Re: Moving On

At the end of the day, it was probably too huge a shift in paradigm to
make the language easily upgradeable to the next generation of computer
languages.

If that were true most of us would be more understanding of the situation.
Unfortunately, it's not. It was, plain and simple, a long list of
decisions that were simply made wrong. They could have got it right, and
with very little extra effort.

They sincerely *thought* they were "doing good" by cleaning up the language.
They weren't cleaning it up because of conflicts with .Net, but because of
conflicts with their own background in other languages. The decision team
simply didn't have people who had used earlier MS Basic products to any real
level. So, the team making the change decisions didn't understand the
language to know the impact, nor did they understand ways of minimizing the
impact on existing users for the changes that did have to be made.

Again, until it hit the streets they thought they were making
*improvements*. Once it was out, they were very hard pressed to change
things back for political reasons. The developer team was upset at the
reaction and even (quoting) "had their feelings hurt". They went so far as
to change logical expression evaluation, for crying out loud. That got as
far as a Beta1 release (we did convince them to change that back).

It was not the shift in paradigm, but simple bonehead decisions and refusal
to fix it.

Here we are 5 or 6 years down the road. They "didn't have time" to fix it
then. It would have taken a year or so Had they done that they'd have had
most of the VB community onboard the .Net bandwagon for 4 or 5 years by now.

I wonder what that could have meant for them in the long term? That makes
it a serious enough issue that not only Ballmer should be interested... the
stockholders should be interested.

Dan



"Harry Strybos" <harry@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:pw5Sg.36332$rP1.18661@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"Robert Comer" <bobcomer-removeme-@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:%23$78xiN4GHA.4632@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
1. I have enjoyed immensely being part of this group.
2. VB has served me well and has provided a good living for me for
many years.
3. I am thankfull for the excellent support provided by the people in
this group

Same here. I'm usually just a lurker here as VB programming isn't my
main job, but I get a lot out of this group!

However...

1. I don't believe VB6/5 folks have been deserted by Microsoft

In some ways yes, but no upgrade path is a KILLER for those of us with
large codebases. I don't consider a forced rewrite as support. I've
been through numerous language upgrades on other platforms and none have
been this deficient in ability to upgrade.

2. If you want to continue with VBn, no problems, its still supported
in Vista

Only the runtime is supported. :(

At first, I hated VB.Net, and searched with vengance, anything that
would make .Fred look bad. Did Microsoft abondon VB users..hell yes...or
did they?

I don't care if it looks good or bad, it's just a language like VB is
just a language, I really don't have an overall preference when it comes
to such things, they all have their good points and bad points, but I do
care how much it's going to cost to implement something and will it
continue to work for a long time.

Stay with VBn...or move to Power Basic, Delphi...et al. Not much
commercial value in any of these, other than legacy support..

I'm staying with VB6 here for the existing codebase.

--
Bob Comer



"Harry Strybos" <harry@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:l2LRg.35625$rP1.35401@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Hi All

While I will be the target of some reactionary flamming, I would like to
make the following comments:

1. I have enjoyed immensely being part of this group.
2. VB has served me well and has provided a good living for me for
many years.
3. I am thankfull for the excellent support provided by the people in
this group

However...

1. I don't believe VB6/5 folks have been deserted by Microsoft
2. If you want to continue with VBn, no problems, its still supported
in Vista

At first, I hated VB.Net, and searched with vengance, anything that
would make .Fred look bad. Did Microsoft abondon VB users..hell yes...or
did they?

I hung onto every adverse comment made within this group as something
that would substantiate the crime Microsoft had committed. Jerry French
caused my fragile ego to feel condemmed even for abandoning V5. The much
hallowed Randy Birch (and he has made huge contributions to programmers
worldwide) even caused me to feel righteous at my indignation with
Microsoft.

Moving on...

Stay with VBn...or move to Power Basic, Delphi...et al. Not much
commercial value in any of these, other than legacy support..

VB.Net takes some work, a shift in your programming paradign to fully OO
concepts. VB.Net 2005 has some brilliant stuff. Just to get a connection
to a database is so easy... Binding is just native, classes are
everything you want. Microsoft has made an enormous effort to help
VBer's move on. Every single shortfall of VB classic has been addressed
and more.

Sorry for causing offence to some of you. The brilliance of programmers
I have mentioned above would be hugely enhanced by VB.Net. Randy, Jerry
and others, what about using your excellent skills to enhance the next
generation rather that lock people into a language that has become
static. I am not saying that you abandon VBn, just stop telling users of
this group that the world ends with VB classic. VB, as we used to know
it, is dead...that will not change. Your skills are enhanced with
VB.Net, provided you can let go of your predjudices. Lets all move on.

Cheers

Harry Strybos



Thanks guys for not being too unkind to me. Before I start, I am nobody
other that a developer. I started my work life as an Armament Technician
in the Australian Air Force and have been taught software development by
an amateur...me.

You're comments were all well received and were all worthy. I will
continue to show the utmost respect for the people in this group that have
provided valuable assistance to literally millions of VB programmers.

VB7 would have been an easy task for Microsoft. The information I have at
hand tells me that MS actually did all the design work. At the end of the
day, it was probably too huge a shift in paradigm to make the language
easily upgradeable to the next generation of computer languages. Just to
upgrade code from the much used "ComboBox" control is nearly impossible.

The VB.Net ComboBox deals with objects, rather than Name/Value pairs. Took
me a while to get a hold of that, but the new way is so powerful. I can
populate a combo box with a collection of business objects and set a local
variable of the same type to equal the selected item in the combo box.

I am an IT Manager (and Senior Developer) of an international cash flow
management company, and we have had to look at the future. Had it not been
for VBn, none of this would have happened for me. Having said that, VBn
does not cut it for the "convergence paradigm" we wish to subscribe to.

The comments made about VB.Net not being suitable for desktop applications
is in some way, correct, and does require some reasonably expensive
obfuscation software to protect you code investment. Having said that,
VB.Net does provide "one touch" delivery to your clients...much nicer than
issuing upgrades (and the associated dll hell).

I am not on the payroll of Microsoft, just a guy that leaned "heaps" from
you guys and enabled me to move on. You don't have to change to VB.Net.

Thanks heaps

Harry Strybos

p.s. I will still regularly visit this group and help where I can





.