|
code
newsgroups
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
VB.net vs VB 6.0We currently have a mix of VB 6.0 and Access 2000 apps. We are trying to develop a strategy for further new development (in in some cases rebuild the Access stuff)and basically have decided on either of VB 6.0 or VB .net as the standard. Since neither of us really have much experience with VB .net, would anyone out there who does, have any suggestions for us as far as which way we should go? There appears to be a huge learning curve for .net. Is moving to ..net really going to buy us anything down the road? Should we even bother looking at it or should we stay with version 6? Is it buggy? How well does it perform? The design interface sure seems sluggish... Are there any horror storys with .net? Is VB 6 going to continue to be supported by Micorosoft for a while ? We are just unsure exactly what to do... Any comments, tips woudl be greatly appreciated! Thanks, Brad Well, the company where I am at is planning on using .NET soon for
new projects, but will continue to maintain existing VB6 apps. If you are going to do any rewrites, .NET may be worth takng a look. The learning curve should not stop you, learning is constant. Microsoft discontinued support for VB6 on March 31 of 2005, although I do not have all the details. Check out this petition: http://classicvb.org/petition The only thing that .NET will buy you down the road is compliance with MS. In using .NET you'll be part of the "moving ahead crowd". If you stay with VB6, you'll be one of those dang dino rebels. VB6 is a safe bet, it runs on almost al PCs out there with Win 95 or better. .NET need more resources, thus a more powerful PC (RAM uP, HD) so there is a chance that anyone that wants to install your ..NET app will need to upgrade (or get a new PC altogether). The big push in using .NET is security and Internet development that involves distributed processes that may reside in PCs accessable through the Internet. I would suggest asking this question in a .NET ng and see what they have to say, although it should be obvious<g>. A friend of mine in similar circumstances switched from VB6 to C#. It was a somewhat hard decision, as he did not have much faith in the ..NET platform. He also considered Java, but he did not like it, mostly becasue it would not compile to native code for Windows. Since he is client driven and needed some sort of compatibility with some standard (read that MS), he decided (I could almost say forced) to choose a .NET language. Since he comes from a C background he opted for C#. He did not even consider Delphi (I never asked why). Good luck! Saga Show quoteHide quote "Brad Pears" <donotre***@notreal.com> wrote in message news:un3$wSVYFHA.3032@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl... > We are a small shop - two IT people. We both are developers etc.... > > We currently have a mix of VB 6.0 and Access 2000 apps. We are trying > to develop a strategy for further new development (in in some cases > rebuild the Access stuff)and basically have decided on either of VB > 6.0 or VB .net as the standard. > > Since neither of us really have much experience with VB .net, would > anyone out there who does, have any suggestions for us as far as > which way we should go? There appears to be a huge learning curve for > .net. Is moving to .net really going to buy us anything down the road? > Should we even bother looking at it or should we stay with version 6? > Is it buggy? How well does it perform? The design interface sure seems > sluggish... > > Are there any horror storys with .net? Is VB 6 going to continue to be > supported by Micorosoft for a while ? > > We are just unsure exactly what to do... > > Any comments, tips woudl be greatly appreciated! > > Thanks, > > Brad > Saga wrote:
> A friend of mine in similar circumstances switched from VB6 to C#. There's wisdom in that foreboding.> It was a somewhat hard decision, as he did not have much faith in the > .NET platform. > He also considered Java, but he did not like it, mostly Did you tell him you can't do that with .NET either? <g>> becasue it would not compile to native code for Windows. He knows, the difference was the MS in the product's copyright.
Undeniably, being a software giant does influence decisions, sometimes making not the best ones. Saga Show quoteHide quote "Karl E. Peterson" <k***@mvps.org> wrote in message news:eSSZmxVYFHA.4032@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl... > Saga wrote: >> A friend of mine in similar circumstances switched from VB6 to C#. >> It was a somewhat hard decision, as he did not have much faith in the >> .NET platform. > > There's wisdom in that foreboding. > >> He also considered Java, but he did not like it, mostly >> becasue it would not compile to native code for Windows. > > Did you tell him you can't do that with .NET either? <g> > -- > Working Without a .NET? > http://classicvb.org/petition > > Saga wrote:
> He knows, the difference was the MS in the product's copyright. "Nobody ever got fired for buying IBM," huh?> Undeniably, being a software giant does influence decisions, > sometimes making not the best ones. I suggest that you make the move to .net. Why use old technology to build
new applications. My company moved to .Net last year and we have been very happy with the move. However, we still do VB6 for maintaining old applications. I do understand why most VB6 programmers are against the .Net movement however I really like .Net. It gives me tools that VB6 does not have (reflection, full OO, end of dll hell...). But with that said there are somethings about .Net that I do not like (slow/buggy IDE, .net runtime, slow performance). With my suggestion to move to .Net, I think you should wait for VS.Net 2005. Good Luck Show quoteHide quote "Brad Pears" <donotre***@notreal.com> wrote in message news:un3$wSVYFHA.3032@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl... > We are a small shop - two IT people. We both are developers etc.... > > We currently have a mix of VB 6.0 and Access 2000 apps. We are trying to > develop a strategy for further new development (in in some cases rebuild > the Access stuff)and basically have decided on either of VB 6.0 or VB .net > as the standard. > > Since neither of us really have much experience with VB .net, would anyone > out there who does, have any suggestions for us as far as which way we > should go? There appears to be a huge learning curve for .net. Is moving > to .net really going to buy us anything down the road? Should we even > bother looking at it or should we stay with version 6? Is it buggy? How > well does it perform? The design interface sure seems sluggish... > > Are there any horror storys with .net? Is VB 6 going to continue to be > supported by Micorosoft for a while ? > > We are just unsure exactly what to do... > > Any comments, tips woudl be greatly appreciated! > > Thanks, > > Brad > Keep existing apps in VB 6 and Access. Download and install VB 2005 Express
Beta 2 from http://www.microsoft.com/vstudio to take a look at VB 2005. Don't bother with .NET 2002 or 2003 as the VB IDEs are major steps backwards. Also, don't let the name Visual Basic fool you, VB 2005, though similar, is a major change from VB 6. Mike Ober. Show quoteHide quote "Brad Pears" <donotre***@notreal.com> wrote in message news:un3$wSVYFHA.3032@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl... > We are a small shop - two IT people. We both are developers etc.... > > We currently have a mix of VB 6.0 and Access 2000 apps. We are trying to > develop a strategy for further new development (in in some cases rebuild the > Access stuff)and basically have decided on either of VB 6.0 or VB .net as > the standard. > > Since neither of us really have much experience with VB .net, would anyone > out there who does, have any suggestions for us as far as which way we > should go? There appears to be a huge learning curve for .net. Is moving to > .net really going to buy us anything down the road? Should we even bother > looking at it or should we stay with version 6? Is it buggy? How well does > it perform? The design interface sure seems sluggish... > > Are there any horror storys with .net? Is VB 6 going to continue to be > supported by Micorosoft for a while ? > > We are just unsure exactly what to do... > > Any comments, tips woudl be greatly appreciated! > > Thanks, > > Brad > > Brad,
We have a very large code base in VB6 and have a nearly finished project in Asp.Net. > There appears to be a huge learning curve for .net. There is, but it is not insurmountable, and .net has a lot of new and interesting ideas. > Is moving to .net really going to buy us anything down the road? Well, if you're not planning on retiring soon. The problem with VB6 is that it's great today, but sooner or later it is going to wear out. > Should we even bother looking at it or should we stay with version 6? For new development, I would definitely suggest looking at it. If you have a large code base that you want to conserve, I would suggest sticking with VB6. Except for the Asp.Net project we are doing, all the rest of our development work is in VB6. Porting our apps at present is out of the question. >Is it buggy? It's not bad. I've worked with much worse.> How well does it perform? The design interface sure seems sluggish... The design interface crawls like a snail, but once you've got your program up and running it's not bad. It is different from VB6 though. Some things in Vb.Net are slower than VB6 (like Mid$, binary file access), but once you adjust to the .net philosophy and code to be fast in .net, it's ok. One thing that really is lacking is edit and continue (promised in VS2005). Every time you have to stop to modify something, the behemoth has to stop rolling, you change a line of code, hit F5 and the behemoth tries to get up on its feet again. > Are there any horror storys with .net? Not that I know of, except for those who have attempted porting a large VB6 program. > Is VB 6 going to continue to be supported by Micorosoft for a while ? No way.> We are just unsure exactly what to do... Join the group.Gary Just got back from an MSDN event. VS2005 will probably make you want to move
to .Net. The next version of Web Services and "ClickOnce" features make seamless deployment and online updating a breeze. The new IDE also adds some nice touches to development. While I blast Microsoft for something about once a week, in the case of the IDE, they seem to be on the right track, motivated to get the developer tools right. You may however wish to move directly to C# instead of VB.Net. Functionally, they are nearly identical, but the woefully misguided naming of "VB.Net" (which has very little to do with "Classic VB") will almost undoubtedly spell its eventual demise. Show quoteHide quote "Brad Pears" <donotre***@notreal.com> wrote in message news:un3$wSVYFHA.3032@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl... > We are a small shop - two IT people. We both are developers etc.... > > We currently have a mix of VB 6.0 and Access 2000 apps. We are trying to > develop a strategy for further new development (in in some cases rebuild > the Access stuff)and basically have decided on either of VB 6.0 or VB .net > as the standard. > > Since neither of us really have much experience with VB .net, would anyone > out there who does, have any suggestions for us as far as which way we > should go? There appears to be a huge learning curve for .net. Is moving > to .net really going to buy us anything down the road? Should we even > bother looking at it or should we stay with version 6? Is it buggy? How > well does it perform? The design interface sure seems sluggish... > > Are there any horror storys with .net? Is VB 6 going to continue to be > supported by Micorosoft for a while ? > > We are just unsure exactly what to do... > > Any comments, tips woudl be greatly appreciated! > > Thanks, > > Brad >
Show quote
Hide quote
> Just got back from an MSDN event. VS2005 will probably make you want See, I find that quite disheartening to hear. I agree with you about theto move > to .Net. The next version of Web Services and "ClickOnce" features make > seamless deployment and online updating a breeze. The new IDE also adds some > nice touches to development. While I blast Microsoft for something about > once a week, in the case of the IDE, they seem to be on the right track, > motivated to get the developer tools right. > > You may however wish to move directly to C# instead of VB.Net. Functionally, > they are nearly identical, but the woefully misguided naming of "VB.Net" > (which has very little to do with "Classic VB") will almost undoubtedly > spell its eventual demise. probable end result for VB.NET... the vast majority of the current VB-Classic users do not want VB.NET and, more than likely, won't move up to it. But the real disheartening part of this scenario is all of the time and money and manpower that Microsoft has thrown at it... money and manpower and time that could have been spent doing what they did so well for the past 10 years... finding out what those who push the then current VB to its limits want next and INTEGRATING that into the current product so that the existing, ordinary users can still function while the wizards get some new "toys" to play with. Had they done that, they wouldn't now be facing their apparent killing off of the most popular programming language ever created. They can still save the day, but I'm afraid management-ego (we're management, we know what's best) will prevent that from happening. Whenever I think about all of this, I'm reminded of the movie Dr. Strangelove and the character Slim Pickings played. All I can envision is the various top management folks at Microsoft riding the "atomic bomb" of VB.NET downward to its eventual detonation and destruction while waving their hats and yelling Yahoo!. (If you never saw the movie, the analogy will unfortunately be lost on you.) Rick VB.Net is a great and powerful development tool and is fun to develop with.
Not to mention that the IDE is far superior to the VB6 IDE. But it took a stone moron to name the language "VB.Net" -- or someone with too much power that they couldn't say no to.... The marketing folks probably thought that by using a goofy name like VB.Net that they could suck along the classic VB folks and instead just pissed them off. Brilliant!! Had it been given a different name, what is now known as "VB.Net" would've made it. But the snob factor by the major corporations for anything with C in its name is already marginalizing the VB.Net language, and that will just snowball. The "classic VB" guys don't want VB.Net and the big players in business don't want VB.Net. Who is left? Oh, that's right, Billy likes it! But don't be too distraught over the eventual outcome (and the writing is ALREADY on the wall for VB.Net). Both C# and ADO.Net will survive intact and there isn't that much of a transition to C#. Indeed, it's much more of a transition to go from VB to VB.Net than it is to go from VB.Net to C#. In terms of Microsoft tools, I think it's evolving to a common high-level programming language. Show quoteHide quote "Rick Rothstein" <rickNOSPAMnews@NOSPAMcomcast.net> wrote in message news:uDVbeQ2YFHA.3648@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl... >> Just got back from an MSDN event. VS2005 will probably make you want > to move >> to .Net. The next version of Web Services and "ClickOnce" features > make >> seamless deployment and online updating a breeze. The new IDE also > adds some >> nice touches to development. While I blast Microsoft for something > about >> once a week, in the case of the IDE, they seem to be on the right > track, >> motivated to get the developer tools right. >> >> You may however wish to move directly to C# instead of VB.Net. > Functionally, >> they are nearly identical, but the woefully misguided naming of > "VB.Net" >> (which has very little to do with "Classic VB") will almost > undoubtedly >> spell its eventual demise. > > See, I find that quite disheartening to hear. I agree with you about the > probable end result for VB.NET... the vast majority of the current > VB-Classic users do not want VB.NET and, more than likely, won't move up > to it. But the real disheartening part of this scenario is all of the > time and money and manpower that Microsoft has thrown at it... money and > manpower and time that could have been spent doing what they did so well > for the past 10 years... finding out what those who push the then > current VB to its limits want next and INTEGRATING that into the current > product so that the existing, ordinary users can still function while > the wizards get some new "toys" to play with. Had they done that, they > wouldn't now be facing their apparent killing off of the most popular > programming language ever created. They can still save the day, but I'm > afraid management-ego (we're management, we know what's best) will > prevent that from happening. Whenever I think about all of this, I'm > reminded of the movie Dr. Strangelove and the character Slim Pickings > played. All I can envision is the various top management folks at > Microsoft riding the "atomic bomb" of VB.NET downward to its eventual > detonation and destruction while waving their hats and yelling Yahoo!. > (If you never saw the movie, the analogy will unfortunately be lost on > you.) > > Rick > |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Other interesting topics