 million VB > users > : > were ditched along with VB and all of their code? gag... here we go > again. > : > Too many threads already. > : > : Once you get into using .net you see how broken vb6 was. I agree they > did > : dump vb6 users but that is a different story. There is no question .net > is > : *far* superior to vb6. > : > : Michael > : > : > This is the correct link:
http://www.googlefight.com/index.php?lang=en_GB&word1=VB+6+sucks&word2=VB.net+sucks You'll note that VB 6 now has lost by over 320,000!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ;-} Have a nice day. Ken. "Randy Birch" <rgb_removet***@mvps.org> wrote in message http://www.googlefight.com/index.php?lang=en_GB&word1=VB6+sucks&word2=VB.net+sucksnews:Ob%23wQ61VFHA.3620@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl... > > http://www.googlefight.com/index.php?lang=en_GB&word1=VB.net+improves+on+VB6&word2=VB.Net+does+not+improve+on+VB6> > Show quote > > <g> > > -- > > Randy Birch > MS MVP Visual Basic > http://vbnet.mvps.org/ > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > Read. Decide. Sign the petition to Microsoft. > http://classicvb.org/petition/ > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > > > > "Michael C" <mculley@NOSPAMoptushome.com.au> wrote in message > news:utGL3M1VFHA.3540@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl... > : "Ken Halter" <Ken_Halter@Use_Sparingly_Hotmail.com> wrote in message > : news:eP1s3E0VFHA.612@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl... > : > Will that new understanding give you a clue as to why 6 million VB users > : > were ditched along with VB and all of their code? gag... here we go > again. > : > Too many threads already. > : > : Once you get into using .net you see how broken vb6 was. I agree they did > : dump vb6 users but that is a different story. There is no question .net is > : *far* superior to vb6. > : > : Michael > : > : > "Ken Dopierala Jr." <kdopiera***@wi.rr.com> wrote in message
http://www.googlefight.com/index.php?lang=en_GB&word1=VB+6+sucks&word2=VB.net+sucks
news:%23KG8dm$VFHA.2684@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl > This is the correct link: > > > It's not that VB.Net sucks, it's that it has no reason to exist. As always,> You'll note that VB 6 now has lost by over > 320,000!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! the argument is *not* whether or not VB.Net is technically better than VB but what the mass of VB developers do with the millions of lines of VB code now that MS has abandoned them. Staying in VB6 is not feasible long-term and rewriting in VB.Net is a huge leap of faith given that MS has shown such blatant disregard for the language. -- Reply to the group so all can participate VB.Net: "Fool me once..." > It's not that VB.Net sucks, it's that it has no reason to exist. As I've worked with all kinds of Microsoft's Basic versions since CP/M times. > always, > the argument is *not* whether or not VB.Net is technically better than VB > but what the mass of VB developers do with the millions of lines of VB > code > now that MS has abandoned them. One important reason why Microsoft grew up is and was always the compatibility issue: Microsoft Basic programs did run on all machines, and the core of their program code could be moved to newer basic versions always in a more or less easy way. Furtheron Microsoft introduced a real native compiler when protection against interpreter code decompiling became an important question of protecting know how. In the meantime Microsoft became so huge that even real inventions don't help them to maintain growing up, and so they have to invent the wheel each two years for new so that each newcoming programer generation might not have an impression that their job could be done with something else than the newest not yet available vapourware. If they will not switch on their brain they never will recognize that each time their learning curve becomes a little bit flatter it happens a wheel to be reinvented a little bit rounder but also a little bit harder and more expensive to handle. This way I tend to hold Microsoft for the world's biggest resource destroyer. Toys like their multicolored user interface design have a shorter life expectancy than a new car, so no one should tell me to invest my time into techniques which are internally almost overcome when they are sold for the first time. Concerning introducion of new languages in software languages I only can say to younger collegues 'solve your customer's problems, not those of your tool supplier'. Just my 2c, as in old days. On Thu, 12 May 2005 17:19:12 -0400, "Ben" <NoSpam@NoSpam.com> wrote: ¤ Hi all,¤ ¤ I am still using VB6, I guess I am very behind the time. But it really ¤ works very nicely for what I do. ¤ Is it still alive and well out in the development world? ¤ I figure, after 2 versions of vb.net, may be it's time to move to vb.net? ¤ Thanks for sharing your thoughts. ¤ ¤ Ben ¤ Well as long as it does what you need that's all that really matters. However, if you feel that you're going to be left behind by sticking with it then you would be correct. Paul ~~~~ Microsoft MVP (Visual Basic)  |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Other interesting topics