Printable View
Hello, does anybody know NSBASIC? It looks like an attempt at keeping VB6 alive, which is very good news for those die-hard VB6 users like me.
How similar is it to VB6? Is it worth a try?
If you've never heard about NSBASIC, take a look at this site:
http://www.nsbasic.com/
I'll appreciate any opinion you may want to express about it.
NSBasic runs on hand helds
and http://realbasic.com/ runs on three platforms
Always nice to have options
But isn't it really the frame-work not being used by VB6 that will be it's downfall in the long run?
With MS not supporting the continued use of API calls and such - won't new hardware and drivers simply stop interacting with them?
I'm really just wondering - as we write very simple app's - UI's for DB maintenance and such.
If NSBASIC isn't going to use the frame-work then how can it survive anyway?
Moved
GO .NET!!!! :thumb: :D
Your concerns are exactly the ones I have. That's what keeps me from switching to REALbasic or Delphi. What if MS breaks compatibility with WinAPI32?Quote:
Originally Posted by szlamany
Do the software houses that produce non-.NET development tools know that they might have their days numbered?
Won't they have to as 64 bit machines become the norm?Quote:
Originally Posted by esposito
We are a software house that produces non-.Net applications - and we have to migrate - the customers are starting to notice the different look that new app's have - and we are forced to stay current.
The question is, for how long will it be able to run on three platforms?Quote:
Originally Posted by sessi4ml
What do you mean by "the different look that new app's have"? What is the look that can only be created with .NET and not with VB6?Quote:
Originally Posted by szlamany
I think it's a mistake. One of the tools we use in house for reporting purposes is called SQR - it's cumbersome but it does job quite well and it's going to stay for awhile because it's part a major enterprise...Quote:
Originally Posted by szlamany
Anyway, I recently had to use it outside ERP system just because .Net is so lousy when it comes to printing simple reports (I really am missing that old good Printer object :cry: ).
Long story short some command line agrs need to be p-assed to sqr executable and some of them are folders and files names.
Because long path may contain spaces and arguments list will all be messed up I was forced to convert long path to short. The only way to accomplish this is to use the com interop to get to Win32 APIs.
Now you tell me why the heck framework doesn't naturaly support that?
The only and one reason I can see to switch to .NET is to get ready for the future, so there's no need to be in a hurry. Right now it does not make any sense to abandon VB6, also because Vista supports it quite well. Since this OS has just been released, it is legitimate to assume that for the next four/five years VB6 applications will work just fine.Quote:
Originally Posted by RhinoBull
I wasn't talking about VB6 being alive - that was all about .net 2.0 framework that has 400K+ classes and not at least one that supports api.
Yes, 400K+ classes cannot convert a long path into a short one. VB6 is still alive also for that.Quote:
Originally Posted by RhinoBull
I'm afraid you aren't listening - at this moment I do not care whether or not VB6 is capable of doing something - my point of view is purely related to .Net framework and only framework.
You don't care but I do, since it is not my intention to switch to .NET in the forseeable future... also because, among other things, I would miss the Printer object, as you do.Quote:
Originally Posted by RhinoBull
LOL, I was only kidding (well almost)... :)Quote:
Originally Posted by esposito
Don't know your reasons but sincerly sorry.Quote:
Originally Posted by esposito
Get yourself at least the free 2005 Express Edition so you can get familiar with it and the framework itself.
Under no sircumstances do not limit yourself to one thing - broaden your horizons, learn as much as you can for your benefits.
Anyway, I wish best of luck.
I would be very surprized NOT to see some kind of .NET Printer object class/component created by some third party company/programmer to help ease the pain of VB 6 transition. Their are the example classes written by MS but still a bit too complicated for 1/2 the programmers to be profecient with.
As time goes on, more and more componets will surface written with the .NET Framework that will duplicate the old VB 6 controls/components.
Already done. Now and then I play around with VB2005, but just for fun. I don't feel like developing a commercial application right now. The framework is still a problem.Quote:
Originally Posted by RhinoBull
Same to you.Quote:
Originally Posted by RhinoBull
I agree with you: as time goes on, .NET will prevail. Right now, if I can get what I want with VB6, it would be stupid to do it in .NET, as it would limit the number of potential customers. I'll cross that bridge when I come to it.Quote:
Originally Posted by RobDog888
I will miss VB6 with the good old API's and the single threads... :cry:
But the new stuff has so much more potential then VB 6.
Do you miss DOS 6.22 also? :D
Grammatical doubt: shouldn't it be "Under no circumstances do limit yourself to one thing"? I was taught that the presence of two negative expressions (i.e. "under no circumstances" and "do not limit") would make the meaning affirmative. Nevertheless, as a non-native English speaker (and teacher), I may be wrong. Any (grammatical) help will be appreciated.Quote:
Originally Posted by RhinoBull
Sorry if it is OT.
that's way before my time :pQuote:
Originally Posted by RobDog888
never used it... :D
To be honest, I don't take for granted that .NET represents the future. Initially, MS had thought of basing Vista on the .NET Framework. At a certain point, they changed their mind. Nobody knows why.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheBigB
VB6 was discontinued many years ago. Amazingly, the number of VB6 developers is still so high (as their presence in VBForums shows). I think the reason for it is that many developers do not want to produce byte code software. After all, if they had liked it, they would have switched to Java more than a decade ago.
Byte code software is easy to crack and, worse, it requires a cumbersome virtual machine (the .NET Framework) that makes the deployment of applications a real headache.
So, before missing the old good API's, let's wait and see.
Who cares about transition? What if .Net 2005 is all someone ever knew?Quote:
Originally Posted by RobDog888
How can you explain that printing stupid "Hello World" is a major task and not only for a newbie?
How could they not include such an easy way to produce hard copy of simple text and/or graphics?
Why do I have to go third party when all I need to do is this?
That is the reason that I had to interop com object to interface api which are also not available in the framework...VB Code:
For haven sake WHY?! Why do we need almost half of a million classes if one of the most usefull aren't there?
We are talking about the people that are still on VB 6 that dont make the jump to .NET because of issues like that and the one you mentioned.
For the ones that have never seen VB 6 then its irrelevant.
I don't but I know quite of few people that do - mostly old time accountants. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by RobDog888
How is it irrelevant again? Rob, are you suggesting that spending hours on task like I posted is normal?Quote:
Originally Posted by RobDog888
People that never used VB6 would never know that there was an extremly easy way to print few lines but they all are wondering why is it so compilicated?
So, please don't try to say it's not an issue because it is - everybody knows this.
All the pros in the world are trying to finally accept new "idea" however you can't full everybody - if you try to sell me something nthat was very easy and now it is not I will make some noise.
This is basically why we had 3 releases in three years - someone at MS made a big boo-boo... :) And they still trying to recover...
I know... Maybe I'm just making such a drama because I'm to lazy to learn another language... :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by RobDog888
I also must agree with Rhinobull
I also agree with him when he points out the incongruencies you can find in .NET. But I'm afraid that, if you tried to convince him that, in some cases, it may make sense to go back to VB6, he would get offended.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheBigB
If "he" is "me" then it's very difficult to offend me - there are only few people that love VB6 as much as I do.Quote:
Originally Posted by esposito
However, since VB6 language is outdated and if you are MS developer then it's just doesn't make any sense what so ever to do new development using outdated tool.
can I join the club? :DQuote:
Originally Posted by RhinoBull
Don't worry about it. There are still COBOL programmers around to maintain that legacy code. There will be a need for VB6 folks for the forseeable careers of everybody here, though the need will probably decline. If the hardware moved to the point that a VB6 program simply wouldn't run, then the niche for VB6 would decline to a pretty small level, but that level will be above zero.
The thing that bothers me about .NET is that it is not "settled". There was little difference between VB5 and VB6, much more between VB4 and VB5, and a huge jump from VB3 to VB4. The difference between 2003 and 2005 is pretty significant, which makes me think that .NET has a ways to go before it matures as a language. I already avoid going back to VB6, but it is mostly because of the lack of true OO, and the lack of IDE features found in .NET (which has nothing to do with the language, of course). However, I expect that one advantage that the eventual, settled, .NET will have over VB6 will be its ability to run on either 32 bit or 64 bit systems without re-compiling. Heck, if you can't get cross-platform compatibility within MS, we'll certainly never see it elsewhere.
Its kind of like going from VBscript to VB6 .. well kind of .. there are many things that can be done in VBscript with just a couple lines, which needs all kinds of API code in VB6 (actually you can just use Vbscript inside VB6 but not for this point) .. even the FSO over using DIRs etc .. its so much easier half the time to do stuff simply in VBscript .. but then there are also many issues with that, and VB6 does have alot of stuff that you cant do in Vbscript .. the timer for one, and APIs! It took me a while to go from VBscript to VB6 .. i dont think i'll be tackling VB.net just yet ... maybe later on though when i get into Vista some.
You're correct.Quote:
Originally Posted by esposito
I just tested the demo .. its nothing like VB6 though, I mean it looks similar but reacts much differently, very slow interface on my PC compared to the speed of VB6 .. is this something like how VB1.0 was back in the day? :D
Why would someone use this over VB6 .. i mean unless the hardware suddenly stops working for VB6 .. but It seems like it would be just as easy to just move up to VB.net one time? Its not like its free also.
Again, my post is taken out of context.Quote:
Originally Posted by RhinoBull
I was stating that for the transition from vb 6 to .net reasons is irrelevant to a .net programmer only as they make do with the way .net operates. Sure, its not normal to spend allot of time on a print statement but thats not a reason to keep from using .net as you could very easily create a CR report and let it do the printing or use some other workaround.
If someone wants to stay with VB 6 because of a lack of information that would allow them to make a educated choice then thats one thing. But for someone to never have gave .net a look or chance then thats just biasism (is that a word?). I know you use .NET and VB 6 but it will take a few more years for .NET to have replaced VB 6 substancially and other solutions/fixes/workaround will have been created.
I dont care if someone loves one language vs another. I dont know why you think I care. I dont hound you to give up vb 6 do I? I still post in the VB 6 forum as I still have some apps written in vb 6 that arent going to be rewritten until later this year. Its a process and not an overnight one.
There is no "boo boo" that was made by MS as its an evolution process. 2002 wasnt too good, 2003 was better, and 2005 is to the point where it can actually be used in a production enviropnment. Within two more years Orcas should be out or close to it and I will be looking into the Orcas CTP preview as soon as I get Virtual Server installed.
VB6 may be an outdated tool but, as Shaggy Hiker has brilliantly pointed out, VB.NET is not yet a mature language:Quote:
Originally Posted by RhinoBull
I will switch to .NET when it becomes the present. Right now, it only represents a possible future.Quote:
The thing that bothers me about .NET is that it is not "settled". There was little difference between VB5 and VB6, much more between VB4 and VB5, and a huge jump from VB3 to VB4. The difference between 2003 and 2005 is pretty significant, which makes me think that .NET has a ways to go before it matures as a language.
VB 6 is not free where .NET is. Its more of an issue of using the right tool for each job and if one tool is already being used then you continue on with it until you make the evaluation that its worth the change for that app to go up to .NET.Quote:
Originally Posted by rory
The whole VB 6 vs .NET argument in a nutshell. :thumb:Quote:
Originally Posted by rory
If what you said is true, it does not make any sense to switch to NSBASIC now, considering that VB6 is still fully functional and it is superior to NSBASIC.Quote:
Originally Posted by rory