Re: Visual Basic.net

On 2005-07-25, Michael B Johnson <mjohnson@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Sat, 23 Jul 2005 13:57:00 -0500, Tom Shelton
><tshelton@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>>As someone who has ACTUALLY converted a number of projects to VB.NET and
>>C#, I can tell you that VB.NET is a MAJOR improvement over VB.CLASSIC in
>>terms of productivity, power, and flexability. For, example I converted a
>>project a few months ago and when I was done I had removed ALL api calls
>>and the lines of code were about 1/2 the VB.CLASSIC version. People who
>>say it takes more code to do things in .NET are those who don't know the
>>.NET framework.
>
> So, because you have ACTUALLY converted projects, that makes you the definitive
> and final authority on the issue, right? No.
>

I'm not claiming that - but, I would guess that I have more .NET
experience then some of the other posters in the thread.

> Anyway, no one in this group has made an issue of "count of lines of code". You
> are simply throwing up a straw man to make your position appear strong.
>

Go back and re-read the thread. You will find that that claim was
indeed made.

>>VB.NET has web functionality, but it is NOT all about web or web
>>connected applications. All my applications have been either standalone
>>desktop apps or client server based applications. Let me tell you, it
>>is much easier to write a multithreaded server app in VB.NET then in
>>VB.CLASSIC. I know, I've had to do both.
>
> Easier by who's definition? There are many people who find Python much easier to
> use, you know. Frank is an experienced programmer. His point that the multitude
> of classes and hierarchies is complex should be noted and heard, not dismissed
> out-of-hand. Wasn't ADO advertised as "better" way back when because it
> supposedly "flattened the hierarchy?"
>

I don't know. I never really used ADO. I'm not a data dweeb normally.

>>VB.NET is more object oriented then VB.CLASSIC - but it allows the same
>>coding style that you used in VB.CLASSIC. There are differences, but
>>for the most part, the jump is not that great. Those that say it is are
>>exagerating. Like, I said I've converted several apps now, and there
>
> I, for one, have philosophical differences that make me avoid .NET - no one in
> this newsgroup said that the "jump is too great", and that us pitiful VB6
> programmers haven't got a clue and can't possibly ever learn a new programming
> language.
>

You certainly haven't been paying attention to what has been claimed.

>>have been very few gotcha's. Of course, that can depend on the
>>application and how it was written in VB.CLASSIC. If your code was
>>poorly structured in VB.CLASSIC it will not translate well to .NET
>
> No, not only that. If you use 3rd party controls, then your project won't
> translate well into .NET. I forget the other things that won't tranlate well,
> but there aren't as few as you imply.
>

I've yet to come accross a 3rd party control that didn't work in .NET.
COM controls and components work just fine. I use them every day.

>>Further, Visual Basic 2005 addresses many of the most requested missing
>>features - for example, edit and continue. As well as adding many RAD
>
> True. I liked that bit when I saw it. BUT, the choice of software development
> environment generally isn't predicated upon any single feature. Glad they've
> seen fit to /finally/ add that functionality back in so that it's closer to VB6
> quality.
>

IMHO, VB.NET has always been better.

>>features that blow VB.CLASSIC out of the water, for example the My
>>namespace, many improvements to System.Windows.Forms - such as better
>>layout management, improved controls with theme support, etc.
>
> Theme support - that's a reason to switch to .NET? What exalted Folly!
>
> Improved controls - maybe. But most things I can't use in existing projects -
> nothing is backwards compatible, so in order to gain those improvements I would
> have to re-write. I'm not so sure that the solutions I have right now aren't
> better with the customizations I've made than switching to the so called "latest
> and greatest" "New and Improved!" controls.
>
> You've sparked my curiousity though, with the phrase the "many improvements to
> System.Widows.Forms"? What are they?
>
>>VB.CLASSIC is a dead language, and all I have to say to that is thank
>>goodness. I officially went to .NET is 2002 (though, I had been playing
>>with it since the PDC bits in 2000), and I have no regrets at all.
>
> So, because you went to .NET in 2002, and there are those of us happily
> productive with VB6 in 2005, we all MUST switch immediately in order to make you
> happy?
>

No. I don't care what you do. But, the op asked for oppinions, and I
gave mine. Especially since most of the posts were complete
fabrication.

> VB.CLASSIC is dead? WHY? Because Microsoft isn't there to hold our hands and
> whisper sweet nothings into our ears? Millions of VBA users suddenly care about
> the fact that .NET 2005 has been released? Thousands of lines of existing VB6
> code suddenly cease to matter? New projects in VB6 code no longer have any
> chance at seeing the light of day?
>

It's dead from an MS support standpoint. You can continue to use it
until it won't run anymore.

> .NET has gone through a number of incompatible changes from version to version.

Bullocks. There have been very few breaking changes so far. .NET 2.0
is the first runtime to really break compatability - and that only in
the sense that you can't run 2.0 compiled code on an earlier runtime.
You can still run 1.0/1.1 compiled code on the 2.0 runtime though.

> You go ahead and enjoy mantaining your code in order to keep up with the
> Joneses, I mean, the Microsoft VS development team. You keep your .NET and enjoy
> what you have, and we'll keep VB6. You'll be changing in 3-5 years again, anyway
> and we can have this debate again at that time: no doubt you'll be explaining to
> us why we don't need to worry about DRM, why licensing terms really don't matter
> to developers and why renting our own data is best practice.
>

If you feel so wounded, why don't you move to another platform - like
Linux. I use Linux everday, in fact I'm posting from my Linux box right
now. And you know what - C# works on Linux. Actually, VB.NET does as well
to some degree - but it's mbas (mono basic compiler) is still beta.

> As an interesting side note, our company had a Microsoft consultant in the other
> day and he was recommending that I download a crack from the Internet in order
> to decompile encrypted stored procedures (for troubleshooting/learning reasons)
> - and yet was vehemently against Open Source code. Can you say "Double
> standard"? Here was someone willing to break the law in order to get his work
> done and yet at the same time try to prevent me from using/supporting Open
> Source.
>

Who the hell cares what MS thinks about OSS? I use OSS everday. And I
don't intend to stop. Don't get me wrong - I have nothing against MS,
but I don't cow-tow to them either.

--
Tom Shelton
.

Relevant Pages

  • RealBasic?
    ... I was wondering just how close RealBasic is compared to VB6? ... I understand RealBasic will work on both so I assume I could develop on Linux and it would work on Windows. ... My apps are mostly for manufacturing environments - serial comm, using controls to comm with PLCs, using OO4O to connect to Oracle. ...
    (microsoft.public.vb.general.discussion)
  • Re: VB6 to RealBasic
    ... I never intended to convert a VB6 program line by line into RealBasic. ... But the rewritten code shouldn't end up in two different versions for Windows and Linux, ... There are many nice things you can do using Win32 API functions which are not at all or at least poorly implemented in VB6, and these things often are nescessary for professional programs. ...
    (comp.lang.basic.realbasic)
  • Re: Visual Basic.net
    ... seen fit to /finally/ add that functionality back in so that it's closer to VB6 ... >layout management, improved controls with theme support, etc. ... Theme support - that's a reason to switch to .NET? ... Joneses, I mean, the Microsoft VS development team. ...
    (comp.lang.basic.visual.misc)
  • Re: Migrating VB6 apps to Linux using Wine
    ... >>> to their VB6 apps. ... >>> and help report any Wine bugs your application exposes. ... Do I hate Java? ... > software and I don't receive any income from Linux, ...
    (comp.lang.basic.visual.misc)
  • Re: Creating Shortcut Keys tabbed form
    ... In that you ask the differences between a VB6 label and ..Net label they are many, including the alignment improvements, ability to add images and image alignment. ... I am glad you wrote this message, because I was scrapping my mind what Sheldon could mean by that tab control. ... Before you misunderstand me, you are partially correct what you wrote, but we should keep this by controls like the Ms Flexcontrol and probably this SStab and some controls who are replaced by data variants which fits better to AdoNet. ...
    (microsoft.public.vb.general.discussion)
Loading