Re: Is VB.NET Stable??

Tech-Archive recommends: Fix windows errors by optimizing your registry

speak english or die ***
maybe if your country was full of wusses and communists; then maybe you
could have your own software industry lol

VB 2005 is TOTALLY IMPRACTICAL
and there wasn't anything wrong with VB6. it worked; it's reliable.
it's stable and it's fast.

it's like-- they're trying to sell us on the performance angle; they're
trying to sell a freezer to eskimos!


-Aaron




tommaso.gastaldi@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
The people who are still asking why they should need VB.NET, I think
should not use it. Because they actually do not need it, and, probably,
they would not use it the way it is intended to be used.
I have been programming years with vb6 and previous vers. and always
felt that language was just a toy, incapable to do any serious large
project.
Only with the advent of VB.net I felt we finally got something we
could work with.

To answer to original question, trying make a joke and a provocation,
in a language different from my native one... Frankly, I would say
that perhaps the current VB 2005 cannot be defined
fully stable... (This is forgivable considering the level
of complexity it deals with.) ... VB6 language, instead,
compared with VB.NET, was certainly *a* stable.

Hope it works :)

-t

.

Quantcast