VB Runtime supported in next Windows

Anonymous
5/18/2008 12:52:16 PM #

I doubt Greg DeMichillie speaks for Microsoft, and in any event Win7 is far from RTM at this date.

> It is time to upgrade your skills as a developer and also to migrate your application to greener grounds.

I find the notion of a move to VB.Net anything but "upgrading."   We're all tired of the sneers of hacks who imagine themselves superior because their thin skills saw no impact in making such a move.

Nobody expects and few would want VB6 forever.  What we do want is an updated follow-on that preserves our investment through evolutionary updating and that isn't subject to the vagaries of a thinly-veiled rehash of the JVM.

Anonymous
5/18/2008 12:52:16 PM #

I doubt Greg DeMichillie speaks for Microsoft, and in any event Win7 is far from RTM at this date.

> It is time to upgrade your skills as a developer and also to migrate your application to greener grounds.

I find the notion of a move to VB.Net anything but "upgrading."   We're all tired of the sneers of hacks who imagine themselves superior because their thin skills saw no impact in making such a move.

Nobody expects and few would want VB6 forever.  What we do want is an updated follow-on that preserves our investment through evolutionary updating and that isn't subject to the vagaries of a thinly-veiled rehash of the JVM.

Anonymous
5/18/2008 12:52:16 PM #

I doubt Greg DeMichillie speaks for Microsoft, and in any event Win7 is far from RTM at this date.

> It is time to upgrade your skills as a developer and also to migrate your application to greener grounds.

I find the notion of a move to VB.Net anything but "upgrading."   We're all tired of the sneers of hacks who imagine themselves superior because their thin skills saw no impact in making such a move.

Nobody expects and few would want VB6 forever.  What we do want is an updated follow-on that preserves our investment through evolutionary updating and that isn't subject to the vagaries of a thinly-veiled rehash of the JVM.

Anonymous
5/28/2008 9:56:38 AM #

Many companies have spent 100’s of thousands of dollars writing large VB programs. These programs have use a lot of WinAPI and many advanced VB programs use inline machine language and have lots of pointers. These types of apps cannot be migrated and must be rewritten. Even if money is no object this still takes many, many years. DotNet only recently is to the point where you can develop on it. Currently most of these VB6 programs work with Vista without any problem. Why does Microsoft try so hard to punish companies for writing Windows software? There is no reason why VB6 programs can’t work on Windows 7 unless Microsoft tries to deliberately break them. If Microsoft thinks Vista went bad and then tries to break all VB6 programs Windows 7 will get even worse reviews and even more people will switch to Mac.

Anonymous
5/28/2008 9:56:38 AM #

Many companies have spent 100’s of thousands of dollars writing large VB programs. These programs have use a lot of WinAPI and many advanced VB programs use inline machine language and have lots of pointers. These types of apps cannot be migrated and must be rewritten. Even if money is no object this still takes many, many years. DotNet only recently is to the point where you can develop on it. Currently most of these VB6 programs work with Vista without any problem. Why does Microsoft try so hard to punish companies for writing Windows software? There is no reason why VB6 programs can’t work on Windows 7 unless Microsoft tries to deliberately break them. If Microsoft thinks Vista went bad and then tries to break all VB6 programs Windows 7 will get even worse reviews and even more people will switch to Mac.

Anonymous
5/28/2008 9:56:38 AM #

Many companies have spent 100’s of thousands of dollars writing large VB programs. These programs have use a lot of WinAPI and many advanced VB programs use inline machine language and have lots of pointers. These types of apps cannot be migrated and must be rewritten. Even if money is no object this still takes many, many years. DotNet only recently is to the point where you can develop on it. Currently most of these VB6 programs work with Vista without any problem. Why does Microsoft try so hard to punish companies for writing Windows software? There is no reason why VB6 programs can’t work on Windows 7 unless Microsoft tries to deliberately break them. If Microsoft thinks Vista went bad and then tries to break all VB6 programs Windows 7 will get even worse reviews and even more people will switch to Mac.

Anonymous
5/28/2008 2:00:39 PM #

Wow, thanks for responding so quick! Just upset that I might not have time to convert apps to DotNet before the next version of windows. Hopefully VB6 runtime will still work on Windows 7 even if it's not supported (Windows Side by Side - works pretty well on Vista!) But in the meantime even as I still write in VB6 I'm converting as much code to C# as possible. Just hope it will be in time. BTW, the Wall Street Journal had video online today showing mult-touch screens for Windows 7. That will be nice as I've done tablet developement too. Cheers!

Anonymous
5/28/2008 2:00:39 PM #

Wow, thanks for responding so quick! Just upset that I might not have time to convert apps to DotNet before the next version of windows. Hopefully VB6 runtime will still work on Windows 7 even if it's not supported (Windows Side by Side - works pretty well on Vista!) But in the meantime even as I still write in VB6 I'm converting as much code to C# as possible. Just hope it will be in time. BTW, the Wall Street Journal had video online today showing mult-touch screens for Windows 7. That will be nice as I've done tablet developement too. Cheers!

Anonymous
5/28/2008 2:00:39 PM #

Wow, thanks for responding so quick! Just upset that I might not have time to convert apps to DotNet before the next version of windows. Hopefully VB6 runtime will still work on Windows 7 even if it's not supported (Windows Side by Side - works pretty well on Vista!) But in the meantime even as I still write in VB6 I'm converting as much code to C# as possible. Just hope it will be in time. BTW, the Wall Street Journal had video online today showing mult-touch screens for Windows 7. That will be nice as I've done tablet developement too. Cheers!

Anonymous
5/31/2008 4:17:32 AM #

I work in the UK supporting a c++ application that is COM automated within workflows - principly legal and accounting.

I can assure you that 'fresh' VB6 code is still being written in May 08 - I have twicesupported developers doing it this month. I would estimate a good third+ of developer contact is with VB6. When I ask them about the situation they reply, "there is no way we can rewrite our codebase - it would put us out of business"

... but the vb6 runtimes will run on Windows7 if installed, right?

Anonymous
5/31/2008 4:17:32 AM #

I work in the UK supporting a c++ application that is COM automated within workflows - principly legal and accounting.

I can assure you that 'fresh' VB6 code is still being written in May 08 - I have twicesupported developers doing it this month. I would estimate a good third+ of developer contact is with VB6. When I ask them about the situation they reply, "there is no way we can rewrite our codebase - it would put us out of business"

... but the vb6 runtimes will run on Windows7 if installed, right?

Anonymous
5/31/2008 4:17:32 AM #

I work in the UK supporting a c++ application that is COM automated within workflows - principly legal and accounting.

I can assure you that 'fresh' VB6 code is still being written in May 08 - I have twicesupported developers doing it this month. I would estimate a good third+ of developer contact is with VB6. When I ask them about the situation they reply, "there is no way we can rewrite our codebase - it would put us out of business"

... but the vb6 runtimes will run on Windows7 if installed, right?

Anonymous
6/2/2008 2:40:26 AM #

I fully agree with the anger expressed here about the failure of MS to forsee the impossible situation that many established businesses would be placed in by the abandonment of VB6.

Real businesses, real lives, real code, real money.

Anonymous
6/2/2008 2:40:26 AM #

I fully agree with the anger expressed here about the failure of MS to forsee the impossible situation that many established businesses would be placed in by the abandonment of VB6.

Real businesses, real lives, real code, real money.

Anonymous
6/2/2008 2:40:26 AM #

I fully agree with the anger expressed here about the failure of MS to forsee the impossible situation that many established businesses would be placed in by the abandonment of VB6.

Real businesses, real lives, real code, real money.

Anonymous
8/14/2008 2:53:12 PM #

Apparently VB6 development is still going strong in consumer/business market. Look at this, some company just released a very advanced VB6 app that they spent years developing. (http://www.omnicognic.com/">http://www.omnicognic.com/)

Anonymous
8/14/2008 2:53:12 PM #

Apparently VB6 development is still going strong in consumer/business market. Look at this, some company just released a very advanced VB6 app that they spent years developing. (http://www.omnicognic.com/">http://www.omnicognic.com/)

Anonymous
8/14/2008 2:53:12 PM #

Apparently VB6 development is still going strong in consumer/business market. Look at this, some company just released a very advanced VB6 app that they spent years developing. (http://www.omnicognic.com/">http://www.omnicognic.com/)

Anonymous
9/5/2008 5:03:44 AM #

I really hope Windows 7 loses the UAC and supports vb6 applications. There are millions of lines of vb6 code out there and Vista was such a dud. Windows 7 is supposed to be an upgrade to Vista not a new release of an OS. I still develop in vb 6 and support programs written in 2003 that are in vb6. VB net is a completely new language, it's not vb. You cannot easily change a vb6 program to .net. Good luck Microsoft but I think your new ad with Seinfeld is awful and so is Vista.

Anonymous
9/5/2008 5:03:44 AM #

I really hope Windows 7 loses the UAC and supports vb6 applications. There are millions of lines of vb6 code out there and Vista was such a dud. Windows 7 is supposed to be an upgrade to Vista not a new release of an OS. I still develop in vb 6 and support programs written in 2003 that are in vb6. VB net is a completely new language, it's not vb. You cannot easily change a vb6 program to .net. Good luck Microsoft but I think your new ad with Seinfeld is awful and so is Vista.

Anonymous
9/5/2008 5:03:44 AM #

I really hope Windows 7 loses the UAC and supports vb6 applications. There are millions of lines of vb6 code out there and Vista was such a dud. Windows 7 is supposed to be an upgrade to Vista not a new release of an OS. I still develop in vb 6 and support programs written in 2003 that are in vb6. VB net is a completely new language, it's not vb. You cannot easily change a vb6 program to .net. Good luck Microsoft but I think your new ad with Seinfeld is awful and so is Vista.

Anonymous
9/19/2008 11:12:48 AM #

Still using and supporting VB6. Many clients simply cannot support heavy dotnet stuff. And it added little new that we actually needed! I agree only 2.0 onwards is fit for purpose.

Microsoft should look at the developement of php, and how the pragmatic needs of its developers were incrementally met - pdf, zip, geolocation, etc etc all plugging into a SIMPLE core language. asp.net just clogs everything up. Who NEEDs 6 load events?

If Windows 7 snuffs VB6 (I don't imagine it will), it will mark yet another mistake by Microsoft. I think they have learnt though.

Anonymous
9/19/2008 11:12:48 AM #

Still using and supporting VB6. Many clients simply cannot support heavy dotnet stuff. And it added little new that we actually needed! I agree only 2.0 onwards is fit for purpose.

Microsoft should look at the developement of php, and how the pragmatic needs of its developers were incrementally met - pdf, zip, geolocation, etc etc all plugging into a SIMPLE core language. asp.net just clogs everything up. Who NEEDs 6 load events?

If Windows 7 snuffs VB6 (I don't imagine it will), it will mark yet another mistake by Microsoft. I think they have learnt though.

Anonymous
9/19/2008 11:12:48 AM #

Still using and supporting VB6. Many clients simply cannot support heavy dotnet stuff. And it added little new that we actually needed! I agree only 2.0 onwards is fit for purpose.

Microsoft should look at the developement of php, and how the pragmatic needs of its developers were incrementally met - pdf, zip, geolocation, etc etc all plugging into a SIMPLE core language. asp.net just clogs everything up. Who NEEDs 6 load events?

If Windows 7 snuffs VB6 (I don't imagine it will), it will mark yet another mistake by Microsoft. I think they have learnt though.

Anonymous
10/18/2008 6:39:11 AM #

I was a huge VB6 fan, and still am.  I wrote some .Net 1.1 stuff.. but really waited until VS2005 and the .Net Framework 2.0 to move.  Once I embraced the move, I love it.  It's so much more powerful.  That's not to say there isn't a special place in my heart for VB6 and it's not to say that I don't still have some custom programs I wrote for myself in it that I still use (on Vista).  I would support VB6 personally just because of the back log of software from it.  The 1 thing that really differitiates Windows still is that there is far more software available for it than other platforms.  This is one of the huge selling points and if I were Microsoft I would be doing everything to keep that selling point.  

Anonymous
10/18/2008 6:39:11 AM #

I was a huge VB6 fan, and still am.  I wrote some .Net 1.1 stuff.. but really waited until VS2005 and the .Net Framework 2.0 to move.  Once I embraced the move, I love it.  It's so much more powerful.  That's not to say there isn't a special place in my heart for VB6 and it's not to say that I don't still have some custom programs I wrote for myself in it that I still use (on Vista).  I would support VB6 personally just because of the back log of software from it.  The 1 thing that really differitiates Windows still is that there is far more software available for it than other platforms.  This is one of the huge selling points and if I were Microsoft I would be doing everything to keep that selling point.  

Anonymous
10/18/2008 6:39:11 AM #

I was a huge VB6 fan, and still am.  I wrote some .Net 1.1 stuff.. but really waited until VS2005 and the .Net Framework 2.0 to move.  Once I embraced the move, I love it.  It's so much more powerful.  That's not to say there isn't a special place in my heart for VB6 and it's not to say that I don't still have some custom programs I wrote for myself in it that I still use (on Vista).  I would support VB6 personally just because of the back log of software from it.  The 1 thing that really differitiates Windows still is that there is far more software available for it than other platforms.  This is one of the huge selling points and if I were Microsoft I would be doing everything to keep that selling point.  

Anonymous
10/30/2008 9:37:47 AM #

MMhh.. you people should take a closer look at the VB6 compiler. Its just a C++ compiler.

Infact VB6 is just made in C++.

If your using functions and API calls in VB and compile your project to EXE, it just using the C compiler.

If you look a lil better at VB6 you see windows and VB6 go hand in hand.

I doubt they just can simple get rid of VB6. To much stuff depends on it.

And to all those people who just ''tell and tell bad stories about VB6''

As far as all the doom scenarios i read about VB6 it still works on ALL windows versions, and prolly will for the Next 10 years.

Microsoft doing a great job. And doing it proffesional enough if you ask me. keep up the good work Microsoft. Microsoft are the Real people who may Speak about something that might changes in Windows.

Your doom Scenarios keep them for yourself.

Anonymous
10/30/2008 9:37:47 AM #

MMhh.. you people should take a closer look at the VB6 compiler. Its just a C++ compiler.

Infact VB6 is just made in C++.

If your using functions and API calls in VB and compile your project to EXE, it just using the C compiler.

If you look a lil better at VB6 you see windows and VB6 go hand in hand.

I doubt they just can simple get rid of VB6. To much stuff depends on it.

And to all those people who just ''tell and tell bad stories about VB6''

As far as all the doom scenarios i read about VB6 it still works on ALL windows versions, and prolly will for the Next 10 years.

Microsoft doing a great job. And doing it proffesional enough if you ask me. keep up the good work Microsoft. Microsoft are the Real people who may Speak about something that might changes in Windows.

Your doom Scenarios keep them for yourself.

Anonymous
10/30/2008 9:37:47 AM #

MMhh.. you people should take a closer look at the VB6 compiler. Its just a C++ compiler.

Infact VB6 is just made in C++.

If your using functions and API calls in VB and compile your project to EXE, it just using the C compiler.

If you look a lil better at VB6 you see windows and VB6 go hand in hand.

I doubt they just can simple get rid of VB6. To much stuff depends on it.

And to all those people who just ''tell and tell bad stories about VB6''

As far as all the doom scenarios i read about VB6 it still works on ALL windows versions, and prolly will for the Next 10 years.

Microsoft doing a great job. And doing it proffesional enough if you ask me. keep up the good work Microsoft. Microsoft are the Real people who may Speak about something that might changes in Windows.

Your doom Scenarios keep them for yourself.

Anonymous
10/31/2008 8:12:59 AM #

When vb6 will stop to work I'll quit windows programing. xdxdxd

Anonymous
10/31/2008 8:12:59 AM #

When vb6 will stop to work I'll quit windows programing. xdxdxd

Anonymous
10/31/2008 8:12:59 AM #

When vb6 will stop to work I'll quit windows programing. xdxdxd

Anonymous
12/18/2008 4:03:37 AM #

I'm developing in .NET for some years now. In the past i have written several VB6 applications. These applications use a lot of third party controls, due to this they have never worked on Vista.

Development on these applications has stopped, they will NEVER migrate, due to these third party controls. It's easy to ask people to migrate, another thing to actually do it, nomatter what you say. I think VB6 must be supported for many more years to come. Because the software refuses to run Windows Vista, none of my users have moved to windows vista, they will not for many years to come and if windows 7 does not support VB6 either, than they won't move to Windows 7 either.  They will use XP until it actually drops dead and than what?

A way to circumvent the problem is to use a virtual machine, but these are really slow for heavy duty VB6 applications. So that's no solution. Like somebody above said, cobol has been arround for +30 years and it still works, why should VB6 applications stop working after 10 years??? It sound like a terrible excuse from the side of microsoft. The biggest software company in the world can not support a programming language for more than 10 years??? that's just weak.

Anonymous
12/18/2008 4:03:37 AM #

I'm developing in .NET for some years now. In the past i have written several VB6 applications. These applications use a lot of third party controls, due to this they have never worked on Vista.

Development on these applications has stopped, they will NEVER migrate, due to these third party controls. It's easy to ask people to migrate, another thing to actually do it, nomatter what you say. I think VB6 must be supported for many more years to come. Because the software refuses to run Windows Vista, none of my users have moved to windows vista, they will not for many years to come and if windows 7 does not support VB6 either, than they won't move to Windows 7 either.  They will use XP until it actually drops dead and than what?

A way to circumvent the problem is to use a virtual machine, but these are really slow for heavy duty VB6 applications. So that's no solution. Like somebody above said, cobol has been arround for +30 years and it still works, why should VB6 applications stop working after 10 years??? It sound like a terrible excuse from the side of microsoft. The biggest software company in the world can not support a programming language for more than 10 years??? that's just weak.

Anonymous
12/18/2008 4:03:37 AM #

I'm developing in .NET for some years now. In the past i have written several VB6 applications. These applications use a lot of third party controls, due to this they have never worked on Vista.

Development on these applications has stopped, they will NEVER migrate, due to these third party controls. It's easy to ask people to migrate, another thing to actually do it, nomatter what you say. I think VB6 must be supported for many more years to come. Because the software refuses to run Windows Vista, none of my users have moved to windows vista, they will not for many years to come and if windows 7 does not support VB6 either, than they won't move to Windows 7 either.  They will use XP until it actually drops dead and than what?

A way to circumvent the problem is to use a virtual machine, but these are really slow for heavy duty VB6 applications. So that's no solution. Like somebody above said, cobol has been arround for +30 years and it still works, why should VB6 applications stop working after 10 years??? It sound like a terrible excuse from the side of microsoft. The biggest software company in the world can not support a programming language for more than 10 years??? that's just weak.

Anonymous
12/29/2008 12:38:30 PM #

Microsoft confirmed to me that Vb6 run times will be included and fully supported in Windows 7. Although I don't know for certain it seems to me that use of Interop and VBA are dependent on these run times. What an insult to developers if Interop and/or support for vb6 run times are withdrawn; another rug pulled from underneath developers by Microsoft for what purpose?  It would be an interesting world if non Microsoft languages turned out to be more compatible with the various versions of Microsoft's O/S than languages from Microsoft.

Anonymous
12/29/2008 12:38:30 PM #

Microsoft confirmed to me that Vb6 run times will be included and fully supported in Windows 7. Although I don't know for certain it seems to me that use of Interop and VBA are dependent on these run times. What an insult to developers if Interop and/or support for vb6 run times are withdrawn; another rug pulled from underneath developers by Microsoft for what purpose?  It would be an interesting world if non Microsoft languages turned out to be more compatible with the various versions of Microsoft's O/S than languages from Microsoft.

Anonymous
12/29/2008 12:38:30 PM #

Microsoft confirmed to me that Vb6 run times will be included and fully supported in Windows 7. Although I don't know for certain it seems to me that use of Interop and VBA are dependent on these run times. What an insult to developers if Interop and/or support for vb6 run times are withdrawn; another rug pulled from underneath developers by Microsoft for what purpose?  It would be an interesting world if non Microsoft languages turned out to be more compatible with the various versions of Microsoft's O/S than languages from Microsoft.

Anonymous
1/13/2009 5:03:29 AM #

The title of this page i wrong.

Windows 7 supports the VB6 runtime files (!).

In the past I was developed my programs on the VB6, today I'm developing on the .NET platform. But.. many of my .NET applications are using OCXs and DLLs which built with VB6 (most of those components are just using the API of windows). I'm talking about many components (more then 100). So it will take me a looong time to convert them to a different language...

And I've not started to talk about all the other environments around (delphi, java, .net and even c/c++) that use the OCXs and DLLs which built on VB6. I think it will be a big mistake of MS if they will not support VB6 Runtime.

Anyway, Windows 7 supports the VB6 Runtime

Anonymous
1/13/2009 5:03:29 AM #

The title of this page i wrong.

Windows 7 supports the VB6 runtime files (!).

In the past I was developed my programs on the VB6, today I'm developing on the .NET platform. But.. many of my .NET applications are using OCXs and DLLs which built with VB6 (most of those components are just using the API of windows). I'm talking about many components (more then 100). So it will take me a looong time to convert them to a different language...

And I've not started to talk about all the other environments around (delphi, java, .net and even c/c++) that use the OCXs and DLLs which built on VB6. I think it will be a big mistake of MS if they will not support VB6 Runtime.

Anyway, Windows 7 supports the VB6 Runtime

Anonymous
1/13/2009 5:03:29 AM #

The title of this page i wrong.

Windows 7 supports the VB6 runtime files (!).

In the past I was developed my programs on the VB6, today I'm developing on the .NET platform. But.. many of my .NET applications are using OCXs and DLLs which built with VB6 (most of those components are just using the API of windows). I'm talking about many components (more then 100). So it will take me a looong time to convert them to a different language...

And I've not started to talk about all the other environments around (delphi, java, .net and even c/c++) that use the OCXs and DLLs which built on VB6. I think it will be a big mistake of MS if they will not support VB6 Runtime.

Anyway, Windows 7 supports the VB6 Runtime

Anonymous
1/13/2009 8:13:03 AM #

During the months since this blog post has been written there has been a change in positions from Microsoft.

The VB team at Microsoft confirmed that the VB6 runtime will be supported in Windows 7.  I guess they heard your screams loud and clear!

This does not change the fact that the developer environment is no longer officially supported and that I believe you should have a migration plan in place.

Anonymous
1/13/2009 8:13:03 AM #

During the months since this blog post has been written there has been a change in positions from Microsoft.

The VB team at Microsoft confirmed that the VB6 runtime will be supported in Windows 7.  I guess they heard your screams loud and clear!

This does not change the fact that the developer environment is no longer officially supported and that I believe you should have a migration plan in place.

Anonymous
1/13/2009 8:13:03 AM #

During the months since this blog post has been written there has been a change in positions from Microsoft.

The VB team at Microsoft confirmed that the VB6 runtime will be supported in Windows 7.  I guess they heard your screams loud and clear!

This does not change the fact that the developer environment is no longer officially supported and that I believe you should have a migration plan in place.

Anonymous
1/13/2009 10:37:26 AM #

Federico, can you point me to some official link or statement from microsoft about the vb6 runtime being supported in windows 7?  I've been googling for evidence of this all morning with no success.  Our company is right in the middle of strategic decisions about support for some of our legacy vb6 applications and of course this would be quite relevant for us.

Thanks!

Anonymous
1/13/2009 10:37:26 AM #

Federico, can you point me to some official link or statement from microsoft about the vb6 runtime being supported in windows 7?  I've been googling for evidence of this all morning with no success.  Our company is right in the middle of strategic decisions about support for some of our legacy vb6 applications and of course this would be quite relevant for us.

Thanks!

Anonymous
1/13/2009 10:37:26 AM #

Federico, can you point me to some official link or statement from microsoft about the vb6 runtime being supported in windows 7?  I've been googling for evidence of this all morning with no success.  Our company is right in the middle of strategic decisions about support for some of our legacy vb6 applications and of course this would be quite relevant for us.

Thanks!

Anonymous
1/15/2009 6:54:44 AM #

Thanks for following up!  I'll see if I can contact Paul directly.  Thanks for the offer to chat, but we've got a pretty good handle on our migration strategies for our legacy apps - we've got a large portfolio of products for our customers to migrate to.  The big question is just nailing down timing for the laggards who won't want to move until they're really forced to...

Anonymous
1/15/2009 6:54:44 AM #

Thanks for following up!  I'll see if I can contact Paul directly.  Thanks for the offer to chat, but we've got a pretty good handle on our migration strategies for our legacy apps - we've got a large portfolio of products for our customers to migrate to.  The big question is just nailing down timing for the laggards who won't want to move until they're really forced to...

Anonymous
1/15/2009 6:54:44 AM #

Thanks for following up!  I'll see if I can contact Paul directly.  Thanks for the offer to chat, but we've got a pretty good handle on our migration strategies for our legacy apps - we've got a large portfolio of products for our customers to migrate to.  The big question is just nailing down timing for the laggards who won't want to move until they're really forced to...

Anonymous
1/23/2009 9:18:57 AM #

Just wanted to follow up with a thanks for directing me to Paul.  He provided us with a statement that was official enough for our purposes, and said he is working on getting the official VB6 support statement to include ' and Windows 7' statements at the appropriate spots.

Cheers,

Anonymous
1/23/2009 9:18:57 AM #

Just wanted to follow up with a thanks for directing me to Paul.  He provided us with a statement that was official enough for our purposes, and said he is working on getting the official VB6 support statement to include ' and Windows 7' statements at the appropriate spots.

Cheers,

Anonymous
1/23/2009 9:18:57 AM #

Just wanted to follow up with a thanks for directing me to Paul.  He provided us with a statement that was official enough for our purposes, and said he is working on getting the official VB6 support statement to include ' and Windows 7' statements at the appropriate spots.

Cheers,

Anonymous
2/3/2009 11:30:17 AM #

Just my 2cents....

I program industrial machines where their native application is an addin to VB6... I will be programming in VB6 for a very long time. The app is no longer supported but has turned out to be so robust that no one wants to upgrade to newer versions.

I also do quick custom apps for industrial customers using VB6.

My biggest PRO for VB6 is that I can compile the program to a single file executable and email to the customer. They simply copy it to where they want to run it.  They do not have to install any .net framework, no extra baggage... very clean.

Anonymous
2/3/2009 11:30:17 AM #

Just my 2cents....

I program industrial machines where their native application is an addin to VB6... I will be programming in VB6 for a very long time. The app is no longer supported but has turned out to be so robust that no one wants to upgrade to newer versions.

I also do quick custom apps for industrial customers using VB6.

My biggest PRO for VB6 is that I can compile the program to a single file executable and email to the customer. They simply copy it to where they want to run it.  They do not have to install any .net framework, no extra baggage... very clean.

Anonymous
2/3/2009 11:30:17 AM #

Just my 2cents....

I program industrial machines where their native application is an addin to VB6... I will be programming in VB6 for a very long time. The app is no longer supported but has turned out to be so robust that no one wants to upgrade to newer versions.

I also do quick custom apps for industrial customers using VB6.

My biggest PRO for VB6 is that I can compile the program to a single file executable and email to the customer. They simply copy it to where they want to run it.  They do not have to install any .net framework, no extra baggage... very clean.

Anonymous
2/18/2009 10:32:47 PM #

JJ is correct. the dotnet runtimes are simply NOT PRESENT on many PCs for a dozen reasons - I have heard them all - which means that distributors of apps use c++. Ironically, VB6 is where Java never got to. It was madness to throw it away. Dotnet's insistance on strict OOP just wrecked our development productivity and raised costs all round while making distribution much more painful.

Anonymous
2/18/2009 10:32:47 PM #

JJ is correct. the dotnet runtimes are simply NOT PRESENT on many PCs for a dozen reasons - I have heard them all - which means that distributors of apps use c++. Ironically, VB6 is where Java never got to. It was madness to throw it away. Dotnet's insistance on strict OOP just wrecked our development productivity and raised costs all round while making distribution much more painful.

Anonymous
2/18/2009 10:32:47 PM #

JJ is correct. the dotnet runtimes are simply NOT PRESENT on many PCs for a dozen reasons - I have heard them all - which means that distributors of apps use c++. Ironically, VB6 is where Java never got to. It was madness to throw it away. Dotnet's insistance on strict OOP just wrecked our development productivity and raised costs all round while making distribution much more painful.

Anonymous
3/4/2009 12:53:46 PM #

Lots of confusion apparent here, regarding the future support of the VB6 runtime.  Why take it from a guy who's trying to sell you something?  Here's the official Microsoft position:

msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/vbrun/ms788708.aspx">msdn.microsoft.com/.../ms788708.aspx

As of today, it says:

 "VB6 runtime will ship and will be supported in Windows 7 for the lifetime of the OS.  Developers can think of the support story for Vista being the same as it is for Windows 7.  However there are no plans to include VB6 runtime in future versions of Windows beyond Windows 7."

As for you, Fzoufaly, your condescension speaks volumes.  I'm not sure why you feel talking down to people is a way to encourage them to buy your products.  You say you don't think Microsoft wants to break VB apps, and yet a number of years back you said that's exactly what they told you they were doing.  You're not so old you forget that, are you?

  First, “we are breaking backward compatibility in VB.”

  And second, “we need a good upgrade story.”

  http://www.devx.com/vb/Article/16822">www.devx.com/.../16822

I don't think I trust you anymore than I trust Microsoft.  Why should I?  Clearly, you are an enabler, an accomplice if you will, to the crime.

Anonymous
3/4/2009 12:53:46 PM #

Lots of confusion apparent here, regarding the future support of the VB6 runtime.  Why take it from a guy who's trying to sell you something?  Here's the official Microsoft position:

msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/vbrun/ms788708.aspx">msdn.microsoft.com/.../ms788708.aspx

As of today, it says:

 "VB6 runtime will ship and will be supported in Windows 7 for the lifetime of the OS.  Developers can think of the support story for Vista being the same as it is for Windows 7.  However there are no plans to include VB6 runtime in future versions of Windows beyond Windows 7."

As for you, Fzoufaly, your condescension speaks volumes.  I'm not sure why you feel talking down to people is a way to encourage them to buy your products.  You say you don't think Microsoft wants to break VB apps, and yet a number of years back you said that's exactly what they told you they were doing.  You're not so old you forget that, are you?

  First, “we are breaking backward compatibility in VB.”

  And second, “we need a good upgrade story.”

  http://www.devx.com/vb/Article/16822">www.devx.com/.../16822

I don't think I trust you anymore than I trust Microsoft.  Why should I?  Clearly, you are an enabler, an accomplice if you will, to the crime.

Anonymous
3/4/2009 12:53:46 PM #

Lots of confusion apparent here, regarding the future support of the VB6 runtime.  Why take it from a guy who's trying to sell you something?  Here's the official Microsoft position:

msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/vbrun/ms788708.aspx">msdn.microsoft.com/.../ms788708.aspx

As of today, it says:

 "VB6 runtime will ship and will be supported in Windows 7 for the lifetime of the OS.  Developers can think of the support story for Vista being the same as it is for Windows 7.  However there are no plans to include VB6 runtime in future versions of Windows beyond Windows 7."

As for you, Fzoufaly, your condescension speaks volumes.  I'm not sure why you feel talking down to people is a way to encourage them to buy your products.  You say you don't think Microsoft wants to break VB apps, and yet a number of years back you said that's exactly what they told you they were doing.  You're not so old you forget that, are you?

  First, “we are breaking backward compatibility in VB.”

  And second, “we need a good upgrade story.”

  http://www.devx.com/vb/Article/16822">www.devx.com/.../16822

I don't think I trust you anymore than I trust Microsoft.  Why should I?  Clearly, you are an enabler, an accomplice if you will, to the crime.

Anonymous
3/4/2009 2:03:51 PM #

Kark?  Well, I tell ya, Zouflalffle, I don't "dislike" .NET so much, not at all.  Rather, the .NET transition that you helped create "a good story" for was one where betrayal was the keyword.  As others in the thread have pointed out, Microsoft abandoned all pretense of trying to maintain forward compatibility just as soon as they realized it wouldn't be 100%.  This is how they treated their six million customers.  Instead, they chose to have full compatibility with a language that, to date, had customer base of exactly *zero*.

It's the very definition of insanity to Trust Microsoft with your intellectual assets, as they've proven wholly unsuitable for such trust, willing to destroy customer data without the slightest hesitation if it serves their own marketing purposes.  (Which, as you make no effort to hide, you also promote.)  There's nothing at all wrong with evolving an app.  There's everything wrong with rewriting it on someone else's schedule.

I worked with Lori, and knew her fairly well.  She had no axe to grind.  I'm not sure she cared one way or the other about Microsoft directions, as long as the magazine and/or website got out on time.  For you to imply bad will on her part as you do, is less than dignified.

Finally, I realized you were aware of Microsoft's position regarding continued support for the VB6 runtime, but I noted that you made no real effort to correct the misleading headline here.  It came to my attention via a newspost (originated in India) just today.  It's important to have the link to Microsoft's actual support statement alongside such blatant propoganda.  (And yeah, I feel more than a little icky having to hold up a Microsoft statement to refute Microsoft cheerleader propadogma!)

On an only semi-related note, I see you recently added Tom Button to the staff.  Vis your google observation, here's one of his:

  "Ours is an evolutionary approach, not a revolutionary approach that suddenly makes old software obsolete. We’re committed to making it as easy as possible to adapt current software, without losing anything in the process."

Too bad he didn't live up to that ideal, while he had a chance.  Is he now with Artinsoft as an act of contrition?

Anonymous
3/4/2009 2:03:51 PM #

Kark?  Well, I tell ya, Zouflalffle, I don't "dislike" .NET so much, not at all.  Rather, the .NET transition that you helped create "a good story" for was one where betrayal was the keyword.  As others in the thread have pointed out, Microsoft abandoned all pretense of trying to maintain forward compatibility just as soon as they realized it wouldn't be 100%.  This is how they treated their six million customers.  Instead, they chose to have full compatibility with a language that, to date, had customer base of exactly *zero*.

It's the very definition of insanity to Trust Microsoft with your intellectual assets, as they've proven wholly unsuitable for such trust, willing to destroy customer data without the slightest hesitation if it serves their own marketing purposes.  (Which, as you make no effort to hide, you also promote.)  There's nothing at all wrong with evolving an app.  There's everything wrong with rewriting it on someone else's schedule.

I worked with Lori, and knew her fairly well.  She had no axe to grind.  I'm not sure she cared one way or the other about Microsoft directions, as long as the magazine and/or website got out on time.  For you to imply bad will on her part as you do, is less than dignified.

Finally, I realized you were aware of Microsoft's position regarding continued support for the VB6 runtime, but I noted that you made no real effort to correct the misleading headline here.  It came to my attention via a newspost (originated in India) just today.  It's important to have the link to Microsoft's actual support statement alongside such blatant propoganda.  (And yeah, I feel more than a little icky having to hold up a Microsoft statement to refute Microsoft cheerleader propadogma!)

On an only semi-related note, I see you recently added Tom Button to the staff.  Vis your google observation, here's one of his:

  "Ours is an evolutionary approach, not a revolutionary approach that suddenly makes old software obsolete. We’re committed to making it as easy as possible to adapt current software, without losing anything in the process."

Too bad he didn't live up to that ideal, while he had a chance.  Is he now with Artinsoft as an act of contrition?

Anonymous
3/4/2009 2:03:51 PM #

Kark?  Well, I tell ya, Zouflalffle, I don't "dislike" .NET so much, not at all.  Rather, the .NET transition that you helped create "a good story" for was one where betrayal was the keyword.  As others in the thread have pointed out, Microsoft abandoned all pretense of trying to maintain forward compatibility just as soon as they realized it wouldn't be 100%.  This is how they treated their six million customers.  Instead, they chose to have full compatibility with a language that, to date, had customer base of exactly *zero*.

It's the very definition of insanity to Trust Microsoft with your intellectual assets, as they've proven wholly unsuitable for such trust, willing to destroy customer data without the slightest hesitation if it serves their own marketing purposes.  (Which, as you make no effort to hide, you also promote.)  There's nothing at all wrong with evolving an app.  There's everything wrong with rewriting it on someone else's schedule.

I worked with Lori, and knew her fairly well.  She had no axe to grind.  I'm not sure she cared one way or the other about Microsoft directions, as long as the magazine and/or website got out on time.  For you to imply bad will on her part as you do, is less than dignified.

Finally, I realized you were aware of Microsoft's position regarding continued support for the VB6 runtime, but I noted that you made no real effort to correct the misleading headline here.  It came to my attention via a newspost (originated in India) just today.  It's important to have the link to Microsoft's actual support statement alongside such blatant propoganda.  (And yeah, I feel more than a little icky having to hold up a Microsoft statement to refute Microsoft cheerleader propadogma!)

On an only semi-related note, I see you recently added Tom Button to the staff.  Vis your google observation, here's one of his:

  "Ours is an evolutionary approach, not a revolutionary approach that suddenly makes old software obsolete. We’re committed to making it as easy as possible to adapt current software, without losing anything in the process."

Too bad he didn't live up to that ideal, while he had a chance.  Is he now with Artinsoft as an act of contrition?

Anonymous
3/4/2009 5:10:27 PM #

Wow.  Amazing to watch the responses here.

> Well, I tell ya, Zouflalffle

Is that a "I'll see your typo and retort with name calling"  ?

> Lots of confusion apparent here, regarding the future support of the VB6 runtime.  

> Why take it from a guy who's trying to sell you something?

Hmm, strange.... when I read the comments made since April 2008, I see clear posts about the support for VB6.  And looking at the blog posts, there is even a newer one saying so.  

Maybe there should be a did you breathe before replying checkbox ;)

>

>On an only semi-related note, I see you recently added

> Tom Button to the staff.  Vis your google observation, here's one of his:

>

>  "Ours is an evolutionary approach, not a revolutionary approach that

> suddenly makes old software obsolete. We’re committed to making it as

> easy as possible to adapt current software, without losing anything in the process."

>

> Too bad he didn't live up to that ideal, while he had a chance.  

> Is he now with Artinsoft as an act of contrition?

That has got to be the biggest attempt at posting out of context *EVER*.  Tom Button supposedly said those things around 1992, and if we believe what Karl otherwise says about VB5 and VB6, Tom clearly did live up to that ideal.

Was there really any need for him quoting him out of context and making it a personal attack ?  Seems if anything he is in fact making a statement that maybe the truth is out there, but that won't stop him misquoting and resorting to personal attacks.

Here's yet another example:

groups.google.com/.../532424193861c3b7">groups.google.com/.../532424193861c3b7

In a conversation about events in VB6, Karl seemed so outraged that people talk openly and honestly about their limitations, he thought it appropriate to attack over the latest bushfires in Australia, where over 200 people lost their lives.... "out of context" ... you betya... "lost the plot"... absolutely.

Anonymous
3/4/2009 5:10:27 PM #

Wow.  Amazing to watch the responses here.

> Well, I tell ya, Zouflalffle

Is that a "I'll see your typo and retort with name calling"  ?

> Lots of confusion apparent here, regarding the future support of the VB6 runtime.  

> Why take it from a guy who's trying to sell you something?

Hmm, strange.... when I read the comments made since April 2008, I see clear posts about the support for VB6.  And looking at the blog posts, there is even a newer one saying so.  

Maybe there should be a did you breathe before replying checkbox ;)

>

>On an only semi-related note, I see you recently added

> Tom Button to the staff.  Vis your google observation, here's one of his:

>

>  "Ours is an evolutionary approach, not a revolutionary approach that

> suddenly makes old software obsolete. We’re committed to making it as

> easy as possible to adapt current software, without losing anything in the process."

>

> Too bad he didn't live up to that ideal, while he had a chance.  

> Is he now with Artinsoft as an act of contrition?

That has got to be the biggest attempt at posting out of context *EVER*.  Tom Button supposedly said those things around 1992, and if we believe what Karl otherwise says about VB5 and VB6, Tom clearly did live up to that ideal.

Was there really any need for him quoting him out of context and making it a personal attack ?  Seems if anything he is in fact making a statement that maybe the truth is out there, but that won't stop him misquoting and resorting to personal attacks.

Here's yet another example:

groups.google.com/.../532424193861c3b7">groups.google.com/.../532424193861c3b7

In a conversation about events in VB6, Karl seemed so outraged that people talk openly and honestly about their limitations, he thought it appropriate to attack over the latest bushfires in Australia, where over 200 people lost their lives.... "out of context" ... you betya... "lost the plot"... absolutely.

Anonymous
3/4/2009 5:10:27 PM #

Wow.  Amazing to watch the responses here.

> Well, I tell ya, Zouflalffle

Is that a "I'll see your typo and retort with name calling"  ?

> Lots of confusion apparent here, regarding the future support of the VB6 runtime.  

> Why take it from a guy who's trying to sell you something?

Hmm, strange.... when I read the comments made since April 2008, I see clear posts about the support for VB6.  And looking at the blog posts, there is even a newer one saying so.  

Maybe there should be a did you breathe before replying checkbox ;)

>

>On an only semi-related note, I see you recently added

> Tom Button to the staff.  Vis your google observation, here's one of his:

>

>  "Ours is an evolutionary approach, not a revolutionary approach that

> suddenly makes old software obsolete. We’re committed to making it as

> easy as possible to adapt current software, without losing anything in the process."

>

> Too bad he didn't live up to that ideal, while he had a chance.  

> Is he now with Artinsoft as an act of contrition?

That has got to be the biggest attempt at posting out of context *EVER*.  Tom Button supposedly said those things around 1992, and if we believe what Karl otherwise says about VB5 and VB6, Tom clearly did live up to that ideal.

Was there really any need for him quoting him out of context and making it a personal attack ?  Seems if anything he is in fact making a statement that maybe the truth is out there, but that won't stop him misquoting and resorting to personal attacks.

Here's yet another example:

groups.google.com/.../532424193861c3b7">groups.google.com/.../532424193861c3b7

In a conversation about events in VB6, Karl seemed so outraged that people talk openly and honestly about their limitations, he thought it appropriate to attack over the latest bushfires in Australia, where over 200 people lost their lives.... "out of context" ... you betya... "lost the plot"... absolutely.

Anonymous
3/4/2009 9:53:44 PM #

"But why do you seem to dislike .NET?  Why should it be bad for people to evolve their apps?"

It's not about .NET, it's about the trashing by Microsoft of classic Visual Basic, then daring to hand its birthright to a chimera known as "Visual Basic" [spit] Dot Net. This "Visual Basic" of the .NET persuasion is like an ugly sister who did go to the ball and made everyone puke into their pockets. Where classic Visual Basic was, and is, a joy to use, easy to learn, more flexible than a circus contortionist and, above all, extremely powerful, "Visual Basic" [spit] Dot Net is an abortion that should have got most of Microsoft arrested for disservices to the computing fraternity. When "Visual Basic" [spit] Dot Net was announced I bought a book on it. Yeah, I actually spent money on "Visual Basic" [spit] Dot Net,. would you believe! This was the work of another arch enthusiast, one Dan Applebaum, in his seminal work entitled "Moving to VB [spit] .Net" (Okay, the actual title doesn't contain any spit, but curiously I lose control of my salivary glands whenever confronting the abortion known as "Visual Basic" [spit] Dot Net. After all, you don't get an abortion without some seminal work beforehand.)

Amongst the treasures in that book: "Many programmers will miss the flexibility of being able to set the base for arrays." Well, yippee! This new language is supposed to be an improvement and Microsoft removes some key features? Sorry, no. Doesn't compute with me. And not with tens of thousands of other classic Visual Basic programmers and tens of thousands of businesses and start-ups that used, and use, it either. Another favourite subheading from Dan's ramblings: "Everything you know is now obsolete" Gee, thanks, Bill! Thanks, Dan! That REALLY is a recommendation for how to win friends and influence people. Not!

Anyway, now that registration-free COM has been shown to work on XP, Vista and Windows 7, classic Visual Basic has a whole new lease of life ahead of it, like the cancer patient who IS cured, despite best efforts of family members who were counting on an inheritance to pull the tubes out. See! I always said OOP was nuts. I'm still waiting for the shelves at PC World to sink under the weight of brand-new applications written solely in "Visual Basic" [spit] Dot Net, but maybe a DVD isn't big enough yet to accommodate the enormous runtime, which, I'm led to believe, is several orders of magnitude larger than what classic Visual Basic requires. Move to Blu-Ray, perhaps? I've heard you can get up to 50gb onto one of those, more than enough, surely, for the life support machine behind the "Visual Basic" [spit] Dot Net monster.

Anonymous
3/4/2009 9:53:44 PM #

"But why do you seem to dislike .NET?  Why should it be bad for people to evolve their apps?"

It's not about .NET, it's about the trashing by Microsoft of classic Visual Basic, then daring to hand its birthright to a chimera known as "Visual Basic" [spit] Dot Net. This "Visual Basic" of the .NET persuasion is like an ugly sister who did go to the ball and made everyone puke into their pockets. Where classic Visual Basic was, and is, a joy to use, easy to learn, more flexible than a circus contortionist and, above all, extremely powerful, "Visual Basic" [spit] Dot Net is an abortion that should have got most of Microsoft arrested for disservices to the computing fraternity. When "Visual Basic" [spit] Dot Net was announced I bought a book on it. Yeah, I actually spent money on "Visual Basic" [spit] Dot Net,. would you believe! This was the work of another arch enthusiast, one Dan Applebaum, in his seminal work entitled "Moving to VB [spit] .Net" (Okay, the actual title doesn't contain any spit, but curiously I lose control of my salivary glands whenever confronting the abortion known as "Visual Basic" [spit] Dot Net. After all, you don't get an abortion without some seminal work beforehand.)

Amongst the treasures in that book: "Many programmers will miss the flexibility of being able to set the base for arrays." Well, yippee! This new language is supposed to be an improvement and Microsoft removes some key features? Sorry, no. Doesn't compute with me. And not with tens of thousands of other classic Visual Basic programmers and tens of thousands of businesses and start-ups that used, and use, it either. Another favourite subheading from Dan's ramblings: "Everything you know is now obsolete" Gee, thanks, Bill! Thanks, Dan! That REALLY is a recommendation for how to win friends and influence people. Not!

Anyway, now that registration-free COM has been shown to work on XP, Vista and Windows 7, classic Visual Basic has a whole new lease of life ahead of it, like the cancer patient who IS cured, despite best efforts of family members who were counting on an inheritance to pull the tubes out. See! I always said OOP was nuts. I'm still waiting for the shelves at PC World to sink under the weight of brand-new applications written solely in "Visual Basic" [spit] Dot Net, but maybe a DVD isn't big enough yet to accommodate the enormous runtime, which, I'm led to believe, is several orders of magnitude larger than what classic Visual Basic requires. Move to Blu-Ray, perhaps? I've heard you can get up to 50gb onto one of those, more than enough, surely, for the life support machine behind the "Visual Basic" [spit] Dot Net monster.

Anonymous
3/4/2009 9:53:44 PM #

"But why do you seem to dislike .NET?  Why should it be bad for people to evolve their apps?"

It's not about .NET, it's about the trashing by Microsoft of classic Visual Basic, then daring to hand its birthright to a chimera known as "Visual Basic" [spit] Dot Net. This "Visual Basic" of the .NET persuasion is like an ugly sister who did go to the ball and made everyone puke into their pockets. Where classic Visual Basic was, and is, a joy to use, easy to learn, more flexible than a circus contortionist and, above all, extremely powerful, "Visual Basic" [spit] Dot Net is an abortion that should have got most of Microsoft arrested for disservices to the computing fraternity. When "Visual Basic" [spit] Dot Net was announced I bought a book on it. Yeah, I actually spent money on "Visual Basic" [spit] Dot Net,. would you believe! This was the work of another arch enthusiast, one Dan Applebaum, in his seminal work entitled "Moving to VB [spit] .Net" (Okay, the actual title doesn't contain any spit, but curiously I lose control of my salivary glands whenever confronting the abortion known as "Visual Basic" [spit] Dot Net. After all, you don't get an abortion without some seminal work beforehand.)

Amongst the treasures in that book: "Many programmers will miss the flexibility of being able to set the base for arrays." Well, yippee! This new language is supposed to be an improvement and Microsoft removes some key features? Sorry, no. Doesn't compute with me. And not with tens of thousands of other classic Visual Basic programmers and tens of thousands of businesses and start-ups that used, and use, it either. Another favourite subheading from Dan's ramblings: "Everything you know is now obsolete" Gee, thanks, Bill! Thanks, Dan! That REALLY is a recommendation for how to win friends and influence people. Not!

Anyway, now that registration-free COM has been shown to work on XP, Vista and Windows 7, classic Visual Basic has a whole new lease of life ahead of it, like the cancer patient who IS cured, despite best efforts of family members who were counting on an inheritance to pull the tubes out. See! I always said OOP was nuts. I'm still waiting for the shelves at PC World to sink under the weight of brand-new applications written solely in "Visual Basic" [spit] Dot Net, but maybe a DVD isn't big enough yet to accommodate the enormous runtime, which, I'm led to believe, is several orders of magnitude larger than what classic Visual Basic requires. Move to Blu-Ray, perhaps? I've heard you can get up to 50gb onto one of those, more than enough, surely, for the life support machine behind the "Visual Basic" [spit] Dot Net monster.

Anonymous
3/5/2009 7:25:38 AM #

Hey, no sweat on the name thing Fedrico.  But attention to details, even seemingly minute ones, are important.  Especially in the codegen business.

What did you think I was suggesting you were attempting to hide?  I don't see that I said anything like that anywhere.  I'm pretty sure I asserted exactly the opposite.

(Whassamatter Bill/Bob, you embarrassed to sign your posts?  Grow a spine, and get back to us, eh?)

Anonymous
3/5/2009 7:25:38 AM #

Hey, no sweat on the name thing Fedrico.  But attention to details, even seemingly minute ones, are important.  Especially in the codegen business.

What did you think I was suggesting you were attempting to hide?  I don't see that I said anything like that anywhere.  I'm pretty sure I asserted exactly the opposite.

(Whassamatter Bill/Bob, you embarrassed to sign your posts?  Grow a spine, and get back to us, eh?)

Anonymous
3/5/2009 7:25:38 AM #

Hey, no sweat on the name thing Fedrico.  But attention to details, even seemingly minute ones, are important.  Especially in the codegen business.

What did you think I was suggesting you were attempting to hide?  I don't see that I said anything like that anywhere.  I'm pretty sure I asserted exactly the opposite.

(Whassamatter Bill/Bob, you embarrassed to sign your posts?  Grow a spine, and get back to us, eh?)

Anonymous
3/6/2009 9:05:25 AM #

For Fzoufaly: my opinion is that if you truly want to correct the error, then post a note at the beginning of the article saying that thare is an update in the information and the article is not longer current. Then add the link to the new article and leave the original article just as historic.

It's my opinion. Of course you do want you want, it's your blog.

Anonymous
3/6/2009 9:05:25 AM #

For Fzoufaly: my opinion is that if you truly want to correct the error, then post a note at the beginning of the article saying that thare is an update in the information and the article is not longer current. Then add the link to the new article and leave the original article just as historic.

It's my opinion. Of course you do want you want, it's your blog.

Anonymous
3/6/2009 9:05:25 AM #

For Fzoufaly: my opinion is that if you truly want to correct the error, then post a note at the beginning of the article saying that thare is an update in the information and the article is not longer current. Then add the link to the new article and leave the original article just as historic.

It's my opinion. Of course you do want you want, it's your blog.

Anonymous
3/9/2009 11:27:59 AM #

Interestingly dotnet runtimes are far more up to date on domestic PCs than work-based ones. When it comes to DISTRIBUTING apps, from long experience I know that the support load is all. I work for a software house that immediately bit the bullet and moved to c++ when VB6 was pulled. All serious distributors of apps avoid dotnet runtimes like the plague. Can any body name a Skype equivalent that uses dotnet?

For what its worth, I think vb6 will survive easily for long enough for python to get its GUI creation act together and offer something to the dotnet 'refusniks'. Its syntax and ethos is very VB6-like. it just needs pulling together some more.

Anonymous
3/9/2009 11:27:59 AM #

Interestingly dotnet runtimes are far more up to date on domestic PCs than work-based ones. When it comes to DISTRIBUTING apps, from long experience I know that the support load is all. I work for a software house that immediately bit the bullet and moved to c++ when VB6 was pulled. All serious distributors of apps avoid dotnet runtimes like the plague. Can any body name a Skype equivalent that uses dotnet?

For what its worth, I think vb6 will survive easily for long enough for python to get its GUI creation act together and offer something to the dotnet 'refusniks'. Its syntax and ethos is very VB6-like. it just needs pulling together some more.

Anonymous
3/9/2009 11:27:59 AM #

Interestingly dotnet runtimes are far more up to date on domestic PCs than work-based ones. When it comes to DISTRIBUTING apps, from long experience I know that the support load is all. I work for a software house that immediately bit the bullet and moved to c++ when VB6 was pulled. All serious distributors of apps avoid dotnet runtimes like the plague. Can any body name a Skype equivalent that uses dotnet?

For what its worth, I think vb6 will survive easily for long enough for python to get its GUI creation act together and offer something to the dotnet 'refusniks'. Its syntax and ethos is very VB6-like. it just needs pulling together some more.

Anonymous
4/23/2009 1:10:44 AM #

now Microsoft introduce SmallBasic:

http://blogs.msdn.com/smallbasic/">blogs.msdn.com/smallbasic

Anonymous
4/23/2009 1:10:44 AM #

now Microsoft introduce SmallBasic:

http://blogs.msdn.com/smallbasic/">blogs.msdn.com/smallbasic

Anonymous
4/23/2009 1:10:44 AM #

now Microsoft introduce SmallBasic:

http://blogs.msdn.com/smallbasic/">blogs.msdn.com/smallbasic

Anonymous
5/2/2009 5:58:56 AM #

now Microsoft introduce XP mode in Windows 7.

Anonymous
5/2/2009 5:58:56 AM #

now Microsoft introduce XP mode in Windows 7.

Anonymous
5/2/2009 5:58:56 AM #

now Microsoft introduce XP mode in Windows 7.

Anonymous
6/13/2009 10:46:34 AM #

Pls excuse my poor english, I'm a revolted french spaeker !

I'm a doctor (neurologist) and professionnal developper and I discover today with stupefaction and horror, using WINDOWS 7 for the first time that "There is a known incompatibility with this program, namely (VB6.0)".

From 1989, all my programs are written with VB (from 10 years with VB 6.0 !). For me it is a real catastrophe and I decide to stop IMMEDIATELY all the migration of the hospital programs to Win 7 !

Comercialy Better for Microsoft, is to try to develop a new version of VB, for instance the VB 7.0, an upgrade of VB 6.0, entierely compatible with WINDOW 7 and VB 6.0 !

Good Luck !

Dr. STRUL (Belgium, Brussels)

Anonymous
6/13/2009 10:46:34 AM #

Pls excuse my poor english, I'm a revolted french spaeker !

I'm a doctor (neurologist) and professionnal developper and I discover today with stupefaction and horror, using WINDOWS 7 for the first time that "There is a known incompatibility with this program, namely (VB6.0)".

From 1989, all my programs are written with VB (from 10 years with VB 6.0 !). For me it is a real catastrophe and I decide to stop IMMEDIATELY all the migration of the hospital programs to Win 7 !

Comercialy Better for Microsoft, is to try to develop a new version of VB, for instance the VB 7.0, an upgrade of VB 6.0, entierely compatible with WINDOW 7 and VB 6.0 !

Good Luck !

Dr. STRUL (Belgium, Brussels)

Anonymous
6/13/2009 10:46:34 AM #

Pls excuse my poor english, I'm a revolted french spaeker !

I'm a doctor (neurologist) and professionnal developper and I discover today with stupefaction and horror, using WINDOWS 7 for the first time that "There is a known incompatibility with this program, namely (VB6.0)".

From 1989, all my programs are written with VB (from 10 years with VB 6.0 !). For me it is a real catastrophe and I decide to stop IMMEDIATELY all the migration of the hospital programs to Win 7 !

Comercialy Better for Microsoft, is to try to develop a new version of VB, for instance the VB 7.0, an upgrade of VB 6.0, entierely compatible with WINDOW 7 and VB 6.0 !

Good Luck !

Dr. STRUL (Belgium, Brussels)

Anonymous
7/3/2009 3:11:21 AM #

VB6 and VB.NET are two different things. The name look similar, but the content is totaly different. The convertion between VB6 and VB.NET doesn't exist and doesn't make any sense. Serious VB6 applications can't be converted! Don't be silly! Try even to convert the VB6 examples that ships with VB6. It is not possible. They don't work. I hate VB.NET. I like C#. You have to re-think the application and completly rewrite it from scratch. VB6 runtime must survive. Microsoft save VB6 applications. I am a VB programmer since VB2.

Anonymous
7/3/2009 3:11:21 AM #

VB6 and VB.NET are two different things. The name look similar, but the content is totaly different. The convertion between VB6 and VB.NET doesn't exist and doesn't make any sense. Serious VB6 applications can't be converted! Don't be silly! Try even to convert the VB6 examples that ships with VB6. It is not possible. They don't work. I hate VB.NET. I like C#. You have to re-think the application and completly rewrite it from scratch. VB6 runtime must survive. Microsoft save VB6 applications. I am a VB programmer since VB2.

Anonymous
7/3/2009 3:11:21 AM #

VB6 and VB.NET are two different things. The name look similar, but the content is totaly different. The convertion between VB6 and VB.NET doesn't exist and doesn't make any sense. Serious VB6 applications can't be converted! Don't be silly! Try even to convert the VB6 examples that ships with VB6. It is not possible. They don't work. I hate VB.NET. I like C#. You have to re-think the application and completly rewrite it from scratch. VB6 runtime must survive. Microsoft save VB6 applications. I am a VB programmer since VB2.

Anonymous
7/16/2009 8:28:30 AM #

Who want write code in Vb.Net ? Just a crazy!

Vb.Net is totally different from Vb6, it is much more a java than a vb, the only reason to call it Vb.net is to get update money.

But this is not an update, the porting from Vb6 to Vb.net it's simple impossible! Have you never heard of an upgrade that have not a backward compatibility ? Have you never break a backward compatibility it to your users, what they said ?

More and worst if Microsoft have done it with vb6 who said it can do another time with vb.net ? Can we spend and lost tens of years of work and million dollars in development every time that some STUPID Microsoft manager change mind ?

My company have huge code in vb6 and we are on basic programming since MS Dos time (Basic Compiler 7), but after the joke of vb.net we will never choice a MS compiler until we die.

Actually we are moving from scratch on c,c++ and delphi and we have no more plan to spend money in visual studio platform.

I think that Microsoft in the last years is really a crazy company that like just simple money, if this is the way.....Microsoft will have not a long run! Sell your stocks.

Good luck.

Anonymous
7/16/2009 8:28:30 AM #

Who want write code in Vb.Net ? Just a crazy!

Vb.Net is totally different from Vb6, it is much more a java than a vb, the only reason to call it Vb.net is to get update money.

But this is not an update, the porting from Vb6 to Vb.net it's simple impossible! Have you never heard of an upgrade that have not a backward compatibility ? Have you never break a backward compatibility it to your users, what they said ?

More and worst if Microsoft have done it with vb6 who said it can do another time with vb.net ? Can we spend and lost tens of years of work and million dollars in development every time that some STUPID Microsoft manager change mind ?

My company have huge code in vb6 and we are on basic programming since MS Dos time (Basic Compiler 7), but after the joke of vb.net we will never choice a MS compiler until we die.

Actually we are moving from scratch on c,c++ and delphi and we have no more plan to spend money in visual studio platform.

I think that Microsoft in the last years is really a crazy company that like just simple money, if this is the way.....Microsoft will have not a long run! Sell your stocks.

Good luck.

Anonymous
7/16/2009 8:28:30 AM #

Who want write code in Vb.Net ? Just a crazy!

Vb.Net is totally different from Vb6, it is much more a java than a vb, the only reason to call it Vb.net is to get update money.

But this is not an update, the porting from Vb6 to Vb.net it's simple impossible! Have you never heard of an upgrade that have not a backward compatibility ? Have you never break a backward compatibility it to your users, what they said ?

More and worst if Microsoft have done it with vb6 who said it can do another time with vb.net ? Can we spend and lost tens of years of work and million dollars in development every time that some STUPID Microsoft manager change mind ?

My company have huge code in vb6 and we are on basic programming since MS Dos time (Basic Compiler 7), but after the joke of vb.net we will never choice a MS compiler until we die.

Actually we are moving from scratch on c,c++ and delphi and we have no more plan to spend money in visual studio platform.

I think that Microsoft in the last years is really a crazy company that like just simple money, if this is the way.....Microsoft will have not a long run! Sell your stocks.

Good luck.

Anonymous
7/26/2009 10:21:52 PM #

VB.net is inferior to VB6 in a lot of ways. No one should be forced to write code for a crappy platform and slow bytecode.

Many VB6 programs (if written correctly) will run much faster than if it were made in bloated .NET (this is not a random statement, I have benchmarked it myself).

The 2 languages are completely different. The whole .NET framework sucks in my opinion.

If you're a VB6 programmer looking to "upgrade", skip .Net. If you wanna go that route, then learn Java instead. But it would probably be better to learn C++ or another language that doesn't compile to crappy bytecode.

The only time I'd use .Net or recommend using it, is if you're developing for a mobile platform that runs the .Net framework.

As for SmallBasic... complete waste of time making that. Pointless.

Anonymous
7/26/2009 10:21:52 PM #

VB.net is inferior to VB6 in a lot of ways. No one should be forced to write code for a crappy platform and slow bytecode.

Many VB6 programs (if written correctly) will run much faster than if it were made in bloated .NET (this is not a random statement, I have benchmarked it myself).

The 2 languages are completely different. The whole .NET framework sucks in my opinion.

If you're a VB6 programmer looking to "upgrade", skip .Net. If you wanna go that route, then learn Java instead. But it would probably be better to learn C++ or another language that doesn't compile to crappy bytecode.

The only time I'd use .Net or recommend using it, is if you're developing for a mobile platform that runs the .Net framework.

As for SmallBasic... complete waste of time making that. Pointless.

Anonymous
7/26/2009 10:21:52 PM #

VB.net is inferior to VB6 in a lot of ways. No one should be forced to write code for a crappy platform and slow bytecode.

Many VB6 programs (if written correctly) will run much faster than if it were made in bloated .NET (this is not a random statement, I have benchmarked it myself).

The 2 languages are completely different. The whole .NET framework sucks in my opinion.

If you're a VB6 programmer looking to "upgrade", skip .Net. If you wanna go that route, then learn Java instead. But it would probably be better to learn C++ or another language that doesn't compile to crappy bytecode.

The only time I'd use .Net or recommend using it, is if you're developing for a mobile platform that runs the .Net framework.

As for SmallBasic... complete waste of time making that. Pointless.

Anonymous
8/5/2009 12:46:27 AM #

Apparently 87%  (yes that is an 'eight' followed by a 'seven') of companies still use VB6.

source:

http://www.infoq.com/news/2009/02/vb6">www.infoq.com/.../vb6

How the hell Microsoft could kill this product is beyond me

I fully agree about the dotnet runtime being the issue with vb.net. I understand is now 200MB for 3.5! Naturally I have not bothered to download it.

Anonymous
8/5/2009 12:46:27 AM #

Apparently 87%  (yes that is an 'eight' followed by a 'seven') of companies still use VB6.

source:

http://www.infoq.com/news/2009/02/vb6">www.infoq.com/.../vb6

How the hell Microsoft could kill this product is beyond me

I fully agree about the dotnet runtime being the issue with vb.net. I understand is now 200MB for 3.5! Naturally I have not bothered to download it.

Anonymous
8/5/2009 12:46:27 AM #

Apparently 87%  (yes that is an 'eight' followed by a 'seven') of companies still use VB6.

source:

http://www.infoq.com/news/2009/02/vb6">www.infoq.com/.../vb6

How the hell Microsoft could kill this product is beyond me

I fully agree about the dotnet runtime being the issue with vb.net. I understand is now 200MB for 3.5! Naturally I have not bothered to download it.

Anonymous
11/1/2009 10:07:38 AM #

I have VB6 apps the are rock solid and there is no reason to reqrite them. I am not going to spend a years (YES A YEAR) rewriting code to accomodate some dumb marketing by MicroSoft.

Microsoft, stop treating VB6 coders like your enemies. We're not the problem.

And can someone at MicroSoft tell me what products we can use to deveop with for a 15 year horizon. 5 years does not cut it !!!

Thx

Anonymous
11/1/2009 10:07:38 AM #

I have VB6 apps the are rock solid and there is no reason to reqrite them. I am not going to spend a years (YES A YEAR) rewriting code to accomodate some dumb marketing by MicroSoft.

Microsoft, stop treating VB6 coders like your enemies. We're not the problem.

And can someone at MicroSoft tell me what products we can use to deveop with for a 15 year horizon. 5 years does not cut it !!!

Thx

Anonymous
11/1/2009 10:07:38 AM #

I have VB6 apps the are rock solid and there is no reason to reqrite them. I am not going to spend a years (YES A YEAR) rewriting code to accomodate some dumb marketing by MicroSoft.

Microsoft, stop treating VB6 coders like your enemies. We're not the problem.

And can someone at MicroSoft tell me what products we can use to deveop with for a 15 year horizon. 5 years does not cut it !!!

Thx

Anonymous
11/9/2009 12:14:38 AM #

The problem is best looked at from the Customers point of view. If you have supplied them with vba products over the last decade or so then the time is coming when the product they have had developed and paid for in good faith simply will not work.

For example it is one thing being told that you need to buy a deisel powered vehicle because it can do the job lot better and more efficiently another because the gas station sees this a reason to stop selling petrol

It's not just wrong it is bad business like a large part of IT .  

Anonymous
11/9/2009 12:14:38 AM #

The problem is best looked at from the Customers point of view. If you have supplied them with vba products over the last decade or so then the time is coming when the product they have had developed and paid for in good faith simply will not work.

For example it is one thing being told that you need to buy a deisel powered vehicle because it can do the job lot better and more efficiently another because the gas station sees this a reason to stop selling petrol

It's not just wrong it is bad business like a large part of IT .  

Anonymous
11/9/2009 12:14:38 AM #

The problem is best looked at from the Customers point of view. If you have supplied them with vba products over the last decade or so then the time is coming when the product they have had developed and paid for in good faith simply will not work.

For example it is one thing being told that you need to buy a deisel powered vehicle because it can do the job lot better and more efficiently another because the gas station sees this a reason to stop selling petrol

It's not just wrong it is bad business like a large part of IT .  

Anonymous
1/25/2010 7:57:55 AM #

Trained as a VB3 programmer, Used VB4, 5 & 6 proffessionally.  A lot of my programmes in VB6 still run today in countries around the world.  However since 2003 ive been pushing myself into the many versions of VB.NET that have come my way.  Yes ive wrote great applications in .NET but ive also had dozens upon dozens of problems using it... So much so i long for the simple days of VB6.

In 2010 ive had a call from a local company to me that are still using a system i designed in VB6 back in 1999.  Its been struggling with a bloated database that it was never designed to cope with - im not sure i thought as far ahead to 2010 where the system is 11 years old, and the workload the system now handles is 3 TIMES what it was when i put it together.

They have signed me up for a system upgrade - now the question is, with VB.NET 2008 sitting on my machine, and installation disks for VB6 on my desk... Which direction do i go in?  If i had a coin handy i would just flip it.

Anonymous
1/25/2010 7:57:55 AM #

Trained as a VB3 programmer, Used VB4, 5 & 6 proffessionally.  A lot of my programmes in VB6 still run today in countries around the world.  However since 2003 ive been pushing myself into the many versions of VB.NET that have come my way.  Yes ive wrote great applications in .NET but ive also had dozens upon dozens of problems using it... So much so i long for the simple days of VB6.

In 2010 ive had a call from a local company to me that are still using a system i designed in VB6 back in 1999.  Its been struggling with a bloated database that it was never designed to cope with - im not sure i thought as far ahead to 2010 where the system is 11 years old, and the workload the system now handles is 3 TIMES what it was when i put it together.

They have signed me up for a system upgrade - now the question is, with VB.NET 2008 sitting on my machine, and installation disks for VB6 on my desk... Which direction do i go in?  If i had a coin handy i would just flip it.

Anonymous
1/25/2010 7:57:55 AM #

Trained as a VB3 programmer, Used VB4, 5 & 6 proffessionally.  A lot of my programmes in VB6 still run today in countries around the world.  However since 2003 ive been pushing myself into the many versions of VB.NET that have come my way.  Yes ive wrote great applications in .NET but ive also had dozens upon dozens of problems using it... So much so i long for the simple days of VB6.

In 2010 ive had a call from a local company to me that are still using a system i designed in VB6 back in 1999.  Its been struggling with a bloated database that it was never designed to cope with - im not sure i thought as far ahead to 2010 where the system is 11 years old, and the workload the system now handles is 3 TIMES what it was when i put it together.

They have signed me up for a system upgrade - now the question is, with VB.NET 2008 sitting on my machine, and installation disks for VB6 on my desk... Which direction do i go in?  If i had a coin handy i would just flip it.

Anonymous
2/13/2010 7:48:20 AM #

been using dotnet for 4 years now. but still still miss the SIMPLICITY of vb6.

SIMPLICITY = stability = money.

why cant I move/copy *.* ?  8 lines of code to do this? subfolders = more?

fso.copyfile "d:\*.*"

nothing beat that.

today, i am SLOWER dudes. loosing bits of my time on earth !!!

Anonymous
2/13/2010 7:48:20 AM #

been using dotnet for 4 years now. but still still miss the SIMPLICITY of vb6.

SIMPLICITY = stability = money.

why cant I move/copy *.* ?  8 lines of code to do this? subfolders = more?

fso.copyfile "d:\*.*"

nothing beat that.

today, i am SLOWER dudes. loosing bits of my time on earth !!!

Anonymous
2/13/2010 7:48:20 AM #

been using dotnet for 4 years now. but still still miss the SIMPLICITY of vb6.

SIMPLICITY = stability = money.

why cant I move/copy *.* ?  8 lines of code to do this? subfolders = more?

fso.copyfile "d:\*.*"

nothing beat that.

today, i am SLOWER dudes. loosing bits of my time on earth !!!

Anonymous
6/10/2010 3:08:20 AM #

I think trying this will make vb6 an obsolete in the world of programming, however the beginners (who currently on vb6), like me will not but absolutely be throwned off the track. Microsoft should equip vb6 with neccessary tools to compete with .Net rather than trying making it an obsolete language in the nearest future.

Anonymous
6/10/2010 3:08:20 AM #

I think trying this will make vb6 an obsolete in the world of programming, however the beginners (who currently on vb6), like me will not but absolutely be throwned off the track. Microsoft should equip vb6 with neccessary tools to compete with .Net rather than trying making it an obsolete language in the nearest future.

Anonymous
6/10/2010 3:08:20 AM #

I think trying this will make vb6 an obsolete in the world of programming, however the beginners (who currently on vb6), like me will not but absolutely be throwned off the track. Microsoft should equip vb6 with neccessary tools to compete with .Net rather than trying making it an obsolete language in the nearest future.

lauraine2011
3/23/2012 2:21:35 AM #

Thanks for sharing your info. I really appreciate your efforts and I will be waiting for your further write ups thanks once again.
http://viperwolfplayer.com

elektroauto-talk.de
4/28/2013 1:05:10 AM #

Pingback from elektroauto-talk.de

Can I Purchase Tagamet Online  , Zantac Remedies Dissolve, 20 Pounds Tagamet Pur - Seite 4 - Elektroauto-Talk.de