Why Visual Basic 6?

[Yue_Hong]

Visual Basic .NET has come to earth for years already. But I found out until today still many of us still sticking with Visual Basic 6. This can be proved from this site and many other Visual Basic website, where Visual Basic 6 is more active than the .NET.

I never use the .NET before, so I don't really know the power with it. But I knew that with the .NET version, you can display your software with XP style properly. I am just curious why many of us still sticking with Visual Basic 6? Is it because it is much more easier to program than .NET? or it is something else?

[Sir Loin]

I use VB6 because my computers are too old to run WindowsXP SP2, and WinXP SP2 is required to run the .NET framework.

-Sir Loin

[Joacim Andersson]

I use VB6 because my computers are too old to run WindowsXP SP2, and WinXP SP2 is required to run the .NET framework.

-Sir Loin

You can run the .Net framework 1.1 SDK on a Win2000 and above. So that's the minimum to develop for the framework but a .Net application can run on Win98.

[mayurvb]

The main reason for using is that the applications developed are pretty less in size.
Any application developed with .Net will require, quite understandably, the .Net framework, the installer of which is way too big and the actual installation is also quite large.
With VB 6.0 ( shall we call i legacy now?) a couple of essential files copied and registered on the client machine and you are done. The actual package is too small and easy to distribute, say over the internet.

The application developed with VB 6 are less resource intensive, at least that is my observation.
My personal experience with VB.Net is bad, it is no-where like VB6 and is a trap laid my MS for VB6 programmers. I believe that C# is far more easier and the mindest is also set that we are doing something new. It will be interesting to see how may VB6 programmers prefer VB.Net, i went for C#.

[dee-u]

You mean C# has more similarities with VB6.0?

[dglienna]

I'm working with VB.Net 2003 now, and haven't come accross anything that has turned me off to it altogether. I have managed to get sample projects, and even codebank snippets running, and I like what I see.

I've written a few simple programs, that are much like VB6, but am still wondering when I'm going to be able to debug other snippets, or just sit down and develop an app. I'd be satisfied with the confidence to rewrite a vb6 app that I worked on for a year.

I'm still in the learning stage. It took a while to move to VB from QuickBasic. Imagine that: developing an app for a window instead of the console? Now we're back to a console! I suppose I could rewrite the QB app as a Net console app and be done with it! Maybe not the best idea that I've had, though.

[|2eM!x]

dg, have you turned off the vb namespace? if not your not learning pure .net

[mayurvb]

No, there is no similarities.

The problem i guess is with Object Oriented Programming stuff. I agree it is good stuff but it was really not there in VB 6.0, and everybody agree to that. In an effort to make VB.Net OOP's type MS really spoiled it. It is not the same VB6, and this is my opinion. It is difficult for a progammer who spent 3-4 years on VB6 to adapt to VB.Net.
I will prefer learning from the scratch, perhaps in that case, go for the new C# which is the most significant of all .Net

[dglienna]

The book as examples with the namespace, but i'm trying to use samples without it. I haven't started writing from scratch, but hope to not use the namespace. I think I can run samples through to have the IDE re-write them from net, just to see how it does it, but I'm still looking for a way to realize which commands to use now, if I used to use that command then.

[baja_yu]

What about VB.Net ability to convert VB6 projects to .Net? I heard it is total crap. Useless.

[dglienna]

It has made programs that run on your computer, and shows you the code, but when it comes to running it elsewhere, it bombs out. I tried it with a few simple programs that I had in VB6. The only way I would use it is to see how to do something in Net, by plugging in a section of code. It couldn't even translate my clock code that drew the face of a clock. Just textboxes, on a form, in a circle. Not really too challenging, I would have thought.

[mendhak]

You shouldn't run the converter tool for your application unless you absolutely need to convert the app. "If it ain't broken, don't try fixing it." I had met one of the VS.NET developers and he had emphasized (several times) in his presentation that one should evaluate all possible reasons for HAVING to convert the app, and that one shouldn't convert just for the heck of "being with" .NET.

[wossname]

I think the reason that VB6 developers sometimes go to C# instead is BECAUSE there are no similarities. It makes the break easier and you are able to separate the two languages in your mind.

VB.Net has sufficient similarities to VB6 to confuse and introduce problems.

Personally I had no problem coming to .Net because I initially tried to use Managed C++.Net What a nightmare. Compared to that C# and VB.net are a walk in the park. I moved to C# after MC++.Net and started making immediate progress, it was such a good way to learn oop without polluting my new code with nasty old VB6 habits.

Time passed and I migrated to VB.Net after having long forgotten VB6 habits. Happily, I am now almost incapable of any significant feats of coding in VB6 because I find it so badly restrictive.

Now I'm moving back to C# and staying with VB.Net at the same time. This could be tricky.

[StrangerInBeijing]

Damn, get a life!

Face it, pro's and con's aside, the days of vb6 are over. Gone..not coming back!

There's not traps laid, conspiracy or anything.

So, count your losses, see your shrink, pop your prozacs and move on!

FYI: VB, C#, blah blah...does not matter. Learn about the framework. Do it in any langauge you like, but focus of the FRAMEWORK!! And be sure to at least get a basic understanding of MSIL. Then you too will see, the language does not makes a difference.

.NET is here, and it's here to stay. Join the grumpy old farts in the corner if you wnat, but if so, just shut the F up!

[dee-u]

I dont know how many years VB6.0 "stayed" but will .Net stay for long?

[dee-u]

Why Visual Basic 6? It is because it could still make me a living.

[StrangerInBeijing]

A friend the other day said "MS Sucks"

So she essentially said Windows, MS App she use every day (and many are FREE) like MSN, I-Explorer, Office, etc etc sucks. I can relate, and even agree to that honestly.

So my answer is a question: Know anything better?

IF you do some research why .net was created, then you will notice, the ball have just started rolling.

[dee-u]

I dont have any grudge to anybody, if their product gives me a living then I'll be ok.

[mayurvb]

I dont agree that VB6 is gone... what about the millions of lines of code that is already there and running....
The new development can be more .Net development, that's true, but VB6 will go only when the framework is shipped inbuilt with the operating system, consumers getting good hardware at very less cost.
I have seen some very complex system specially in financials etc running superbly in VB6 and the consumers dont want to upgrade!

[StrangerInBeijing]

... I know..u r right...but you just HAVE to think in terms of the future.

I had myself blinded by my boss a few years ago, trying to force me not to study .net, and focus on my work (vb6). A year later he kicked me out, and you know how hard it was to find a job back then with no .net experience??

That bring us to the VB vs C# think. Even VB.NET could not land me a job when I got out of the country and I was just lucky to end up here.

the future.....let this old man tell you out of experience..

[mayurvb]

You are absoultely correct!
IT is all about "upgrade" and so is Microsoft!!!

[dee-u]

So what it more viable to learn, VB.Net or C#?

[mayurvb]

I have prefered C# over VB.net.
1. C# is pretty new and i hope MS must have learned the pro and cons from programming languages and tried to make C# use the best features.
2. OOP's is there since last 15 years almost, we can expect it to be stable and a recent language should let implement it more accurately than any other previous.
3. New, makes sense to learn something new than to think of learning over the same thing again.
4. Not very sure, but there are rumors that at IL generated is better optimized for C# specially for loops!. (what i know is IL is same for every .Net language, but some gurus dont believe this. I remember i read this somewhere, will search for the link.)

[Jacob Roman]

Damn, get a life!

Face it, pro's and con's aside, the days of vb6 are over. Gone..not coming back!

There's not traps laid, conspiracy or anything.

So, count your losses, see your shrink, pop your prozacs and move on!

FYI: VB, C#, blah blah...does not matter. Learn about the framework. Do it in any langauge you like, but focus of the FRAMEWORK!! And be sure to at least get a basic understanding of MSIL. Then you too will see, the language does not makes a difference.

.NET is here, and it's here to stay. Join the grumpy old farts in the corner if you wnat, but if so, just shut the F up!

That's what Microsoft is forcing all the programmers into. They are too hyped up in their .NET Framework and have all their eggs in one basket. You are one of many who have been sucked into their game. I'm not that into OOP, and it's a shame that they made all the latest languages totally OOP and require the Framework. That's why I still stick with VB6 and Visual C++ 6.0. And what's the point in being forced into relearning a language you already know? Especially when you don't have the time. I can see if it was a minor update with new built in functions and all, but now they modified it so much, that they have made VB's syntax look like C++. The classic BASIC syntax that's been around for 30-40 years is now dead.

[dee-u]

That's why I still stick with VB6 and Visual C++ 6.0.

I also "love" VB6.0 but what would the future give us if we would stick in it?

[Joacim Andersson]

I must say that this discussion feels a bit old. It has been discussed more times then I'm able to count during the last few years in different forums, news groups, and blog sites. But here are my 5 cents.... (once again)

Classic VB will die only because MS has desided to kill it not because it's old or doesn't belong in the future of software development. If unmanaged code wouldn't be important in the future (as MS see it) then they would have scrapped their VC++ tool as well which they haven't.

Don't get me wrong I have truely embraced .Net and I started using it (however not for commercial use) as soon as Beta 1 was released to the public. However I still use VB6 extensively simply because I have many thousand lines of code out there I still have to support.

C# is not newer then VB.Net since they where released at the same time. Stating that C# is a new language while VB.Net isn't is just silly since you would then look on VB.Net only as an upgrade of VB6 which it isn't. Since MS is facing out VB6 and there will not be any VB.COM, VB.Net would at first glance look like a natural upgrade (and for many people it has been) but the difference between the languages are as large as between C# and C++ or Java.

I read a blog site where someone, using about the same tone as StrangerInBeijing above, wrote that the request to MS to continue support and develop classic VB was made from a bunch of old farts that just made a lot of noice through their false teeth. He also continued by making the comparison between MS QuickBasic and VB. He had a point that if you came from QuickBasic and then tried to learn VB the step would have been about the same as going from VB6 to VB.Net. However the comparison is just ridiculous simply because of the difference in code base.

VB was for many years (and probably still are if you also count in VB.Net) the most commonly used computer language in the world. MS also made sure that even more people used it by introducing VBA in all of their Office softwares and also licensing VBA to other software companies. They then created Visual Basic Scripting Edition (or VBScript) that became very popular after MS released the ASP technology in IIS. So if you count all applications and macros written with VB over the years you understand why people are still using VB6. Simply because just because MS can afford to drop their previous software, many of us regular mortals can not.

To sum it up I love .Net and I'm seriously considering upgrading my Delphi 6 version to lastest version so I still can enjoy writing .Net code while still having the ability to use a great RAD tool for unmanaged code.

[NoteMe]

Classic VB will die only because MS has desided to kill it not because it's old or doesn't belong in the future of software development. If unmanaged code wouldn't be important in the future (as MS see it) then they would have scrapped their VC++ tool as well which they haven't.

Just as a note to this. I might be wrong here since this is just a guess though. But it is easier for MS to scrap something they have the full controll over. If they don't want VB anymore as we know it. They can just stop supporting it, and it will die. That is not so easy with C++. Since there is a lot of different tools that can compile C++ pretty nice. And a few compilers that is actualy much better then the one that comes with VS it self. So if they scrap it from VS, it will still live on in other forms.

And this is exactly what will happen to C# and VB.NET too now. Since the standard is public, everyone that wants can make a compiler for it. And that is whats going on at the moment too. If you don't like to buy a big fancy IDE, but can manage with a small free one, then you can get just that. And it even outputs purer more platform independent code then VS too.


Well, that was just me ranting a bit again..

[Joacim Andersson]

Well, MS might have been afraid to lose their C++ users if they dropped their VC++ tool, but that was not my point. If MS really truly believed that .Net will be the future and that all code base should in the future run as managed code they would have dropped VC++ in the same manner as they dropped VB6. But this has not happened, they continue to evolve that tool (not just keep the support of version 6) so they must know that unmanaged code will still be used in the future so why not give a VB developer the same opportunity to keep developing unmanaged code?

As of today this can only be achieved for us by continue to use VB6 but at the same time MS is phasing out the support for VB6 and the tool is being discontinued. Which only leaves us with the ability to use managed code while a C++ developer still have a choice between C++ and C# for unmanaged vs. managed code.

[dee-u]

unmanaged and managed code, anybody who wants to explain it?