Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 49

Thread: VB6 is not dead

  1. #1

    Thread Starter
    Lively Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    95

    VB6 is not dead

    I just wanted to say vb6 is NOT dead and it shouldn't be, considering it still runs faster than .net with some stuff, it's still incredibly simple/fun to use, and the fact all the code in the past written for it are still great. There were lot of fears on slashdot that microsoft was abandoning .net in some or all forms, while I don't think this is true I also don't think .net lived up to what it was suppose to. I don't understand why microsoft continues to try and shove .net down peoples throat, people know and love vb6, from their corps to the end user, it was at a time one of the most popular language in the entire world. vb.net is not an update, is different language entirely. I'm very pleased to see vb6 will run on windows 8, I still produce commercial projects in it, and will continue to in the future.

    Also in terms of vb6 being very much alive, look how many view and post in the vb6 section on here, and lot of other sites like PSC. The language is a winner, Microsoft abandoning it was a very sad day for a company who had a great history of longevity of products, especially successful ones. While just as saddening to see their company ranking fall, it doesn't suprise me if they keep pulling a vb6 act on people.
    Last edited by Vbstr; Oct 3rd, 2011 at 12:35 AM.

  2. #2
    PowerPoster Nightwalker83's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Adelaide, Australia
    Posts
    13,346

    Re: VB6 is not dead

    Not to be a bother but we already have several threads on the subject perhaps next time you could search the forum before posting.
    when you quote a post could you please do it via the "Reply With Quote" button or if it multiple post click the "''+" button then "Reply With Quote" button.
    If this thread is finished with please mark it "Resolved" by selecting "Mark thread resolved" from the "Thread tools" drop-down menu.
    https://get.cryptobrowser.site/30/4111672

  3. #3

    Thread Starter
    Lively Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    95

    Re: VB6 is not dead

    No bother at all, thanks for sharing. And yes i'm aware there are threads comparing vb6 to .net, that's not the intent with this one, I want people who search via google or on here in 2011 that vb6 is still very much alive and to not listen to the nay sayers. I'm also very happy vb6 will be supported on win8, that gives it another 2/3 years at least, maybe in that time Microsoft will release the source or release a 64bit version. This would show programmers they really care and give them a great reason to hop back on windows dev if they hopped off.

  4. #4
    PowerPoster Nightwalker83's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Adelaide, Australia
    Posts
    13,346

    Re: VB6 is not dead

    Here are some of the threads that come up when searching "vb6 dead" on here.

    http://www.vbforums.com/search.php?searchid=3093642
    when you quote a post could you please do it via the "Reply With Quote" button or if it multiple post click the "''+" button then "Reply With Quote" button.
    If this thread is finished with please mark it "Resolved" by selecting "Mark thread resolved" from the "Thread tools" drop-down menu.
    https://get.cryptobrowser.site/30/4111672

  5. #5

    Thread Starter
    Lively Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    95

    Re: VB6 is not dead

    Thanks, i'm fully capable of searching, check out my post above

  6. #6
    PowerPoster Nightwalker83's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Adelaide, Australia
    Posts
    13,346

    Re: VB6 is not dead

    Quote Originally Posted by Vbstr View Post
    Thanks, i'm fully capable of searching, check out my post above
    Yeah, I know! However some people just don't bother most of the time.
    when you quote a post could you please do it via the "Reply With Quote" button or if it multiple post click the "''+" button then "Reply With Quote" button.
    If this thread is finished with please mark it "Resolved" by selecting "Mark thread resolved" from the "Thread tools" drop-down menu.
    https://get.cryptobrowser.site/30/4111672

  7. #7

    Thread Starter
    Lively Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    95

    Re: VB6 is not dead

    you been here over 9 years...that's incredible. Knew I recognized your nick, you post a lot of quality stuff, so thanks!

  8. #8
    Super Moderator Shaggy Hiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    35,048

    Re: VB6 is not dead

    There was also a thread on here that discussed why MS would NEVER release the source for VB6. I forget what the argument was, but I felt that it was compelling, and therefore I wouldn't be holding my breath for an open source VB6.

    I loved that language back in the late 90s and the first few years of the following, nameless, decade. I wrote a fair amount in it, and was reluctant to switch to .NET. However, I had to write some things for a PDA, and there was no VB6 variation for PDA development (I don't count eVB, since it was actually VBS and sucked rocks lustily). For that reason, I started into .NET. Once I realized what features it added, I stopped using VB6 and would never willingly go back. The IDE improvements in .NET are sufficient that coding in the VB6 IDE is painful, but it was the language improvements that really had me sold. At the time, it was the OO nature of .NET, and the multithreading, which appeared to be the best features. Neither of those will ever be added to VB6, even if it was made open source. Then in the 2005 release came generics, which are super useful, followed by LINQ and other additions which look great (but are actually a mixed blessing).

    In the end, VBx that preceded .NET, had a run of about 6-7 years. I don't count VB1-3, because they were a pretty different animal to VB4-6 that used the same syntax as VBA. .NET has had a run of 9 years and counting. It's not a flash in the pan, at this point. In fact, VB6 is by comparison. Eventually, .NET will be replaced, as well. VB6 programs will almost certainly still be around. After all, COBOL programs are still around, and there were a whole lot fewer COBOL coders in the 80s than VB6 coders in the late 90s. Therefore, the population of VB6 is pretty much guaranteed to be larger and will last longer. If COBOL made it 30 years, VB6 code will make it at least as long (unless MS really does make the VB6 runtime engine incompatible with the OS). Having said that, it should also be recognized that 20 years down the road, COBOL is pretty much an anachronism, and thus will be VB6. The population hasn't died out, so VB6 isn't extinct. However, its reproduction is declining steadily and rapidly, with no realistic expectation that it will not drop to 0. Therefore, extinction is inevitable, even if it has not arrived just yet.
    My usual boring signature: Nothing

  9. #9
    PowerPoster SJWhiteley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    South of the Mason-Dixon Line
    Posts
    2,256

    Re: VB6 is not dead

    "VB6 Extinct" can mean different things. Does it mean that programs that were developed in VB6 will go away, or not be able to run? Or does it mean that development in VB6 is on the rocks?

    I believe it means the latter. I (similar to SH) was a staunch VB6er. But when .NET came along, and really tried to use it and not compare every little difference to VB6, it really was a substantial improvement. I do think VB6 development is really on its last legs. Barring maintenance issues, there really is little incentive to develop anything in VB6.

    It won't go away, of course. These things never really do. Just like an old set of woodworking tools, or an older, antique, car - "They don't make them like they used to" promotes the response "no, they didn't - they make them better". At the same time, I'll never get rid of Visual Studio 6, and always have VB6 available. I'll never use it, of course, and it (as it should) collect dust.
    "Ok, my response to that is pending a Google search" - Bucky Katt.
    "There are two types of people in the world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data sets." - Unk.
    "Before you can 'think outside the box' you need to understand where the box is."

  10. #10
    Freelancer akhileshbc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Trivandrum, Kerala, India
    Posts
    7,647

    Re: VB6 is not dead

    Quote Originally Posted by Nightwalker83 View Post
    Here are some of the threads that come up when searching "vb6 dead" on here.

    http://www.vbforums.com/search.php?searchid=3093642
    Sorry for interrupting, but I wish to say that the above link is dead now. I think, it's a temp link created when you perform the searching.

    VB6 is still in syllabus of several educational institutions.

    If my post was helpful to you, then express your gratitude using Rate this Post.
    And if your problem is SOLVED, then please Mark the Thread as RESOLVED (see it in action - video)
    My system: AMD FX 6100, Gigabyte Motherboard, 8 GB Crossair Vengance, Cooler Master 450W Thunder PSU, 1.4 TB HDD, 18.5" TFT(Wide), Antec V1 Cabinet

    Social Group: VBForums - Developers from India


    Skills: PHP, MySQL, jQuery, VB.Net, Photoshop, CodeIgniter, Bootstrap,...

  11. #11
    PowerPoster Nightwalker83's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Adelaide, Australia
    Posts
    13,346

    Re: VB6 is not dead

    Ah well, I keep forgetting about that! Still if the original poster searched this very section showing all the threads from the beginning I lot of thread will show up on the subject.
    when you quote a post could you please do it via the "Reply With Quote" button or if it multiple post click the "''+" button then "Reply With Quote" button.
    If this thread is finished with please mark it "Resolved" by selecting "Mark thread resolved" from the "Thread tools" drop-down menu.
    https://get.cryptobrowser.site/30/4111672

  12. #12

    Thread Starter
    Lively Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    95

    Re: VB6 is not dead

    Quote Originally Posted by SJWhiteley View Post
    "VB6 Extinct" can mean different things. Does it mean that programs that were developed in VB6 will go away, or not be able to run? Or does it mean that development in VB6 is on the rocks?

    I believe it means the latter. I (similar to SH) was a staunch VB6er. But when .NET came along, and really tried to use it and not compare every little difference to VB6, it really was a substantial improvement. I do think VB6 development is really on its last legs. Barring maintenance issues, there really is little incentive to develop anything in VB6.

    It won't go away, of course. These things never really do. Just like an old set of woodworking tools, or an older, antique, car - "They don't make them like they used to" promotes the response "no, they didn't - they make them better". At the same time, I'll never get rid of Visual Studio 6, and always have VB6 available. I'll never use it, of course, and it (as it should) collect dust.
    Sorry I just can't signoff on the "just because it's old it should be put down" mentality. If they were true I wouldn't read about people abandoning .net in groves to go back to C/C++. And both those languages are ancient. VB6 is easier to use than .net, it just is. if you disagree then why aren't websites filled to the brim with awesome .net apps that equal vb6? Because vb6 is just easier, which makes it better, i've seen some of the most amazing programs ever written in vb6, in easy to understand code that can adopted in other languages and i'm sure took far less time to write then if it were done in .net. Infact I need to start organizing and backing code up, so I can translate into C, I refuse to play Microsoft's language game. As a business or as an individual that takes programming serious, it makes no sense to write quality stuff in a language that a single company controls and will guarantee drop and replace it with what they tell you is "better" in only a few years. Languages should be updated, not replaced entirely, it's showing they care not for what the community wants, just that they know better than you. The best thing Microsoft can do is open source vb6, because the reality is it still does have a massive following, and open sourcing it will only drive more users to windows, allow corps to update all the code they have which will make them happy, and windows stronger ingeneral. Linux and mac backend API are weak and limited compared to windows, so the threat of users jumping platforms is unmerited IMHO. Their app management is fundamentally flawed too.

  13. #13
    Raging swede Atheist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    8,020

    Re: VB6 is not dead

    Quote Originally Posted by Vbstr View Post
    Sorry I just can't signoff on the "just because it's old it should be put down" mentality. If they were true I wouldn't read about people abandoning .net in groves to go back to C/C++. And both those languages are ancient.
    At first I didn't want to participate in this kind of half meaningless debates, but I just cant help myself now.
    You can not compare VB.NET to C/C++. Nobody is saying that VB.NET is better than C/C++ because it is newer. These languages are aimed at waaay different areas of development.
    Quote Originally Posted by Vbstr View Post
    VB6 is easier to use than .net, it just is. if you disagree then why aren't websites filled to the brim with awesome .net apps that equal vb6? Because vb6 is just easier, which makes it better, i've seen some of the most amazing programs ever written in vb6, in easy to understand code that can adopted in other languages and i'm sure took far less time to write then if it were done in .net.
    Oh come on. Yes yes I bet the entire world agrees with you in that vb6 is easier than .NET. All of us .NET programmers are tearing or hair out just wishing the world would go back to VB6 where we got things done for a change.
    Quote Originally Posted by Vbstr View Post
    Infact I need to start organizing and backing code up, so I can translate into C, I refuse to play Microsoft's language game. As a business or as an individual that takes programming serious, it makes no sense to write quality stuff in a language that a single company controls and will guarantee drop and replace it with what they tell you is "better" in only a few years. Languages should be updated, not replaced entirely, it's showing they care not for what the community wants, just that they know better than you. The best thing Microsoft can do is open source vb6, because the reality is it still does have a massive following, and open sourcing it will only drive more users to windows, allow corps to update all the code they have which will make them happy, and windows stronger ingeneral.
    So what you are saying is that MS should update and support VB6 for all eternity? Should all software companies support all software for all eternity?
    Who are you to decide what the community wants?
    You are insinuating that VB6 has been replaced entirely - but has it? YOU are still using it. Alot of people are still using it, and I think its good that you do. Just dont expect alot of exciting development jobs to jump your way.
    Quote Originally Posted by Vbstr View Post
    Linux and mac backend API are weak and limited compared to windows, so the threat of users jumping platforms is unmerited IMHO. Their app management is fundamentally flawed too.
    I would like you to elaborate on the part where you suddenly attack the "Linux and mac backend API".
    Rate posts that helped you. I do not reply to PM's with coding questions.
    How to Get Your Questions Answered
    Current project: tunaOS
    Me on.. BitBucket, Google Code, Github (pretty empty)

  14. #14

    Thread Starter
    Lively Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    95

    Re: VB6 is not dead

    Quote Originally Posted by Atheist View Post
    At first I didn't want to participate in this kind of half meaningless debates, but I just cant help myself now.
    You can not compare VB.NET to C/C++. Nobody is saying that VB.NET is better than C/C++ because it is newer. These languages are aimed at waaay different areas of development.

    Oh come on. Yes yes I bet the entire world agrees with you in that vb6 is easier than .NET. All of us .NET programmers are tearing or hair out just wishing the world would go back to VB6 where we got things done for a change.

    So what you are saying is that MS should update and support VB6 for all eternity? Should all software companies support all software for all eternity?
    Who are you to decide what the community wants?
    You are insinuating that VB6 has been replaced entirely - but has it? YOU are still using it. Alot of people are still using it, and I think its good that you do. Just dont expect alot of exciting development jobs to jump your way.

    I would like you to elaborate on the part where you suddenly attack the "Linux and mac backend API".
    Your nick just makes me sad. I think responding to you will just lead to misguided negativity, so i'm gonna bow out. You can feel like you "won" if you like, have a great day!

  15. #15
    Raging swede Atheist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    8,020

    Re: VB6 is not dead

    Quote Originally Posted by Vbstr View Post
    Your nick just makes me sad. I think responding to you will just lead to misguided negativity, so i'm gonna bow out. You can feel like you "won" if you like, have a great day!
    My personal beliefs has no place in this discussion.
    Rate posts that helped you. I do not reply to PM's with coding questions.
    How to Get Your Questions Answered
    Current project: tunaOS
    Me on.. BitBucket, Google Code, Github (pretty empty)

  16. #16
    Hyperactive Member Ram2Curious's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    484

    Re: VB6 is not dead

    Quote Originally Posted by Vbstr View Post
    Your nick just makes me sad. I think responding to you will just lead to misguided negativity, so i'm gonna bow out. You can feel like you "won" if you like, have a great day!
    You may wish to remain 18 yrs old forever but you can't. Personal interests are personal. You can't force someone else to support your interest.

  17. #17
    Frenzied Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    1,687

    Re: VB6 is not dead

    The land lines are not extinct, people still use them. Doesn't mean I want one. The main issue is people are reluctant to change. Being a programmer this behavior should be evident when you find something that works wrong or is worded wrong and has been for some time. The users complain. Why do they complain when you fix something? For the same reason some VB6 programmers refuse to learn .NET. Reluctant to/afraid of change.

    I didn't learn .NET until two years ago. I didn't want to leave VB. Now I like .NET better. If you only know VB and do not know .NET then you only have 1/2 of the story and you can not say which is better because of ignorance. Same if you only know .NET, you can't say .NET is better because you do not know VB.

    I like .NET better because with it you can produce more code in less time, and it is more modern abd featurefull.

    Just because I like word doesn't mean people are wrong who like typewriters. Whatever works for them.
    se la ve.
    VB6 Library

    If I helped you then please help me and rate my post!
    If you solved your problem, then please mark the post resolved

  18. #18
    Hyperactive Member Ram2Curious's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    484

    Re: VB6 is not dead

    Quote Originally Posted by MarMan View Post
    se la ve.
    Welcome back MarMan.

  19. #19
    Super Moderator Shaggy Hiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    35,048

    Re: VB6 is not dead

    Quote Originally Posted by Vbstr View Post
    Sorry I just can't signoff on the "just because it's old it should be put down" mentality.
    Who has that mentality? I was talking about reality. Who is creating new versions of VB6? Nobody. Who is maintaining it? Nobody. Once that happens, the end is in sight whether you like it or not. If you have a complaint about maintaining it, take it up with MS, not other developers. It probably won't do you any good to take it up with MS, but they are the only ones who can do what you want.
    If they were true I wouldn't read about people abandoning .net in groves to go back to C/C++.
    I'd say that this is a case of not seeing the forest for the trees. Any developer who does that is not out of the woods just by switching languages.

    On a more serious note, if you believe this, then you are reading only what you want to read. .NET has lasted longer than previous versions of VB despite the frantic cries of folks like you. Sure, there will come a day when .NET is no more, and on that day, all the people who stuck desperately with a program that lasted for 2-5 years (depending on how you count it) will say, "I told you so." That would be a stupid statement now, and won't be any more rational when they do get to say it.

    The world won't turn back for you no matter how much you want it to. Times change. Languages change. What was once a Long is now an Integer, and what is now a Long will eventually become an Integer. It's how this industry moves. Fortunately for you, you don't ever have to change. There is still a TRS-80 fan club, though the computer was crap and vanished two decades back. How much greater a support group will you have with VB6? Find them. Stay with them. You can trade messages back and forth about how terrible .NET is and pray for it to finally go away. It'll make you feel good to be with like-minded people, and there are probably enough of them that you will die of old age without ever needing to learn another language, if you so choose. The rest of us don't share your views.

    And both those languages are ancient.
    They're wheezing, to be sure, but they also get updated. C has gone through a couple standardization procedures, while C++ has only gone through one, but it is highly likely that both will be updated with a new standardization procedure in the near future. No version of VB has ever been standardized, which is largely because VB is a proprietary language created by, and owned by, Microsoft. That allows the language to change faster and ossify less, but, of course, that has its disadvantages, too, as you are well aware. If you don't like the direction of change, then change is not a good thing for you.

    VB6 is easier to use than .net, it just is. if you disagree then why aren't websites filled to the brim with awesome .net apps that equal vb6?
    Hard to parse that challenge to see whether it is verifiable. Do you mean that the only proof that .NET is easier to use than VB6 would be if there were websites filled to the brim with .net apps that equal VB6? How about if there are websites with apps that are better than anything written in VB6? Multi-threaded apps that take advantage of modern multi-core processors, for instance. Or perhaps you mean that there are more VB6 apps on websites than there are .NET apps. Getting rid of the statistical bias inherent in that interpretation would be daunting. You can't look at just websites in the last few years, because VB6 hasn't been available to purchase in that time, but if you include sites further back you'd be biasing the sample because of the newness of .NET as a language.

    In other words, that isn't a valid argument because an honest comparison is probably impossible.
    Because vb6 is just easier, which makes it better, i've seen some of the most amazing programs ever written in vb6, in easy to understand code that can adopted in other languages and i'm sure took far less time to write then if it were done in .net.
    The most amazing program (based on talks I've given) was one that I wrote in VB6, then re-wrote in .NET. It was a polynomial multi-variate regression analysis engine based on a genetic algorithm. It was considerably easier to write in .NET, though I was less experienced with the language at the time, but that's because genetic algorithms are highly suited to object oriented design, which .NET supports and VB6 does not. That's a sample of only 1, which is not signficant, but it does show the problem with your statement. The languages are different, and each would excel for certain things, but none would excel for all things.

    Infact I need to start organizing and backing code up, so I can translate into C, I refuse to play Microsoft's language game.
    I've argued that point before. If you can't stand the fact that MS abandoned VBx for .NET, then the only rational step you can take is to move to a language that isn't owned by any one company. C/C++ is the obvious move. In your case, since you would be leaving VB6, which is not OO, then C would be a superior choice for you over C++. In fact, you'd probably want to stay away from C++ entirely, lest you come to love that as much as you do VB6. If you did that, you might be drawn back to .NET for rapid development using C#.

    As a business or as an individual that takes programming serious, it makes no sense to write quality stuff in a language that a single company controls and will guarantee drop and replace it with what they tell you is "better" in only a few years.
    So everybody who wrote in VB6 was irrational? Lots of programs were written in that language by both business and individuals, yet that langauge was controlled by a single company. Do you think all of those people were irrational, or might it be that they had a reason which you ought to discover?

    Languages should be updated, not replaced entirely, it's showing they care not for what the community wants, just that they know better than you.
    Yeah. That's business, though. It has worked well for companies in the past, and failed for some others. It's always a gamble, and the people involved make their best estimate and go with that.

    The best thing Microsoft can do is open source vb6, because the reality is it still does have a massive following, and open sourcing it will only drive more users to windows, allow corps to update all the code they have which will make them happy, and windows stronger ingeneral. Linux and mac backend API are weak and limited compared to windows, so the threat of users jumping platforms is unmerited IMHO. Their app management is fundamentally flawed too.
    That's not as coherent an argument as you seem to think. There are only three viable OS in the world today: Windows, Apple, and Linux. You have thoroughly dismissed Apple and Linux as being inferior. If that is true, then Windows will not need some open source langauge to drive people in that direction. Windows will only need good apps, which it has, written in whatever language is popular: Java, C/C++, .NET, VBx, Delphi, etc. Most people don't care what language a program is written in, they care how it works.

    Heck, technical superiority of one technology has never been a guarantee of its eventual success, only adoption of that technology has been such. Adding one more language might increase the application pool, in this case, further bolstering Windows, but it would also mean that MS would be competing against itself, to some extent.

    Lastly, what would open sourcing VB6 mean? Surely that would mean publishing the code behind the VB6 engine, compiler, runtime, and development environment (maybe not that last one, as it would probably entail giving away VS). Was any of that written in VB6? I could find out, but I think it was all written in C/C++. If that was the case, wouldn't that mean that fans of VB6 would have to learn C/C++ to further the language they really want to know?
    My usual boring signature: Nothing

  20. #20
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    764

    Re: VB6 is not dead

    vb6 is as dead as the dodo

  21. #21
    Frenzied Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    1,687

    Re: VB6 is not dead

    Quote Originally Posted by Ram2Curious View Post
    Welcome back MarMan.
    Thanks Ram. You made it feel good to be back.

    I will be visiting the forum from home, so I may not be able to reply as quick as I had in the past.
    VB6 Library

    If I helped you then please help me and rate my post!
    If you solved your problem, then please mark the post resolved

  22. #22
    Frenzied Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    1,687

    Re: VB6 is not dead

    Quote Originally Posted by moti barski View Post
    vb6 is as dead as the dodo
    Its not that bad moti. I don't see any dodos, but I still have a machine with VB6 on it, although its been a couple of years since I clicked on it.

    I would say VB6 is dead as dial-up or the typwewriter. Some people still use those.
    VB6 Library

    If I helped you then please help me and rate my post!
    If you solved your problem, then please mark the post resolved

  23. #23
    PowerPoster techgnome's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    32,836

    Re: VB6 is not dead

    Shaggy - you forgot my favorite argument: "Clearly VB6 is more popular because there's a lot more posts about VB6 than there are for .NET." ... that's one of those classic made up statistics that can be easily twisted: "Clearly VB6 is much more difficult, just look at all the VB6 posts there are out there."

    @Moti - really? you think so? If that's the case, then this argument wouldn't be happening. I suspect VB6 will live a long long time... maybe not for new development, but existing apps will continue to roll with it. As long as some one has a copy of the VB6 run-time files and can figure out how to deploy them on what ever version of Windows is current, Vb6 apps will continue to run. And in 20 years, there will be VB6-Developer-Dinosaur jokes, just like there were years ago about COBOL developers...

    -tg
    * I don't respond to private (PM) requests for help. It's not conducive to the general learning of others.*
    * I also don't respond to friend requests. Save a few bits and don't bother. I'll just end up rejecting anyways.*
    * How to get EFFECTIVE help: The Hitchhiker's Guide to Getting Help at VBF - Removing eels from your hovercraft *
    * How to Use Parameters * Create Disconnected ADO Recordset Clones * Set your VB6 ActiveX Compatibility * Get rid of those pesky VB Line Numbers * I swear I saved my data, where'd it run off to??? *

  24. #24
    PowerPoster RhinoBull's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    New Amsterdam
    Posts
    24,135

    Re: VB6 is not dead

    @moti

    And what about Assembly, FORTAN, etc? Noone seems to complain about those Dinosaurs but they are just as old as BASIC if not older.
    VB6 must still be very popular and/or very much in use, don't you think?
    Btw, C and C++ aren't that young either...

  25. #25
    PowerPoster Nightwalker83's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Adelaide, Australia
    Posts
    13,346

    Re: VB6 is not dead

    @ moti barski,

    There is proof vb6 is not dead here on vbforums! You only need to see how many new people on the forum are still asking basic vb6 questions.

    Quote Originally Posted by RhinoBull View Post
    And what about Assembly, FORTAN, etc? Noone seems to complain about those Dinosaurs but they are just as old as BASIC if not older.
    VB6 must still be very popular and/or very much in use, don't you think?
    Btw, C and C++ aren't that young either...
    I think it comes down to the fact that they are not basic and it takes more work to understand those languages. Anyway, from what I understand there are newer versions of the languages you mentioned being used today. No, I am not talking about C# but C++ and if I am not mistaken F# (Microsoft's version of Fortran?).
    Last edited by Nightwalker83; Oct 17th, 2011 at 10:58 PM. Reason: Fixed spelling!
    when you quote a post could you please do it via the "Reply With Quote" button or if it multiple post click the "''+" button then "Reply With Quote" button.
    If this thread is finished with please mark it "Resolved" by selecting "Mark thread resolved" from the "Thread tools" drop-down menu.
    https://get.cryptobrowser.site/30/4111672

  26. #26
    PowerPoster
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    21,063

    Re: VB6 is not dead

    Why would anyone think F# has anything to do with Fortran? The most common commercial Fortran compilers are probably the ones Intel makes.

    I'm not sure there is much point to threads like this. There is little to be accomplished except rehashing ancient arguments.

  27. #27
    PowerPoster Nightwalker83's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Adelaide, Australia
    Posts
    13,346

    Re: VB6 is not dead

    Quote Originally Posted by dilettante View Post
    Why would anyone think F# has anything to do with Fortran?
    You might be right! I am just wondering where F# fits into the scheme of things though such as we have c, c++ and now c#. I have never hear of a language called f though, only when swearing but that is a different matter.
    when you quote a post could you please do it via the "Reply With Quote" button or if it multiple post click the "''+" button then "Reply With Quote" button.
    If this thread is finished with please mark it "Resolved" by selecting "Mark thread resolved" from the "Thread tools" drop-down menu.
    https://get.cryptobrowser.site/30/4111672

  28. #28
    PowerPoster
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    21,063

    Re: VB6 is not dead

    F# is a minor wonky language nobody uses for much. It was designed to rival other languages in obscurity.

  29. #29
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    764

    Re: VB6 is not dead

    granted vb6 is kinda alive but,

    to me when converting vb6 to vb.net code it never works, now I add to my searches -vb6.

  30. #30
    PowerPoster Nightwalker83's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Adelaide, Australia
    Posts
    13,346

    Re: VB6 is not dead

    Quote Originally Posted by moti barski View Post
    to me when converting vb6 to vb.net code it never works, now I add to my searches -vb6.
    That is why some people say it is better to rewrite the code in VB.NET. I managed to convert one of my vb6 projects to vb.net using the converter and the code still worked. I need to rewrite the version of the project I did in vb.net because I lost the original vb.net I wrote.
    when you quote a post could you please do it via the "Reply With Quote" button or if it multiple post click the "''+" button then "Reply With Quote" button.
    If this thread is finished with please mark it "Resolved" by selecting "Mark thread resolved" from the "Thread tools" drop-down menu.
    https://get.cryptobrowser.site/30/4111672

  31. #31
    PowerPoster SJWhiteley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    South of the Mason-Dixon Line
    Posts
    2,256

    Re: VB6 is not dead

    Quote Originally Posted by Vbstr View Post
    ... If they were true I wouldn't read about people abandoning .net in groves to go back to C/C++. And both those languages are ancient. ...
    While Atheist has fisked this comment well enough, I'd just like to highlight the above: if your comment is true, note that they are moving from .NET to C-Style, NOT to VB6. I can guarantee you that no-one is moving back to VB6.

    Even so - I don't believe anyone is really saying "because it's old, put it down", but what advantage is there to creating an application in VB6?
    "Ok, my response to that is pending a Google search" - Bucky Katt.
    "There are two types of people in the world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data sets." - Unk.
    "Before you can 'think outside the box' you need to understand where the box is."

  32. #32
    New Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    7

    Re: VB6 is not dead

    Well, I was encouraged to see this thread!

    VB6 is certainly not dead for me! Itís the only MS COMish "language" aside from VC++.

    AFAIK, unmanaged VC++ is the only "current," supported, unmanaged "language" to program to COM.

    "Language" is in quotes because it's really not the language per se, but the fact that it allows one to create a COM client.

    In an ongoing support incident with MS, with respect to the "it just works" binary compatibility slogan for VB6/Windows 7, it's been suggested to me that I port a somewhat complex webbrowser app from VB6 to VC++.

    According to http://support.microsoft.com/kb/934368, WebBrowser applications with event sinks (which need to use the .net/com interop assembly) are not supported in .net. Of course, this kb article was posted many years after .net was released.

    So, if you don't use C++, after Windows 7, no support for VB6 binary compatibility. Hopefully, it will continue to "just work."

    I've heard that the VB6 runtime is in the pre-beta of Windows 8. But, MS points out that, unless it's in the actual beta, that can't be relied upon. I'm keeping my fingers crossed.

    It seems absurd to me that you have to "program to the metal," as they say to implement what would seem to be a relatively common thing.

    In my case, I already know C, but not COM from a programming perspective. I actually prefer the C language, and certainly wouldn't mind knowing the intricacies of programming COM but, since I can't do all things all the time, that would be a real financial (and other) setback.

    Plus, what programmer want to do a "do-over?"

    On a slightly positive note, MS (so I'm told by the support rep) actually intends to fix the VB6/IE9 issue that I originally called about.

  33. #33
    Super Moderator Shaggy Hiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    35,048

    Re: VB6 is not dead

    Quote Originally Posted by stevesny View Post
    I've heard that the VB6 runtime is in the pre-beta of Windows 8. But, MS points out that, unless it's in the actual beta, that can't be relied upon. I'm keeping my fingers crossed.
    That's just market speak. Of course they would like you to move everything to a version of VS that they still support, so why would they tell you anything different? Abandoning support of existing VB6 apps would just be a bad idea for them. The time may come when they stop functioning, but I'll be amazed when it happens.

    Plus, what programmer want to do a "do-over?"
    You never fully understand a problem until you have solved it the first time. Every program that I have had a chance to re-write has come out significantly improved. I just don't get the opportunity to cover old ground very often.
    My usual boring signature: Nothing

  34. #34
    Frenzied Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    1,687

    Re: VB6 is not dead

    Quote Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker View Post
    Every program that I have had a chance to re-write has come out significantly improved. I just don't get the opportunity to cover old ground very often.
    I concur 100%. As far as "wanting" to do a do-over, you can end up wanting wanting. My job has many aspects. Some I enjoy, some I like and some I do not have much interest in. Some things I can start off wanting to do then change my mind. Also some things I a not looking forward to do I may come to enjoy. The business is a major player dictating what must be done. There is not always room for me to choose projects that I "want" to do.

    We are migrating an app from Access (VBA) to .NET. And after the pain of dealing with VBA's limitations I am grateful for this "do-over".

    @ stevesny, So sometimes some want a do-over. I can tell by your statement, that you do not. You should not think everyone thinks as you do unless you wish to be mistaken. There was a time when I was younger I felt like that. Now sometimes I appreciate the chance to enlighten myself.
    VB6 Library

    If I helped you then please help me and rate my post!
    If you solved your problem, then please mark the post resolved

  35. #35
    Hyperactive Member Max Peck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    384

    Re: VB6 is not dead

    Who cares if VB6 (or any other technology) is "dead" or not? If it's in your toolbox and accomplishes your end then use the thing. I'm sure the 15-year-old hammer in my garage isn't supported by its vendor any longer (unless it was made by Craftsman, that is!) but it still drives nails OK.

    To the OP ... why carry a torch? Is MS paying you to? If not, then just relax. Use VB6 as long as you like, we won't make you stand in the corner. I still use it, too (to maintain our system). I even enjoy it. However, don't carry a torch. That's what the Linux guys like to do! ;-)

    -Max
    The name's "Peck" .... "Max Peck"

    "If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." - Red Adair

  36. #36

    Thread Starter
    Lively Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    95

    Re: VB6 is not dead

    Quote Originally Posted by Max Peck View Post
    Who cares if VB6 (or any other technology) is "dead" or not? If it's in your toolbox and accomplishes your end then use the thing. I'm sure the 15-year-old hammer in my garage isn't supported by its vendor any longer (unless it was made by Craftsman, that is!) but it still drives nails OK.

    To the OP ... why carry a torch? Is MS paying you to? If not, then just relax. Use VB6 as long as you like, we won't make you stand in the corner. I still use it, too (to maintain our system). I even enjoy it. However, don't carry a torch. That's what the Linux guys like to do! ;-)

    -Max
    Because I want to develop new software in vb6 that runs on the latest version of windows, if Microsoft screws me I won't be able to. This is one company that values(or at least in the past has) valued compatibility for older tech at least in their ecosystem, and I hope they continue to. This javascript+html crap seems like a desperate move and I really hope they don't focus everything on that, they're falling into exactly what google wants and it's sad.

  37. #37
    Frenzied Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    1,687

    Re: VB6 is not dead

    While whether VB6 is alive or dead can be debated endlessly. Whether VB6 is better or worse than .NET is mainly someone's opinion. Developing in an unsupported language that requires a runtime and is over 10 years... well you get the point. To use your words, you are setting yourself up to be "screwed". It would not be a good business decision, however for a hobby, it is whatever you would prefer. Just be prepared for your stuff to not work at some time in the future. It is tough to be a rebel, and you endure many hardships. But in the end it is your choice. Good luck!

    Quote Originally Posted by Vbstr View Post
    Because I want to develop new software in vb6 that runs on the latest version of windows
    VB6 Library

    If I helped you then please help me and rate my post!
    If you solved your problem, then please mark the post resolved

  38. #38
    Super Moderator Shaggy Hiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    35,048

    Re: VB6 is not dead

    Quote Originally Posted by Vbstr View Post
    This javascript+html crap seems like a desperate move and I really hope they don't focus everything on that, they're falling into exactly what google wants and it's sad.
    Yeah, but I'm not sure they're wrong about that. They are looking at where the future is going and they are seeing mobile apps and tablets. The high tech field is littered with companies that didn't adapt to the changing market and failed, so it is understandable that MS doesn't want to join in. The point behind .NET was a multi-platform language with the same write-once-run-anywhere concept behind Java, and probably came about as a result of the Sun-Microsoft suits in the 90s. VB6 couldn't play in that field, so MS abandoned it. VB6 also can't play in the mobile/tablet market. The only vague attempt at that was the horrid eVB. MS wants to be a leader in whatever direction the market takes, and that is driving the Javascript+html crap.
    My usual boring signature: Nothing

  39. #39
    Hyperactive Member Max Peck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    384

    Re: VB6 is not dead

    Quote Originally Posted by Vbstr View Post
    Because I want to develop new software in vb6 that runs on the latest version of windows, if Microsoft screws me I won't be able to. This is one company that values(or at least in the past has) valued compatibility for older tech at least in their ecosystem, and I hope they continue to. This javascript+html crap seems like a desperate move and I really hope they don't focus everything on that, they're falling into exactly what google wants and it's sad.
    Well, whether you like it or not, the platform has changed. VB6 is an excellent development tool but the technology has been obsoleted. That's simply the way it is.

    I'm not an advocate of upgrading every time you turn around either, but after going to .Net I realize that I am now able to accomplish things much more quickly writing C# under .Net than I could with VB6. Access to resources that didn't exist under VB6 is possible under .Net. The forms engine in .Net is better refined. The IDE under Visual Studio 2008 makes VB6 seem like a toy.

    As much as I loved VB6 it was time to move on.

    If you are just doing hobby programming then VB6 will continue to serve your needs. Otherwise, sport, it's time to get with the program!

    -Max
    The name's "Peck" .... "Max Peck"

    "If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." - Red Adair

  40. #40

    Thread Starter
    Lively Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    95

    Re: VB6 is not dead

    Quote Originally Posted by Max Peck View Post
    Well, whether you like it or not, the platform has changed. VB6 is an excellent development tool but the technology has been obsoleted. That's simply the way it is.

    I'm not an advocate of upgrading every time you turn around either, but after going to .Net I realize that I am now able to accomplish things much more quickly writing C# under .Net than I could with VB6. Access to resources that didn't exist under VB6 is possible under .Net. The forms engine in .Net is better refined. The IDE under Visual Studio 2008 makes VB6 seem like a toy.

    As much as I loved VB6 it was time to move on.

    If you are just doing hobby programming then VB6 will continue to serve your needs. Otherwise, sport, it's time to get with the program!

    -Max
    Well "sport" i'm happy it suits your needs. But for vb6 being an obsolete technology it's amazing how some apps run so much faster than .net ones? And hows COM support in .net, "sport"? You also forget the massive massive ecosystem that vb6 has, planet source code and others has tons and tons of vb5/vb6 activex ocx's etc... that can add fantastic power and extension to your apps. Funny how .net has been around 10+ years yet I don't see anywhere near the same following. So again i'm happy .net does what you need, I am, but don't act like it makes vb6 obsolete, because it doesn't. The only benefits of javascript+html5 I see integrated into windows is Microsoft can't make those go away, since they're open source.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  



Click Here to Expand Forum to Full Width