Re: VB6, VB2005, or Something Else?

On Sat, 25 Feb 2006 08:33:08 -0800, "Anthony" <Anthony@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

¤
¤ It seems to me that you are a proponent for the .net framework, and it
¤ sounds like you know a lot about it. That's fine. I am just wondering what
¤ your suggestion would be though redarging the issues I presented:
¤
¤ "(1) our code wouldn't convert,

In some instances this will happen. If I don't have time to re-write then what I typically do is
split the code off to a component that I can use via COM interop.

¤ (2) the
¤ framework seemed overly large for shareware downloads,

This is true. If you don't have a high speed Internet connection it's a problem that probably
doesn't have a good solution right now. It was also a problem for Classic VB when the run time,
MDAC, Jet database components, etc. were not pre-installed in Windows as they are now, and high
speed Internet wasn't as common.

¤(3) anyone that wanted
¤ to could decompile our code, and

There are obfuscators available that will help protect your code or make it at least more difficult
to reproduce. That doesn't mean that someone who really wants it can't get it. It just means that
you have to make it so it isn't worth their time and effort.

¤ (4) the final application seemed very
¤ sluggish (slow) compared to a vb6 app"

Yes, .NET apps tend to be a bit slower than VB 6.0 apps in general. Same is true if you're comparing
VB 3.0 and 4.0, since COM components tended to have a bit more overhead than VBX components.

However, it helps to know exactly what it is that's slower to see if there is an alternative
solution to the performance issue.

¤
¤ Relating to the above 4 items: A small company selling software such as us
¤ is more interested in (1) code conversion speed (and possibility to convert),
¤ (2) small filesize so people will download and "try" it before they buy, (3)
¤ intellectual and piracy protection and (4) software that works AT LEAST as
¤ fast as the old release (definately not slower).
¤
¤ Relating to the above 4 items: Can't Microsoft:
¤
¤ (1) Provide better conversion or better abilities to wrap a vb6 project into
¤ a .net project (even if it's a $1,000 add-on, we would consider it), (2)
¤ enable coders to link framework components used to create an .exe that does
¤ not need the entire framework, (3) give us a way to protect out code so
¤ people can't decompile it, and (4) make our apps run AT LEAST as fast as VB6?
¤

Those are all good suggestions. I can't really speak for #1 because I'm not sure what that would
entail. Same for #2. I don't know what would be required to implement static linking. Not even
Classic VB supported this feature. You won't get a beef from me about #3, although Microsoft seems
to have left this up to third-party vendors as they often do.

I doubt that .NET desktop apps will ever be as fast as VB 6.0 apps in general. Newer hardware will
certainly help but as far as desktop apps are concerned .NET needs a little work with respect to
performance.

¤ We would even subscribe to MSDN membership and continue to pay for vb6
¤ upgrades if we knew Microsoft would support them through future operating
¤ systems.
¤
¤ Seems to us Microsoft put lots of great features and gizmos into the
¤ language (I actually like C# very much), which are very nice, but do not
¤ allow us to meet our objective. Kind of like having a Mercedes that has every
¤ feature in the world, but you can't drive it to where you want to go.
¤
¤ Has Microsoft forgotton (or are they no longer interested) in the software
¤ companies selling software?
¤
¤ Lots of posts in this topic - we still feel like we don't know what the heck
¤ to do next. It's scary -

The way I look at it is that sooner or later you have to move forward. It might take a lot of baby
steps. It might be painful. It might not even be to a Microsoft product. But if you don't move
forward the alternative is far worse.


Paul
~~~~
Microsoft MVP (Visual Basic)
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: VB6, VB2005, or Something Else?
    ... By the way, the preformance of Gosub in PCode was quite good, it ... ¤ ... I'm not complaining about the necessary changes, ... that Microsoft intentionally and unnecessarily made it more difficult. ...
    (microsoft.public.vb.general.discussion)
  • Re: Rolling the dice on vb6
    ... Stefan Berglund wrote: ... ¤ Yep, long gone. ... Let us say that Microsoft could write a real VB6 -> Fred ... MS could have had their business, could have had my business, and they ...
    (microsoft.public.vb.general.discussion)
  • Re: VB6, VB2005, or Something Else?
    ... It seems to me that you are a proponent for the .net framework, ... Relating to the above 4 items: A small company selling software such as us ... Relating to the above 4 items: Can't Microsoft: ... ¤>we are. ...
    (microsoft.public.vb.general.discussion)
  • Re: VB6, VB2005, or Something Else?
    ... ¤ Duh! ... Microsoft MVP ... GoSub is a bit dated - but no reason to kill it. ... possibly understand how a compiler or platform might work. ...
    (microsoft.public.vb.general.discussion)
  • Re: VB6, VB2005, or Something Else?
    ... Microsoft is the source of my pain. ... We were talking about GoSub, but porting the code requires a lot more than ... ¤> ¤ future. ...
    (microsoft.public.vb.general.discussion)
Loading