VB6 is DEAD!

[SJWhiteley]

I used to have the same attitude until I actually got one (Android)...

I was the same, but with an iPhone.

Apps I use regularly: e-mail, phone, calendar, messaging, calculator + programming calculator, notes, web, camera, MyRadar, maps (apple maps, I find, is more accurate than google maps).

Intermittently: AeroWeather, iHeartRadio, HandLoad (ammunition load tracker), WoW armory, WoW authenticator.

I have had my iPhone for 2 1/2 years, it's in perfect condition since I have a huge, massive, rubber case for it, but have dropped it on concrete and in dirt and rain a good few times (box has been replaced twice).

I have looked at replacing it, as the charge doesn't seem to hold as well as it once did (excuse for a new phone...) but it has no performance issues. The Windows Phone still looks superior to the Androids, though.

What is interesting, though, is that here, we have VB6 programmers who have iPhones, Android and Windows phone - that we choose the device based on performance, requirements, needs, etc. and not what our favorite development tool is (whether we program that device or not). The vast majority of users are looking for a tool to do the job, and not what tools are used to make it. While it may be true that a .NET programmer may favor the Windows Phone over an iPhone, for example, if they are going to develop for the device, for those that have the choice, I'd say the wise developer would choose a device that does the job for the end user, not a device which fits their world.

[szlamany]

I recently decided to code for an Android device - having been down the road of the abandonment of windows mobile pocket pc's. I had created apps for the PPC using compact FW and learning SQL CE - now I do not trust the longevity of windows mobile platforms.

I felt that Android was the better choice from a development standpoint - and so far it has not let me down. I can code android apps and they talk to the same .Net web method that my web app's talk to. All very cool.

[jayinthe813]

I was the same, but with an iPhone.

Apps I use regularly: e-mail, phone, calendar, messaging, calculator + programming calculator, notes, web, camera, MyRadar, maps (apple maps, I find, is more accurate than google maps).

Intermittently: AeroWeather, iHeartRadio, HandLoad (ammunition load tracker), WoW armory, WoW authenticator.

I have had my iPhone for 2 1/2 years, it's in perfect condition since I have a huge, massive, rubber case for it, but have dropped it on concrete and in dirt and rain a good few times (box has been replaced twice).

I have looked at replacing it, as the charge doesn't seem to hold as well as it once did (excuse for a new phone...) but it has no performance issues. The Windows Phone still looks superior to the Androids, though.

What is interesting, though, is that here, we have VB6 programmers who have iPhones, Android and Windows phone - that we choose the device based on performance, requirements, needs, etc. and not what our favorite development tool is (whether we program that device or not). The vast majority of users are looking for a tool to do the job, and not what tools are used to make it. While it may be true that a .NET programmer may favor the Windows Phone over an iPhone, for example, if they are going to develop for the device, for those that have the choice, I'd say the wise developer would choose a device that does the job for the end user, not a device which fits their world.

I guess superior is in the eye of the beholder. Windows Phone is a lot more like iPhone in mentality than Android IMO. It seems to be what MS (or Apple) thinks you should want your phone to do, not what you actually want it to do. I think if you had one for a little while like I did, you would miss all the features available to you now like having native GPS (Google Maps) at the ready or a notification center drop-down.

It is an interesting concept that we all have different mobile devices. I would love nothing more than to write VB.NET apps on Android. This may one day be a reality when MS realizes that they will probably not gain significant market share with Windows Phone, buy out Xamarin, and charge a premium for designing Android apps in VS2010 instead. I would say a wise developer is going to develop on a platform that is going to be able to hit the largest target audience available. The 3% market share on WP is not worth the time it takes to learn and develop on unless you are doing it just for fun or can easily port your app over.

[Nightwalker83]

I doubt that, piscatorial essence does tend to linger.

I was wondering what that stench was!

[dilettante]

This may one day be a reality when MS realizes that they will probably not gain significant market share with Windows Phone, buy out Xamarin, and charge a premium for designing Android apps in VS2010 instead.

"Buying out Xamarin" just isn't in the cards. Microsoft has actually been pivoting toward handing all of .Net over to Xamarin, divesting themselves of it.

.NET Goes Open Source

Rosyln is a compiler for C# and VB that runs as a service. By making it open source, with an Apache licence, Microsoft really has handed the keys to C# and Visual Basic to anyone who wants them.

This isn't a huge immediate gain for the average .NET programmer. Only programmers with the desire to modify the languages, or support then on some other platform, are instant winners. Miguel de Icaza of Xamarin already has it running under Linux, which is an amazing event.

If anything it is Xamarin that makes this move to open source a positive one. While Microsoft moved away from .NET and embraced C++, COM, JavaScript and anything but .NET, Xamarin kept the lights on by making it available on non-Microsoft platforms and generally pointing out to the world what a really good idea it all was.

[jayinthe813]

If anything it is Xamarin that makes this move to open source a positive one. While Microsoft moved away from .NET and embraced C++, COM, JavaScript and anything but .NET, Xamarin kept the lights on by making it available on non-Microsoft platforms and generally pointing out to the world what a really good idea it all was.

What do they mean Microsoft moved away from .NET and embraced C++, COM Javascript and anything but .NET? Are they not still working and delivering on the framework (4.5.1?)? I dont think Xamarin makes or breaks whether I use the technology personally as I end up having a business need.

[dilettante]

A train doesn't stop on a dime. They're still working to get 4.5.2 out.

But they've moved toward the switches to dim the lights: closing time is coming soon. Don't panic, you can still use legacy .Net tools to maintain programs for years to come. Just don't expect the sort of life cycle VB6 has enjoyed.

[jayinthe813]

A train doesn't stop on a dime. They're still working to get 4.5.2 out.

But they've moved toward the switches to dim the lights: closing time is coming soon. Don't panic, you can still use legacy .Net tools to maintain programs for years to come. Just don't expect the sort of life cycle VB6 has enjoyed.

So what, their answer to the future is basically use C++ or JavaScript? Is that some kind of joke? I would imagine they have to develop some new take on Visual Basic.

[dilettante]

It all seems to be part of their turning away from desktop PCs. The focus now seems to be dominated by mobile devices and cloud computing, demoting the desktop to just another mobile device for most folks. Mobile in general and non-Windows servers seems to be where they're handing .Net over to, i.e. by giving it to Xamarin.


The "odd man out" seems to be larger businesses, where the desktop and conventional server farms will linger for years.

Google Announces Massive Expansion of Android

Google isn't really a major force with Microsoft's core business audience, but it is indeed a huge threat in three key areas, all of which speak to the future: Individuals/consumers, education and small business startups. None of these customer groups see much need for on-site infrastructure, complex and expensive software services, or traditional computing devices. And each is more likely to "go Google," as the firm says, than stick with the Microsoft past.

This year's show represented a flexing of Google's market power muscles, and the firm barely even mentioned Microsoft, which at one time pushed a similar sweeping vision for its own platforms.

But anyone who is pining for the days of "Windows everywhere" or Microsoft's "three screens and a cloud" mantra should be shocked by the sheer scope of Google's ambitions. This company is ensuring that its technologies—mostly Android-based—will be there with us no matter where we are: At home, out and about, in a car, or whatever, and in our glasses, on our wrists, in our phones and tablets, and in our TVs and other screens. Maybe it's' time for "Android everywhere."

[dilettante]

Watch or listen to What The Tech 216: Google I/O Recap.

For a Windows-friendly podcast (to say the least), this episode sure sounds like a eulogy for Microsoft.

[Schmidt]

What is interesting, though, is that here, we have VB6 programmers who have iPhones, Android and Windows phone - that we choose the device based on performance, requirements, needs, etc. and not what our favorite development tool is (whether we program that device or not). The vast majority of users are looking for a tool to do the job, and not what tools are used to make it. While it may be true that a .NET programmer may favor the Windows Phone over an iPhone, for example, if they are going to develop for the device, for those that have the choice, I'd say the wise developer would choose a device that does the job for the end user, not a device which fits their world.

Just in case this is meant (again) as a kind of "VB6 developers are unwilling to change and are stuck in their universe"-pun...

IMO it is you who is stubbornly *clinging* to that wrong perception, unwilling to change it,
so start freeing your mind about that...

You seem under the impression, that .NET is the only viable choice for anybody who does
Win-Desktop-Programming these days - but aside from VB6 there's a lot of other
alternatives which allow to program for the Desktop... .NET it *not* the only tool in town,
so start freeing your mind about that too...

The vast majority of users are looking for a tool to do the job, and not what tools are used to make it.

And exactly that is the reason, why so many VB6-professionals don't see any reason
to switch to anything else (yet) - the tool still does the job just fine.

In your plea for "wise developers, who will choose a device that does the job for the end-user",
you apparently subconcsiously ruled out VB6-developers as not being capable to make such an
educated choice - but they already made one - it was just not the one you made.

And differing from your own attempts, I'm not trying to force my own decision down *your* throat -
I'm fine with the coice you made - try to come up with the same attitude towards me ...
just some food for contemplating thought on your end.

Olaf

[SJWhiteley]

Just in case this is meant (again) as a kind of "VB6 developers are unwilling to change and are stuck in their universe"-pun...

If you want to read it that way, ok. The rest of your post reinforces the notion, as you continue to put words and meaning where there is none.

No one has said that VB.NET is the only tool in town, but that's what you see. The reality is that VB.NET is the natural migration path for VB6. You don't like that, and have not explained reasonably why, beyond 'it's not VB6'.

But the thing is, you aren't happy with VB6, or else you wouldn't be so vocally complaining about it. You aren't happy with .NET, and are vocally complaining about that - yet insist that .NET isn't the only tool in town. What? So where's the problem?

For a long time now, the VB6 life cycle has been potentially coming to an end (It may well live on well beyond the 2020's, who knows?) but as already noted, the 'desktop era' is being relegated to the back-burner. I don't think that's necessarily true, but I find myself doing more and more on a tablet and smart phone, so there may be the direction things go. Does that mean .NET is going away? Yes/No/Maybe. But the application is going to have to change: that may mean using another development tool. But the user doesn't care, but if I insist on forcing the user to use a specific system to use the tool, even though historically that is what they were happy with, they will no longer be happy.

Here's a dilemma: I hate windows 8 - let's call it irrational; so be it. I, and my customers, can only get computers with Windows 8. You can't get 7 anymore - I like windows 7, I wan't everyone to use windows 7. It ain't going to happen. I now have to convince my users to adapt to Windows 8 - a lot of them don't like it, the reasons are pretty much irrelevant. With 8.1, Microsoft made a fair attempt to placate the naysayers. It isn't the same, but it's close enough. I will develop for that system, because it'll give the longest lead time for the next development iteration. The users expect to buy a computer and run the program, even though the program doesn't change, if they can't do what they need, the program has failed.

As an aside, I program in VB6, VB.NET, JavaScript and Objective-C (on a reasonably regular basis - at least once a month). Some I like, some I hate; sometimes both at the same time. Just like driving to and from work, work itself. You cannot change those things, but you can change your own behavior. If thou think .NET is a poor substitute for VB6, just wait until Microsoft decides that 'Everything Mac' is the new Windows, and your stuck with Objective-C.NET.

[SJWhiteley]

I guess superior is in the eye of the beholder. Windows Phone is a lot more like iPhone in mentality than Android IMO. ...

It wasn't a dig at Android; but you do bring up the point about similarities. They are, really, all similar - this is a good thing.

We are down to First World Problems with the differences between devices. There's still a bit to go, but when people choose one device over another because the 'sparkly thing is too sparkly', the operating system doesn't matter. Good. The user matters, the operating system doesn't, the development tools don't (they do, but only to a tiny segment of the population).

I like the compact size of the iPhone, but have seen some of the larger android phones - the latest screens look absolutely gorgeous. A bit too large for my taste - a 6 inch screen is still 6 inches no matter how thin you make the device.

[Schmidt]

No one has said that VB.NET is the only tool in town, but that's what you see.

No, what I've seen is your (continuing) misconception about the motivation of VB6-users
to stick with their tool.

The reality is that VB.NET is the natural migration path for VB6.

See - that's what I mean...
You're apparently convinced about what you wrote above - but for a lot of VB6-developers
it is surely *not* "the natural migration path" - for different reasons - the first one
among them being: "Is a migration necessary at all?".

But the thing is, you aren't happy with VB6, or else you wouldn't be so vocally complaining about it.

I'm (over-all) happy with it currently, but no tool is "absolutely ideal" (VB.NET included) -
life is an everlasting compromise (choice of tools included).

You aren't happy with .NET, and are vocally complaining about that...

Again that misconception of yours...
Speaking for myself, I'm not complaining about .NET as a tool - I complain about
those who recommend it as, say: "the natural migration path for VB6" - which it
surely is not.

For a long time now, the VB6 life cycle has been potentially coming to an end

As has the .NET lifecycle apparently, since you write below:

... but as already noted, the 'desktop era' is being relegated to the back-burner.

I don't think that's necessarily true,

Here I agree with you...

...but I find myself doing more and more on a tablet and smart phone, so there may be the direction things go.
Does that mean .NET is going away? Yes/No/Maybe.
But the application is going to have to change: that may mean using another development tool.

Exactly - but as it seems currently - .NET is not the primary tool to develop for
those platforms (in the same way as VB6 is of course not suitable for "mobile apps").

So both of us will perhaps end up with another tool, should "Desktop-development as we know it"
come to an end.

The difference being, that I didn't waste any time with an unnecessary .NET-migration
before doing that switch.


Olaf

[dilettante]

The tech pundits all seem to agree that the conventional "desktop PCs and in-house servers" model will linger for years, especially in established businesses. Even many of the biggest fans of mobile and cloud.

Some of this is inertia and taking advantage of existing investments. Some of it is because this model has been adapted to their business, and to some extent they've adapted their business to this computing model.

It also fits a lot of existing home and small office workers, for many of the same reasons.

Given that, legacy development and maintenance will continue for many years. In such cases it doesn't matter what you use: C++, VB6, Java, Delphi, or even .Net programmers will have work for some time.


This just isn't where the "action" and future growth seem to be.

In light of that, how responsible is it for companies to waste time converting existing code to .Net? I'd answer "not very." Porting existing code to new software models will mean rerwites, so an intermediate step along the way seems like a waste of resources. Why go through it twice?

In that sense .Net programming as people have been doing it is just as "dead" as VB6. No more, but no less either.

[jayinthe813]

The tech pundits all seem to agree that the conventional "desktop PCs and in-house servers" model will linger for years, especially in established businesses. Even many of the biggest fans of mobile and cloud.

Some of this is inertia and taking advantage of existing investments. Some of it is because this model has been adapted to their business, and to some extent they've adapted their business to this computing model.

It also fits a lot of existing home and small office workers, for many of the same reasons.

Given that, legacy development and maintenance will continue for many years. In such cases it doesn't matter what you use: C++, VB6, Java, Delphi, or even .Net programmers will have work for some time.


This just isn't where the "action" and future growth seem to be.

In light of that, how responsible is it for companies to waste time converting existing code to .Net? I'd answer "not very." Porting existing code to new software models will mean rerwites, so an intermediate step along the way seems like a waste of resources. Why go through it twice?

In that sense .Net programming as people have been doing it is just as "dead" as VB6. No more, but no less either.

Yes, my industry is far behind current generation standards as far as software is concerned (still have IBM DB2, Windows XP, etc). We are going to just now be transitioning towards Windows 7. "To the cloud" is not seen as a viable option because of security concerns over data. We are a member of a business consortium (not related to technology) and other businesses suffer the exact same way we do.

Traditional client-server (At least in our arena) as well as supplementing that with desktop applications will be here to stay indefinitely. Essentially, we run systems that have no ROI, so we will never get money to migrate anything. IT is so cautious over migrating into new technologies with security, no one wants to be the guy that upset the apple-cart, then got all of the apples stolen.

Ultimately, Microsoft's trend towards "the cloud" or thin-client desktop at least in my arena is something that will be a no-go for quite some time. We have over 400 legacy systems, and it costs money to even begin to consolidate them.

[SJWhiteley]

...

In light of that, how responsible is it for companies to waste time converting existing code to .Net? I'd answer "not very." Porting existing code to new software models will mean rerwites, so an intermediate step along the way seems like a waste of resources. Why go through it twice?

...

I think the disconnect is the 'porting' aspect.

The implication is that AppleCounter.exe VB6 must be converted to AppleCounter.exe .NET, or else you are a stuck-in-the-mud.That's really not the full story. Application development is an iterative process. AppleCounter.exe needs to become ApplesAndPearsCounter.exe. While the user would like this, a developer and architect of the system will see that the user would really benefit from FruitCounter.exe. While there would be an aspect of porting, you don't throw away your existing code and rewrite to get the new 'features'. You use your existing VB6, and add on .NET components. Porting is really a migration path.

While we could get into an argument about 'giving the customer what they ask for' (You'd be wrong), the 'porting' is not an isolated task, but part of a refinement process of the tool for the user.

Even if we simply accept a porting aspect - what we have today is a long way from what we had 10 years ago. If purely porting an application was going to occur, if it hasn't occurred in the past 10 years, it's not going to happen, now. Indeed, when Next.NET comes along, why would anybody who hasn't ported to .NET port to Next? Or the Next? Or the Next? Why port three, four, five times?

Because companies don't simply port an application (I'm sure you can come up with some examples, of big companies, as well as small, doing so - where are they now?). There are other variables, of course (vertical market, in-house, custom, embedded, etc.). But every application depends on, and is driven by, outside influences; developers - or rather programmers - tend to have a very shallow view. That's not necessarily a bad thing as some problems require very specific and in-depth skills to solve, but it leaves little room for 'big picture' stuff. Programmers make very poor business men; and that's why we have 'useless' (sic) middle managers.

Here's an anecdotal story: I wrote a pretty neat (I thought so) 'star trek' exploration program on a CP/M system, in BASIC. I subsequently received a PC and a copy of VB (VB3). It was awesome! I decided to port my CP/M basic over to VB. It was hard work, and never really was the same; it was tricky to replicate both the graphics and the 'functionality'. But I was replicating the functionality by 'copying' the code - that didn't work so well. The great (sic) game I made, now sucked. Blame placed squarely on VB3. VB3 now sucked. Years later, and many successful VB 3/4/5 programs later, I realized my mistake. Any given program has less than 1/2 dozen functions, or so. I was able to replicate my original program rapidly by looking at what it gave the game player, and 'replicating' those functions; the graphics were better (color!), with sound added, and an overall better experience. I trashed it, of course; nostalgia for the green screen showed that the VB game just didn't have soul.

[NeedSomeAnswers]

The tech pundits all seem to agree that the conventional "desktop PCs and in-house servers" model will linger for years

Exactly so all this talk about what to move to next needs to be taken in the correct context. I know i personally we will continue to do Desktop development for many many years yet, probably with the same tools we are using now with a few updates.

That doesn't mean we are ignoring web & mobile we are already doing that as well as the desktop development.

In light of that, how responsible is it for companies to waste time converting existing code to .Net? I'd answer "not very."

In many cases it is a waste of time it just depends is the correct answer.

We have some VB6 systems that we will never ever re-write, they do the job and re-writing them wont give us anything extra, but were it makes business sense we will happily re-write.

For instance we have one particular system currently which i have inherited which is about 50/50 VB6 and .Net and i am converting it entirely to .net. Why? well for a few reasons,

- the VB6 parts of it are very old, not very well written and full of bugs, the .Net code is better written (non of it written my me i might add)

- The main App is VB6 but an increasing number of its components are written in .net as Controls and its a pain to debug and maintain. We are finding we spend significantly more time on maintenance on this system than any other we look after and a good part of that is the time it take to debug, maintain, rebuild and test the various components between the 2 languages.

- We are starting to have issues with things like Printing for this system with the VB6 components on environments like the latest Citrix.

For me it is drivers like this that determine a re-write or not, not because i can do it in a newer language which i might prefer to write in.

In that sense .Net programming as people have been doing it is just as "dead" as VB6. No more, but no less either.

Depends on which way you mean it, .Net up to now has had development on its IDE,Tools and Framework that VB6 has not had for a number of years now, but if you mean going forward will it continue to and will it then be in the same boat as VB6, i.e still supported but not developed? then probably but who cares? as long as i can do what i want with it then i am happy.

If i cant then we will look at other tools.

[jayinthe813]

Exactly so all this talk about what to move to next needs to be taken in the correct context. I know i personally we will continue to do Desktop development for many many years yet, probably with the same tools we are using now with a few updates.

That doesn't mean we are ignoring web & mobile we are already doing that as well as the desktop development.



In many cases it is a waste of time it just depends is the correct answer.

We have some VB6 systems that we will never ever re-write, they do the job and re-writing them wont give us anything extra, but were it makes business sense we will happily re-write.

For instance we have one particular system currently which i have inherited which is about 50/50 VB6 and .Net and i am converting it entirely to .net. Why? well for a few reasons,

- the VB6 parts of it are very old, not very well written and full of bugs, the .Net code is better written (non of it written my me i might add)

- The main App is VB6 but an increasing number of its components are written in .net as Controls and its a pain to debug and maintain. We are finding we spend significantly more time on maintenance on this system than any other we look after and a good part of that is the time it take to debug, maintain, rebuild and test the various components between the 2 languages.

- We are starting to have issues with things like Printing for this system with the VB6 components on environments like the latest Citrix.

For me it is drivers like this that determine a re-write or not, not because i can do it in a newer language which i might prefer to write in.



Depends on which way you mean it, .Net up to now has had development on its IDE,Tools and Framework that VB6 has not had for a number of years now, but if you mean going forward will it continue to and will it then be in the same boat as VB6, i.e still supported but not developed? then probably but who cares? as long as i can do what i want with it then i am happy.

If i cant then we will look at other tools.

So what will businesses do in the future for desktops once .NET becomes deprecated? Will most businesses be Ok with a framework that will most likely not be officially supported or updated by MS? It sounds like MS is banking on coralling businesses into what THEY want businesses to do. I cannot see a lot of businesses instantly going cloud, especially with sensitive data and needs.

It just makes me start to think that I need to look at another language that will be viable in 10 years (maybe c++). We are just now using sharepoint, but find it to be slow and less-featured compared to older software that we have had for years.

[techgnome]

So what will businesses do in the future for desktops once .NET becomes deprecated? Will most businesses be Ok with a framework that will most likely not be officially supported or updated by MS? It sounds like MS is banking on coralling businesses into what THEY want businesses to do. I cannot see a lot of businesses instantly going cloud, especially with sensitive data and needs.

It just makes me start to think that I need to look at another language that will be viable in 10 years (maybe c++). We are just now using sharepoint, but find it to be slow and less-featured compared to older software that we have had for years.

So they don't go to a public cloud... they go to a private one: Servers that are inside a firewall and actively protected. Then a data layer sits in the extranetzone, and you have interal applications also inside the firewall and public applications on the outside... both then talk to the data in the middle... that's how our system works today. Once we got rid of the thick client portion of our framework, and went to a rich web client, with the exception of the servers,we're platform independent. we no longer care if our client uses Macs, iPads, iPhones, Chromebooks, laptop, Surface, what ever, if it's got a modern web browser, it will work. And yet nothing has really changed on the back end. And I think that's something a lot of people don't realize. Even if the desktop as we know it were to stop ... that doesn't mean the end of Windows development. there's still going to be things to work on from the server side. Now, how you access that server may change, but while Windows Desktop maybe changing and evaporating, I don't see mass changes to Windows Server, IIS, or SQL Server anytime soon. Especially if MS wants to play in the cloud business too, after all, they need something to run their cloud. Although the vaporizaiton of the desktop is going put a potential crimp in my development tools. I also don't stay up at nights fretting about it.

-tg

[jayinthe813]

So they don't go to a public cloud... they go to a private one: Servers that are inside a firewall and actively protected. Then a data layer sits in the extranetzone, and you have interal applications also inside the firewall and public applications on the outside... both then talk to the data in the middle... that's how our system works today. Once we got rid of the thick client portion of our framework, and went to a rich web client, with the exception of the servers,we're platform independent. we no longer care if our client uses Macs, iPads, iPhones, Chromebooks, laptop, Surface, what ever, if it's got a modern web browser, it will work. And yet nothing has really changed on the back end. And I think that's something a lot of people don't realize. Even if the desktop as we know it were to stop ... that doesn't mean the end of Windows development. there's still going to be things to work on from the server side. Now, how you access that server may change, but while Windows Desktop maybe changing and evaporating, I don't see mass changes to Windows Server, IIS, or SQL Server anytime soon. Especially if MS wants to play in the cloud business too, after all, they need something to run their cloud. Although the vaporizaiton of the desktop is going put a potential crimp in my development tools. I also don't stay up at nights fretting about it.

-tg

So how is this different than what is done today by ASP.NET?

[FunkyDexter]

So what will businesses do in the future for desktops once .NET becomes deprecated?

.Net will only be deprecated as a desktop development language when the desktop itself is deprecated so the question doesn't really make sense.

But further to that there's a misapprehension I'm starting to see creep into the argument here. I'm seeing folks say: ".Net is dead because the desktop will die and therefore .Net's lifespan is the same as VB6's". The first part of that argument is wrong so the second is equally wrong. .Net is not limited to the desktop. It can be used for web development, mobile development and cloud based development. It's likely that, when yet another paradigm comes along, .Net will be extended to accommodate that new paradigm too. It has a life beyond the desktop. Vb6, on the other hand, is basically desktop only. It's possible that it will be extended to new paradigms but, I would say, extremely unlikely.

We are just now using sharepoint

You have my sympathy. I personally think it's a technology that lost it's way along time ago. It really started out as a document sharing system and somewhere along the line someone decided to try and turn it into a full blow business system/development environment/web server/report server/a variety of other disparate functions I can't be bothered to list. It fails in all those function except for the first. It's still a pretty good document sharing system.

[techgnome]

So how is this different than what is done today by ASP.NET?

I don't do any ASP.NET development... I do pure SQL, and VB.NET development. Everything in our system is a service. There isn't any ASP.NET development. There's a couple of html files for landing pages, then after that, maaaybe an ASP page that then launches the app, which emits HTML & JS... and then a ton of custom AJAX takes over, makes calls to the services, gets the rendering information, tranforms the xml into HTML as needed, loads additional HTML files (these are if it needs to, drops them into the designated spots, loads JS as directed... badda boom, badda bing.

-tg

[dilettante]

Nobody does any serious ASP.Net development anymore. Microsoft is struggling to keep it relevant and working, but about all they're doing besides that is help get it reliably hosted in Azure.

Most places where I go static page layout has been handed to "web secretaries" who use Word-like WYSIWYG tools to update text and images using these "content managers." Anything dynamic is done using far more stable alternatives PHP or JSP, with some more short-lived innovation done in Node.Js with a hope this will stabilize in the near future.

The ASP.Net code is considered legacy now. Management got fed up with it becoming obselete and needing rewrites to keep up with the moving target of .Net. It's so bad I know people still maintaining ASP.Net pages based on VS 2003 and they can't get approval for the hours estimated to do the rewrites required to bring it up to date. Most of these guys are taking JavaScript/Node and Java classes so they don't get laid off.

.Net just has too much version churn to be used for serious business applications. A lot of people actually hope development of .Net does stop, just to overcome that problem.

VB6 never had that problem, in large part because Microsoft stopped development of VB.

[KGComputers]

Nobody does any serious ASP.Net development anymore. Microsoft is struggling to keep it relevant and working, but about all they're doing besides that is help get it reliably hosted in Azure.

Well, I work in a global company where majority of internal tools are developed in Sharepoint. There are other projects developed in MS CRM dynamics as well and some in ASP.NET MVC with HTML5/jQuery flavors. Some of the team members were tasked to familiarize Angular/Knockout to be integrated in ASP.NET MVC. So, our company does serious ASP.NET development.

[dilettante]

♫Yesterday, all my troubles seemed so far away...

.. Oh, I believe in Yesterday.♫

Take a look at Using Node.js in an ASP.NET MVC application with iisnode. And that was posted about 2 1/2 years ago.

[KGComputers]

I didn't mention anything about Node.js..

asp-net-web-api-2-and-angularjs
Combine-angular-js-with-asp-net-mvc/

[sapator]

Just subscribed again to say something and i'm off. ASP.NET development DOES happen and very seriously. js pages, never seen anyone using them. It's either php or asp.net . Due to the aspect of my previous work i have been talking to major Greek and multinational companies. Turns out that the biggest non 100% software specific companies (p.e. Sony,Toshiba,Insurance companies,Big storage companies) will mostly be using either vb6 or upgraded(just) to VB.net and asp.net. On the other hand most software houses (including the biggest in Greece) will go C# and either have asp.net or something custom for web. As i've said, i have never seen js pages on a big company and most certainly no pure php. I have seen php and a lot of it (and i want to start learning also) on web development houses, including angular,Jquery, wordpress and drupal (seen joomla only on one of the biggest shipowner's company but was a brunch of a clothes selling shop created). So in general ASP.NET is not dead and (unfortunately) MVC is almost always asked on interviews. You know i really hate MVC and i want a quick painful death for it but i won't lie about the demand. So taken aside the Greek companies here, multinational also go for .net in general or (in desktop development) pure Java(AIG uses Java here, for example).VB6 is also used but tends to go .NET. The second biggest ATM company in the world currently uses vb6 and slowly migrating to C# (not aware of web) and the biggest car rental company in Greece uses VB6 and maaaybe will migrate to VB.NET, the biggest blood test lab in Greece uses VB6 and is migrating to VB.NET and ASP.NET and so on.

[FunkyDexter]

Nobody does any serious ASP.Net development anymore

Seriously?! That's what you think?! I've gotta tell you, do a search round my way and there are butt-loads of ASP.Net jobs. Way more than I see asking for PHP, JSP or node.js.

Out of interest I went onto CW jobs and did a few job searches for Hampshire (where I live):-
ASP.Net - 47 results
PHP - 32 results
JSP - 4 results
Node.js - 7 results

Hardly a scientific survey, to be sure, but enough of an indicator for me to assert that ASP.Net development is still alive and well.

[NeedSomeAnswers]

We are just now using sharepoint, but find it to be slow and less-featured compared to older software that we have had for years.

You have my sympathy. I personally think it's a technology that lost it's way along time ago

Mine too, SharePoint is terrible ( to use) and its not the nicest thing to develop against either. MS has Tried to make SharePoint all things to all men and only succeed in making a horrible mess.... and its sooooo slow.

Nobody does any serious ASP.Net development anymore.

Utter nonsense, i know quite a lot of developers doing serious ASP.Net.

We were doing it at my last job in fact not long before i left they had just signed off a new £1 Million project mainly written in ASP.Net, and i am about to start a new project using it in the next few weeks.

Companies like Late Rooms for instance have designed there entire system in ASP.Net.


If anything ASP.Net has improved in more recent iterations of Visual Studio and the Framework and is nicer to work with.

The ASP.Net code is considered legacy now. Management got fed up with it becoming obselete and needing rewrites to keep up with the moving target of .Net.

You must work in a very different industry to mine because i just see no evidence of this what so ever.

And why would you need to keep updating your web site as the Framework updates?

These are web applications you don't need the framework even installed to run them, apart from on your server which is 1 machine you have full control over and can choose when and what to update.

Just keep you server patched up with the Framework versions which is really simple and you barely even have to think about it. Upping you Framework version at most will require messing around in ISS a bit with your application pools and what not.

Management got fed up with it becoming obsolete and needing rewrites to keep up with the moving target of .Net

Also why is the site becoming obsolete? was it badly written? did it not fulfill the needs of the user? there is no need to upgrade a site just because the Framework changes.

This just does not make sense as an argument!

[dilettante]

I'm not suggesting people won't be doing maintenance on ASP.Net pages for a very long time. You can still find people supporting classic ASP for that matter.

But it isn't something strategic you'd choose for new development.

The situation is very similar to desktop development. Things have changed a lot over the past few years.

[NeedSomeAnswers]

But it isn't something strategic you'd choose for new development.

Apart from that is exactly what is happening and what i am seeing is ASP.Net being chosen for new development, and significant new development.

In Manchester where i live all the Code events run in the city have a heavy Asp.Net flavor, and a lot of the web start-ups are asking for Asp.Net (c#), and maybe more significantly there are an increasing number of what were once small, but are now fairly big companies like Late Rooms that use Asp.Net for there main web systems. (obviously they use a mix of other stuff with it Javascript / Node / Less for instance)

The situation is very similar to desktop development. Things have changed a lot over the past few years.

I agree things are changing, but Asp.Net is also changing and keeping up with the times. I just don't see what you see. I see more jobs, and more development in ASP.Net not less.

In fact this week i start a brand new ASP.Net project for a type of Client Extranet, and due to the tools i will be using we will be creating the site once and making it available on Web / Tablet and Mobile.

How much web development do you do? when was the last time you used ASP.Net?

[jmcilhinney]

Perhaps the prawn-again .NETters carp on about VB6 to save our soles ? Something must explain why they trawl through VB6 sites.

I'm not sure whether this comment was made purely to facilitate the pun but I wanted to address it in case it wasn't. I can't speak for others but I certainly do not go looking for VB6 threads to interrupt with talk of .NET. I've never posted in a thread that asks a question about how to achieve something in VB6 with a suggestion that .NET should be used instead unless I can see that it is a problem that could easily be solved by doing so. If I look at the New Posts list on this site, which I do numerous times a day, and see "another" thread on Microsoft's "abandonment" of VB6 and those who use it and what should be done about it, then I feel an urge to reply. It's not VB6 I have an issue with, nor those who used or those who want to use it now. The issue I have is with those who continue, even after all this time, to refuse to accept the reality of the situation. They are, of course, completely within their rights to refuse to accept that reality, as I'm within my rights to think that they are foolish and tell them so.

[techgnome]

Seriously?! That's what you think?! I've gotta tell you, do a search round my way and there are butt-loads of ASP.Net jobs. Way more than I see asking for PHP, JSP or node.js.

Out of interest I went onto CW jobs and did a few job searches for Hampshire (where I live):-
ASP.Net - 47 results
PHP - 32 results
JSP - 4 results
Node.js - 7 results

Hardly a scientific survey, to be sure, but enough of an indicator for me to assert that ASP.Net development is still alive and well.

Turning that argument on it head for a moment:

Or it could mean the that they can't pay people enough to work on it. 4 years ago when I was looking for a job, there was a shed load of SharePoint jobs available. I had done some very minor SP work at some point in my previous job, and so I listed it on my CV. Even with just listing "exposure" as my experience level, I got tons of calls. It's because no one in their right mind would want to work with it. On the other hand, that does mean that those who are brave enough to get into SP development could practically write their own ticket.

Sapator mentioned hating MVC ... as a concept I don't mind MVC... I don't like MS's implementation of it in ASP.NET... but I've worked with it in PHP using CodeIgnitor framework, and it works great. I loved it. It's made a few things that I originally thought was going to be tricky a lot easier. IT does require some thinking in 3-dimension vs the usual flat 2-dimension, but as a design pattern and model, I don't mind it so much.

-tg

[sapator]

Personally, i think Microsoft is sabotaging it's products (MVC in general as a concept btw is fine but as tech said MS implementation is bull(for me, so let's not start again). I had a perfectly working MVC2 WCF service and i was asked to migrate to MVC4. So the WCF stopped working and was puking exception or did not answer Ajax calls. So the sabotage comes in the form "we want to push this or that product so we won't bother fix migration issues at all,or maybe a minimum fix". Well yes, that is fine for some individual people but is very unproductive for big businesses, so i think that is why some Big companies will stay on asp.net or VB6. Imagine is Sony used MVC2 with thousand or web services and all of a student, migrated to MV4 just to find out that they don't have a membership database console anymore, WCF will not play, they markup tags are gone. And i am talking about a migration from MVC to MVC. If they did asp.net to MVC, i am sure they would have committed harakiri. Personally i don't know any one of you (except Manavo and, if funky comes to Greece) and i don't know your business requirement. I had to deal, as I've said, with the top Greek and Multinational companies here in Greece and got a glimpse of what they are using. They are taking the steps so slow that i personally believe that if VB.NET gets deprecated tomorrow, it will take at least 7 to 10 years for a big company to change the plan. Again this is Greek territory and company brunches from Germany, Italy and of course Japan. I haven't dealt with USA, GB, and Aussie corporations so they may make things differently.So that is my opinion. Oh and just to have JM call me names: I HATE MS MVC WITH ALL MY SOUL!!I cannot double click on a controller and i have to right click for a view!!As opposed to asp.net that didn't need to right click the controller...As there was no firkin' controller anyhow!

[szlamany]

I don't do any ASP.NET development... I do pure SQL, and VB.NET development. Everything in our system is a service. There isn't any ASP.NET development. There's a couple of html files for landing pages, then after that, maaaybe an ASP page that then launches the app, which emits HTML & JS... and then a ton of custom AJAX takes over, makes calls to the services, gets the rendering information, tranforms the xml into HTML as needed, loads additional HTML files (these are if it needs to, drops them into the designated spots, loads JS as directed... badda boom, badda bing.

-tg

That's exactly what I'm doing with jQuery to help.

Those services you speak of - they are still running in IIS - right? No ASP.Net pages getting created - just talking to the web methods - right?

[techgnome]

That's exactly what I'm doing with jQuery to help.

Those services you speak of - they are still running in IIS - right? No ASP.Net pages getting created - just talking to the web methods - right?

YUp... I took a look at the installation... there are some aspx pages, but they are part of the platform framework, but yeah, other than that, it's all webservices. And yes, it runs on IIS.

-tg

[szlamany]

Were you not all .Net winforms back a few years ago? Di you move to another company?

[techgnome]

I last changed jobs about 3 1/2 years ago. Even with this job, we started off with WinForms. Over the last few years, the products team has been retooling our platform, so that instead of generating winforms interface with a thick client, any application built on our framework runs in a browser with a rich client experience.

-tg

[Niya]

The person who almost always enflames things, is now gone for a while - and we enjoy the
immediate effects of that decision apparently. No "He-mad?" picture-storm, no other cheap
and easy to accomplish "no-real-arguments"-replies, cobbled together in a minute - and only
thought to ridicule, enrage and flood the opponent - not exactly fair if you ask me, since when
you sit at the receiving end of such nonsense, you cannot really do anything about it without
getting insulting in your attempts to point out this idiotic behaviour explicitely to those, who
apparently "have that much fun with it" (thereby forcing you to offer even more of an attack-
surface, because then the next replies, of the "stop-whining"-kind will kick in - all with much
glee on the side of the kids of course, who apparently think they just won an argument... sigh.

VB6 is a sloppy development tool when compared against its natural successor, VB.Net. You're the ones that choose to get inflamed when faced with this pure truth.

When I'm being asked directly, what tool to use for professional development,
and the one who asks already has VB6-experience (and in most cases it *is* for
the Desktop), then my answer will also be: continue with VB6 - no reason to switch,
because you can get biten equally easy when you choose .NET.

Its nonsense like this is why I get baited into these ridiculous threads. This hypothetical person could have been me and if I found out later on my own that this wasn't sound advice, I'd be quite cross with you. You wouldn't be doing a person seeking such advice any service by suggesting he should stay in VB6. In fact, you're sabotaging him. Its people like you that influenced my decision to stay away from .Net for as long as I did and I'll always hate your kind for that!

Would like a more immediate reaction by the moderators, when such discussion-disrupting
picture-nonsense starts the next time

When you guys stop posting your nonsense, I'll stop mine. In the mean time here:-