C# better then VB.NET... [Resolved]

[RobDog888]

I have been searching through the job market recently and am finding that its predominantly C#.
Why do you think this is so? There are very little jobs that are focused solely or mainly on VB.NET.

[dee-u]

One reason maybe is that with C# you are hitting 3 birds with one stone, you'll have understanding for Java and C/C++ also, at least that's what I've heard...

[RobDog888]

Could be. Also, I heard for user controls and graphics C# is better performing. I guess I am surprized at its dominance in the market where VB used to have the edge. Perhaps because C# is more of a RAD language then C++, VC++, Java and VB is less flexible and not as powerful?

[Hack]

Are these jobs you are looking at graphics oriented? The job postings in my area are all looking for VB.NET people.

[abhijit]

Thats cos C# just sounds much more cooler than VB.NET.

[zeek840]

If i may stick my ore in here....

Lets first get some things straight. C# and VB.Net both compile to MSIL, the same language, and either one can be converted back to either one. I have heard that people have done benchmark testing and found that C# was faster, such reports are poorly documented and as far as i know not endorsed by microsoft, besides the performance measured was fractions of a millisecond. It is true however that C# can do somethings that VB.NET can't, but at the risk of contradicting myself there are work arounds in VB.NET that allow you do do exactly the same thing just with more code, a possible reason for the performace difference i would say. Also to say that C# is more of a RAD programming language is completely false. VB.NET developers will have fininshed writing their app long before a C# developer would have started put in those curly braces.
Please don't think i'm being argumentative these are just the facts.
Is C# better that VB.NET - No. Just programming background and personal preference would decide between the two. However, do C# programmers get paid more -Yes - Why, beats me.

[Hack]

However, do C# programmers get paid more -Yes - Why, beats me.

I suspect because it is a more difficult language and takes longer to learn.

[RobDog888]

That could be true Hack but the jobs I have seen are not graphics but just application development. C# is a bit harder to learn then VB.NET but if you already know C++ then its easy to pickup. I think that they would want VB.NET since its all about maintaining your budget and getting the app finished in the allowed time. This is where the company will make more profits and not from any performance gains over VB.NET. Like zeek840 posted, maybe because it more like C++ that they are more willing to pay more.

[dee-u]

Why C# developers earn more

[RobDog888]

I actually have that issue in my bookcase! I forgot about it but its still true. Guess it really just comes down to bias and feelings that the C# programmers are better educated - bottom line. Well I am educated like a C# programmer but without the C# knowledge.

Thanks Dee-u. This answers my question completely unless anyone else has more input?

[jcis]

http://www.aspnetpro.com/opinion/200...200309en_o.asp
http://www.angrycoder.com/blog/entries/20030605.html

More info

[RobDog888]

Great articles jcis. I think the decision is clear now. Thanks

[penagate]

Also to say that C# is more of a RAD programming language is completely false. VB.NET developers will have fininshed writing their app long before a C# developer would have started put in those curly braces.

Mmm... no

Nice articles Dee-u and Jcis. I agree the fact that C# is a standardised specification is a good point as you can implement it on other platforms with other compilers. Not sure about VB.NET in that regard.

[RobDog888]

What was the deciding factor for me was that

A standardized specification for C# has been certified by both ECMA and ISO.

[penagate]

That's the one!

Standards = good

[RobDog888]

Especially the ISO one. Too bad VB.NET isnt going to be standardized.

[penagate]

From my understanding the .NET framework is an openly implementable standard but the language VB.NET itself is not, is that correct?

[RobDog888]

Not sure as the article states that C# itself was standardized and it said nothing about the framework. Seems that if they standardized C# then the FW should be too, but go figure.

[penagate]

Well we have the Mono framework implementation on Linux/Mac OS so that's where I got that idea from.

[RobDog888]

Does anyone know if VB.NET is going to also be standardized too someday?

[jcis]

From one week ago
http://www.panopticoncentral.net/arc.../30/10911.aspx

[RobDog888]

Another great article! Guess it more then likely will never become standardized. Although I can see the points made that it would actually hinder the evolvement of VB yet we would have to give up the respect and pay .

[tr333]

FYI: the C# language and the .NET framework are ECMA (and possibly ISO) standards. The .NET framework class libraries (eg. System.Windows.Forms) are not standards.

[RobDog888]

In the article it said that C# was both ECMA and ISO but doesnt mention the framework. If it was how could the framework be standardized and not the classes in it?

[dee-u]

So Rob, are you shifting to C#?

[RobDog888]

Eventually, I will teach myself more but not right now as I have too many things to do. I have learned some already and its not too tough, but I have only written entry level stuff under C# so far.

[DNA7433]

Wouldn't the CLR be standardized, but you leave the BCL open?

[CornedBee]

A few core parts of the framework are standardized: the common language specification, the System namespace, a few others. The standardized part has no graphics capabilities at all. In its scope, it's about on a level with the standardized part of C++, perhaps a bit above it. (I believe it has threading support, reflection, all that stuff.)