So Retro!

[dilettante]

If you expect Win8.1 to look like Win7 you're in for a shock. About all they did was add a small "Windows tile" where the Start Button was, which takes you back into Metro instead of popping up a Start Menu. They also moved more config options from Control Panel to Metro.

You can "boot to desktop" but that's minor. it just means the desktop comes up after your Metro-based logon.

All in all, 8.1 remains just as big of a "Wha?" to a user coming to it from previous versions as 8 was.

[sapator]

I think that currently they are in denial as they were probably with Vista, but this is even worse. They tried to cover for they mobile market with W8 (that is 0,1% of the total market) ending up ignoring the rest off the 99,9% or regular users. No one in it's right mind will use W8, i set up a 2012 server last month and it was replace for a 2008 server within two hours or so by client demand.
About the VB. Ok i haven't actually used VB6 a lot but if you are aiming for graphs then ye, C++. I've read about your Nintendo sim and show how much time it takes to animate. VB6 seems to me like one of the worst options for using graphs but i will be honest here and say that i have never done a comparison of C++ vs VB6 to graph manipulation (i giggled here for about a minute). So yeah, it's also the job opportunities (another thread about Delphi, if i remember correctly is relieving) and that there is no support from MS anymore. Personally i kinda like the API usage you get on vb6 but is more of a "hobby" for me to APIize the hell out of a program but that's about it.

[Niya]

VB6 vs C++ is really a pointless argument. They each have something the others don't. I combined them in a few pet projects in the past which worked out beautifully. One example was an editor I wrote for a game that needed a parser. We didn't have StringBuilders like we do in VB.Net so string processing was a pain in VB6 because it was just too slow. I wrote the parser in C++ which was way faster and I mean way faster. VB6 provided RAD and C++ provided execution speed when needed.

Its really better if you can embrace both and not think of them as mutually exclusive which I why I no longer lend any attention to VB vs C nonsense.

[dunfiddlin]

If you expect Win8.1 to look like Win7 you're in for a shock. About all they did was add a small "Windows tile" where the Start Button was, which takes you back into Metro instead of popping up a Start Menu. They also moved more config options from Control Panel to Metro.

You can "boot to desktop" but that's minor. it just means the desktop comes up after your Metro-based logon.

All in all, 8.1 remains just as big of a "Wha?" to a user coming to it from previous versions as 8 was.

This I discovered after I'd posted. Not that I was intending to leave W7 at any point anyway but I had hoped that some sense was being restored. It does look like MS is further from the point of realising that the best way to get out of a hole is to stop digging than I'd thought!

[Shaggy Hiker]

I knew you guys would tear me a new (....yeah....) on VB.Net. But heres the thing. Microsoft is starting to suck hard. And here are some reasons why:

1) They are already coming out with a game console, the XBox One, thats pretty much DOA because they turned it into an overglorified cable box. All they talked about during the revealing was TV TV TV, Sports Sports Sports, Call o Duty Call o Dooty Callodooty, and even more TV. They didnt focus on what the gamers wanted, or games in general for that matter. Majority of hardcore gamers could care less about sports. Were freaking nerds! And the whole point of buying a game console, is to play games! And with all the rumors gone viral, some of which is true, and due to the vague responses from MS, it will die on arrival because everyone will be flocking to Nintendos Wii U and Sonys PS4.

As much as I'd like to agree with you on this point, I think I will wait and see. Gameboxes may be dead across the board, and that may be why MS is doing what they are doing. They may feel that dedicated gaming hardware has no future, and I tend to feel that they are right. The trend has been to take them in different directions, such as Kinect and Wii, or integrate them into a more social environment. Furthermore, portables seem to be growing faster than console titles. I think that all the game system manufacturers are flailing about at the moment, and this is just one more contortion. It may even work.

[wossname]

VB6 was pretty great. It made a lot of us VBForums members a lot of money.

In total. Not individually. Apart from Bill.

[Niya]

Yes VB6 was truly great and the i386 processor was a high-end processor at one time

[Witis]

Yes VB6 was truly great and the i386 processor was a high-end processor at one time

What do you mean was?? It is definitely still going strong, and I have even read some articles and discussions that speculate that it will make it to Windows 9 and 10!

[Witis]

It made a lot of us VBForums members a lot of money.

In total. Not individually. Apart from Bill.

Do you think that linux is a better way to go if you want to eat more quids???

[Shaggy Hiker]

What do you mean was?? It is definitely still going strong, and I have even read some articles and discussions that speculate that it will make it to Windows 9 and 10!

I'm pretty sure that Windows 9 won't run on the i386, in which case 10 definitely won't.

[Niya]

I don't think he seriously believes that >Win7 will run on the i386. Its more likely he meant that VB6 would be able to run on future versions of Windows.

[Witis]

I'm pretty sure that Windows 9 won't run on the i386, in which case 10 definitely won't.

At the moment it looks like 64 bit processors (x86-64) are the the only current option, and there is no information regarding Skylake from intel -> "There are no official details regarding this microarchitecture's development. The first Skylake processors are expected in 2015." - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skylake...oarchitecture)

Windows 9 has been rumoured to be scheduled for release in November 2014 which means it will likely be released for x86 32 and 64 bit processors which means there is a high chance for VB6 to make it that far. I imagine it is too early to speculate about windows 10.

[Shaggy Hiker]

I don't think he seriously believes that >Win7 will run on the i386. Its more likely he meant that VB6 would be able to run on future versions of Windows.

I'm sorry that you thought I was taking him seriously. My response was perfectly valid, since he left it up to the reader to decide what subject "it" referred to. One alternative was boring. Who wants to be boring?

[Niya]

I'm sorry that you thought I was taking him seriously. My response was perfectly valid, since he left it up to the reader to decide what subject "it" referred to. One alternative was boring. Who wants to be boring?

I was thinking the same thing when I read his post but given just how primitive the i386 is, I felt the subject that "It" was referring to didn't really need qualification. I mean the i386 is practically a calculator by today's standards. No way he could have meant the i386.

[Niya]

Windows 9 has been rumoured to be scheduled for release in November 2014 which means it will likely be released for x86 32 and 64 bit processors which means there is a high chance for VB6 to make it that far. I imagine it is too early to speculate about windows 10.

To be honest, I hope VB6 would be supported on all future versions of Windows. There are just way too many apps written in it. I don't think MS would risk breaking the thousands of apps out there that depend on the VB6 runtime. For all the bad things that people like to say about MS, one thing that I find highly admirable about them is their commitment to backward compatibility. I love that about MS.

[Shaggy Hiker]

No way he could have meant the i386.

I was going to say that I saw no reason to make the most reasonable inferrence as to his meaning, but then I thought more about your statement and some recent threads, and am more inclined to ask: Considering your subject, do you still believe that?

[Jacob Roman]

To be honest, I hope VB6 would be supported on all future versions of Windows. There are just way too many apps written in it. I don't think MS would risk breaking the thousands of apps out there that depend on the VB6 runtime. For all the bad things that people like to say about MS, one thing that I find highly admirable about them is their commitment to backward compatibility. I love that about MS.

Tell that to the XBox 360 owners when the XBox One comes out

[Niya]

....but then I thought more about your statement and some recent threads...

This part totally lost me . I had to read it like 10 times and I still don't get what the implication is here . In particular, which statement and which threads. The only recent thread that comes to mind where me and Witis interacted with any major hoopla was Jacob's rant thread.

Tell that to the XBox 360 owners when the XBox One comes out

I don't know anything about those systems but your statement seems to imply that there would be no backward compatibility between the XBox 360 and the XBox One. If so, I actually think that would be pretty normal, wouldn't it ? Backward compatibility between different generation consoles was never a serious consideration, if it was a consideration at all. Eg. The 8 bit Nintendo to the SNES to the N64.....As far as I know, there was no backward compatibility in that evolution. Feel free to correct me on this. The last console I ever interacted with was a Sega Dreamcast ages ago so I don't really know anything about consoles today.

[EDIT]

Made a mistake with the Sega console....It wasn't the Saturn, it was the Dreamcast I last played. Corrected.

[dunfiddlin]

one thing that I find highly admirable about them is their commitment to backward compatibility

And I find it highly admirable that you find it highly admirable (in the face of all evidence to the contrary!)

[Niya]

And I find it highly admirable that you find it highly admirable (in the face of all evidence to the contrary!)

I'm not saying that newer Windows doesn't break older Windows apps, in fact, it happens all the time. But don't kid yourself, they really are committed to backward compatibility almost to a fault. I remember reading an article from an MS insider years ago when XP was the new thing. I believe it was a blog on MSDN where this guy talked about the lengths that they go through to maintain compatibility. One thing that always stuck with me was when he talked about how the Windows team would even replicated old bugs in Windows for specific programs not to break. He implied that the Windows code base had a tangled mess of bad hacky code where its only reason for being was to prevent the breaking of certain older Windows applications. Personally, I abhor hacky and buggy code and if I were a programmer for Windows, I don't think I could bring myself to do that. In fact, in my own experience, writing for backward compatibility is a huge huge pain in the ass. I'm not kidding. I prefer to take my chances and break stuff. I seriously admire that kind of fortitude.

[dilettante]

Newer versions of Windows tend to break users more often than programs.

There are even rumors that the Desktop will be phased out entirely down the road: Windows Blue shows why Microsoft may kill the Desktop in Windows 9.

[Niya]

Newer versions of Windows tend to break users more often than programs.

There are even rumors that the Desktop will be phased out entirely down the road: Windows Blue shows why Microsoft may kill the Desktop in Windows 9.

Hmmm...well...maybe its time for a change, as long its not a retarded change.

[Witis]

Newer versions of Windows tend to break users more often than programs.

There are even rumors that the Desktop will be phased out entirely down the road: Windows Blue shows why Microsoft may kill the Desktop in Windows 9.

At least it might be as easy as -> "If Microsoft kills the Desktop, it would almost certainly build a of feature into Windows that would allow you to run install Desktop apps in some way and run them from the Start screen. There just wouldn't be a Desktop."

Hmmm...well...maybe its time for a change, as long its not a retarded change.

Not another Vista, please!!

[dilettante]

At least it might be as easy as -> "If Microsoft kills the Desktop, it would almost certainly build a of feature into Windows that would allow you to run install Desktop apps in some way and run them from the Start screen. There just wouldn't be a Desktop."

Well as far as I have read only the Desktop (Explorer Shell) would be gone in the short term. Beyond Win9 or so all bets are off anyway.

Not another Vista, please!!

Another crowdsourced opinion, and far off base from reality. Vista was one of the best Windows versions, superior to Win7 in a number of ways.

Vista suffered from a few handicaps, mainly: (1.) poor hardware vendor driver support Day One, (2.) poor application developer support Day One, and (3.) widely-spewed ignorant opinions picked up during the time (1.) and (2.) had not yet been addressed.

The first two issues being fixed prior to Win7 are significant reasons why Win7 was so well accepted. Neither was Microsoft's or Vista's fault.

The Vista bashing gets pretty old and never lends credibility.

[Niya]

Another crowdsourced opinion, and far off base from reality. Vista was one of the best Windows versions, superior to Win7 in a number of ways.

"Vista" and "best" shouldn't even be in the same sentence. The only thing that Vista brought that I really fancied was Aero Glass. Aside from that Vista is another M.E.....Maybe not as bad as M.E. but a failure non-the-less.

[Jacob Roman]

If MS kills the desktop, ill take my business elsewhere because they would officially kill Windows and lose a ton of customers. Hell, MS is doing drarastic changes in the gaming side with the XBox One, and look how that is turning out. Complete utter failure before the product is even released. Whoever the CEO is needs to be fired, arrested, sued, and sent to prison for destroying Microsofts very reputation.

[Niya]

If MS kills the desktop, ill take my business elsewhere because they would officially kill Windows and lose a ton of customers. Hell, MS is doing drarastic changes in the gaming side with the XBox One, and look how that is turning out. Complete utter failure before the product is even released. Whoever the CEO is needs to be fired, arrested, sued, and sent to prison for destroying Microsofts very reputation.

Why not advise your customers to stick with what works. After seeing Windows 8 I've firmly decided that I'm not moving from Windows 7 until the day comes that it completely fails on whatever new hardware configurations become the norm in the future. That could take like a decade or two.

However, I do hold on to hope. MS has screwed up badly in the past and managed to set things straight. After seeing what a disaster Windows Vista was, I remember resolving to stay in XP and yet here I am today, loving Windows 7. I remember also resolving to stay in VB6, yet here I am today, absolutely loving VB.Net. I'm keeping the faith and hoping I wouldn't actually have to stay in Windows 7 till I'm gray.

[Witis]

Another crowdsourced opinion, and far off base from reality.

Not at all, I bought a copy and sold it after installing it just the once, it was literally that bad!!

Vista was one of the best Windows versions, superior to Win7 in a number of ways.

It was only better at being a turkey!!

Vista suffered from a few handicaps,

At last you have actually summarised the Vista experience!

mainly: (1.) poor hardware vendor driver support Day One, (2.) poor application developer support Day One,

Poor and poor again, yes that's Vista!

and (3.) widely-spewed ignorant opinions picked up during the time (1.) and (2.) had not yet been addressed.

Don't agree, I only had to play with it for less than an hour before realising that it was a goner!

The first two issues being fixed prior to Win7 are significant reasons why Win7 was so well accepted. Neither was Microsoft's or Vista's fault.

The main reason windows seven is so popular is because it moved substantially away from its shameful attempt at Windows Vista and back, in the right direction, towards the ongoing and lasting XP fame!

The Vista bashing gets pretty old

Thank you!

and never lends credibility.

I have to disagree again, and let the consumers indicate just how bad Vista really was!!
Desktop Operating System Market Share
Windows 7 44.85%
Windows XP 37.74%
Windows Vista 4.51%
Windows 8 4.27%
Mac OS X 10.8 2.97%
Source: https://www.netmarketshare.com/opera...10&qpcustomd=0

[sapator]

It's simple: 98 good ,ME bad, XP good Vista bad, W7 good W8 bad. Every two versions Microsoft get's creative hiccups, then see how bad it went, fire some guys and move on. Notice that windows8 market share (according to Witis link) is 4.27%, lower than Vista and it's been, a year i think, that they are out? MS will soon find out something that the users found out literally from early screenshots of W8 ( i found out from their first presentation ), that they simply suck bad and is probably the worst OS ever created by a human being or alien at our galaxy. Even the Martian XX17B0 OS for Marty Klapingtosh computers was better. With that said, i expect windows9 to
A)Either be good and be done with W8 BS.
B)Be the end of MS operating systems for something else.Possibly an Xbox with the fire buttons for programming (Button1 will be "and", Button2 will be "or",B3 will be "xor" and Button4 will be "call my mother").
Oh and yeah, i don't really say that i am "loving" a "good" OS by Microsoft, i just adapt and tolerate it. Only OS i loved from MS was DOS 6.1.

[Niya]

Only OS i loved from MS was DOS 6.1.

Ah...fond memories. It was around there MS introduced Deltree. Finally we could delete directories!!

[sapator]

rmdir b:\test (gling...gling..gling..)
"The directory is not empty."
Good times, good times.
(or 'rd' of course)

[Niya]

Ya lol.....it used to drive me crazy, having to delete files before an "rd". "Deltree" was really a God-sent.

[sapator]

And let's not forget "copy con" . My favorite for creating .bat files!
P.S. Can't recall if PCtools did the full deltree stuff.Many years have pass, i remember that i could give you a full DOS command list instantly, if you gave me a starting letter.

[Niya]

And let's not forget "copy con" . My favorite for creating .bat files!
P.S. Can't recall if PCtools did the full deltree stuff.Many years have pass, i remember that i could give you a full DOS command list instantly, if you gave me a starting letter.

"Copy con" was neat but I preferred using Edit. I always had "EDIT.EXE" reachable in the environmental paths. Now PCTools....that was truly a godly little program. I can't tell you how many files that helped me recover from bad sectors on floppy disks. I can't remember though if it could delete directories.

[Niya]

Damn!! I found a web page about PC Tools with screenshots!

Brings back fond memories

[sapator]

Yes and Edit.exe but unfortunately it was not there when i was using DOS 3.3 so i was trained to use "con".
PCTools and Norton Commander! I am sure you had that too. "Nc.exe" .
I remember i could crack windows words pass protected files using pctools. Microsoft protection was always lame

[sapator]

Oh. That is the newer PCtool for windows or anyhow windows oriented. A disgrace to the PCtools name!
True PCtools had no mouse!
Pctools 4.22 forever! lol

[Niya]

Oh. That is the newer PCtool for windows or anyhow windows oriented. A disgrace to the PCtools name!
True PCtools had no mouse!
Pctools 4.22 forever! lol

We didn't have that version because we had PC Tools very early(long before Windows came along) so it was an earlier version but a lot of that one looks very familiar.

[Niya]

....Norton Commander! I am sure you had that too. "Nc.exe" .
I remember i could crack windows words pass protected files using pctools. Microsoft protection was always lame

I remember having Norton products but for the life of me I can't remember specific ones except for anti-virus software. When viruses were viruses in those days, Norton was the best way to fight them. I remember that much. I have only a vague memory of other Norton tools we used in those days. I believe there were quite a few that some really impressive low-level stuff that other software of the day couldn't.


On that note, do you remember Stacker ?

[sapator]

No to be honest i haven't used stacker. Norton commander was a classic, it was written by Peter Norton himself if my memory serves me right. I remember my first virus was jerusalem and i had the Norton antivirus with the scan and clean commands but i also remember f-prot as a newer antivirus. Back then when you cough a virus it usually went to our beloved boot sector so every time you booted your DOS, then virus was there. For the life of me i can't recall how i used to pass this obstacle. I vaguely remember booting with another disk and then using clean on your other DOS disk but can't be sure.
Damn this brings back memories but i have to leave, will pick this up tomorrow, great talk that was!