|
Basically i think main difference between VB6 and VB.NET is that VB was built over base of COM (Component Object Model) and VB.NET is built on .NET. COM is a component framework that provides developers to create reuseable components for different kind of applications. VB6 did not had much control over COM and Win32 API but it was most of time dependent on its run time environment ActiveX components/Controls(COM).
Microsoft used Visual C++ for most of COM development, not Visual Basic. So actual differnce between VB6 and VB.NET is the run time enviroment and addition of some nice features like Full OOP and new web development functions. Microsoft have introduced .NET to answer many questions as solution to all needs for development.
I think that VB6 have a very huge codebase that cannot be converted to .NET easily. This is really serious issue, there are some companies that still are working with VB6 COM applications. But at this stage Microsoft is focused on .NET it looks very difficult that they continue on more development for VB6 as it means improving COM so making two frameworks side by side again.
VB6 vs VB.NET = COM/COM+/DCOM vs .NET
Humayun Shabbir Bhutta
|
|
|
|
|
Is there a CListCtrl in VB?
--
Affordable Windows-based CMS for only 99 €: try www.zeta-producer.com for free!
|
|
|
|
|
No. There's a COM wrapper that works, but doesn't expose nearly all the functionality, so you end up flipping back and forth between the wrapper (a nice abstraction) and straight win32 calls (in VB, not nice at all. No header files, for starters...).
Is it any wonder so many VB apps use Flexgrid and it's ilk?
Shog9
I'm not the Jack of Diamonds... I'm not the six of spades.
I don't know what you thought; I'm not your astronaut...
|
|
|
|
|
Normally when Microsoft wants to move people away from something in, say, C++, they will deprecate it in one version, and then the next version stop supporting it entirely. That makes it much easier to migrate - at least you see what is going to break and have time to fix it before a newer version rolls out.
I don't think it makes any sense to continue to support a non-.NET VB. There is no advantage... VB6 required a runtime itself, it just wasn't .NET. It's kind of a shame that Microsoft didn't anticipate this and either come out with an intermediate version (VB7?) before .NET, or make the first VB.NET version compatible with VB6 but flag a lot of things as deprecated and give a better migration path.
But then again, that's just me. I don't program in that stuff unless I absolutely have to anyway, so it doesn't really affect me. Most VB code I migrate I wind up migrating to C++ or something. 
The generation of random numbers is too important to be left to chance.
|
|
|
|
|
I put I don't care, but there should be another option that says 'I don't care, as long as it doesn't affect Microsoft's ability to support/maintain VC++ and .NET'
Even though they are a giant, it doesn't mean they can just maintain anything that we want.
-
Drew
|
|
|
|
|
That way, I could have said "I don't know, and I don't care".
Vikram.
http://www.geocities.com/vpunathambekar
"In oneself lies the whole world and if you know how to look and learn, the door is there and the key is in your hand. Nobody on earth can give you either the key or the door to open, except yourself." — Jiddu Krishnamurti.
|
|
|
|
|
Microsoft have bowed to the pressure and... created a new web site[^], VBRun, to help VB6 developers to migrate.
I'm sure that'll keep everyone happy. 
Gavin Greig
"Haw, you're no deid," girned Charon. "Get aff ma boat or ah'll report ye."
Matthew Fitt - The Hoose O Haivers: The Twelve Trauchles O Heracles.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'll try it! Not that I do any VB6 development anymore, but it can happen, sometimes, that I am in need of a small unmanaged utility, for example, as part of an installation package. Unfortunately, not everyone has the .NET framework installed yet.
VB6 allowed me to do that without having to learn a new language like Delphi. Now that VB6 is dead, RealBasic might be a good option. Again, I never tried RB so we'll see how it performs! From the screenshots, it seems a little too much "Basic for Dummies" to me, but we'll see!
|
|
|
|
|
... as long as I don't have to write in VB; or - even worse, maintain someone's VB code*. 
David
* don't argue that it's not *only* VB problem. Sure, but statistics is against you.
Never forget: "Stay kul and happy" (I.A.)
David's thoughts / dnhsoftware.org / MyHTMLTidy
|
|
|
|
|
I don't care either, but what you said is actually a good argument for getting rid of it. What if, in your next job, you _HAVE TO_ maintain someone's VB code? I had to just 2 short years ago.
Tim Hodgson
ExclamationSoft (http://www.ExclamationSoft.com)
|
|
|
|
|
VB6 should remain as is, that is, COM based and available through the VS6 IDE only, period!
To say that VB6 deserves a place within VS.NET the way C++ has been given a place within it is completely insane! First and foremost, VB, the language, already has a prominent place within the .NET IDE, although unfortunately it was given the name VB.NET instead of just simply VB 7. All this talk about VB.NET being a COMPLETELY different language than VB6 is straight out ridiculous! Sure it's different, but I don't see the difference being any bigger than the one that existed between VB3 and the first COM version of VB, VB4, when VB got its first taste at OO. Second, comparing the importance of VB6 with that of C++ is without merit. C++ doesn't need COM at all; however, the same cannot be said about VB6, since without COM VB is Nothing. You can't have Windows without C++; however, the same cannot be said about VB.
Don't get me wrong, for I do feel for those of you that are left with the task of converting VB6 code to VB.NET, more so for those of you that have implemented mission critical apps in VB6 yet never took the time to implement them in an OO manner, in which case the migration will end up being a complete rewrite. Otherwise, the task shouldn't be that bad; furthermore, here on CP there's an excellent, excellent article[^] that can help you through the process.
Finally, if the cost of migrating outweighs the benefits, then just don't do it; the user will never be able to tell the difference. But please, stop the whining for heaven's sake. Unfortunately, all this whining has been heard to the extent that the next version of VB, whatever the hell its called, hopefully VB 8, will have a whole bunch of features meant to calm down the tension. Furthermore, all this attention placed on the cries for help has lead to the next version of VB not having some very powerful language features such as Iterators and Anonymous Methods, which is just straight out wrong!
VB6 was good for its time, but that's all. Now we have VB.NET. Just accept that fact and move on!
just my two pesos
|
|
|
|
|
Don't try it, just do it!
|
|
|
|
|
What Microsoft should do is to develop an alternative that isn't so O-O or powerful, like VB was to C++ in the early days, so that beginners and casual programmers could create simple programs without all the complications of real programming. How does this sound: "VB Classic -- Built on .NET" ?
Windows Scripting Host with VBScript or JavaScript may be a contender, but there isn't a good or inexpensive IDE and I don't know it well enough.
In any case, there has to be some discipline about enhancing the language. I've seen other scripting languages, and VB itself, get much more complicated and less easy to learn because someone wanted to push it to the next level and do things that they should be doing in another language or environment.
Peter Kryszak
|
|
|
|
|
...it occurs to me after further consideration that i have a very good reason for wanting any VB code on my computer to be as managed as possible. Why? Easy...
...Nearly all of the VB code currently on my computer was written by non-programmers. Hobbiests, dabblers, engineers converting old FORTRAN formulas, all these have produced VB code that i run on occasion... but a quick look around reveals precious little from those with serious experience in Windows coding.
So why would i want this code to run any closer to the machine than necessary?!
IMHO, VBScript is the best form of VB ever produced by MS. Quick-and-dirty, forgiving syntax, extensible... yeah, the perfect language for anyone who couldn't care less about the difference between a class and an interface, or why one gigantic block of code isn't the best structure for any program. And best of all, it's interpreted - if i wanted to hack my own interpreter or hook Microsoft's, no problem.
So yeah, my revised answer would be "no - i don't want VB compiling to anything like native code... But if some half-compiled .NET hack is the best we can do, then lets go with it."
Shog9
I'm not the Jack of Diamonds... I'm not the six of spades.
I don't know what you thought; I'm not your astronaut...
|
|
|
|
|
As I looked at the possible answers of the survey I found out that none of them could cover me. I’d like to watch the whole situation under the prism of the following aspects.
1) The market view
Too many custom applications are written , working , passed into the production level and currently being actively supported and are thoroughly developed with vb6 (I don’t agree with shipping a product written in vb6 , but we’re not here to criticize reality) .
For the market or the customer isn’t acceptable or affordable to move every then and so from one product to another if that means just nothing new to business logic, user interaction etc. For a customer moving to a more robust framework most of the times mean nothing at all. Sometimes the same counts for software vendors. That’s because of the realistic tendency enclosed in the sentence “if it works don’t fix it”, and of the nightmare lemma called amortization.
Microsoft can’t go blind to the dinosaur called vb6 (ok don’t yell it’s not COBOL).
2) The “developers” view
I’d be glad to see Microsoft disinherit vb6. I’m not dogmatic against vb, I’ve been using vb6 in an ancillary fashion since vb4, but I believe cutting off from vb officially would be very good for the developing community. I’ll explain below:
Developing isn’t a lone path in life for dreamers and romantics. Most of the times you have to work along with other developers , other development teams other development companies. Each one of those can have different theoretical background, different programming taste and different specialization.
I’m working as a full time developer since I was 19 and I’ve participated in too many technical meetings. I’ve seen the biggest abominations brought to life by vb “developers”. In my opinion this happens because of the following:
a) vb is NOT a strict language. You can do “any” nonsense may cross your head without a “hey dork” signal (I’ve seen a guy wanted to be called developer to use err as a member variable, the mess was outstanding).
b) vb does not enforce clearly object-orientation. Most of the code I’ve seen could be characterized procedural and the majority of the vb developers have no prior knowledge of c/c++ which for me is at least catastrophic. If anybody want to argue with the catastrophic label above, I propose to him to have a conversation with a typical vb developer about initialization-instantiation-finalization and multithreading.
c) vb is EASY , even my grandma after a crash course can write in vb. That easiness in addition with point (a) and (b) gave birth to an army of wannabe-developers. This led only to one thing: BAD SOFTWARE.
For those who want to argue I’d like to note that I don’t hate vb but the whole “hype” around vb. Even though vb6 was the main factor of income for two years of my life.
For the past 3 years I work on C#, for a software house specializing on health-care sector.
Quorth the raven nevermore
|
|
|
|
|
VB seems like a perfect little language for doing small in-house type apps. I'm doing some (C#/.NET) work for a local university, and there is actually quite a lot of VB programming being done by the non-programmers here, and they are quite productive with it. It seems to me that those in that category have a perfectly legitimate expectation that microsoft continue to support and extend their primary tool. It doesn't make any sense that they should have to learn ASP.NET just to continue what they do.
"The Yahoos refused to be tamed."
|
|
|
|
|
I was a hardcore VB6 developer using Hungarian Naming conventions. However, it's time to move on! I changed the way I developed with .NET...it's called progress. I even learned C#.
It's a crying shame that Microsoft caved in at all for us VB6 developers when they created VB.NET (for example the AndAlso or OrElse operators).
Let's get real - VB6 was cool and great for it's time, but it was a "proprietary", flaky toy.
Who's problem is it that you wrote more than prototypes with VB6? You should have used C++ or Java at the time!
|
|
|
|
|
Speed, compatibility and complexity are future's keywords... VB doesn't have any of these attributes!
Don't try it, just do it!
|
|
|
|
|
Really i am least bothered whether they continue with non .net Vb or anything else .  Because i am really scared microsoft's innovative techinical adventures. There is no pre-post plan which will protect either existing developers or products which developed in their old technologies.
What i am suggesting is  , If you are choosing microsoft technologies for your new development.Then don't commit further updation or level upgradations on deliverded product or project.
Sreejith Nair
[ My Articles ]
|
|
|
|
|
Out of curiosity, do you just close your eyes and click randomly when it comes time to insert an emoticon?
Charlie
if(!curlies){ return; }
|
|
|
|
|
I vted no bcause ,who is using VB 4 a new project now? since there is alot of other powerful tools available out thetre? For thrr guys who have already devoloped their VB projects and sold they can give support and service beacause VB is there microsoft is not gonna kill VB any more. But thrte is no need to devolope Vb anymore since other power ful tools are available with ms itself.
Prasun.G.Nambiar Cochin
|
|
|
|
|
C++ has unmanaged support because (a) the language has a standard and (b) it's used to write all the things that have to operate closer to the metal than managed code.
VB6 has neither of these things going for it. While there is some business justification for wanting to hold onto the old syntax - migrating to VB.NET will genuinely cost some businesses non-trivial amounts - sometimes technical improvements do require a break with the past. VB.NET is a nicer language, with interoperability benefits and great libraries shared with other .NET languages, while one of the biggest arguments against upgrading seems to be "I can't afford/be bothered to learn something new". Surely those people are better out of the industry anyway? Of course, the sloppier the VB6 code, the less likely it is to migrate satisfactorily, but whose fault is that?
I am not a Visual Basic user. I have some sympathy with those facing the pain of migration, but there's no way Microsoft should backtrack for the dinosaurs now.
Gavin Greig
"Haw, you're no deid," girned Charon. "Get aff ma boat or ah'll report ye."
Matthew Fitt - The Hoose O Haivers: The Twelve Trauchles O Heracles.
|
|
|
|
|
Not you again !!
>While there is some business justification
The business case is actually a lot stronger than that. Just think of a huge codebase that would need migrated, tested - even then you are introducing risk only to 'stand still' in functionality. Many small shops will struggle or fold over this.
I am a VB6 user at work and rather cold to it but rather than be witty on online forums about its shortcommings, these days I used it as a challenge to write disciplined and ordered code.
Take care,
Davy
|
|
|
|
|
Davy Mitchell wrote:
Not you again!!
No, it's not me, I've never heard of him. 
I want to be reasonable and sympathetic to the shops that have this sort of trouble, but when it comes down to it, I think they brought it on themselves. It has never seemed a sensible choice to build a huge codebase in VB6 - a language targeted at quickly producing small utilities - and companies that thought it might be were always making a false economy. At the very least, it was never less than a gamble, and they've lost. That's life.
Now Microsoft have demonstrated their commitment to Visual Basic by turning it into a more grown-up and suitable language for doing significant development in. Good on them I say (though it still wouldn't be my language of choice), and anyone complaining about it now should have been doing something about it three to five years ago - either complaining to Microsoft then, when it might have been more practical for MS to make some sort of accommodation for "classic" VB, or just quietly preparing to make the move.
VB6 can still be used to work with all the old code that it isn't worth upgrading.
Gavin Greig
"Haw, you're no deid," girned Charon. "Get aff ma boat or ah'll report ye."
Matthew Fitt - The Hoose O Haivers: The Twelve Trauchles O Heracles.
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
