Quote Originally Posted by SJWhiteley View Post
So, if they are effectively interchangeable, what is VB6 used for that VB.NET isn't, and visa versa?
I work with doctors who do charity work in 3rd-world countries. While a lot of my work is moving to mobile devices like iPhones, it used to be that doctors would carry a collection of diagnostic software on a USB drive, and simply plug it into whatever PC they have access to on-site. (This approach is still used in areas with crime problems, as a stolen USB drive is easier to replace than a stolen iPhone or laptop.)

Anyway, there are no guarantees about these target PCs. XP is common, a lot of times they don't have Internet access, or they haven't been updated beyond the initial OS install. Doctors can't waste time playing tech support, so they need software that can be plugged into a PC like that and run without any effort or configuration on their part.

VB6 is ideal for this. Its projects run on anything from XP to Windows 10 without needing configuration or additional run-time dependencies, and because my focus is on medical imaging software, I have to produce code that does things like real-time Retinex adjustments on a video feed from a pill camera. There are only so many programming languages that a) can run without dependencies or special run-time configuration, and b) provide native-compiled performance.

So you're right: VB6's stability, predictability, and lack of run-time dependencies is exactly why I use it on some projects. (I'm not campaigning for a new VB6, in case that wasn't clear.)

Developers seem to forget that there are use-cases for all programming languages. If there weren't, the languages would disappear. Just because VB.Net is a good fit for one person's work doesn't mean it's a good fit for everyone. Same goes for the VB6 guys who think VB6 is the solution to everything. People waste an inordinate amount of energy evangelizing various programming tools.