Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 11th Jun 2012 00:38 UTC, submitted by judgen
Windows "Microsoft recently extended 'It Just Works' compatibility for Visual Basic 6 applications through the full lifetime of Windows 8. Visual Basic 6 first shipped in 1998, so its apps will have at least 24 years of supported lifetime. Contrast that with the Microsoft .NET Framework 1.0 (2002), which is incompatible with Windows 7 (2009)."
Thread beginning with comment 521553
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: VB6.....
by WorknMan on Mon 11th Jun 2012 06:58 UTC in reply to "VB6....."
WorknMan
Member since:
2005-11-13

An abomination of a language. You don't have to make something complex to make it easy to use....look at Python. it adheres to common sense design for a language and is simple to learn and use.


And how far along was Python in the mid-late 90's, when VB was at its prime? Even now, although there's some GUI frameworks, there isn't (AFAIK) an IDE for rapid application development in Python that is as robust as the one in VB6.

As for .NET, is it even relevant anymore now that Metro and WinRT are on the scene? Are developers expected to start all over again every 3-5 years (from COM to .NET to Winforms to Silverlight/WPF to Metro) when MS changes its mind and decides that a technology that it 'bet the company on' should be replaced by a new technology that they're betting the company on?

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: VB6.....
by galvanash on Mon 11th Jun 2012 07:18 in reply to "RE: VB6....."
galvanash Member since:
2006-01-25

And how far along was Python in the mid-late 90's, when VB was at its prime?


There was Delphi though - and a few others. You can't blame VBs popularity on lack of alternatives - it was simply targeted at a very particular demographic - people who wanted to write programs but didn't want to learn how to write programs. It sold immensely well to that market...

I'm sure I will piss off some people with that comment, but the truth hurts. I did some pre.NET VB way back in the day (had no choice), but thankfully I learned a real language or two first so the long-term damage to my brain was minimal.

To the VB apologists out there: If you cut your teeth on VB but have since moved on, good for you - but if you don't realize by now how insanely, unforgivably, mind-numblingly bad it was... I have news for you - you still don't understand basic programming.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[3]: VB6.....
by Tuishimi on Mon 11th Jun 2012 19:12 in reply to "RE[2]: VB6....."
Tuishimi Member since:
2005-07-06

I never had the chance to use Delphi but I had always wanted to... it did seem like a nice development environment.

I haven't used VB since the 90's to the early 2000's... but I enjoyed it when I used it, for the most part.

But there was no VB when I started out programming. I think I made use of BASIC, Pascal, Fortran and C... but when VB came out it was a lot of fun and you really could make functional apps with it.

During my career I've used (for actual applications) BASIC, Fortran, Pascal, COBOL, Ada, Assemly language, C, Bliss, Python, Ruby and others... but like I said in another post I mostly use Java now, tho' it is not my FAVORITE language... but whatever. I use what is in use where I work.

Really my favorite language was Ada... I don't know why really. I think I enjoyed the structure, the build environment and the ability to go low-level if necessary. But I do actually have fond memories of VB.

I taught a programming languages class at a small business college one year (filled in for someone else) and used Python for the most part as a starting language for the students (90's) because I actually liked the indentation requirements and the fact that you could whip a small program up in no time to illustrate various principles.

To me every language and environment has strengths and weaknesses and I guess I just try to learn and enjoy each and every one, like operating systems.

I don't understand why people get almost "angry" (not saying you are) with languages or operating systems especially when there are so many choices out there.

Live and let live, I guess.

I DO agree that there are times when certain languages are inappropriate choices for projects that have specific requirements that would suffer due to a weakness of a language.

That still happens. I was pulled into a project because I was familiar with Ruby. I specifically stated before the project even got started that I thought Ruby was a bad choice, especially considering that so much of the libraries and existing functionality were written in (and still being actively developed in) another language and we'd be doing a lot of reimplementing. No one cared, they just wanted to use Ruby... Sure enough we encountered a number of issues during development and now what's happening? It is being rewritten... only a year later

So yeah. Language choice is important.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: VB6.....
by WorknMan on Mon 11th Jun 2012 22:29 in reply to "RE[2]: VB6....."
WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

There was Delphi though - and a few others. You can't blame VBs popularity on lack of alternatives - it was simply targeted at a very particular demographic - people who wanted to write programs but didn't want to learn how to write programs. It sold immensely well to that market...


Yeah, and it also worked well for that purpose too ;)

I'm sure I will piss off some people with that comment, but the truth hurts.


LOL, no pissing off here. What you say is true, but doesn't hurt in the least. You might know a couple of 'real' languages, but does that mean I should bow down and worship you, or that your penis is bigger than mine? I think not ;)

To the VB apologists out there: If you cut your teeth on VB but have since moved on, good for you - but if you don't realize by now how insanely, unforgivably, mind-numblingly bad it was... I have news for you - you still don't understand basic programming.


Well, I think anybody who wrote VB programs understands basic programming, but maybe not ADVANCED programming. And that was the beauty of VB... I wrote some VB apps for myself back in the early 2000's that are still working great and do exactly what I need them to do, and I didn't have to learn a 'real' language to get that done.

As for moving on, as sad as it is, there really hasn't been a solution (language + IDE + GUI creation tools) to move to since MS killed VB6. Sure, there are languages and frameworks that are much more capable, but also take much longer to learn and are complete overkill for what many of us were doing with VB. Nothing in .NET really fills the 'niche' that VB6 did. Even Dan Appleman (one of the most well-known of VB/Windows gurus) lamented this fact.

Edited 2012-06-11 22:32 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: VB6.....
by lucas_maximus on Mon 11th Jun 2012 08:31 in reply to "RE: VB6....."
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

As for .NET, is it even relevant anymore now that Metro and WinRT are on the scene? Are developers expected to start all over again every 3-5 years (from COM to .NET to Winforms to Silverlight/WPF to Metro) when MS changes its mind and decides that a technology that it 'bet the company on' should be replaced by a new technology that they're betting the company on?


TBH someone always says this. The .NET framework hasn't fundamentally changed since 2004-2009. Even with the update to 4.5

Most of the same techniques and technologies learnt for Silverlight WPF is pretty much the same as those that one would use in Metro.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: VB6.....
by moondevil on Mon 11th Jun 2012 10:24 in reply to "RE: VB6....."
moondevil Member since:
2005-07-08

COM to .NET to Winforms to Silverlight/WPF to Metro when MS changes its mind and decides that a technology that it 'bet the company on' should be replaced by a new technology that they're betting the company on?


Since Windows XP most Win32 APIs are actually COM based.

All the .NET APIs for native code to interact with a running .NET VM are COM based.

Metro is COM based and you can use it flawlessly from .NET.

The way Microsoft replaces the framework of the day, is no different than what other companies do.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: VB6.....
by modmans2ndcoming on Mon 11th Jun 2012 23:42 in reply to "RE: VB6....."
modmans2ndcoming Member since:
2005-11-09

How did a comment complaining about VB6 compared to Python turn into attacking some non existent argument about.net?

Reply Parent Score: 3