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 521554
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: VB6.....
by galvanash on Mon 11th Jun 2012 07:18 UTC 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[4]: VB6.....
by snorkel1 on Mon 11th Jun 2012 19:50 in reply to "RE[3]: VB6....."
snorkel1 Member since:
2012-02-25

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

No time like now, check out Lazarus. It's outstanding.

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[4]: VB6.....
by galvanash on Tue 12th Jun 2012 00:18 in reply to "RE[3]: VB6....."
galvanash Member since:
2006-01-25

"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 ;)
"

Touché.

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.


That is where we do not agree. I don't think you really understand basic programming, I think you understand how to use Visual Basic. To be clear there is nothing at all wrong with that - I just think you are oversimplifying what an understanding of basic programming actually involves...

The knowledge acquired in learning "classic" VB doesn't lend itself to pursuing a career in programming. My main gripe against VB was that it was promoted as a teaching language for such a long time, not that it was a bad tool for non-programmers. It was great for that, as long as you didn't have plans on actually becoming a programmer...

The stuff most VB programmers consider "advanced" really is basic stuff (like proper scoping and OOP concepts) and the language does nothing to teach good habits - defaulting to variants for everything in what is actually a statically typed language is unforgivable stupid on Microsoft's part. It promotes poor organization and you end up decomposing problems in ways that don't map to other languages well at all.

Also, it starts way too far up the food chain - GUI development isn't hard, but it also has next to nothing to do with actual programming. I'd much rather give a beginner a few months with Ruby or Python doing command line stuff - a drag and drop GUI for wiring up event handlers is not programming and in fact has virtually nothing to do with learning the craft. Skipping straight to that without an understanding of basic terminal I/O ignores how we all got from there to here...

Anyway, it gets the job done for you - nothing wrong with that. I don't want to sound like an ass or anything - I just have strong feelings about it.

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.


I have converted many VB users to Delphi over the years... It is no longer around in the same form (the current versions are expensive and overblown - they suck for beginners) but Lazarus is free and accessible. Not as easy to get going with as Delphi 7 was unfortunately, but it might be worth the trouble if you are really looking for something similar in concept to VB with a bit more headroom.

I would highly recommend giving it a try if RAD/GUI development is what you are after. Pascal isn't the best language in the world either, but when you get down to the nitty gritty it is just C with a more verbose "englishy" syntax that goes to great lengths to try and keep you from shooting your own foot off. If you learn Pascal moving on to C/C++/Java/C# is fairly straightforward.

Reply Parent Score: 2