dcsimg
Page 4 of 12 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 160 of 476

Thread: Vb6 , the Future, and what I have discovered

  1. #121
    PowerPoster
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    18,978

    Re: Vb6 , the Future, and what I have discovered

    Another thing Microsoft could build around VB6 is a far more successful IoT platform.

    Because most of these are "headless" devices (no video adapter) the UI layout widgets don't matter, but the programs could compile to small, fast, clean-burning native code. They could strip a build of Windows way, way down (even based on the Win9x codebase if need be) to run on very tiny x86 SOC devices at the level of a Pentium II or less. All they need is standard GPIO support at the Win32 level, along with an ActiveX wrapper DLL to make for easy access in VB6.

    This could be far more successful then their ongoing "ready FIRE aim" failures in the IoT space that insist on the bloated .Net add-on layer that requires a lot more RAM and CPU power.

  2. #122
    Angel of Code Niya's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    5,625

    Re: Vb6 , the Future, and what I have discovered

    Quote Originally Posted by Elroy View Post
    Microsoft screwed us over royally with the move to .NET. And I still insist that there was no call for it....
    You can read this. It should shed light on some of the decision that were made when it comes to COM.
    Treeview with NodeAdded/NodesRemoved events | BlinkLabel control | Calculate Permutations | Object Enums | ComboBox with centered items | .Net Internals article(not mine) | Wizard Control | Understanding Multi-Threading | Simple file compression | Demon Arena


    C++ programmers will dismiss you as a cretinous simpleton for your inability to keep track of pointers chained 6 levels deep and Java programmers will pillory you for buying into the evils of Microsoft. Meanwhile C# programmers will get paid just a little bit more than you for writing exactly the same code and VB6 programmers will continue to whitter on about "footprints". - FunkyDexter

    There's just no reason to use garbage like InputBox. -jmcilhinney

  3. #123
    Frenzied Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,032

    Re: Vb6 , the Future, and what I have discovered

    Quote Originally Posted by Niya View Post
    Didn't really wanna get involved in this shitstorm but this statement is patently false and highly misleading. MS devotes a tremendous amount of effort to backward compatibility. I remember reading an article some 7 to 10 years ago about the insane lengths MS was going to keep stuff working as they released new and newer versions of Windows. You can say a lot of bad things about MS but their commitment to backward compatibility is not one of them.
    You can say a lot of MS commitment to backward compatibility, but VB6 is not one of them.

    Quote Originally Posted by Niya View Post
    All this is moot since VB6 applications and the VB6 IDE still work fine to this day, aside from some issues with installation and security. So all those countless man hours spent developing VB6 applications hasn't been lost. I think MS was more than fair with the amount of time they gave VB6 developers to adapt to the changes they made to the development ecosystem. Now if you spent the last 20 years complaining instead of adapting and they completely kill support for VB6 past 2024 then that's on you. You can't blame MS for this.
    If you have a VB6 program that has 1 to 3 million lines of code, do you want your program to just keep running? Do you want it to have nothing to do with Web and Mobile? Would you like to spend 3 to 10 years to develop a .NET version that is completely similar to the old one.

    Moreover, Microsoft said VB6 can be smoothly migrated to .NET, this lie not only cheated a lot of people but also wasted a lot of people's time.

    Edit:

    It took me a lot of time trying to migrate VB6 programs to .NET, but I finally gave it up.

    Whether to continue to use VB6 programs or rewrite a new program completely with .NET, this hesitation took me a long time.

    Because of the very rudeness of .NET at the beginning, I was not convinced of it, so I went to investigate many other languages, such as Dephi, Java, Python, C++, which took me a lot of time.

    Now I don't have time.
    Last edited by dreammanor; Jan 26th, 2018 at 11:30 AM.

  4. #124
    Frenzied Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,032

    Re: Vb6 , the Future, and what I have discovered

    Quote Originally Posted by dilettante View Post
    Yes, these are called "Copy/Paste Cowboys." I suspect that a lot of people who want to plink away at coding have inadequate language and reading skills. This is as important as having fingers to type with, since as already pointed out it is pretty hard writing documentation so it places a burden on the reader.

    In the early 1980s I worked for a large organization that ended up completely replacing "programming tests" by "reading skills tests" for programming jobs. The quality of hiring candidates improved immensely, with a higher rate of success. Then the "political correctness police" came along and dictated that any testing was discriminatory. Quality and rates of success plummeted from then on, and development costs began to skyrocket.
    Hi dilettante, what you're saying reflects only one aspect of a cube, but does not reflect the other five, so I can only agree with you 16%. I like to see different viewpoints, even if they are not comprehensive.

    Quote Originally Posted by dilettante View Post
    When your ship is sinking fast with a roaring blaze consuming it you may say things you might regret later in the desperation of the moment. Doubly so if you pridefully refuse to get into the lifeboats while you try to fight the fire and bail the rising water at the same time.
    Very wonderful analogy. In my opinion, RC5 is our last lifeboat. Continuing to use Microsoft's technology to remedy VB6 is similar to refusing to get into the lifeboats and trying to fight the fire and bail the rising water at the same time.

    Quote Originally Posted by dilettante View Post
    Another thing Microsoft could build around VB6 is a far more successful IoT platform.

    Because most of these are "headless" devices (no video adapter) the UI layout widgets don't matter, but the programs could compile to small, fast, clean-burning native code. They could strip a build of Windows way, way down (even based on the Win9x codebase if need be) to run on very tiny x86 SOC devices at the level of a Pentium II or less. All they need is standard GPIO support at the Win32 level, along with an ActiveX wrapper DLL to make for easy access in VB6.

    This could be far more successful then their ongoing "ready FIRE aim" failures in the IoT space that insist on the bloated .Net add-on layer that requires a lot more RAM and CPU power.
    Microsoft has made too many mistakes, but due to his tremendous success in Windows, Office and Database, he is still the greatest company in the world. It's just that all VB6 developers have become the victims of his mistakes.

    Microsoft put everything into .NET, his strategy is extremely wrong and stupid. I thought so in 2000, and now everything more confirmed what I thought. Now, VB.NET has become more and more out of focus, and its distance from C# is getting bigger and bigger.

    In the beginning, if .NET did not contain everything but only C#, then C# would be more excellent and powerful than it is now. If .NET had only included C#, then Microsoft had enough energy to continue developing VB6, then Microsoft's share in the programming language will be even greater.
    Last edited by dreammanor; Jan 26th, 2018 at 11:32 AM.

  5. #125
    Fanatic Member PlausiblyDamp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    Newport, UK
    Posts
    829

    Re: Vb6 , the Future, and what I have discovered

    Quote Originally Posted by dreammanor View Post
    You can say a lot of MS commitment to backward compatibility, but VB6 is not one of them.
    The apps still work and the IDE still works, that seems pretty good in terms of backwards compatibility to me.

    Quote Originally Posted by dreammanor View Post
    If you have a VB6 program that has 1 to 3 million lines of code, do you want your program to just keep running? Do you want it to have nothing to do with Web and Mobile? Would you like to spend 3 to 10 years to develop a .NET version that is completely similar to the old one.
    VB was designed before the web or mobiles really existed as we know them, it is hardly their fault that they made decisions that didn't carry forward to areas that didn't exist as the time decisions were made.

    .Net has supported interop with COM (both creating and consuming components) an the windows API as well, if you have a 1 to 3 million line program that was split into ActiveX components etc then you could have had a reasonable migration experience by reusing some of these libraries under .Net.

    I am also not sure why you would spend up to 10 years designing a new app that looked and behaved exactly like the old one anyway, if the old one worked fine then carry on using VB6 - nothing forced you to move existing applications to .Net

  6. #126
    PowerPoster
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    18,978

    Re: Vb6 , the Future, and what I have discovered

    If you want to get grumpy about the possible near future, read Beginning of The End?

    Some will say "Doesn't impact me, people will still be able to get plain old Windows 10." But the point is that the new "Polaris" is going to be targeted at the masses.

    So yes, it doesn't matter if you only write programs for yourself. But it certainly shuts you out if you write programs to be used by others.

  7. #127
    PowerPoster
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    18,978

    Re: Vb6 , the Future, and what I have discovered

    Quote Originally Posted by PlausiblyDamp View Post
    VB was designed before the web or mobiles really existed as we know them, it is hardly their fault that they made decisions that didn't carry forward to areas that didn't exist as the time decisions were made.
    Actually that's not true.

    VB6 WebClasses were designed to support the web. This concept was later stolen to become ASP.Net and Microsoft proceeded to trash the WebClass capabilities in IIS.

    There was also a mobile development add-on for VB6 that worked for their Windows Mobile platforms... before they went .Net-crazy and trashed that and ended up committing mobile suicide with Windows Phony and its lame successors.

  8. #128
    Frenzied Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,032

    Re: Vb6 , the Future, and what I have discovered

    Quote Originally Posted by PlausiblyDamp View Post
    The apps still work and the IDE still works, that seems pretty good in terms of backwards compatibility to me.

    VB was designed before the web or mobiles really existed as we know them, it is hardly their fault that they made decisions that didn't carry forward to areas that didn't exist as the time decisions were made.

    .Net has supported interop with COM (both creating and consuming components) an the windows API as well, if you have a 1 to 3 million line program that was split into ActiveX components etc then you could have had a reasonable migration experience by reusing some of these libraries under .Net.

    I am also not sure why you would spend up to 10 years designing a new app that looked and behaved exactly like the old one anyway, if the old one worked fine then carry on using VB6 - nothing forced you to move existing applications to .Net
    Perhaps you haven't experienced the DLL hell that ActiveX brought. Our program has a lot of customized development process, so it needs to be upgraded continuously. DLL hells almost made us crash. At that time, we didn't know "registration-free" technology.

    In our country, customers are keen to use the latest technology, which is almost a trend. If you don't have the Web version and the Mobile version of your software (even if they don't need them), then almost no one will buy your software.

    In addition, migrating large VB6 programs to. NET is almost impossible, and the workload and difficulty is much larger than rewriting a new program. And, in my opinion, .NET was so bad before 2005.
    Last edited by dreammanor; Jan 26th, 2018 at 09:23 PM.

  9. #129
    Fanatic Member PlausiblyDamp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    Newport, UK
    Posts
    829

    Re: Vb6 , the Future, and what I have discovered

    Quote Originally Posted by dreammanor View Post
    Perhaps you haven't experienced the DLL hell that ActiveX brought. Our program has a lot of personalized development process, so it needs to be upgraded continuously. DLL hells almost made us crash. At that time, we didn't know "registration-free" technology.

    In our country, customers are keen to use the latest technology, which is almost a trend. If you don't have the Web version and the Mobile version of your software (even if they don't need them), then almost no one will buy your software.

    In addition, migrating large VB6 programs to. NET is almost impossible, and the workload and difficulty is much larger than rewriting a new program. And, in my opinion, .NET was so bad before 2005.
    Dll hell was a direct consequence of COM / ActiveX - this was one of the things .Net addressed with the concept of local deployments and versioned assemblies.

  10. #130
    Frenzied Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,032

    Re: Vb6 , the Future, and what I have discovered

    Quote Originally Posted by dilettante View Post
    If you want to get grumpy about the possible near future, read Beginning of The End?
    My temper won't get worse, on the contrary, my temper is getting better since I decided to continue using VB6 with the help of RC5. Because I no longer have to tangle in the choice of programming language.

    Quote Originally Posted by dilettante View Post
    So yes, it doesn't matter if you only write programs for yourself. But it certainly shuts you out if you write programs to be used by others.
    Yes, I'm just writing the program for myself now, because my company was closed down two years ago, and even though it's been existed for many years, and even it's provided products and services to many famous companies. If I had studied RC5 earlier, maybe I wouldn't close it.

    I'm only engaged in the development of web-app and cloud-database now, and I hope they are completed by VB6. I also let my nephew come to learn VB6 instead of C#.

    Quote Originally Posted by dilettante View Post
    Actually that's not true.

    VB6 WebClasses were designed to support the web. This concept was later stolen to become ASP.Net and Microsoft proceeded to trash the WebClass capabilities in IIS.

    There was also a mobile development add-on for VB6 that worked for their Windows Mobile platforms... before they went .Net-crazy and trashed that and ended up committing mobile suicide with Windows Phony and its lame successors.
    Many years ago, a lot of rumors said VB6 was not suitable for the development of Web-app, so we didn't conduct this exploration, until last year Olaf gave me a positive answer.
    Last edited by dreammanor; Jan 26th, 2018 at 02:13 PM.

  11. #131
    You don't want to know.
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    4,580

    Re: Vb6 , the Future, and what I have discovered

    I feel like part of why some of this gets heated is it's impossible for, say, a 20-something or 30-something developer to really understand the context of VB6 that a 40-something or 50-something programmer might have.

    Once Win95 came out, I get the feeling not an awful lot changed for client developers through the early 2000s. Improvements and new versions of VB were released, but generally you only felt shook up if you suddenly wanted a brand-new feature and it didn't quite mesh with your current code. I think if you really pay attention to the period, this makes sense because the pace of computer progress was glacial compared to today's. The most exciting thing that happened between 1995 and 2000 in terms of PCs was more or less "more people have modems" and "more people have video cards".

    2000-2005, on the other hand, was very transformative. Internet usage ballooned, as did access to broadband. Smartphones became a thing. While Windows devs laughed at them, smartphones gobbled up the market. 2005-2010 saw tablets arrive. Again, people laughed until they saw their market share devoured. 2010-2015 made HTML more relevant than any other native platform. 2015-2017 has us hurtling back towards thin clients powered by mainframes once again, we just call it "the cloud".

    Each of those things dramatically changed how we write software for computers. That, naturally, can have a big impact on what kinds of languages we want to use.

    I think MS had an inkling of what was to come in 2000-2005, and the shift to .NET was an attempt to be positioned to handle a world that needed a slightly more flexible Windows. I think no one could have properly predicted what actually happened, and it took a LONG time for .NET to deliver on its promises. In the meantime, the world shifted, and MS needed to meet new challenges while still trying to play catch-up with their intended platform.

    When the world changes this fast, we can't easily stick with the same platform for decades. I started, professionally, in 2003 or so. That was before things started changing rapidly, but late enough that I've never had a 5-year period where I felt the beginning and the end looked at all the same. I didn't even have enough time to feel like I was an expert in WPF before I was studying Silverlight. That was in the trash can before I'd read my 2nd book. I didn't even have time to look at Win8 apps before UWP arrived. I tried to go to iOS to get away from it, but it's very similar over there: half the good Swift books come out just in time for the next version to release and invalidate some of their facts.

    Anyway, what I mean is:

    I can't blame people who want VB6 to be some kind of de facto desktop client development platform forever. I might not agree that VB6 should be that platform, but the idea of having SOMETHING you can base a 30-year project on is appealing. Right now I don't know what to tell you, especially if you need to interface with hardware. HTML/JS is probably going to last forever, but that's not something you'll connect to a weird bit of hardware.

    Windows has to change, yesterday. It feels at least 10 years behind the curve. If Microsoft can't find a way to reaffirm its grip on the OS market, then Windows dies and then you won't even have "difficult" compatibility. No one outside of Microsoft gives a flip about VB6 compatibility, as far as I can tell. They are your only advocate, and the only way they make money off of you is if you buy Windows licenses. Put another way, I could argue, 'You are betting your business on the whims of a multinational company.' But I also understand for many of you, you made that bet at a time when it was true that VB6 represented a ridiculously significant percentage of revenue for Microsoft. That is no longer true, and they've not been shy about documenting that on the VB language team blog.

    I don't think VB6 can rise to meet the challenge of facing the next 10 years. It would require very heavy investment to catch up with 2017. I don't believe the traditional Windows Client is what we'll be writing in 2028 at all, and somewhere along the way life is going to get very bad for a VB6 developer. I don't know what to tell you to move on to. There are a lot of marketable languages today, most similar. Pick your favorite parachute and be ready to pull the cord.
    This answer is wrong. You should be using TableAdapter and Dictionaries instead.

  12. #132
    Frenzied Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,032

    Re: Vb6 , the Future, and what I have discovered

    Quote Originally Posted by dilettante View Post
    Very useful information, but don't know how many people will continue to follow Microsoft's footsteps. In 2007, my company had provided technical consulting for a software company. At that time, Microsoft tried hard to promote WPF and Silverlight, but I suggested my customer (that software company) adopt HTML5 in the future development. Now it seems that my suggestion was totally correct.
    Last edited by dreammanor; Jan 26th, 2018 at 09:59 PM.

  13. #133
    Angel of Code Niya's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    5,625

    Re: Vb6 , the Future, and what I have discovered

    Quote Originally Posted by dreammanor View Post
    You can say a lot of MS commitment to backward compatibility, but VB6 is not one of them.
    The VB6 IDE and the applications written in it still work on the latest Windows. Considering VB6 is something like 20 years old, that's a hell of a commitment to backward compatibility. You should really look closely at the sheer number things that changed in Windows since VB6 was the bleeding edge. It's almost insane that it still works. If that's not commitment, I don't know what is.

    Quote Originally Posted by dreammanor View Post
    If you have a VB6 program that has 1 to 3 million lines of code, do you want your program to just keep running?
    Yep. As long as it keeps working, I'm fine with that.

    Quote Originally Posted by dreammanor View Post
    Do you want it to have nothing to do with Web and Mobile? Would you like to spend 3 to 10 years to develop a .NET version that is completely similar to the old one.
    Why would I want to write a web or mobile application in VB6? VB6 was tailored to making Windows desktop applications. That's what it was best at. What does VB6 have to do with web and mobile apps?

    Quote Originally Posted by dreammanor View Post
    Moreover, Microsoft said VB6 can be smoothly migrated to .NET, this lie not only cheated a lot of people but also wasted a lot of people's time.

    Edit:

    It took me a lot of time trying to migrate VB6 programs to .NET, but I finally gave it up.

    Whether to continue to use VB6 programs or rewrite a new program completely with .NET, this hesitation took me a long time.

    Because of the very rudeness of .NET at the beginning, I was not convinced of it, so I went to investigate many other languages, such as Dephi, Java, Python, C++, which took me a lot of time.

    Now I don't have time.
    I too hated .Net in the beginning and resisted for something like 2 years because of countless threads, blogs and articles like this thread all over the internet. Then I realized that the hate wasn't justified since I had never actually used VB.Net myself. I only listened to *******s mouthing off on the internet about how bad it was. I decided to gave it a try so I could judge for myself. Needless to say the experience was very pleasant for me, nothing like the horror stories I read online. I was no longer a VB6 programmer from that point.

    VB.Net is not without it's own flaws but after years using it, I could see why MS wanted to go in this direction. The things that VB.Net and the .Net Framework could do, there was no way they could have shoehorned the old VB6 infrastructure to do these things.

    Yes it was harsh what they did to VB6 developers, just dropping it like that. I'm not going to deny that. But it was the right call. It had to be made eventually. 10 to 20 years from now, something else will come along and .Net would be history too. This is just how it goes in this business. There's really no sense in getting so emotional about it.
    Treeview with NodeAdded/NodesRemoved events | BlinkLabel control | Calculate Permutations | Object Enums | ComboBox with centered items | .Net Internals article(not mine) | Wizard Control | Understanding Multi-Threading | Simple file compression | Demon Arena


    C++ programmers will dismiss you as a cretinous simpleton for your inability to keep track of pointers chained 6 levels deep and Java programmers will pillory you for buying into the evils of Microsoft. Meanwhile C# programmers will get paid just a little bit more than you for writing exactly the same code and VB6 programmers will continue to whitter on about "footprints". - FunkyDexter

    There's just no reason to use garbage like InputBox. -jmcilhinney

  14. #134
    Member Grant Swinger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    32

    Re: Vb6 , the Future, and what I have discovered

    Quote Originally Posted by Niya View Post
    You can read this. It should shed light on some of the decision that were made when it comes to COM.
    Then read this. Skip to page 7 to get the part about the focus groups.

    While everybody complains about Microsoft "screwing over their legit customers" they're overlooking the fact that they aren't the only customers Microsoft has. The major enterprises -- the people who sign big purchase orders for development tools -- did not want another COM-based Visual Basic. That's why they were heading to Java. I was an enterprise developer in those days and watched it happen.

  15. #135
    PowerPoster Elroy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Near Nashville TN
    Posts
    4,534

    Re: Vb6 , the Future, and what I have discovered

    Quote Originally Posted by Niya View Post
    You can read this. It should shed light on some of the decision that were made when it comes to COM.
    Hi Niya,

    Yeah, I've read the smoke-and-mirrors excuses before. I suppose the following is the one that they always try to cram down our throats:

    It could ... have created a compatible VB7 as a separate stream of non-.NET development. ... If Microsoft had done that, nobody would have taken its .NET strategy seriously.
    Really? Were (are) they really that insecure? And if that's actually true (which, if .NET was so obvious, how could it be), do we really think it's still true 20 years later? Are they still afraid that everyone will abandon .NET if they release a VB7?

    Now if that's actually true, then how can they still argue that actually abandoning VB6 was the correct decision? Isn't 20 years enough time for a product to prove itself and establish its own recognition?

    Take Care,
    Elroy
    Any software I post in these forums written by me is provided “AS IS” without warranty of any kind, expressed or implied, and permission is hereby granted, free of charge and without restriction, to any person obtaining a copy. Please understand that I’ve been programming since the mid-1970s and still have some of that code. My contemporary VB6 project is approaching 1,000 modules. In addition, I have a “VB6 random code folder” that is overflowing. I’ve been at this long enough to truly not know with absolute certainty from whence every single line of my code has come, with much of it coming from programmers under my employ who signed intellectual property transfers. I have not deliberately attempted to remove any licenses and/or attributions from any software. If someone finds that I have inadvertently done so, I sincerely apologize, and, upon notice and reasonable proof, will re-attach those licenses and/or attributions. To all, peace and happiness.

  16. #136
    PowerPoster Elroy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Near Nashville TN
    Posts
    4,534

    Re: Vb6 , the Future, and what I have discovered

    Quote Originally Posted by Grant Swinger View Post
    The major enterprises -- the people who sign big purchase orders for development tools -- did not want another COM-based Visual Basic.
    Well, if they'd had both VB6/VB7 and .NET, nobody would have forced them to purchase VB6/VB7. Are you suggesting that these "major enterprises" were actually complicit in trying to kill VB6?
    Any software I post in these forums written by me is provided “AS IS” without warranty of any kind, expressed or implied, and permission is hereby granted, free of charge and without restriction, to any person obtaining a copy. Please understand that I’ve been programming since the mid-1970s and still have some of that code. My contemporary VB6 project is approaching 1,000 modules. In addition, I have a “VB6 random code folder” that is overflowing. I’ve been at this long enough to truly not know with absolute certainty from whence every single line of my code has come, with much of it coming from programmers under my employ who signed intellectual property transfers. I have not deliberately attempted to remove any licenses and/or attributions from any software. If someone finds that I have inadvertently done so, I sincerely apologize, and, upon notice and reasonable proof, will re-attach those licenses and/or attributions. To all, peace and happiness.

  17. #137
    PowerPoster
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    18,978

    Re: Vb6 , the Future, and what I have discovered

    The issue is that most "enterprise developers" have even thinner skills than the peanut gallery here.
    Most can't begin to deal with deployment, let alone issues of binary compatibility.

    So a scripting engine like the .Net CLR was a godsend, as a Microsoft-blessed JVM clone. Decision makers had no idea what the nuances are all about, they just found that limiting their developers to scripting languages is safer than letting them program on the bare metal was.

    Even that isn't enough though, thus the moves toward containerization. As the development labor force gets dumber and dumber (cheap outsourced labor, web secretaries, illiterate burger-flipper Millennials, etc.) the damage control required becomes ever more important.

    Why the push for self-driving cars? People are getting too dumb to drive themselves safely.

  18. #138
    PowerPoster Elroy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Near Nashville TN
    Posts
    4,534

    Re: Vb6 , the Future, and what I have discovered

    And again, in response to dilettante, what's the problem with multiple alternatives? COM based and .NET based applications run just fine on the same machine.
    Any software I post in these forums written by me is provided “AS IS” without warranty of any kind, expressed or implied, and permission is hereby granted, free of charge and without restriction, to any person obtaining a copy. Please understand that I’ve been programming since the mid-1970s and still have some of that code. My contemporary VB6 project is approaching 1,000 modules. In addition, I have a “VB6 random code folder” that is overflowing. I’ve been at this long enough to truly not know with absolute certainty from whence every single line of my code has come, with much of it coming from programmers under my employ who signed intellectual property transfers. I have not deliberately attempted to remove any licenses and/or attributions from any software. If someone finds that I have inadvertently done so, I sincerely apologize, and, upon notice and reasonable proof, will re-attach those licenses and/or attributions. To all, peace and happiness.

  19. #139
    Frenzied Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    1,030

    Re: Vb6 , the Future, and what I have discovered

    Quote Originally Posted by Niya View Post
    Considering VB6 is something like 20 years old, that's a hell of a commitment to backward compatibility. You should really look closely at the sheer number things that changed in Windows since VB6 was the bleeding edge. It's almost insane that it still works. If that's not commitment, I don't know what is.
    After Win Vista MS wanted to review ALL code for Win 7 to optimize the perfomance. As it happens when you review old codes with sometimes no comments is that you think you optimize something but actually something got broken.
    That happened by Win 7 RTM with few incompatibilties. They got fixed in SP1.

    And VB6 was a victim on those reviews. The vbame.dll was broken.
    Now a further break is unlikely to happen as they commented it better now after the fix.

    The fix was in 2010 and extended support ended on 2008. MS actually cared about it, so much from me about good vb6 commitment from MS.

    How Windows 7 broke VB6's RightToLeft property, and how to get it fixed
    Last edited by Krool; Jan 26th, 2018 at 03:33 PM.

  20. #140
    Angel of Code Niya's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    5,625

    Re: Vb6 , the Future, and what I have discovered

    Quote Originally Posted by Elroy View Post
    Really? Were (are) they really that insecure? And if that's actually true (which, if .NET was so obvious, how could it be), do we really think it's still true 20 years later? Are they still afraid that everyone will abandon .NET if they release a VB7?

    Now if that's actually true, then how can they still argue that actually abandoning VB6 was the correct decision? Isn't 20 years enough time for a product to prove itself and establish its own recognition?

    Take Care,
    Elroy
    They wanted to push VB into the future. Apparently COM was getting in the way of that. It makes no sense splitting their resources into developing two different products that are fundamentally direct competitors of each other. It's just not practical

    Even if that were an option, why would they create a VB7 after they had already decided that they didn't want to go in that direction? It is true that with VB7 alongside VB.Net, people may have gone with VB7 and ignored VB.Net but that would have only delayed what needed to be done. They had to make the hard choice and drag us there forcefully, at great risk to their bottom line as well. Harsh is it was, the reasoning was sound.
    Treeview with NodeAdded/NodesRemoved events | BlinkLabel control | Calculate Permutations | Object Enums | ComboBox with centered items | .Net Internals article(not mine) | Wizard Control | Understanding Multi-Threading | Simple file compression | Demon Arena


    C++ programmers will dismiss you as a cretinous simpleton for your inability to keep track of pointers chained 6 levels deep and Java programmers will pillory you for buying into the evils of Microsoft. Meanwhile C# programmers will get paid just a little bit more than you for writing exactly the same code and VB6 programmers will continue to whitter on about "footprints". - FunkyDexter

    There's just no reason to use garbage like InputBox. -jmcilhinney

  21. #141
    Angel of Code Niya's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    5,625

    Re: Vb6 , the Future, and what I have discovered

    Quote Originally Posted by Krool View Post
    After Win Vista MS wanted to review ALL code for Win 7 to optimize the perfomance. As it happens when you review old codes with sometimes no comments is that you think you optimize something but actually something got broken.
    That happened by Win 7 RTM with few incompatibilties. They got fixed in SP1.

    And VB6 was a victim on those reviews. The vbame.dll was broken.
    Now a further break is unlikely to happen as they commented it better now after the fix.

    The fix was in 2010 and extended support ended on 2008. MS actually cared about it, so much from me about good vb6 commitment from MS.

    How Windows 7 broke VB6's RightToLeft property, and how to get it fixed
    This is a good example of just how committed MS is to backward compatibility.
    Treeview with NodeAdded/NodesRemoved events | BlinkLabel control | Calculate Permutations | Object Enums | ComboBox with centered items | .Net Internals article(not mine) | Wizard Control | Understanding Multi-Threading | Simple file compression | Demon Arena


    C++ programmers will dismiss you as a cretinous simpleton for your inability to keep track of pointers chained 6 levels deep and Java programmers will pillory you for buying into the evils of Microsoft. Meanwhile C# programmers will get paid just a little bit more than you for writing exactly the same code and VB6 programmers will continue to whitter on about "footprints". - FunkyDexter

    There's just no reason to use garbage like InputBox. -jmcilhinney

  22. #142
    PowerPoster
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    18,978

    Re: Vb6 , the Future, and what I have discovered

    With .Net you just get GAC Hell instead.

    No, .Net was all about the vanity of Anders "VB Killer" Hejlsberg and nothing else. Any positives that came along were just fallout from ripping off Java.

  23. #143
    Angel of Code Niya's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    5,625

    Re: Vb6 , the Future, and what I have discovered

    Quote Originally Posted by dilettante View Post
    Any positives that came along were just fallout from ripping off Java.
    That was the idea. As I understand it MS and Sun were haggling over Java and MS just decided to roll their own "Java".

    Quote Originally Posted by dilettante View Post
    they just found that limiting their developers to scripting languages is safer than letting them program on the bare metal was.
    We haven't written programs against the bare metal since DOS.
    Treeview with NodeAdded/NodesRemoved events | BlinkLabel control | Calculate Permutations | Object Enums | ComboBox with centered items | .Net Internals article(not mine) | Wizard Control | Understanding Multi-Threading | Simple file compression | Demon Arena


    C++ programmers will dismiss you as a cretinous simpleton for your inability to keep track of pointers chained 6 levels deep and Java programmers will pillory you for buying into the evils of Microsoft. Meanwhile C# programmers will get paid just a little bit more than you for writing exactly the same code and VB6 programmers will continue to whitter on about "footprints". - FunkyDexter

    There's just no reason to use garbage like InputBox. -jmcilhinney

  24. #144
    Super Moderator Shaggy Hiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    32,253

    Re: Vb6 , the Future, and what I have discovered

    Quote Originally Posted by Elroy View Post
    And I still insist that there was no call for it, other than someone's ego at Microsoft.
    Let me just say: It was a whole LOT more than just that. I realize there are some reductionist conspiracy theories around this one, but I think we were standing around cooking some turkeys when I heard that decision (.NET over vb6) described to me...most recently, and as part of a totally different discussion. MS is just a company like any other. They have no more effective crystal ball than any of the rest of us. After much fretting, and with much anxiety, they made the decision that they felt was most likely to work out for them. We have the advantage of hindsight, and even with that people tend to reduce it down to one malevolent personality bending the corporation to their will. It just didn't happen that way.
    My usual boring signature: Nothing

  25. #145
    Super Moderator Shaggy Hiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    32,253

    Re: Vb6 , the Future, and what I have discovered

    Quote Originally Posted by Elroy View Post
    but why does it have to be one-or-the-other? Why not both?
    Money. Nothing more than that. MS has a MASSIVE payroll, and they waste plenty going in various directions. They wanted to put all their wood behind one arrow....which sounds pretty obscene if you really think about it....so don't, but that was the phrase. What it means is simply that they didn't want to have a group working on one project and a second group working on a different project. Double the payroll, double the fun.
    My usual boring signature: Nothing

  26. #146
    Super Moderator Shaggy Hiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    32,253

    Re: Vb6 , the Future, and what I have discovered

    Quote Originally Posted by dilettante View Post
    With .Net you just get GAC Hell instead.
    GAC Hell doesn't really exist. When hell is optional, who opts in?

    By the way, you weren't talking about eVB when you mentioned that there was a VB6 spin-off for mobile, were you? That one totally sucked.
    My usual boring signature: Nothing

  27. #147
    Member Grant Swinger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    32

    Re: Vb6 , the Future, and what I have discovered

    Quote Originally Posted by Elroy View Post
    Well, if they'd had both VB6/VB7 and .NET, nobody would have forced them to purchase VB6/VB7. Are you suggesting that these "major enterprises" were actually complicit in trying to kill VB6?
    No, what I'm saying is that without them the market for a COM-based VB7 was dead. It would have never sold enough copies to recover the development costs let alone turn a profit. If there's a profitable market for it then why haven't we seen some other company step in and deliver the product that Microsoft won't? It's because there is no such market.

  28. #148
    Super Moderator Shaggy Hiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    32,253

    Re: Vb6 , the Future, and what I have discovered

    I would say that we haven't seen anybody step in and deliver an IDE for ANY language that is as competent and capable as VS has been over the years, even before VB6. The IDE has improved up to a point, and now seems to be over-reaching, as the feature set is nicer and nicer, but the load times have started to become onerous. I've always felt that the pinnacle was VS2010. I appreciate some of the features added with 2013 and 2017, but I'm not sure the cost in performance is worth it. VS has the load characteristics of a graphics-heavy game, these days.

    Still, is there any other IDE out there as nice to use?
    My usual boring signature: Nothing

  29. #149
    PowerPoster
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    3,694

    Re: Vb6 , the Future, and what I have discovered

    Quote Originally Posted by Niya View Post
    They wanted to push VB into the future. Apparently COM was getting in the way of that.
    You have the whole COM-story entirely backwards Niya...
    COM was (and is) getting into nobodys way - instead COM is the building-block(s) (always was) for all modern WinOS-functionality.

    The old article you posted about "Indigo" was horribly bad in its "speculations" (and old - from 2005).
    Here a few facts:
    - Indigo (is no more - it existed only for a short time at the era of .NET 2.0 - but since it was hyped as always - code had to be thrown away in the end)
    - next was WCF (Windows-Communication-Foundation) into which parts of the Indigo-stuff were merged, but IIRC in an incompatible manner)
    - well, WCF is deprecated now too (absolved by "ASP.NET Core 1 and MVC 6"): https://blog.tonysneed.com/2016/01/0...ng-live-mvc-6/
    - well, although the linked article a line above was from 2016 - it's "old news" now, please welcome .NET-Core 2.0: https://weblog.west-wind.com/posts/2...e-finally-here

    Well, I'm sure we didn't hear the end of it - but guess who was "always there, all the time"?
    COM+ (along with normal COM-basedness and -support in MS-Office, Explorer/Shell, modern CoreAudio, Direct2D, DirectWrite, DirectX12, etc. pp.)

    Quote Originally Posted by Niya View Post
    It is true that with VB7 alongside VB.Net, people may have gone with VB7 and ignored VB.Net but that would have only delayed what needed to be done.
    Given your misinformedness about COM - what exactly do you mean with "needed to be done"?

    Olaf
    Last edited by Schmidt; Jan 26th, 2018 at 08:46 PM.

  30. #150
    PowerPoster
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    3,694

    Re: Vb6 , the Future, and what I have discovered

    Quote Originally Posted by Niya View Post
    We haven't written programs against the bare metal since DOS.
    A higher-level language doesn't need to support e.g. "inline ASM-snippets" - but it should (in addition to being able to compile COM-libs):
    - have a native compiler which allows easy access also to the systems flat-APIs
    - offers unmanaged access to "pointer-based stuff", if the need arises
    - and it should be able to link (as a higher-level-glue-language) also to the "first-level-class-wrappers atop the systems flat-API ==> COM)
    That's IMO as far as a higher-level language should go with regards to "bare metal" (if you want to write system-drivers, use C/C++).
    And VB6 to this day supports all of the above...

    BTW, what do you think e.g. UWP-stuff is based on? - right, it's normal COM-interfaces and -VTables.
    The "classic .NET-stuff" you're using, is a "once removed" - "third layer" atop of many of the systems COM-Interfaces and -Classes.
    (.NET core 2.0 is a bit more direct - especially in its Linux-version of course, where there "is no COM" - but that's a new -
    and still comparably small subset of the .NET you currently use).

    Olaf

  31. #151
    PowerPoster
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    18,978

    Re: Vb6 , the Future, and what I have discovered

    Name:  The Race.png
Views: 174
Size:  5.5 KB

    Safety at a Price

  32. #152
    Lively Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    120

    Re: Vb6 , the Future, and what I have discovered

    Quote Originally Posted by dilettante View Post
    Name:  The Race.png
Views: 174
Size:  5.5 KB

    Safety at a Price
    A picture is worth a thousand words

  33. #153

    Thread Starter
    Hyperactive Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    271

    Re: Vb6 , the Future, and what I have discovered

    Quote Originally Posted by Schmidt View Post
    BTW, what do you think e.g. UWP-stuff is based on? - right, it's normal COM-interfaces and -VTables.
    The "classic .NET-stuff" you're using, is a "once removed" - "third layer" atop of many of the systems COM-Interfaces and -Classes.
    (.NET core 2.0 is a bit more direct - especially in its Linux-version of course, where there "is no COM" - but that's a new -
    and still comparably small subset of the .NET you currently use).

    Olaf
    I find it hilarious, this happens to every time I meet a new developer, they think their framework is so SUPERIOR, when in fact all it is , is layer on top of COM.

    The irony is absolutely sad!

    Again Olaf, I am trying Lazarus(limping every step of the way).. making a little progress, but I still have high hopes for your stuff. If I was rich I would give you the money to finish it.

    Please Hurry, I ask humbly..

    WP

  34. #154
    You don't want to know.
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    4,580

    Re: Vb6 , the Future, and what I have discovered

    I find it extremely amusing to see VB6 developers lamenting that developers today "aren't close enough to the bare metal". You are making the argument C deveopers used to call you an incompetent child, for all the same reasons those giant babies made thier stupid arguments. Congratulations, now you fit the diapers.

    COM and VB6 were very good solutions to the problems that Windows developers were facing in their time period. VB .NET was, at the time, a very good solution to a different set of problems that were challenging to face with VB6. To get there, it made some sacrifices that affected the simplicity of writing "solved" Windows client problems. .NET itself is evolving rapidly because, in case you haven't noticed, Windows has been a joke since about 2013.

    In 2018, among many other things, "real programmers" have a big list of needs. We need a flexible language that can facilitate highly isolated architectures. The UI frameworks have to support more screen resolutions than we used to have kilobytes of RAM. We need parallelism and concurrency support that wouldn't have made any sense in the context of VB6's design phase. We're still not certain what kinds of architecture work for most of this.

    I guess I feel like trying to design a modern language specifically for Windows Clients is a very niche activity. We certainly don't have a GDI-focused language anymore. But small business needs aren't "interesting problems" anymore. We know what architectures and tools to use for those. Putting a GUI frontend on them isn't an "interesting problem" anymore, we have a myriad of non-GDI options that work on every platform. So any language that focuses on JUST these issues is not "interesting", nor is it "solving a new problem".

    That makes sitting around and making fun of people doing other things look dangerously like one who grew to be the biggest fish in their particular pond and is now more interested in convincing others they have mastered the ocean.

    We made tools like VB so we could train monkeys to write clients. We did it because we didn't want to waste our time on tedious things we'd already solved. You don't get back-pats for using an ice box instead of a refrigerator.
    This answer is wrong. You should be using TableAdapter and Dictionaries instead.

  35. #155
    PowerPoster
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    3,694

    Re: Vb6 , the Future, and what I have discovered

    Quote Originally Posted by Sitten Spynne View Post
    I find it extremely amusing to see VB6 developers lamenting that developers today "aren't close enough to the bare metal". You are making the argument C deveopers used ...
    Then you entirely misunderstood (IMO)...

    Dile who brought that "bare metal" up, is not an "C or ASM-favouring guy" - and well-aware that with VB6, he's using a "higher-level-language".
    So in all likelihood he meant it in the same way as I understand .NET...

    As a kind of "3rd-layer", which is build atop of the:
    - first-level system-functions (the API- and ABI-wise *very* constant and stable Win32 flat-API)
    - second-level system-Classes (which are ABI-wise also quite constant and stable behind COM-intrfaces)

    VB6 on the other hand, can work directly against the first and second layer above with a native compiler.

    .NET is (although in the beginning designed as a Java-competitor) in the meantime evolving into a kind of "circus" in my opinion,
    which deprecates things in an ever shorter frequency, to "keep the money-machine turning" (mainly for all the consultant-companies,
    and "MS-partners" which suggest "new approaches to old things" in ever shortening cycles, making you feel (as a developer) that you're
    "always wayys behind how to do things properly".

    May I suggest to take a breath and look behind that facade... "the emperor really is naked" behind all that "marketing-hubbub" because:
    MS itself is not using any of that "third-layer" (.NET in its 4.x versions) to design its success-critical cash-cow-Apps - they work against "flat- and COM-ABIs" (as we do with VB6).
    Any company which develops serious stuff, wants to do that on top of stable, relative unchanging lib-interfaces (stability over a period of at least a decade I mean here).

    Quote Originally Posted by Sitten Spynne View Post
    COM and VB6 were very good solutions to the problems that Windows developers were facing in their time period.
    As I just tried to make clear - they still are.
    And I still have to see a .NET-based example (for either Win-Desktop or "the Web"), which I cannot replicate with ease in VB6.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sitten Spynne View Post
    .NET itself is evolving rapidly because, in case you haven't noticed, Windows has been a joke since about 2013.
    I completely disagree - because *nothing* has (fundamentally) changed in the first (flat-API) and second (COM-API) layers of the OS.
    That's the reason, why (for example) I can still put VB6-compiled COM-libs behind:
    - the MS-Webserver IIS (which is *still* heavily interacting with the *still* largely unchanged COM+ service directly)
    - supporting modern Web-Apps with all bells and whistles (per native compiled COM-libs behind the AppServer-layer)

    Quote Originally Posted by Sitten Spynne View Post
    In 2018, among many other things, "real programmers" have a big list of needs.
    You make it sound like there's "a whole lot of stuff we are missing" - but there *isn't* "a lot of new stuff".
    - you only "think there is" (listening to the "hype-mongers" who will tell you all about the emperors new clothes).

    Quote Originally Posted by Sitten Spynne View Post
    We need a flexible language that can facilitate highly isolated architectures.
    Your "highly isolated architectures" are adressed these days over https, end of story.
    Now you can invent "fancy new words" promoting them as great new "Web-technologies" - but in the end it all boils down to:
    - a simple RPC (Remote-Procedure-Call - to use this "old fashioned acronym" in favour of all these ever changing "marketing terms" one tries to cover that fact with

    Can VB6 perform such RPCs (over https) in a simple manner at the clientside?
    - of course it can (asynchronously and also synchronously - over a system-provided COM-object)

    Can VB6 be used to implement the serverside in such scenarios (e.g. implementing a modern, JSON-returning WebService)?
    - of course it can (over a native compiled, fast performing COM-lib, which runs behind MS-IIS - or behind other WebServer-architectures as e.g. FastCGI)

    Quote Originally Posted by Sitten Spynne View Post
    The UI frameworks have to support more screen resolutions ...
    Sure, please show me your DPI-aware .NET example for the WinDesktop - and I'll show you how to do it in VB6...

    Quote Originally Posted by Sitten Spynne View Post
    We need parallelism and concurrency support that wouldn't have made any sense in the context of VB6's design phase.
    Again - show me a .NET-example in that category - and I'll show you the VB6-implementation.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sitten Spynne View Post
    We certainly don't have a GDI-focused language anymore...
    ...we have a myriad of non-GDI options that work on every platform
    VB6 does not have to work against GDI, if we don't want it to... (e.g. using the RC5 - a COM-based cairo-wrapper) -
    and the only other stuff which works "on every imaginable platform, GUI-wise - from the same code-base", is HTML5/CSS3/JavaScript based stuff
    (which you can provide from a VB6-based backend in the same way as from a .NET-based backend).

    Quote Originally Posted by Sitten Spynne View Post
    That makes sitting around and making fun of people doing other things look dangerously like one who grew to be the biggest fish in their particular pond and is now more interested in convincing others they have mastered the ocean.
    What I for my part am trying to do here in this thread is "to get people on their feet" - not "making fun of people"
    (although some of those people should try to understand and *accept* certain truths).
    MS will not help with a "re-incarnation" of VB6 - we have to do it ourselves.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sitten Spynne View Post
    We made tools like VB so we could train monkeys to write clients. We did it because we didn't want to waste our time on tedious things we'd already solved. You don't get back-pats for using an ice box instead of a refrigerator.
    Who is "We"?
    And how does one have to understand this "monkey thing"?
    A language that is "easily accessible" by anybody is not a bad thing at all in my opinion.
    And in case a given language has such low entry-barriers - it doesn't automatically mean, that professionals are hindred to use it to its full extend.

    As for your "ice-box, refrigerator" comparison - I've already tried to describe that there "is no ice-box" and no "refrigerator" -
    these are "invented terms" - any of us always had "a working device for decent cooling" - no matter how you name it.

    Olaf

  36. #156
    You don't want to know.
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    4,580

    Re: Vb6 , the Future, and what I have discovered

    For one, I'm mostly jabbing back at dilettante. You have very good points and I think you missed some of mine because you read it as a reply directly to you, as opposed to pointed directly at dilettante's #137.

    His point comes across as:

    "The people who write most software are dumber than me and too stupid to handle VB6. Therefore Microsoft had to make .NET, which isn't even a REAL programming language, as a safety net for these people. Also Docker sucks and everyone who has a .NET job is an idiot."

    What people said about VB6 in the 90s:

    "The people who write this software are dumber than me and too stupid to handle C. Therefore Microsoft made VB6, which isn't even a REAL programming language, as a safety net for these people. Also Access sucks and everyone who is promoted from "waterboy" to "VB developer" is an idiot."

    We've come a long way, and the technologies he's dismissing may be inappropriate for his particular job. That doesn't mean there aren't people who need them.

    That's mostly what I'm saying about VB. It is a strong performer for writing Windows clients, and that you're so confident it can handle anything I think of is an indicator it's very flexible. But C could do all of those things too. We would likely both agree it'd be harder to pull off in C.

    That's more or less my reason for saying ignoring .NET is folly: many things you speak of "calling out to a COM server" for are parts of the VB .NET runtime with syntax sugar to make them single-line concepts. That's what VB6 did to C. The things .NET improved over VB6 are not quite so dramatic. That's why there's contention. If I were more familiar with VB6 I'd love to dive into some specific examples of how modern features in .NET save programmer time. But I'm not, so anything I toss out is flying blind and hurts my case. I can't disproe you can do some of the things you claim with VB6. But I do know you can't claim to write an iOS app with VB6, or if you can that's neat as hell and I want to see the framework.

    I'm never going to pass up a garbage post like #137 without pointing out the originator is a C developer trash-talking VB.
    This answer is wrong. You should be using TableAdapter and Dictionaries instead.

  37. #157
    PowerPoster
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    18,978

    Re: Vb6 , the Future, and what I have discovered

    Struck a nerve I see.

  38. #158
    PowerPoster
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    18,978

    Re: Vb6 , the Future, and what I have discovered

    How to Become Gluten Intolerant (Funny) - Ultra Spiritual Life episode 12 - with JP Sears (YouTube)

    Whenever you hear "gluten" substitute "native code." Hilarious!

  39. #159
    Super Moderator Shaggy Hiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    32,253

    Re: Vb6 , the Future, and what I have discovered

    This whole thread is a raw nerve, and always has been.
    My usual boring signature: Nothing

  40. #160
    Frenzied Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,032

    Re: Vb6 , the Future, and what I have discovered

    Quote Originally Posted by Niya View Post
    Why would I want to write a web or mobile application in VB6? VB6 was tailored to making Windows desktop applications. That's what it was best at. What does VB6 have to do with web and mobile apps?
    Why can't we use VB6 to develop web or mobile apps? Since Delphi, C#, Java, C++(include Visual C++) can do this kind of development, why VB6 can not?

    No one ever said VB6 was designed for Windows desktop apps only, just as no one has said that Delphi, C#, C++(Visual C++) were designed for Windows desktop apps only, just as no one has said that Java was designed to make web apps only.

    Many years ago, it was because so many people like you mistakenly said that VB6 was not suitable for developing Web-App, many people gave up the trying. Now is the time to correct the mistakes, and I'm learning to develop Web-App with VB6. For now, it is very good.

    Edit:

    Quote Originally Posted by Niya View Post
    Yep. As long as it keeps working, I'm fine with that.
    For a long time, our programs could not run on Vista, later the problem were solved. But there is still an important program that can only run on XP.
    Last edited by dreammanor; Jan 28th, 2018 at 06:11 AM.

Page 4 of 12 FirstFirst 1234567 ... 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
  •  



Featured


Click Here to Expand Forum to Full Width