The Official VB6 vs VB.NET Thread
The Official VB6 vs VB.NET Thread
The Official VB6 vs VB.NET Thread
The Official VB6 vs VB.NET Thread
The Official VB6 vs VB.NET Thread
The Official VB6 vs VB.NET Thread The Official VB6 vs VB.NET Thread The Official VB6 vs VB.NET Thread The Official VB6 vs VB.NET Thread The Official VB6 vs VB.NET Thread The Official VB6 vs VB.NET Thread The Official VB6 vs VB.NET Thread The Official VB6 vs VB.NET Thread
The Official VB6 vs VB.NET Thread The Official VB6 vs VB.NET Thread
The Official VB6 vs VB.NET Thread
Go Back  Xtreme Visual Basic Talk > > > The Official VB6 vs VB.NET Thread


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #81  
Old 08-21-2005, 07:50 AM
brandnew's Avatar
brandnew brandnew is offline
Centurion
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Phnom Penh, Cambodia.
Posts: 181
Default


Nice blogs...

But Joel generalized everything on his own preference. Here's one:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joel
most of their customers are still using C, C++, Visual Basic 6.0, and classic ASP ..... the ones that are using .NET are using ASP.NET to develop web applications
I think above assumption is false. Search google, sf.net, pscode.com, and see how many percent asp.net code in overall .net category. I myself use vb.net and I develop client applications.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joel
How Microsoft Lost the API War (article title)
When did Microsoft lose API war? As far as I know, standard .net api has been ported to Linux and Mac already (Mono .Net). This shows us that the "Lost API War" is actually won as it's smoothly accepted by open source community.
__________________
Very useful and free stuffs for VB programmers.
API-Guide - Wonderful API viewer with examples and full explanation.
APIViewer - More APIs; replacement for default api viewer in VB.
Reply With Quote
  #82  
Old 08-25-2005, 08:14 PM
sgt_pinky's Avatar
sgt_pinky sgt_pinky is offline
Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 633
Default

Am I the only person, who after 2+ years of .NET, still prefixes Button controls with the text "cmd"?

Last edited by sgt_pinky; 08-25-2005 at 09:02 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #83  
Old 08-25-2005, 08:51 PM
mrjeffy321 mrjeffy321 is offline
Ultimate Contributor
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Texas, USA
Posts: 1,623
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sgt_pinky
I am I the only person, who after 2+ years of .NET, still prefixes Button controls with the text "cmd"?
No, I think many other people still do that too. I do, and I dont see any reason to change the way I name my buttons. I also prefix my .Net picture boxes either with, "img" or, "pic" depending on how I want to use it (since there arent any plane image boxes anymore).
Reply With Quote
  #84  
Old 08-26-2005, 12:58 AM
zelg37The Official VB6 vs VB.NET Thread zelg37 is offline
Contributor

* Expert *
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 606
Default The lost api war link

Quote:
Originally Posted by MathImagics
I've only just come across this article, it's a year old but well worth a read:

How Microsoft Lost the API War (Joel on Software, June, 2004)
MathImagics,
You would have found that article back in 2004 if you had taken a look at anon's Zammel thread ( ):
http://www.xtremevbtalk.com/t195041.html

But glad you found time to do some posting with all that's going on in your life these days. I only wish Thinker could find the time to come back and post as well..
Reply With Quote
  #85  
Old 09-15-2005, 08:18 PM
williamlove williamlove is offline
Regular
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 62
Question Is VB.Net anything like VB6?

I've read the posts but one remaining question I have is why use VB.Net at all if it is such a change? Does it retain the same basic rapid application development advantages that VB6 does compared to, say, C++? I use VBA because I can get things done fast. I can't even imagine trying to do the things I do in C. Is this still going to be true if I buy and use VB.Net?
Reply With Quote
  #86  
Old 09-15-2005, 08:30 PM
by_m's Avatar
by_m by_m is offline
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Texas
Posts: 661
Default

It's a step (a large step) in the direction of the future. If you don't make that progress, you remain in the past and don't get anywhere new. Change can be (and in this case is) good. Imagine if we decided that windows was to much of a change and stuck ith MS-DOS. Perhaps we should have stuck with BASIC and not even made VB6? Sure, the change isn't so drastic, it's not like they made VB6 out of BASIC, but step by step progress is made. It may be a big change sometimes, but often big changes are the best ones, and you may find yourself lagging behind sooner or later if you don't make it.
Having said, if you are just a hobbyist, and programming is not that important to you, VB6 will still do the same job it did before for a while from now, and you can still use it. But, time and resources permitting, VB.net is something you may like if you try it.
Final note, VB.net is still very good as far as RAD, to my knowledge it's at least no worse than VB6, possibly better.
Edit: I wrote this before you edited, but you certainly won't see a change like the one you mentioned.
__________________
170 10101010 410 J31^170
Reply With Quote
  #87  
Old 09-17-2005, 12:45 AM
williamlove williamlove is offline
Regular
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 62
Default Is RAD why we should pick VB.net over C?

Your last sentence actually got to the heart of what I am driving at. But there are other factors I'm trying to understand and weigh.

Let me explain. From a professional standpoint, VBA is all I need. I use VBA in a program few people have heard of called RSView (Rockwell Software) which is an engineering package for control systems. I also integrate with Office.

In 1999 I spent months learning C++ but never found a way to use it professionally because of the learning curve to become truly proficient. Plus, VBA is SO DARN well-suited for what I do at work it would be insane to try to pound a round peg into a square hole and use C++. Well, I could probably come up with an excuse to develop a COM object or something...but VBA always fits.

So here it is 6 years later (ugh) and I'm now, LOL, expanding my toolkit by becoming an Access expert and, LOL, reading books on advanced VBA and Access VBA. The payback is IMMEDIATE from a work standpoint.

So, given that any .NET stuff is strictly for fun (I should be put on medication too, lol) and perhaps a strategic investment in long term career aspirations in programming (I'm currently a control systems engineer --we use real time procedural languages you probably never heard of and then other stuff for the operator interface, many of which are VBA compliant), I am pondering what to study, if anything, besides database theory to open up my database skills more (I like databases, it turns out, but then, I like everything once I'm good at it).

So given that, what is the best investment? And is C++.net worth consideration? By the way, I am a big Office user because we use it as toolkit for data acquistion, reporting...so Office has to weigh into my evaluation...

Last edited by williamlove; 09-17-2005 at 12:47 AM. Reason: clarity
Reply With Quote
  #88  
Old 09-17-2005, 12:21 PM
by_m's Avatar
by_m by_m is offline
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Texas
Posts: 661
Default

Perhaps someone else will be better able to answer this question since I have little experience with VBA, but some things that caught my attention...
Whether you are using .Net for work or hobby, it sounds like a good choice...if you are talking about aspirations for the future. As it stands, .Net can handle Office Automation quickly and pretty easily, but it's not the recommended thing for now. Right now the best for office is VBA or VB6 (or so say those who know, I am not one of them). As I understand the main reason for that is stability and the fact that you will run into glitches automating office with .Net. In the future however, I would imagine that .Net will be the ideal way to automate office, to my understanding that is microsoft's goal. For that reason, considering your experience with VBA, I think VB.net would be a good thing to learn, again though, if you want to look towards the future. C++.net is just Microsoft's C++ compiler, the main thing being that you can compile into managed or unmanaged code, if you don't like C++, don't get into C++.net. C#.net is the big .Net language for those with a C type language background, so you still would probably prefer VB.net if you are looking into learning a .Net language.
In short, my humble belief is that VB.net will be a good idea for a "strategic investment in long term career aspirations in programming" in office. Although for the present you would stick with VBA, on the side learning .Net would make a good hobby (again, my opinion), and a good choice for the future.
Final note, noting your title, RAD is the top reason for choosing VB.net over C. I learned that good and well from a question I posted a while back (Why is VB worth it?).
__________________
170 10101010 410 J31^170
Reply With Quote
  #89  
Old 09-19-2005, 05:25 PM
williamlove williamlove is offline
Regular
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 62
Default Still wondering...

I want my efforts to have some ROI eventually, not just be a hobby. I am now convinced that .Net is important but after reading "How Microsoft Lost the API War" I'm frankly even more confused about what is a good idea to study.

Let me ask some questions related to what I've already asked but that more directly address what I'm really wondering now:
1. Can a person with VB.Net skills get a job if they have the accumen to get interviews and have some engineering background and good work history? I guess the short version of that question would be, is VB.Net a highly marketable skill, in and of itself?
2. Is a deeper knowledge of .Net (or anything else) likely to emerge from becoming proficient in C# as opposed to VB.Net? Or put another way, why do people chose C#?
Reply With Quote
  #90  
Old 09-19-2005, 06:31 PM
sgt_pinky's Avatar
sgt_pinky sgt_pinky is offline
Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 633
Default

Hahaha. That "How Microsoft Lost the API War" is absolute rubbish. Just have a look around. There has been no API *war*.

VB.NET and C# are practically the same. I program VB.NET, but I have learnt probably 60% of what I know by reading C# examples - simply because that's the examples that I found. If you are a C++ programmer, C# will be easier than VB.NET for you. If you haven't programmed much at all, VB.NET will be much quicker and more logical to learn than C#.
Reply With Quote
  #91  
Old 09-20-2005, 05:26 PM
herilane's Avatar
herilaneThe Official VB6 vs VB.NET Thread herilane is offline
Unashamed geek

Retired Moderator
* Expert *
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: London, England
Posts: 8,988
Default

MSDN: "Differences Between Visual Basic .NET and Visual C# .NET" white paper

The differences are minor, much smaller than the similarities. It's mostly a question of looks and not functionality - semicolons or not, [] or ().

The two are so similar that even as a VB programmer who's never typed a single line of code in any kind of C-based language, I can easily read C# code, and just like sgt_pinky, a lot of what I've learned has come from C# examples. I don't think it would take me long to learn to write it, too, based on what I know of VB.NET. The big thing to learn, the thing that will take time, is the .Net framework itself.

All that being said, some people still have prejudices about VB - so from that point of view, learning C# may have a minor advantage. However, as I already said, if you learn one, you'll be able to pick up the other one with almost no effort.
Reply With Quote
  #92  
Old 09-20-2005, 05:56 PM
anthony_n's Avatar
anthony_n anthony_n is offline
Senior Contributor
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Manchester,England
Posts: 1,293
Default

people coming from vb6 to .net will find it easyer to code in c# in the long run because it will stop them using commands like mid etc and stop them adding in the vb6 namespace. also they will consider it to be a new language insted of moving to vb7 and getting frustrated when they can not add a simple text string to a combo box. there is not much in it anyway.

One of the problem I have had today with vb6 over .net is the regular expression. ie the lack of the look back facility in the engine .

(untested)

ie

string: MyString 12.14
patten: (?<!MyString\s*)(\d+[.]\d+)

works fine in .net but not in vb

one thing that is much improved is the IDE ("Yes it's slow") but the auto documentation feature is fantastic , and the regions are a god send. also there is inheritance in .net unlike vb6.

all this said vb6 is a faster enviroment to program in and it is down to the programer in what he/she wants to do.
Reply With Quote
  #93  
Old 09-21-2005, 02:08 AM
the master's Avatar
the master the master is offline
Tachikoma
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Mansfield, UK
Posts: 4,596
Default

hmm, .net does have some good points. transparent / semitransparent forms are great in .net because theres no code but they make it run stupidly slow where VB6 has to call an API or 2 and it takes about 6 lines of code but it runs faster, a lot faster. ive heard its really easy to do tray icons in .net, something ive wanted to do but never actually done in VB6 because it looks like a lot of code.

how long will it be before .net is gone and something completely diff and new replaces it? i think ill probs skip .net and start again when the next new thing comes out. i do more html/javascript/php now so i reckon ill stick to that for a bit. .net looks like Micro$oft had a great idea for something new but rushed it and tried to make it look nicer rather than work better. im sure the next thing they make will be as easy to use and as fast as VB6 but looking as good as .net with as many features. and hopefully they will bring back nice little commands like .circle and .line. they could even have object.graphical.circle to keep all the drawing tools together but still keeping it simple... i might have to make a few suggestions to them
__________________
"That which seems simple is often overlooked" ~ me
Halloween 2014 Yard Haunt
Halloween Special FX
Reply With Quote
  #94  
Old 09-21-2005, 02:15 AM
sgt_pinky's Avatar
sgt_pinky sgt_pinky is offline
Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 633
Default

Everything you have mentioned that is API in VB6 is wrapped in the .NET Framework 1.1. And it's the same speed, not slower, because its the same API under the skin!

And all the drawing tools are together:

Code:
Dim gfx As Graphics = Me.CreateGraphics gfx.DrawCurve() gfx.DrawBezier() gfx.DrawIcon() gfx.DrawLine() gfx.DrawPolygon()

Basically, if you are a VB6 programmer, you should have changed to .NET already (except for you VBA people), because it is 1 gazillion times better in ever respect. I programmed Legacy VB for years, and I can't go back now, it feels so old and outdated.
Reply With Quote
  #95  
Old 09-21-2005, 02:29 AM
the master's Avatar
the master the master is offline
Tachikoma
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Mansfield, UK
Posts: 4,596
Default

well surely if M$ put a property there then it should run as fast as the API. you would have thought that uses the same API but its a lot slower than 6 for transparancy.

i know all the drawing things are together in .net but there not on the object. i mean to have it VB6 style so "object.drawcommand" rather than dimming drawing objects and pens and things. but to keep them together so you havnt got "object.line", "object.circle", everything goes under "object.drawing" or something. so "object.drawing.circle". that would be a nice thing to have
__________________
"That which seems simple is often overlooked" ~ me
Halloween 2014 Yard Haunt
Halloween Special FX
Reply With Quote
  #96  
Old 09-21-2005, 02:53 AM
sgt_pinky's Avatar
sgt_pinky sgt_pinky is offline
Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 633
Default

Who says it runs slower? Because it doesn't!! Control transparency should be avoided anyway until they sort out a few problems they have (not supported at display resolutions about 24bit, because it seems that the default Windows 32bit resolution has some old alpha channel issues).

My honest opinion is whatever they have changed from VB6 has been for the better, and the .NET Framework is far more compatible and inline with the Windows operating system - as it should have been from the start, but they went over the top trying to make a dev environment that was *easy* to use.

I'm no expert, but all I know is that it is FAR more efficient to program anything with the .NET Framework than with Legacy VB. And I started with VB when it was VB3, back in the day, under Windows for Workgroups 3.11.
Reply With Quote
  #97  
Old 09-21-2005, 03:51 AM
the master's Avatar
the master the master is offline
Tachikoma
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Mansfield, UK
Posts: 4,596
Default

i tested both VB6 and .net on a good PC and a crap PC. VB6 using API to make the window semitransparent and .net using the property on the form. VB6 worked fine on both and .net was very slow on the slow PC and not much better on the fast one. moving the form around the screen was a big problem for .net
__________________
"That which seems simple is often overlooked" ~ me
Halloween 2014 Yard Haunt
Halloween Special FX
Reply With Quote
  #98  
Old 09-23-2005, 03:00 PM
John's Avatar
John John is offline
Bit Flipper
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: The Inner Loop
Posts: 5,550
Default

You can still use the windows API in .NET if you need to, so sticking with VB6 just to use some API functions is pretty pointless. If it is faster in VB6 it is because the API was used and you can do that in VB.NET too.

Of course, there are some valid reasons for sticking with VB6 for a while, transparent forms and controls is not one of them however.
__________________
Subclassing|Magnetic Forms|Operator Overloading (VB2K5)|QuickSnip.NET

"These Patriot playoff wins are like Ray Charles songs, Nantucket sunsets, and hot fudge sundaes. Each one is better than the last." - Dan Shaughnessy
Reply With Quote
  #99  
Old 09-23-2005, 06:57 PM
sgt_pinky's Avatar
sgt_pinky sgt_pinky is offline
Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 633
Default

Hi John,

Interesting that you say there are valid reasons for sticking with VB6. The only one that really crosses my mind is the VBA reason. Certainly COM should be avoided for the future - what are some other reasons?

Regards.
Reply With Quote
  #100  
Old 09-23-2005, 07:18 PM
reboot's Avatar
rebootThe Official VB6 vs VB.NET Thread reboot is offline
Keeper of foo

Retired Moderator
* Guru *
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Graceland
Posts: 15,614
Default

Hundreds of thousands of lines of VB6 code. And absolutely no justifiable reason to spend the megabucks it would require to convert it all. How's that?
__________________
~ Quod non mortiferum, fortiorem me facit ~

Avatar by lebb
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Advertisement:





Free Publications
The ASP.NET 2.0 Anthology
101 Essential Tips, Tricks & Hacks - Free 156 Page Preview. Learn the most practical features and best approaches for ASP.NET.
subscribe
Programmers Heaven C# School Book -Free 338 Page eBook
The Programmers Heaven C# School book covers the .NET framework and the C# language.
subscribe
Build Your Own ASP.NET 3.5 Web Site Using C# & VB, 3rd Edition - Free 219 Page Preview!
This comprehensive step-by-step guide will help get your database-driven ASP.NET web site up and running in no time..
subscribe
The Official VB6 vs VB.NET Thread
The Official VB6 vs VB.NET Thread
The Official VB6 vs VB.NET Thread The Official VB6 vs VB.NET Thread
The Official VB6 vs VB.NET Thread
The Official VB6 vs VB.NET Thread
The Official VB6 vs VB.NET Thread The Official VB6 vs VB.NET Thread The Official VB6 vs VB.NET Thread The Official VB6 vs VB.NET Thread The Official VB6 vs VB.NET Thread The Official VB6 vs VB.NET Thread The Official VB6 vs VB.NET Thread
The Official VB6 vs VB.NET Thread
The Official VB6 vs VB.NET Thread
 
The Official VB6 vs VB.NET Thread
The Official VB6 vs VB.NET Thread
 
-->