Re: VB 8 Standard and Professional
- From: "Saga" <antiSpam@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 10:27:44 -0500
I believe I saw the .NET versions laid out like this:
.Net 1.0 .Net 2002 VB7
.Net 1.1 .Net 2003 VB7.1
.Net 2 .Net 2005 VB8
.Net 3 Vista
.Net 3.5 .Net 2008 VB9
A complete list:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.NET_Framework_version_list
Saga
--
Soluciones Para Mejorar
www.reset.com.mx
"mayayana" <mayaXXyana1a@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:ORPCtJFhIHA.5280@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
The short answer is that VB is compiled Windows
software, while .Net, in all flavors, is basically Microsoft's
version of Java - running on a gigantic VM (somewhere
around 70-100 MB at this point) and designed primarily
for web-based and server-side tidbits.
The .Net language is different. .Net software is
JIT-compiled like Java, running on the VM "framework".
Where VB is COM-centric, .Net handles COM only
with difficulty. Even the controls in .Net have had
confusing changes to property and method names.
The similarity is that VB and VB.Net have a similar
syntax. Microsoft basically did what Sun did with Java
when they made it look like C++ in order to attract
C++ programmers.
MS started out with VB.Net v. 1, saying at the
time that VB would be gradually left behind. They
wanted Windows programmers to follow their lead
away from the Windows API and toward their fantasy
of "rich web applications" tied into Windows.
Then there was .Net v. 1.1. Then there was .Net v. 2.
Somewhere along the way MS slyly dropped the ".Net"
from "VB". Steve Ballmer said something half-baked at
the time as an excuse. They were dropping ".Net" because
"it's all .Net now anyway".
In any case, VB.Net was renamed to VB in order to
confuse and push VB out of the way. A second trick
involved also renaming the versions. Each version now has
3 version descriptions! I think these are right, but I'm not
certain:
.Net 1.1 .Net 2003 VB7
.Net 2 .Net 2005 VB8
.Net 3 .Net 2008 VB9
You should be aware that while .Net 3 is compatible
with Vista, what they neglected to tell you is that it's
ONLY compatible with XP SP2 and up. I read somewhere
that .Net 2008 actually has a .Net 2 mode, for writing
in .Net v. 2, since v. 3 is all but useless at this point.
So if you want to use Microsoft's Java, and be limited
to a "cross-platform programming system" that only runs
on Vista and XP, then you want to get .Net 3/2008/9.
... That should clear up the confusion. :)
This group is called VB-General so I do not really understand the
distinction. ( I assumed that Visual Studio 8 has VB.) It is very
difficult to find in-depth details about this 2008 software. My main
interest is that it is advertised by Microsoft as being compatible
with the Windows Vista OS ( " ... create great connected applications
on the latest platforms , including the Web, Windows Vista, the 2007
Office System, ...") Your statement that the 2008 software "with the
phrase Visual Basic or VB attached to it is a completely different
language", if true, should be shouted from the mountain tops !!! I
appreciate all the comments which have really inspired me to go after
Microsoft to get more info - which I guess is going to be a project
comparable to climbing Mt. Everest. But I shall try. And I shall
return.
.
- References:
- VB 8 Standard and Professional
- From: Alexm
- Re: VB 8 Standard and Professional
- From: Mike Williams
- Re: VB 8 Standard and Professional
- From: Alexm
- Re: VB 8 Standard and Professional
- From: Alexm
- Re: VB 8 Standard and Professional
- From: mayayana
- VB 8 Standard and Professional
- Prev by Date: Re: VB 8 Standard and Professional
- Next by Date: Re: VB 8 Standard and Professional
- Previous by thread: Re: VB 8 Standard and Professional
- Next by thread: Re: VB 8 Standard and Professional
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
