GrowingHaze
Programmer
I've just started programming and am taking a VB 6 course, would it be in my best intrest to take VB .NET later on?
Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!
Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!
-
Congratulations Chriss Miller on being selected by the Tek-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
VB6 and VB .NET? 3
- Thread starter GrowingHaze
- Start date
- Status
HobbitK,
The last one and the source code link (you will see it) should be sufficient.
canawest,
As for VB6.0 being outdated it will probably be outdated when the majority of the world goes to 64 bit processors (unless MS decides to upgrade 6.0 (NOT)).
Good Luck
As for VB6 being outdated it will probably be a while before that happens. An article I read said that Microsoft will be supporting VB6 for a few years to come. Just because something like .NET comes out doesn't mean that you need to upgrade right away. People assume that they need the latest software out there for some reason. From what I have been told from the database team at my company .NET is ideal for the work they do but for the programming I do it is really not necessary as of now. Besides, I hear that .NET has some bugs in it, as all early versions of software do, so why upgrade until Microsoft get those issues resolved? Swi
-
1
- #26
.NET is a JITed platform like Java - compiled "Just-In-Time" which means your programs live on users computers in an intermediate language (IL) state that is compiled at runtime. The reason for this is to make your code platform independent. That's why it's so easy to decompile.
That's also why your .NET programs will use more resources and run slower than compiled executables (ever written a program in Java? They can be horribly slow...)
I read recently that Microsoft was changing the name of it's Server product from 'Microsoft .NET Server' to 'Microsoft Windows Server 2003' to eliminate confusion, but the .NET platform is here to stay.
Inheritance, Interfaces, Function overloading, Parameterized Constructors, Garbage collection, Multi-threading, Managed code, Namespaces, over 8000 classes...I just attended the .NET Summit in Houston this week and it's full steam ahead with this platform.
We discussed the fact that there has not been a service pack for VB6 even though there are some documented bugs that could have been fixed; Microsoft is going to support VB6 but there won't be any future improvements.
Also know that the major issue with VB6 today is COM. The shift to .NET is the strategy being used to move away from COM and its limitations. .NET does not use the registry to document your objects, it uses a manifest instead, which can even resolve versioning issues - no more DLL hell.
I personally love the new VB since I started with C++ and Java and have been wishing VB would catch up. At first they called it VB7 but what we ended up with really doesn't resemble VB6 that much. The cool thing though is that no matter which language you code your .NET programs in (VB.NET, C#, C++, COBOL, etc.) the IL you end up with will be the same. Visual Studio .NET is also easy to get used to and once you get familiar with the classes/functions available you can write your programs with alot less code - which means fewer bugs.
Note: No more Debug/Edit/Resume feature in .NET - sorry. It's gone. You have to edit/recompile/run, just like C++.
My opinion is that Microsoft is trying to do exactly what Sun did with Java - create a platform independent development environment, but Microsoft went a step further by creating the CLR (Common language runtime) which can be married to any language built to support it, to produce the same IL.
The supposed beauty of this platform is managed code. Once we can get to the point where all of our programs use managed code we can hopefully say goodbye to the blue screen of death caused by programs that misuse pointers.
One last observation: Maybe now VB programmers can get some respect. We have OOP. It's not a "Kiddie Language" anymore.
VBSlammer
Unemployed in Houston, Texas
That's also why your .NET programs will use more resources and run slower than compiled executables (ever written a program in Java? They can be horribly slow...)
I read recently that Microsoft was changing the name of it's Server product from 'Microsoft .NET Server' to 'Microsoft Windows Server 2003' to eliminate confusion, but the .NET platform is here to stay.
Inheritance, Interfaces, Function overloading, Parameterized Constructors, Garbage collection, Multi-threading, Managed code, Namespaces, over 8000 classes...I just attended the .NET Summit in Houston this week and it's full steam ahead with this platform.
We discussed the fact that there has not been a service pack for VB6 even though there are some documented bugs that could have been fixed; Microsoft is going to support VB6 but there won't be any future improvements.
Also know that the major issue with VB6 today is COM. The shift to .NET is the strategy being used to move away from COM and its limitations. .NET does not use the registry to document your objects, it uses a manifest instead, which can even resolve versioning issues - no more DLL hell.
I personally love the new VB since I started with C++ and Java and have been wishing VB would catch up. At first they called it VB7 but what we ended up with really doesn't resemble VB6 that much. The cool thing though is that no matter which language you code your .NET programs in (VB.NET, C#, C++, COBOL, etc.) the IL you end up with will be the same. Visual Studio .NET is also easy to get used to and once you get familiar with the classes/functions available you can write your programs with alot less code - which means fewer bugs.
Note: No more Debug/Edit/Resume feature in .NET - sorry. It's gone. You have to edit/recompile/run, just like C++.
My opinion is that Microsoft is trying to do exactly what Sun did with Java - create a platform independent development environment, but Microsoft went a step further by creating the CLR (Common language runtime) which can be married to any language built to support it, to produce the same IL.
The supposed beauty of this platform is managed code. Once we can get to the point where all of our programs use managed code we can hopefully say goodbye to the blue screen of death caused by programs that misuse pointers.
One last observation: Maybe now VB programmers can get some respect. We have OOP. It's not a "Kiddie Language" anymore.
VBSlammer
Unemployed in Houston, Texas
Actually, guys, THOMASNG is partially correct. Microsoft is discontinuing the .NET Services area. This includes the project known as Hailstorm, and the .NET MyServices offering (being able to run MS-Office via subscription over the Internet, etc.).
I for one, am glad to see Hailstorm go away. I just don't have the level of trust necessary to use such a thing. The MyServices might have worked if the .COM predictions of fiber optic to everyone's house had come true. But even with cable-modem/DSL, that'd be a huge download each time you wanted to jot down the grocery list.
Canawest -
I'm starting to see VB6 fade away already -- the bookstores near me have many more VB.NET and C# books than VB6 titles. With the second release of VS.NET (Visual Studio 2003) and the FCL (v1.1) imminent, I give VB6 less than a year for new development. For maintenance, it'll be around for 3 years or more, just like VB5 and VB4 before it.
Chip H.
I for one, am glad to see Hailstorm go away. I just don't have the level of trust necessary to use such a thing. The MyServices might have worked if the .COM predictions of fiber optic to everyone's house had come true. But even with cable-modem/DSL, that'd be a huge download each time you wanted to jot down the grocery list.
Canawest -
I'm starting to see VB6 fade away already -- the bookstores near me have many more VB.NET and C# books than VB6 titles. With the second release of VS.NET (Visual Studio 2003) and the FCL (v1.1) imminent, I give VB6 less than a year for new development. For maintenance, it'll be around for 3 years or more, just like VB5 and VB4 before it.
Chip H.
Nevertheless, CajunCenturion is 100% correct. When you make outrageous claims like THOMASNG did in his first post, or controversial claims, you should be prepared to back those claims up with some hard evidence if you want to be taken seriously, and not look like a fool.
To clarify:
1) In all due respect to VB.NET, Marketing probably
took Visual Basic 7 and simply changed its name
to "VB.Net". VB7 IS probably as great an improvement
over VB6 as VB6 was over VB5.
2) As the more recent posts indicate, MS Marketing IS
phasing out its ".net" campaign. I don't know where
I heard it, but there definitely was a lady
spokesperson from MS Marketing admitting ".net"
had been pinned onto everything.
1) In all due respect to VB.NET, Marketing probably
took Visual Basic 7 and simply changed its name
to "VB.Net". VB7 IS probably as great an improvement
over VB6 as VB6 was over VB5.
2) As the more recent posts indicate, MS Marketing IS
phasing out its ".net" campaign. I don't know where
I heard it, but there definitely was a lady
spokesperson from MS Marketing admitting ".net"
had been pinned onto everything.
Still, I wouldn't say THOMASNG was even partially correct with the initial statement, considering the question.
I'm would hope that it was just a mis-understanding, like would happen if a discussion was going on about a feature of WinXP (or whatever) and someone just took it for granted that the discussion was on Windows in general, and then assumed that the comments/discussion applied to all versions.
Or something to that nature.
Anyways, I did have a ball reading some statements here and went through a box of tissues wiping the tears of laughter away.
There are also some good points made here, to which I'm sure are appreciated by all.
[/b][/i][/u]*******************************************************
General remarks:
If this post contains any suggestions for the use or distribution of code, components or files of any sort, it is still your responsibility to assure that you have the proper license and distribution rights to do so!
VB7 is a completely different language that happens to look a bit like VB6. Frankly it could have been called, oh, I dunno, let's say Visual Object Basic rather than VB, and it's continued existence or validity does not rest on whether Microsoft have decided to drop the .NET branding from the next release of Windows server (which will be badged with a ".net connected" logo instead). Note that there is NO change in the technology, and, as far as I am aware, other products will continue to bear the .NET branding.
About the only assertion I'd agree with is "MS Marketing admitting .net had been pinned onto everything", which was a mistake, as it confused people about what .net actually is (see here for a basic overview: All MS are doing at the moment is trying to reduce/eliminate the confusion. They are not dropping the core ideas.
About the only assertion I'd agree with is "MS Marketing admitting .net had been pinned onto everything", which was a mistake, as it confused people about what .net actually is (see here for a basic overview: All MS are doing at the moment is trying to reduce/eliminate the confusion. They are not dropping the core ideas.
BTW: As skiflyer had mentioned, I also just received Windows .Net Server 2003 Release Candidte 2 from MS. [/b][/i][/u]*******************************************************
General remarks:
If this post contains any suggestions for the use or distribution of code, components or files of any sort, it is still your responsibility to assure that you have the proper license and distribution rights to do so!
>is it .net or .NET
With all of the MS mailings (letters, Info, and DVDs - 2002 & 2003) I have been receiving they are all mentioned/labeled as .NET.
.Net Server 2003
MS .NET Framework SDK
Visual Studio .NET
.NET Server RC1
Visual J# .NET
ASP.NET
ADO.NET
Etc.NET
[/b][/i][/u]*******************************************************
General remarks:
If this post contains any suggestions for the use or distribution of code, components or files of any sort, it is still your responsibility to assure that you have the proper license and distribution rights to do so!
With all of the MS mailings (letters, Info, and DVDs - 2002 & 2003) I have been receiving they are all mentioned/labeled as .NET.
.Net Server 2003
MS .NET Framework SDK
Visual Studio .NET
.NET Server RC1
Visual J# .NET
ASP.NET
ADO.NET
Etc.NET
[/b][/i][/u]*******************************************************
General remarks:
If this post contains any suggestions for the use or distribution of code, components or files of any sort, it is still your responsibility to assure that you have the proper license and distribution rights to do so!
Okay, I guess there was an overzealousness by the MS
Marketing Department. I wonder what they'll call the next
version of VB (after .net)? It seems that they may have
dug themselves into a marketing corner here.
However, I would not put it past them. Rember when Intel
Marketing decided to switch from "586" to "Pentium"? They
got out of it by attaching a Roman numeral, P-I, P-II, etc.
Marketing Department. I wonder what they'll call the next
version of VB (after .net)? It seems that they may have
dug themselves into a marketing corner here.
However, I would not put it past them. Rember when Intel
Marketing decided to switch from "586" to "Pentium"? They
got out of it by attaching a Roman numeral, P-I, P-II, etc.
As a VB programmer (proudly) since version 1.0 I'm a bit confused. Is there a VB v7.0 out there and, if so, is it actually VB or something inbetween VB and another language?
Since there doesn't seem to be anything at all wrong with VB6 isn't this a case of, if it ain't broke don't try to fix it?
- Andy.
Since there doesn't seem to be anything at all wrong with VB6 isn't this a case of, if it ain't broke don't try to fix it?
- Andy.
I'm sure there were many who thought that there was nothing wrong with versions 1.0 through 5.0. Yet they are now part of VB's history. Not necessarily because there was anything wrong with them (depending on your point of view), but because they could be improved upon.
There may or may not be anything "wrong" with VB6, but few would claim that it's a "perfect" language. And so we move on to VB.NET.
VB.NET is not a perfect language either. It will be improved upon by another version sometime down the road. It's called progress.
There may or may not be anything "wrong" with VB6, but few would claim that it's a "perfect" language. And so we move on to VB.NET.
VB.NET is not a perfect language either. It will be improved upon by another version sometime down the road. It's called progress.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Question