How big would a vb6 be in vb.net

[isnoend07]

I keep reading where vb.net is being recommended to overcome the shortcomings of vb6. vb.net also requires the net framework, right ?
How much bigger would a vb6 app be if switched and recoded to vb.net? I am asking because my app is for download.

[RobDog888]

Shouldnt make a difference as the Framework is a separate download from MS.

[isnoend07]

Shouldnt make a difference as the Framework is a separate download from MS.

It cannot be included in my setup?
How bid is it?

[dilettante]

Looks like a .Net forum question, but maybe take a look at Using Visual Studio 2005 to Redistribute the .NET Framework 2.0

I'm pretty sure the Express Editions don't offer a real packaging solution though. Isn't ClickOnce the only option there?

[Hack]

It can be included in your setup, but what would be a waste when it can be downloaded from Microsoft.

[isnoend07]

It can be included in your setup, but what would be a waste when it can be downloaded from Microsoft.

I write roof estimating software and my clients are not it tech's.
One button click= download complete
Double-click they are doing roof estimates. I have went thru great pains to keep my app under 10 mg for faster downloads. To add another 200 mg is out of the question. The next time i read a post where someone states "Switch to vb.net" without warning them of the huge size i will have to leave a comment

[GaryMazzone]

That is the method that MS is going for now thou. If you don't want to download the Framework (if it is not already installed) then you stay in VB6 or more to another language if VB6 will not run on the OS, since there is no guarantee of this after Vista

[Pradeep1210]

What version of .NET are you using and what is your target customers' OS?
I think .NET is preinstalled on Windows XP and Vista. I'm not sure about the version of .NET though. This might help since most of the windows users have now upgraded to window XP or Vista by now.

[dilettante]

... stay in VB6 or [move] to another language if VB6 will not run on the OS, since there is no guarantee of this after Vista

Support Statement for Visual Basic 6.0 on Windows®Vista™and Windows®Server 2008™

So Win Server 2008 supports VB6 too, and so far the Windows 7 Preview Release does as well. I expect that Support Statement to be updated to include Win7 as it nears release.

I am not saying people should avoid the move to .Net though.


I was pretty sure there was a standard VS.Net packaging technique that offered to do the Framework/Runtime download and kick it off for the user. I just don't think the Express Edition products support this option. Surely somebody can enlighten us on this.

Ahh yes, see Installing the .NET Framework 2.0 Using the Visual Studio 2005 Bootstrapper Setup at the link I posted earlier.

[GaryMazzone]

So Win Server 2008 supports VB6 too, and so far the Windows 7 Preview Release does as well. I expect that Support Statement to be updated to include Win7 as it nears release.

Still what I said is valid.... at some point that support to run VB6 apps will fall way.

[isnoend07]

What version of .NET are you using and what is your target customers' OS?
I think .NET is preinstalled on Windows XP and Vista. I'm not sure about the version of .NET though. This might help since most of the windows users have now upgraded to window XP or Vista by now.

I am not using net, just exploring the possibilities.
Target OS win 98 and up. At this point I am not going to net who's to say they will not discontinue it. i am going to keep plugging away with vb6 and keep my eyes peeled for a solutation. Maybe the program writers god will create a language that will work on all OS and guarantee with writing in blood it will not be discontinued

[RobDog888]

Yes, ClickOnce is the only packaging option in Express versions.

[dilettante]

I'm curious then. Does this work out for the typical .Net Expresser (hobbyists, etc.) or do they tend to XCopy deploy or use a 3rd party packaging solution?

[CDRIVE]

Still what I said is valid.... at some point that support to run VB6 apps will fall way.

And what guarantee do NET users have that MS won't get another ($) bug up their butt and dump them too in a year or two?

[GaryMazzone]

None of course. I just use what is supplied and supported at the time. If I need to learn a new language the I learn the new language.

[isnoend07]

None of course. I just use what is supplied and supported at the time. If I need to learn a new language the I learn the new language.

I would rather spend my time adding new features to my app than redoing all the code for a new language. Then i have to think of the users who bought my estimating software. All their saved bids would no longer open if i abandoned them. I could be like microsoft and tell them to get screwed, I got their money. But i am not that kind of person.

[CDRIVE]

None of course. I just use what is supplied and supported at the time. If I need to learn a new language the I learn the new language.

Well I've heard some NET users say that NET's like C in some respects. If that's even remotely true then it would make more sense to learn C and be done with it. Managa!

[isnoend07]

Well I've heard some NET users say that NET's like C in some respects. If that's even remotely true then it would make more sense to learn C and be done with it. Managa!

I agree. I have even started staying away from api's when possible, who's to say they will be in future windows.

[Pradeep1210]

I would rather spend my time adding new features to my app than redoing all the code for a new language. Then i have to think of the users who bought my estimating software. All their saved bids would no longer open if i abandoned them. I could be like microsoft and tell them to get screwed, I got their money. But i am not that kind of person.

Have you given thought to other versions of BASIC?
Have a look at REALBasic. It is much like VB6 with most of its shortcommings overcome. The migration from VB6 to RealBasic is easier as compared to migration from VB6 to VB.NET.
It is fully Object Oriented and Cross Platform (works on windows, Mac, Linux). And it makes just one standalone exe, so no dll hell problem, nor the burden of a huge framework. I think it might suit your needs as the size of the entire setup (with no preassumptions) makes more meaning to you.

Pradeep

[RobDog888]

Wow, I really cant believe how off topic this thread is. The original question was about exe size.
Its almost laughable to make a comparison about .NET support when MS still supports VB6. Do you really think that MS would dump .NET before dumping support for VB6 (rhetorical question of course)?


Since this thread has notihg to do with a vb6 programming question I am moving it to General Developer forum.

Thread Moved

[isnoend07]

Have you given thought to other versions of BASIC?
Have a look at REALBasic. It is much like VB6 with most of its shortcommings overcome. The migration from VB6 to RealBasic is easier as compared to migration from VB6 to VB.NET.
It is fully Object Oriented and Cross Platform (works on windows, Mac, Linux). And it makes just one standalone exe, so no dll hell problem, nor the burden of a huge framework. I think it might suit your needs as the size of the entire setup (with no preassumptions) makes more meaning to you.

Pradeep

Thanks I'll check it out

[CDRIVE]

Wow, I really cant believe how off topic this thread is.

Thread Moved

That's because VB vs Net evokes anger for many of us. When I purchased VB, before the turn of the century, I never dreamed that MS would dump the most popular language in the world. I expected a progression of VB7, VB8 and so on.

[CDRIVE]

Have you given thought to other versions of BASIC?
Have a look at REALBasic. It is much like VB6 with most of its shortcommings overcome. The migration from VB6 to RealBasic is easier as compared to migration from VB6 to VB.NET.

Pradeep

There's another one out there called Power Basic. I know little of it though. I do know that the company, that created and distributes it, provides their own forum.