I installed API-Guide on Windows 7 and it doesn't work because there are no
VB5 Runtime. I know even Vista didn't had them but it shows a interesting
message. I guess we are going to see a similar message in next Windows
release for VB6.

---
This program requires MSVBVM50.DLL, which is no longer included in this
version of Windows.

Contact Microsoft Corporation for support
Your version of Microsoft Deprecated DLL Components isn't compatible with
this version of Windows.
---

VB5 hasn't been supported in any sense for quite some time.  Was its runtime
ever included in any version of Windows?

I don't see this as any reason to jump to the conclusion that the next
Windows won't have VB6 runtime support.

¤ >I installed API-Guide on Windows 7 and it doesn't work because there are no
¤ > VB5 Runtime. I know even Vista didn't had them but it shows a interesting
¤ > message. I guess we are going to see a similar message in next Windows
¤ > release for VB6.
¤
¤ VB5 hasn't been supported in any sense for quite some time.  Was its runtime
¤ ever included in any version of Windows?
¤
¤ I don't see this as any reason to jump to the conclusion that the next
¤ Windows won't have VB6 runtime support.

VB 6.0 isn't supported either.

As far as the runtime is concerned there are currently no plans to include or support it in future
versions beyond Windows 7.


Paul
~~~~
Microsoft MVP (Visual Basic)

or support it in future
Complete FUD.  No statement has been made one way or the other by any
reputable source.  Everything else is pure speculation.

Kevin Provance laid this down on his screen :
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/vbasic/ms788708.aspx

"VB6 runtime will ship and will be supported in Windows 7 for the
lifetime of the OS.  Developers can think of the support story for
Vista being the same as it is for Windows 7.  However there are no
plans to include VB6 runtime in future versions of Windows beyond
Windows 7."

That means nothing Ray.  Plans change.  Even so, all that would mean is the
runtime would not be included with Windows.  Any developer worth his salt
already includes the runtime with their setup, whether it's needed or
not...because there is always one numbwit out there who thinks they
understand their computer better than anyone who will delete files like
msvbvm60.dll thinking they don't need it.  I've seen it happen time and
again.

If I were you, I'd be more worried about support for various flavours of
your runtime of choice, since Win8 is going to be more COM than next.

Kevin Provance was thinking very hard :
They might.  But, the current plan is not to include vb runtimes with
the next os.  Their is a credible source, and Paul's comment was not
FUD - it was the absolute truth.

I agree.  You should always include the ability to install the runtime
if needed.

I do not discuss that other runtime anymore on this group.  Sorry.

it hurts MS is included a 1 MB in their already bloated OS, in Windows 7 TPM
is inlcuded. go to system32 and search for TPM*
Trusted Platform Module.


Show quoteHide quote

Micro$oft disappoint me time after time. I really thought they might have at
last got it right this time with Windoze 7, but in reality it is just as bug
ridden as any of their other operating systems. It amazes me how they get
away with making false promises about quality and peddling the same old bug
ridden rubbish time after time. Disgraceful.

Mike

¤ : As far as the runtime is concerned there are currently no plans to include
¤ or support it in future
¤ : versions beyond Windows 7.
¤
¤ Complete FUD.  No statement has been made one way or the other by any
¤ reputable source.  Everything else is pure speculation.

Well it wouldn't surprise me since they kept bringing back the Jet database engine until it was
finally replaced, but yes according to Microsoft the VB 6.0 runtime is forked as far as the next
version of Windows is concerned. That is, unless you wish to speculate that they will change their
mind.


Paul
~~~~
Microsoft MVP (Visual Basic)

On Tue, 24 Aug 2010 12:00:04 -0500, Paul Clement
<UseAdddressAtEndofMess***@swspectrum.com> wrote:

How so?  Jet 4.0/msjet40.dll and DAO 3.6 are included from Windows
2000 to Windows 7 as part of the OS.   The Access product group
brought out their own version called ACE which works with Access 2007.
However Jet 4.0 has not yet been replaced.   It's my understanding
that Jet 4.0 is used by the Windows OS.

Tony

On Tue, 24 Aug 2010 16:36:40 -0600, Tony Toews
<tto***@telusplanet.net> wrote:

Jet 4.0 is based on an engine termed "Jet Red", and so is ACE ("Access
Connectivity Engine"), but it isn't "Jet 4.0" that is used by Windows
(Win2k-Win7) but a flavor called "Jet Blue" or the "Extensible Storage
Engine" (ESE). Both 'Jet Red' and 'Jet Blue' came from, and share/d,
the same core technology.

ESE is strictly ISAM, highly tranactional, concurrent, and very
lightweight. It was originally a sort-of 'Jet Red Lite', but that is
less the case. It is used by Windows for internal processes as well as
the backbone in Active Directory, Exchange Server, MS Mail, and
Search.

I expect the gulf between the two will widen even more now that the
Office team (Access) have taken over development of 'Jet Red' from the
SQL Server team, but 'Jet Blue' remains in the hands of the Windows
developers.

-ralph

On Tue, 24 Aug 2010 16:36:40 -0600, Tony Toews <tto***@telusplanet.net> wrote:

¤ On Tue, 24 Aug 2010 12:00:04 -0500, Paul Clement
¤ <UseAdddressAtEndofMess***@swspectrum.com> wrote:
¤  
¤ >since they kept bringing back the Jet database engine until it was
¤ >finally replaced,
¤
¤ How so?  Jet 4.0/msjet40.dll and DAO 3.6 are included from Windows
¤ 2000 to Windows 7 as part of the OS.   The Access product group
¤ brought out their own version called ACE which works with Access 2007.
¤ However Jet 4.0 has not yet been replaced.   It's my understanding
¤ that Jet 4.0 is used by the Windows OS.
¤
¤ Tony

Jet is deprecated technology, perhaps that is a more appropriate description. It does not support
the Access 2007/2010 database format and has been replaced by ACE.

Yes, it is included in the OS, but then again so is the VB 6.0 runtime which is also obsolete
technology.


Paul
~~~~
Microsoft MVP (Visual Basic)

And yet you allow this obsolete technology to rot in part of your brain.
Shouldn't you be moving forward and put these cells to more useful things,
like the .Nxt runtime library, or a new .Nxt language?

¤ > Yes, it is included in the OS, but then again so is the VB 6.0 runtime
¤ > which is also obsolete
¤ > technology.
¤
¤ And yet you allow this obsolete technology to rot in part of your brain.

It's only a very small part I can assure you. This newsgroup and some of its participants affect me
in that way. But I keep my physical distance. ;-)

¤ Shouldn't you be moving forward and put these cells to more useful things,
¤ like the .Nxt runtime library, or a new .Nxt language?
¤

Well I don't think some share your opinion that Classic Visual Basic is useless, but maybe you
should be focusing on *you* and not me. ;-)


Paul
~~~~
Microsoft MVP (Visual Basic)

He wasn't suggesting that Classic Visual Basic is useless, he was suggesting
that YOU are useless, and I agree with him. As far as this newsgroup is
concerned you are about as useful as a chocolate teapot. Why don't you go
back to writing your silly little colour selector applets.

Mike

¤ > Well I don't think some share your opinion that Classic
¤ > Visual Basic is useless, but maybe you should be focusing
¤ > on *you* and not me. ;-)
¤
¤ He wasn't suggesting that Classic Visual Basic is useless, he was suggesting
¤ that YOU are useless, and I agree with him. As far as this newsgroup is
¤ concerned you are about as useful as a chocolate teapot. Why don't you go
¤ back to writing your silly little colour selector applets.
¤
¤ Mike
¤

Actually he was suggesting that .NET was more useful than obsolete technologies such as Classic
Visual Basic, and I agree with him. I mean, why would anyone choose to continue to use an obsolete
technology and then complain about it being obsolete?

Is there some conceptual misunderstanding about what obsolete means? Do you know? You must know it
by now. You can't win. It's pointless to keep fighting it. Why Mr. Williams? Why? Why do you
persist? ;-)


Paul
~~~~
Microsoft MVP (Visual Basic)

Show quote Hide quote I wasn't suggesting that. You waste your time on an obsolete technology by
your admission, the definition of an idiot.

Ask yourself. You are the one who comes here despite that you don't like
VB6.

Don't worry. We will move to something far better than either VB6 or VB.Nxt.
I am personally familiar with Delphi and C++ Builder, which can make the
same software as .Nxt, while using less resources. As for QtBasic(formally
KBasic), it shows promise as a good replacement for VB6, while being
multiplatform and compiles with minimum dependency. I will be free in the
next month or two, and will contribute, or some of the regulars here a free
converter to QtBasic, or the other Basic dialects.

¤ > ¤ > Well I don't think some share your opinion that Classic
¤ > ¤ > Visual Basic is useless, but maybe you should be focusing
¤ > ¤ > on *you* and not me. ;-)
¤ > ¤
¤ > ¤ He wasn't suggesting that Classic Visual Basic is useless, he was
¤ > suggesting
¤ > ¤ that YOU are useless, and I agree with him. As far as this newsgroup is
¤ > ¤ concerned you are about as useful as a chocolate teapot. Why don't you
¤ > go
¤ > ¤ back to writing your silly little colour selector applets.
¤ > ¤
¤ > ¤ Mike
¤ > ¤
¤ >
¤ > Actually he was suggesting that .NET was more useful than obsolete
¤ > technologies such as Classic
¤ > Visual Basic, and I agree with him.
¤
¤ I wasn't suggesting that. You waste your time on an obsolete technology by
¤ your admission, the definition of an idiot.

Which by your logic would make you an idiot too. Remember I never claimed to be wasting my time, but
perhaps your experience in idiocy is more practiced and refined than mine. ;-)

¤ > I mean, why would anyone choose to continue to use an obsolete
¤ > technology and then complain about it being obsolete?
¤
¤ Ask yourself. You are the one who comes here despite that you don't like
¤ VB6.

According to whom? Does an idiot make up things too, or is that simply ignorance?

¤ > Is there some conceptual misunderstanding about what obsolete means? Do
¤ > you know? You must know it
¤ > by now. You can't win. It's pointless to keep fighting it. Why Mr.
¤ > Williams? Why? Why do you
¤ > persist? ;-)
¤
¤ Don't worry. We will move to something far better than either VB6 or VB.Nxt.
¤ I am personally familiar with Delphi and C++ Builder, which can make the
¤ same software as .Nxt, while using less resources. As for QtBasic(formally
¤ KBasic), it shows promise as a good replacement for VB6, while being
¤ multiplatform and compiles with minimum dependency. I will be free in the
¤ next month or two, and will contribute, or some of the regulars here a free
¤ converter to QtBasic, or the other Basic dialects.

What, me worry? ;-)


Paul
~~~~
Microsoft MVP (Visual Basic)

Yawn. For the Clement troll it seems to be business as usual.

Well as far as I can see, Micro$oft do not actually support Windows 7 do
they, or at least not in any way that allows ordinary users to file bug
reports in a way that is going to result in some real action being taken.
Windows 7 doesn't even run Micro$oft Publisher 2007 properly, and that is
presumably still in its support lifecycle, so VB6's lack of support  is
currently no big deal. Even some of Micro$oft's own built in Windows 7
operating system utilities do not work properly in Windows 7. But Micro$oft
basically just do not want to know.

Mike

Just copy the MSVBVM50.dll to the application folder and the application
will run.

Show quoteHide quote

You can also set the compatibility mode to XP for the app.

Show quoteHide quote

Another BAD idea from a bad programmer.  Seriously, go back into hiding
before you really hurt someone with your misinformation.

One of these days you will actually stop your propaganda and answer a
question... That is why you have been stripped of you MVP status... even the
fake one...

Show quoteHide quote

i know how to, not asking for help on this. just telling everyone what
happened. thanks anyway.

Show quoteHide quote

Question about control properties
Can we use Shell to write file properties
VB6 support and beyond
How to manage a large dictionary of words?
Managing Remote Access Database
vbAdvance general dll problem
Register ActiveX EXE
Using OutputDebugString too much can cause slowness in GUI response
Owned On Vista
WebCAM Support