|
code
newsgroups
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
VBclassic petitionHi!
Like, I guess almost everybody else in this newsgroup, I too signed the petition. I'm just curious... Has there been any response from Microsoft to this initiative? Martin Martin wrote:
> The sound of ... silence.> Hi! > > Like, I guess almost everybody else in this newsgroup, I too signed the > petition. I'm just curious... Has there been any response from Microsoft to > this initiative? As for my part it doesn't matter if MS would 'support' VB classic - I can't
remember where I could enjoy their 'support'. Moreover, times ago when I had (better: my client had) a severe Access problem there wasn't any help available neither from MS nor their distributors, even when we asked to pay for. Whereas closing up this newsgroup and some others concerning VB classic would make my life much harder - there are so many useful informations here that MS never was able to present in a reasonable manner. And the only MS mail I receive is PR or bug mail - support is what is done **here** from volunteers around the world - that what MS did in the past years for VB programmer support is, at my feeling, almost null. So I will have no tears for closing up VB support but an ocean of tears for closing the newsgroups. Just my 2c. On Mon, 30 May 2005 18:58:17 +0200, "Bruno Köller"
<mydevicen***@onlinehome.de> wrote: Show quoteHide quote >As for my part it doesn't matter if MS would 'support' VB classic - I can't The issue isn't about "support" but rather, it is about MS providing a>remember where I could enjoy their 'support'. Moreover, times ago when I had >(better: my client had) a severe Access problem there wasn't any help >available neither from MS nor their distributors, even when we asked to pay >for. > >Whereas closing up this newsgroup and some others concerning VB classic >would make my life much harder - there are so many useful informations here >that MS never was able to present in a reasonable manner. And the only MS >mail I receive is PR or bug mail - support is what is done **here** from >volunteers around the world - that what MS did in the past years for VB >programmer support is, at my feeling, almost null. > >So I will have no tears for closing up VB support but an ocean of tears for >closing the newsgroups. > >Just my 2c. forward path other than rewriting from the ground up, for the existing code base. Bryan ____________________________________________________________ New Vision Software "When the going gets weird," Bryan Stafford "the weird turn pro." alpine_don'tsendspam@mvps.org Hunter S. Thompson - Microsoft MVP-Visual Basic Fear and Loathing in LasVegas "alpine" <alpine_don'tsendspam@mvps.org> wrote in message Exactly: And the answer was/is "it will not happen."> > The issue isn't about "support" but rather, it is about MS providing a > forward path other than rewriting from the ground up, for the existing > code base. As much as we don't want to believe that is true, it is. That, unfortunately, leaves a shadow on all their development platforms. I've learned my lesson again (again). It's unlikely to happen to me again in the future as we're placing our eggs in another basket. That's quite unfortunate. MS has some bright guys and a lot of resources to put on projects. Unfortunately, a well done bad project implementing a poor strategy is pretty useless to me. Well, more than useless. Dan "Dan Barclay" <D**@MVPs.org> wrote in message Is that actually a stated official position or just the most reasonablenews:OXwHOWWZFHA.2688@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl > "alpine" <alpine_don'tsendspam@mvps.org> wrote in message >> >> The issue isn't about "support" but rather, it is about MS providing >> a forward path other than rewriting from the ground up, for the >> existing code base. > > Exactly: And the answer was/is "it will not happen." assumption. -- Reply to the group so all can participate VB.Net: "Fool me once..." Hi Bob,
Nothing you're probably not already aware of: It's been, what, 4 or 5 years now. It's still broke. The best we get from MS is: http://blogs.msdn.com/jroxe/archive/2005/03/17/398325.aspx (read: they don't even acknoledge the real problem) http://blogs.msdn.com/somasegar/archive/2005/03/16/397221.aspx (ditto) Their answer is "retraining". Roxe is a marketeer. Soma is CVP of the developer div. At this point it would take a real tail kicking from Ballmer all the way down the line. That's not going to happen, or it would already have happened. Dan Show quoteHide quote "Bob Butler" <tiredofit@nospam.com> wrote in message news:%23WA8qcWZFHA.2756@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl... > "Dan Barclay" <D**@MVPs.org> wrote in message > news:OXwHOWWZFHA.2688@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl >> "alpine" <alpine_don'tsendspam@mvps.org> wrote in message >>> >>> The issue isn't about "support" but rather, it is about MS providing >>> a forward path other than rewriting from the ground up, for the >>> existing code base. >> >> Exactly: And the answer was/is "it will not happen." > > Is that actually a stated official position or just the most reasonable > assumption. > > -- > Reply to the group so all can participate > VB.Net: "Fool me once..." > On Mon, 30 May 2005 17:18:32 -0500, "Dan Barclay" <D**@MVPs.org> wrote: in <OXwHOWWZFHA.2***@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl> Show quoteHide quote > You're so forgiving. <g> Sorry, but once is enough for me and I'll take>"alpine" <alpine_don'tsendspam@mvps.org> wrote in message >> >> The issue isn't about "support" but rather, it is about MS providing a >> forward path other than rewriting from the ground up, for the existing >> code base. > >Exactly: And the answer was/is "it will not happen." > >As much as we don't want to believe that is true, it is. That, >unfortunately, leaves a shadow on all their development platforms. I've >learned my lesson again (again). > >It's unlikely to happen to me again in the future as we're placing our eggs >in another basket. That's quite unfortunate. MS has some bright guys and a >lot of resources to put on projects. > >Unfortunately, a well done bad project implementing a poor strategy is >pretty useless to me. Well, more than useless. > >Dan my chances with any basket other than one offered by MS. C or C++ is a sure thing. --- Stefan Berglund Dan Barclay wrote:
> Hopefully it's a basket w/ an independent standards committee and at> "alpine" <alpine_don'tsendspam@mvps.org> wrote in message > > > > The issue isn't about "support" but rather, it is about MS providing a > > forward path other than rewriting from the ground up, for the existing > > code base. > .... > > It's unlikely to happen to me again in the future as we're placing our eggs > in another basket. ... least more than one viable compiler vendor?
Show quote
Hide quote
"Duane Bozarth" <dpboza***@swko.dot.net> wrote in message Nope just another basket, hopefully with fewer holes.news:429C822E.6CF7140A@swko.dot.net... > Dan Barclay wrote: >> >> "alpine" <alpine_don'tsendspam@mvps.org> wrote in message >> > >> > The issue isn't about "support" but rather, it is about MS providing a >> > forward path other than rewriting from the ground up, for the existing >> > code base. >> > ... >> >> It's unlikely to happen to me again in the future as we're placing our >> eggs >> in another basket. ... > > Hopefully it's a basket w/ an independent standards committee and at > least more than one viable compiler vendor? There are no truly independent development languages. On paper it sounds like a valid concept, but it simply doesn't exist. I've looked at the languages with independent standards (that boils down to C++ pretty quickly) and I have little interest there. It's a bit too low level for my apps, unless you use vendor specific libs which make it JAVL (just another vendor language). You could also argue that C# is "independent", but I doubt there is an app existing that doesn't extensively use MS extensions (JAVL), plus it's only available in a single environment. C++ (even with MS) would be a safe choice though. In studying this for several years, the conclusion I've come to is that what matters most is the longevity/health of the development community coupled with the vendor using the product themselves. MS can't make radical changes to VC without killing themselves. I've actually understood that for many years, but fooled myself into believing that VB was different because MS would never screw a developer community that large (the phrase I've used before is "they're not that stupid"). It looks like I was wrong about that part. Our target is Delphi. It's a lot more like VB than most would like to admit, and it's got a lot of .Netness even in native modes. Actually, .Net is a lot like Delphi<g>. Later, Dan Dan Barclay wrote:
> I'll disagree, but you're obviously free to draw your own conclusions..... > > There are no truly independent development languages. On paper it sounds > like a valid concept, but it simply doesn't exist. ... Depending on what is in your required basket, it may be required to use vendor-specific language, but you're always more exposed... As you probably recall, my background is from scientific/numeric computation where much of the new "paradigm" isn't pertinent...my experience w/ VB is restricted to interfaces for such other computational engines...and, parenthetically, I'm noticing a marked decrease in the traffic here that has much that I can effectively conribute to over the last year... "Duane Bozarth" <dpboza***@swko.dot.net> wrote in message True enough. There are situations in which generic language capibilities of news:429C905E.20973811@swko.dot.net... > Dan Barclay wrote: >> > ... >> >> There are no truly independent development languages. On paper it sounds >> like a valid concept, but it simply doesn't exist. ... > > I'll disagree, but you're obviously free to draw your own conclusions. > > Depending on what is in your required basket, it may be required to use > vendor-specific language, but you're always more exposed... independent langauges are enough for specific libs. They are seldom enough for entire apps though. They fall on their faces with one thing or another, whether it's data access, UI, 3rd party support, whatever. My current world just doesn't work well when I make that limitation. > As you probably recall, my background is from scientific/numeric Yes, for scientific/numeric computation there are more choices. FORTRAN > computation where much of the new "paradigm" isn't pertinent...my > experience w/ VB is restricted to interfaces for such other > computational engines...and, parenthetically, I'm noticing a marked > decrease in the traffic here that has much that I can effectively > conribute to over the last year... (my first, but long forgot) language would be way up on my list for that. It's not hard to create good class libs in C++ for that either (as weak as I am with C++, I put together a complex number lib in no time). Still, when you try to do an entire app with FORTRAN or C++ it turns into grinding work. Most of what I do is heavy in string handling, though I'm working on computation at the moment. The thing is, it's not serious enough to warrant a separate computational engine with the cross langauge "stuff" you inevitibly have to weigh in with. We'll try Delphi for a while and see how that goes. I'm actually beginning to like it. Unfortunately, VB is no longer a choice. Dan Dan Barclay wrote:
Show quoteHide quote > After I posted the previous, I was thinking I should have added the> "Duane Bozarth" <dpboza***@swko.dot.net> wrote in message > news:429C905E.20973811@swko.dot.net... > > Dan Barclay wrote: > >> > > ... > >> > >> There are no truly independent development languages. On paper it sounds > >> like a valid concept, but it simply doesn't exist. ... > > > > I'll disagree, but you're obviously free to draw your own conclusions. > > > > Depending on what is in your required basket, it may be required to use > > vendor-specific language, but you're always more exposed... > > True enough. There are situations in which generic language capibilities of > independent langauges are enough for specific libs. They are seldom enough > for entire apps though. They fall on their faces with one thing or another, > whether it's data access, UI, 3rd party support, whatever. > > My current world just doesn't work well when I make that limitation. .... caveat that when dealing w/ a specific OS and other requirements that there are difficulties...that's where the use of OS-specific languages tends to flourish in my world...the UI and interactive stuff (tended to be thought of as "the fluff" rather than the core :) ) were where VB and its ilk were/are used. For that purposes I've basically migrated to Tcl/Tk which has the high-level abstraction w/ the limitations of being OpenSource not all extensions are totally consistent or to the same level of expertise in implementation. The key point in its favor is the cross-platform nature. But, as you note, wherever the future is for various organizations, VB undoubtedly isn't it... > But, as you note, wherever the future is for various organizations, VB I expect Delphi could make the race. Just looking around what could come for > undoubtedly isn't it. me after VB classic I saw that Delphi not only can produce small exes files it seems that it could also create linux applications. Don't know if that's true and if yes how easy it does it, but if it's true I know in which basket I'll put my eggs next time. On Tue, 31 May 2005 15:33:38 -0500, "Dan Barclay" <D**@MVPs.org> <snip>wrote: >Most of what I do is heavy in string handling, though I'm working on There are a number of tips when it comes to using Delphi>computation at the moment. The thing is, it's not serious enough to warrant >a separate computational engine with the cross langauge "stuff" you >inevitibly have to weigh in with. >We'll try Delphi for a while and see how that goes. I'm actually beginning >to like it. - don't try to make it look VB like - Begin and End; have a very distinctive meaning Also be /very/ careful using the library string handling routines - sometimes it is hard to distinguish between ASCIIZ and ANSI routines You also need to be careful with 3rd party code, a lot of Delphi programmers still think pure 'Pascal' - and Delphi ain't that Messing around with GetMem and New is ridiculous given later constructs. The downside is that I am certain that Borland is on some form of life support machine from MS
Show quote
Hide quote
"J French" <erew***@nowhere.uk> wrote in message Yea, there are significant differences in syntax. OTOH, the application news:429d8f76.179310039@news.btclick.com... > On Tue, 31 May 2005 15:33:38 -0500, "Dan Barclay" <D**@MVPs.org> > wrote: > > <snip> > >>Most of what I do is heavy in string handling, though I'm working on >>computation at the moment. The thing is, it's not serious enough to >>warrant >>a separate computational engine with the cross langauge "stuff" you >>inevitibly have to weigh in with. > >>We'll try Delphi for a while and see how that goes. I'm actually >>beginning >>to like it. > > There are a number of tips when it comes to using Delphi > - don't try to make it look VB like > - Begin and End; have a very distinctive meaning targets are *very* similar between VB and Delphi. Delphi has a much wider range (allowing more low level code on one end and better object management on the other end of the range), but that is a trade off a little with coding simplicity of VB. I actually prefer VB, though I'm growing to really like Delphi. VB just isn't a rational choice for me any more. > Also be /very/ careful using the library string handling routines Yea, I'm more into the Delphi (was ObjectPascal) stuff. It's far better > - sometimes it is hard to distinguish between ASCIIZ and ANSI routines > > You also need to be careful with 3rd party code, a lot of Delphi > programmers still think pure 'Pascal' - and Delphi ain't that isolated from the machinery. Actual Pascal has no draw for me<g>. > Messing around with GetMem and New is ridiculous given later Yup. No need for pointers either, at all.> constructs. > The downside is that I am certain that Borland is on some form of life Yup, been watching them for several years now. Fortunately, the Delphi > support machine from MS group is healthy and the community is healthy. As for the rest of the company.... <shrug>. Their marketing absolutely sucks. If I'd known "back then" what I know now about Delphi now I'd have been there long ago. Instead of getting smacked in the face with marketeers and evangelists (a la MS) I've discovered it as I got into it! It's a real sleeper<g>. I've tried to spark some interest in the Borland Marketeers with regard to a few relatively minor things they could do to capture the attention of VB folks but they seem to be tied up with something else. I'm not going to beat on them about it... if they want to know what I think they know my number. Later, Dan I have found in the 20+ years that I have been programming, that using
Microsoft languages/tools is a sure thing to protect your investment. Until now they have always provided a path to easily upgrade to the next version. Mind you, I have today in my VB6 apps still (little bits of) code that was originally written in MS Basic Professional 6.0 (Some may remember this DOS and OS/2 product). Sometimes companies balancing on the verge of bankrupcy have very innovative ideas but they usually lack the funds/resources to convert those ideas into something solid and lasting. Borland (i think they are called like that again) and Data Access Corp. (Visual Dataflex) are fine examples. Their products are (barely) kept alive by people who are (oh so fashionable) against everything that Microsoft produces. Now, for the last 2 years, I'm planning and researching how to make the transition from VB6 to VB.net and the more I learn about it, the more depressed I get. Not only do I need to learn an entirely new language, but also I need to rewrite my apps. I have tried that upgrade tool, but that is a joke. I feel seriously let down by Microsoft. For the first time in 20 years or so they abrubtly discontinued a development platform to replace it with something else which happens to have some similarities, but is a totally new product never the less. My company is just a small one. The whole year we're working on expanding and improving our main app for next years' version. We cannot interrupt that a whole year to make a tranition to a new platform. Where are the good old days that I was happy and excited when MS came with a new version of (Visual) Basic? Oh well, these were my 2 cents... Martin Show quoteHide quote "Dan Barclay" <D**@MVPs.org> wrote in message news:OWNc3RuZFHA.3144@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl... > > "J French" <erew***@nowhere.uk> wrote in message > news:429d8f76.179310039@news.btclick.com... > > On Tue, 31 May 2005 15:33:38 -0500, "Dan Barclay" <D**@MVPs.org> > > wrote: > > > > <snip> > > > >>Most of what I do is heavy in string handling, though I'm working on > >>computation at the moment. The thing is, it's not serious enough to > >>warrant > >>a separate computational engine with the cross langauge "stuff" you > >>inevitibly have to weigh in with. > > > >>We'll try Delphi for a while and see how that goes. I'm actually > >>beginning > >>to like it. > > > > There are a number of tips when it comes to using Delphi > > - don't try to make it look VB like > > - Begin and End; have a very distinctive meaning > > Yea, there are significant differences in syntax. OTOH, the application > targets are *very* similar between VB and Delphi. Delphi has a much wider > range (allowing more low level code on one end and better object management > on the other end of the range), but that is a trade off a little with coding > simplicity of VB. > > I actually prefer VB, though I'm growing to really like Delphi. VB just > isn't a rational choice for me any more. > > > Also be /very/ careful using the library string handling routines > > - sometimes it is hard to distinguish between ASCIIZ and ANSI routines > > > > You also need to be careful with 3rd party code, a lot of Delphi > > programmers still think pure 'Pascal' - and Delphi ain't that > > Yea, I'm more into the Delphi (was ObjectPascal) stuff. It's far better > isolated from the machinery. Actual Pascal has no draw for me<g>. > > > Messing around with GetMem and New is ridiculous given later > > constructs. > > Yup. No need for pointers either, at all. > > > The downside is that I am certain that Borland is on some form of life > > support machine from MS > > Yup, been watching them for several years now. Fortunately, the Delphi > group is healthy and the community is healthy. As for the rest of the > company.... <shrug>. > > Their marketing absolutely sucks. If I'd known "back then" what I know now > about Delphi now I'd have been there long ago. Instead of getting smacked > in the face with marketeers and evangelists (a la MS) I've discovered it as > I got into it! It's a real sleeper<g>. I've tried to spark some interest > in the Borland Marketeers with regard to a few relatively minor things they > could do to capture the attention of VB folks but they seem to be tied up > with something else. I'm not going to beat on them about it... if they want > to know what I think they know my number. > > Later, > Dan > > > "Martin" <amsterdmr@nospam.hotmail.com> wrote in message I used to believe that as well. However, things changed with VB in the mid news:u4yQLL0ZFHA.3320@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl... >I have found in the 20+ years that I have been programming, that using > Microsoft languages/tools is a sure thing to protect your investment. > Until > now they have always provided a path to easily upgrade to the next > version. versions. They replaced the long time team members with little crossover. Starting with VB, they decided Basic was not a "real" programming language. They started implementing serious breaking changes with VB4. > Mind you, I have today in my VB6 apps still (little bits of) code that was Yes, I started with CP/M versions of Microsoft Basic. Some code fragments > originally written in MS Basic Professional 6.0 (Some may remember this > DOS > and OS/2 product). (less line numbers) still exist in my code. > Sometimes companies balancing on the verge of bankrupcy have very Barely kept alive? You clearly haven't seen Delphi in the last few years. > innovative > ideas but they usually lack the funds/resources to convert those ideas > into > something solid and lasting. Borland (i think they are called like that > again) and Data Access Corp. (Visual Dataflex) are fine examples. > Their products are (barely) kept alive by people who are (oh so > fashionable) > against everything that Microsoft produces. BTW, where do you think the arcitecture for .Net had its genesis? Delphi. > Now, for the last 2 years, I'm planning and researching how to make the Yes, that's a real problem in the short term. The *core* problem, however > transition from VB6 to VB.net and the more I learn about it, the more > depressed I get. Not only do I need to learn an entirely new language, but > also I need to rewrite my apps. I have tried that upgrade tool, but that > is > a joke. is far more serious. MS does *not* consider VB to be a real developer language. The dev team still considers "improvement" to the language that will break your code to be acceptable. I'm not going to repeat myself at length here, but if you want more of my thoughts on the subject: http://vb.mvps.org/tips/stability.asp That was written in 2001. Absolutely *nothing* has changed with regard to MS's attitude or approach to our VB code. I strongly suggest you consider other alternatives. Many of us have worked quietly and loudly with MS since that time. Visit here, sign the petition, if you haven't already ( http://www.classicvb.org/ ). > I feel seriously let down by Microsoft. For the first time in 20 years or Yup.> so > they abrubtly discontinued a development platform to replace it with > something else which happens to have some similarities, but is a totally > new > product never the less. > My company is just a small one. The whole year we're working on expanding Yup, you can't stop the world for this kind of nonsense. One approach we're > and improving our main app for next years' version. We cannot interrupt > that > a whole year to make a tranition to a new platform. taking is to move code incrementally. We are able to start "at the bottom" of our library and convert functions to Delphi, then call those from VB. Doing that we can maintain a single code base and still make enhancements. What's more, we can still deploy in native (Win32) versions and move the same code to .Net. In addition, we can include components within the main exe so we don't have to worry so much about dll hell. > Where are the good old days that I was happy and excited when MS came with I remember those well. The developer group at MS is entirely different now. > a > new version of (Visual) Basic? That excitement has died and gone to Borland I think. > Oh well, these were my 2 cents... Well worth saying. It's unfortunate that MS doesn't care what we think.Dan On Thu, 2 Jun 2005 10:39:57 -0500, "Dan Barclay" <D**@MVPs.org> wrote: ¤ Barely kept alive? You clearly haven't seen Delphi in the last few years. ¤ BTW, where do you think the arcitecture for .Net had its genesis? Delphi. Where do you think the idea for Delphi came from? Paul ~~~~ Microsoft MVP (Visual Basic) On Thu, 02 Jun 2005 11:18:53 -0500, Paul Clement
<UseAdddressAtEndofMess***@swspectrum.com> wrote: >On Thu, 2 Jun 2005 10:39:57 -0500, "Dan Barclay" <D**@MVPs.org> wrote: Not from MS> >¤ Barely kept alive? You clearly haven't seen Delphi in the last few years. >¤ BTW, where do you think the arcitecture for .Net had its genesis? Delphi. >Where do you think the idea for Delphi came from? And where do you think DotNet came from ? "J French" <erew***@nowhere.uk> wrote in message Anders Hejlsberg. DotNet and Delphi have the same "father"...news:429f3730.23581097@news.btclick.com... > >>Where do you think the idea for Delphi came from? > > Not from MS > > And where do you think DotNet came from ? > > 1 of many references..... The spirit of Delphi and the road to .NET http://forums.apress.com/printthread.php?Cat=&Board=Windows&main=351&type=thread ....and, for kicks, see: Conspiracy Theory: Microsoft's .Net IS Borland's Product http://delphi.about.com/od/delphifornet/a/conspiracydnet_3.htm .....and (reposted earlier), it seems that some Delphi users feel like they've been abandoned as well... Came across this in another group.... Borland Delphi is an emotional hot button? http://discuss.joelonsoftware.com/default.asp?joel.3.101881.13 -- Ken Halter - MS-MVP-VB - http://www.vbsight.com DLL Hell problems? Try ComGuard - http://www.vbsight.com/ComGuard.htm Please keep all discussions in the groups..
Show quote
Hide quote
"Dan Barclay" <D**@MVPs.org> wrote in message And then to think that Microsoft owes its very existance to Basic (and itsnews:%23gFnVl4ZFHA.3356@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl... > > "Martin" <amsterdmr@nospam.hotmail.com> wrote in message > news:u4yQLL0ZFHA.3320@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl... > >I have found in the 20+ years that I have been programming, that using > > Microsoft languages/tools is a sure thing to protect your investment. > > Until > > now they have always provided a path to easily upgrade to the next > > version. > > I used to believe that as well. However, things changed with VB in the mid > versions. They replaced the long time team members with little crossover. > Starting with VB, they decided Basic was not a "real" programming language. > They started implementing serious breaking changes with VB4. developers of course). > Hehehe I tried in those days, but compiled MS-Basic code resulted in such> > Mind you, I have today in my VB6 apps still (little bits of) code that was > > originally written in MS Basic Professional 6.0 (Some may remember this > > DOS > > and OS/2 product). > > Yes, I started with CP/M versions of Microsoft Basic. Some code fragments > (less line numbers) still exist in my code. huge run time files that those little floppies we used to have at that time were simply insufficient. Show quoteHide quote > Interesting article Dan. Of course I have signed the petition. I started> > Sometimes companies balancing on the verge of bankrupcy have very > > innovative > > ideas but they usually lack the funds/resources to convert those ideas > > into > > something solid and lasting. Borland (i think they are called like that > > again) and Data Access Corp. (Visual Dataflex) are fine examples. > > Their products are (barely) kept alive by people who are (oh so > > fashionable) > > against everything that Microsoft produces. > > Barely kept alive? You clearly haven't seen Delphi in the last few years. > BTW, where do you think the arcitecture for .Net had its genesis? Delphi. > > > Now, for the last 2 years, I'm planning and researching how to make the > > transition from VB6 to VB.net and the more I learn about it, the more > > depressed I get. Not only do I need to learn an entirely new language, but > > also I need to rewrite my apps. I have tried that upgrade tool, but that > > is > > a joke. > > Yes, that's a real problem in the short term. The *core* problem, however > is far more serious. MS does *not* consider VB to be a real developer > language. The dev team still considers "improvement" to the language that > will break your code to be acceptable. > > I'm not going to repeat myself at length here, but if you want more of my > thoughts on the subject: > > http://vb.mvps.org/tips/stability.asp > > That was written in 2001. Absolutely *nothing* has changed with regard to > MS's attitude or approach to our VB code. I strongly suggest you consider > other alternatives. Many of us have worked quietly and loudly with MS since > that time. Visit here, sign the petition, if you haven't already ( > http://www.classicvb.org/ ). > this thread because I wondered if there had been any reply from Microsoft. Would be nice to put a page on the petition site "Responses from Microsoft". Even if it would be an empty page, that would still tell a lot ;-) Show quoteHide quote > > I feel seriously let down by Microsoft. For the first time in 20 years or > > so > > they abrubtly discontinued a development platform to replace it with > > something else which happens to have some similarities, but is a totally > > new > > product never the less. > > Yup. > > > My company is just a small one. The whole year we're working on expanding > > and improving our main app for next years' version. We cannot interrupt > > that > > a whole year to make a tranition to a new platform. > > Yup, you can't stop the world for this kind of nonsense. One approach we're > taking is to move code incrementally. We are able to start "at the bottom" > of our library and convert functions to Delphi, then call those from VB. > Doing that we can maintain a single code base and still make enhancements. > > What's more, we can still deploy in native (Win32) versions and move the > same code to .Net. In addition, we can include components within the main > exe so we don't have to worry so much about dll hell. > > > Where are the good old days that I was happy and excited when MS came with > > a > > new version of (Visual) Basic? > > I remember those well. The developer group at MS is entirely different now. > That excitement has died and gone to Borland I think. > > > Oh well, these were my 2 cents... > > Well worth saying. It's unfortunate that MS doesn't care what we think. > > Dan > > "Martin" <amsterdmr@nospam.hotmail.com> wrote in message news:ew8eEH% Yup. But, the kids that run it now have not clue about that.>> I used to believe that as well. However, things changed with VB in the > mid >> versions. They replaced the long time team members with little >> crossover. >> Starting with VB, they decided Basic was not a "real" programming > language. >> They started implementing serious breaking changes with VB4. > > And then to think that Microsoft owes its very existance to Basic (and its > developers of course). Show quoteHide quote >> > Mind you, I have today in my VB6 apps still (little bits of) code that Which compiler(s) were you using? If you linked with the /O option they > was >> > originally written in MS Basic Professional 6.0 (Some may remember this >> > DOS >> > and OS/2 product). >> >> Yes, I started with CP/M versions of Microsoft Basic. Some code >> fragments >> (less line numbers) still exist in my code. > > Hehehe I tried in those days, but compiled MS-Basic code resulted in such > huge run time files that those little floppies we used to have at that > time > were simply insufficient. linked in only the code needed and did not require the runtime file. Show quoteHide quote >> I'm not going to repeat myself at length here, but if you want more of my Yea, sorry about ignoring the subject or original post. I run through the >> thoughts on the subject: >> >> http://vb.mvps.org/tips/stability.asp >> >> That was written in 2001. Absolutely *nothing* has changed with regard >> to >> MS's attitude or approach to our VB code. I strongly suggest you >> consider >> other alternatives. Many of us have worked quietly and loudly with MS > since >> that time. Visit here, sign the petition, if you haven't already ( >> http://www.classicvb.org/ ). >> > Interesting article Dan. Of course I have signed the petition. I started > this thread because I wondered if there had been any reply from Microsoft. > Would be nice to put a page on the petition site "Responses from > Microsoft". > Even if it would be an empty page, that would still tell a lot ;-) ng's pretty quickly. Dan
Show quote
Hide quote
On Wed, 1 Jun 2005 14:59:36 -0500, "Dan Barclay" <D**@MVPs.org> wrote: It is peculiar, what is easy in VB is rather painful in Delphi> >"J French" <erew***@nowhere.uk> wrote in message >news:429d8f76.179310039@news.btclick.com... >> On Tue, 31 May 2005 15:33:38 -0500, "Dan Barclay" <D**@MVPs.org> >> wrote: >> >> <snip> >> >>>Most of what I do is heavy in string handling, though I'm working on >>>computation at the moment. The thing is, it's not serious enough to >>>warrant >>>a separate computational engine with the cross langauge "stuff" you >>>inevitibly have to weigh in with. >> >>>We'll try Delphi for a while and see how that goes. I'm actually >>>beginning >>>to like it. >> >> There are a number of tips when it comes to using Delphi >> - don't try to make it look VB like >> - Begin and End; have a very distinctive meaning > >Yea, there are significant differences in syntax. OTOH, the application >targets are *very* similar between VB and Delphi. Delphi has a much wider >range (allowing more low level code on one end and better object management >on the other end of the range), but that is a trade off a little with coding >simplicity of VB. - yet what is hard in VB is really easy in Delphi >I actually prefer VB, though I'm growing to really like Delphi. VB just That Uses clause is a dream>isn't a rational choice for me any more. > >> Also be /very/ careful using the library string handling routines >> - sometimes it is hard to distinguish between ASCIIZ and ANSI routines >> >> You also need to be careful with 3rd party code, a lot of Delphi >> programmers still think pure 'Pascal' - and Delphi ain't that >Yea, I'm more into the Delphi (was ObjectPascal) stuff. It's far better >isolated from the machinery. Actual Pascal has no draw for me<g>. - I suggest that you avoid 'Uses' inside the Implementation >> Messing around with GetMem and New is ridiculous given later Dangerous little things - best avoided wherever possible>> constructs. > >Yup. No need for pointers either, at all. >> The downside is that I am certain that Borland is on some form of life If they had just produced a BASIC version of C++Builder ....>> support machine from MS > >Yup, been watching them for several years now. Fortunately, the Delphi >group is healthy and the community is healthy. As for the rest of the >company.... <shrug>. >Their marketing absolutely sucks. If I'd known "back then" what I know now Yes - I also got into it by accident>about Delphi now I'd have been there long ago. Instead of getting smacked >in the face with marketeers and evangelists (a la MS) I've discovered it as >I got into it! It's a real sleeper<g>. >I've tried to spark some interest They seem to be thrashing around, Kylix, DotNet etc>in the Borland Marketeers with regard to a few relatively minor things they >could do to capture the attention of VB folks but they seem to be tied up >with something else. I'm not going to beat on them about it... if they want >to know what I think they know my number. "J French" <erew***@nowhere.uk> wrote in message Yes, at least where there is a noticable difference in difficulty. OTOH, news:429ec334.258104627@news.btclick.com... >>Yea, there are significant differences in syntax. OTOH, the application >>targets are *very* similar between VB and Delphi. Delphi has a much wider >>range (allowing more low level code on one end and better object >>management >>on the other end of the range), but that is a trade off a little with >>coding >>simplicity of VB. > > It is peculiar, what is easy in VB is rather painful in Delphi > - yet what is hard in VB is really easy in Delphi *most* stuff is about the same in either. Six of one... Show quoteHide quote >>I actually prefer VB, though I'm growing to really like Delphi. VB just I haven't run into that issue yet, I'll be watching for it. References?>>isn't a rational choice for me any more. >> >>> Also be /very/ careful using the library string handling routines >>> - sometimes it is hard to distinguish between ASCIIZ and ANSI routines >>> >>> You also need to be careful with 3rd party code, a lot of Delphi >>> programmers still think pure 'Pascal' - and Delphi ain't that > >>Yea, I'm more into the Delphi (was ObjectPascal) stuff. It's far better >>isolated from the machinery. Actual Pascal has no draw for me<g>. > > That Uses clause is a dream > - I suggest that you avoid 'Uses' inside the Implementation >>> The downside is that I am certain that Borland is on some form of life I tried talking to them about that in the last months. Quite unlikely to >>> support machine from MS >> >>Yup, been watching them for several years now. Fortunately, the Delphi >>group is healthy and the community is healthy. As for the rest of the >>company.... <shrug>. > > If they had just produced a BASIC version of C++Builder .... happen IMHO. Show quoteHide quote >>Their marketing absolutely sucks. If I'd known "back then" what I know Yup. I'm hoping they resurect Kylix a bit, maybe inject VCL there to make >>now >>about Delphi now I'd have been there long ago. Instead of getting smacked >>in the face with marketeers and evangelists (a la MS) I've discovered it >>as >>I got into it! It's a real sleeper<g>. > > Yes - I also got into it by accident > >>I've tried to spark some interest >>in the Borland Marketeers with regard to a few relatively minor things >>they >>could do to capture the attention of VB folks but they seem to be tied up >>with something else. I'm not going to beat on them about it... if they >>want >>to know what I think they know my number. > > They seem to be thrashing around, Kylix, DotNet etc it more of an "across the board" lib. But, I was talking about marketeering. They're not doin' nuthin' on Kylix, not much on .Net (except for staying in the (very small) MS slipstream). They're spending their marketing capital on modeling and ECO "stuff" that only a few "out there" big shops might care about. They need to get back to basics before they go so far down that road. They've got a "pipeline" to fill. But then, they didn't ask me (though I told them anyway<vbg>). Dan > The issue isn't about "support" but rather, it is about MS providing a As far as I'm concerned the issue is will future versions Windows allow VB > forward path other than rewriting from the ground up, for the existing > code base. applications to run, I couldn't care less if they provide active support or not, but I need the COM to work in some form (even emulated would do) for an indefinate period. > but I need the COM to work in some form (even emulated would do) for an Don't worry. MS is not so innovative that they could allow themselves to do > indefinate period. without well running techniques, as you can see on good old DDE still available. And as far as I can see it looks for me that dot net isn't really an alternative to COM but an advancement, and so I have good hope to continue writing VB6 based applications until my retirement. The general direction seems to be that more and more VB6 developers turn to
Delphi. I just stumbled on a website of a product called RealBasic. www.realsoftware.com I'm wondering if anybody has experience with this product, and with porting VB6 apps to RealBasic? I find the info they give out on the website too limited to make a valid judgement, so I'd love to hear from people who have real experience with it... Tia, Martin Show quoteHide quote "Martin" <amsterdmr@nospam.hotmail.com> wrote in message news:e54rsZLZFHA.1368@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl... > Hi! > > Like, I guess almost everybody else in this newsgroup, I too signed the > petition. I'm just curious... Has there been any response from Microsoft to > this initiative? > > Martin > > |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Other interesting topics