Advice_Should I complete my VB6 app or CONVERT? 2

[faxpay]

I have a VB6 app that I developed that is approximately 2/3 complete. I am wondering if it is worth it to complete since the VB6 technology is so old and no longer supported?

I used the conversion feature in visual studio.net and visual basic 2005. There are 256 & 1067 issues to be resolved respectively. Although I am not familiar with either .net or vb2005 it appears many of the issues cannot be resolved without re-design.

I am only familiar with programming in VB6.

Is it worth continuing in VB6?

Looking for advice.
faxpay,
Tom

 

[HughLerwill]

>2/3 complete
It's really more a case of how long it has taken you so far, how big the app is, and if you have a schedule to meet. With the number of issues you report it sounds like you could be in quite deep already.

>VB6 technology is so old and no longer supported?
Not supported as a programming language app by MS but they have 'supported' running of the IDE and VB6.exes in their new Vista OS. Indeed the VB6 runtime and support files are supplied with Vista.

>I am only familiar with programming in VB6
The learning curve to program under VB.Net can be a steep one.

On the face of it I would recommend you finish the current app under VB6 and think about using VB.Net for your next project.

 

[faxpay]

HughLerwill,

Thank You for your input.

I did put in a lot of time. Put in time over a period of years.

"finish the current app under VB6 and think about using VB.Net for your next project." Do you suggest vb.net over vb 2005 for my next project? And why? Is the learning curve easier?

faxpay, Tom

 

[JoeAtWork]

VB.Net and VB 2005 are the same thing.

"Classic" Visual Basic stops at version 6.

I believe in letting the requirements of the project determine what platform to use.

To consider:
1. Is there a requirement that makes VB6 a poor choice?
2. Is there a deadline requirement which would make scrapping your 2/3 completed project impracticle?

I expect VB will continue to be supported (that is, be able to run on) Vista and at least the next operating system. Microsoft doesn't have a choice, too many programs have been written in VB for them not to support it.

 

[faxpay]

Thanks JoeAtWork,

The only thing that makes vb6 the poorer choice is it's transportability to the web. In the interest of expediancy I probably should finish the vb6 app and then look at a conversion to vb.net.

Thanks for pointing out Microsoft's need to continue support. After all, I am still running 2 apps in the DOS operating system on XP.

If vb.net and vb 2005 are the same how come when I run the conversion in vb.net and vb 2005 I get a different number of issues to resolve? 256 in vb.net and 1067 in vb 2005.

Thank You for your input.

faxpay, Tom

 

[faxpay]

I have to give everyone a star so far. I have gleaned something from all the comments so far. Any others will be appreciated.

Thank You all.

faxpay, Tom

 

[JoeAtWork]

Maybe your "VB.Net" is version 1.1, whereas you "2005" would be 2.0? Or you simply have two different tools that are supposed to do the same thing.

If you have written your VB as a 3-tier application, i.e. put your business and data logic in separate DLL's, you could still use it in an ASP.NET application, where the only thing new you have to write is the UI code. That's because .NET can wrap COM compenents and use them.

 

[Merlin88]

I am currently running Windows Vista, and have no problems running the Visual Basic 6.0 programming language. But just as an FYI if you were to install the Visual Studio 6.0 package you will run into problems, the only languages supported on Vista are Visual Basic 6.0, and Visual FoxPro 6.0 as separate installs, not as the Studio. I found this information on Microsoft's Vista support website when I was having problems running Visual Basic from the Studio install.

 

[HarleyQuinn]

faxpay - In essence VB.Net and VB 2005 are the same thing. What you call VB.Net is the original release of the language (2003 version?) whereas VB 2005 is a later (and much changed) version of VB.Net, there are a lot of things that changed between releases (as things were phased out and new features implemented) which is why the error count is so different. This will undoubtedly also be the case with VB 2008 when it's released (it's still currently in beta).

Also, if I remember correctly later versions of .Net utilise parts of the later versions of the .Net framework (are we up to 3.5 now? I'm open to correction if I'm wrong ) that aren't as readily available to the earlier .Net versions.

Hope this helps (and I've remembered dates and versions correctly ).

HarleyQuinn
---------------------------------
Get the most out of Tek-Tips, read FAQ222-2244 before posting.

 

[strongm]

Scarily Vb.net debut was 2001/2002

 

[HarleyQuinn]

I knew I'd get something in there wrong

Wow, I hadn't realised that it had been around that long though!

HarleyQuinn
---------------------------------
Get the most out of Tek-Tips, read FAQ222-2244 before posting.

 

[JoeAtWork]

Isn't the language still called VB.NET in 2005?

I thought the way to distinguish the versions would be:
VB.NET 1.1
VB.NET 2.0

IMHO, that's more sane then renaming the language for every new version.

I've never heard anyone say "C# 2005".

 

[HarleyQuinn]

I think everyone will still call it .Net (as it is really) but the majority of Microsoft documentation on it calls it VB 2005, as is the case with the new version VB 2008.

IMHO, that's more sane then renaming the language for every new version.

Unfortunately looks like Microsoft (at least in the press side) don't share that opinion

On a similar note, I'll be no-one ever calls it Visual C#

Cheers

HarleyQuinn
---------------------------------
Get the most out of Tek-Tips, read FAQ222-2244 before posting.