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
  #261  
Old 02-06-2013, 10:36 AM
dilettante's Avatar
dilettanteThe Official VB6 vs VB.NET Thread dilettante is offline
Underclocked lifestyle

Forum Leader
* Guru *
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Michigan, USA
Posts: 4,524
Default


I despair of all of it when I see so many people struggling to understand that a String is not a Date and turn themselves into knots based on a false mental model that insists they're the same thing as long as the String "looks like" a "date."
Reply With Quote
  #262  
Old 02-06-2013, 12:13 PM
AtmaWeapon's Avatar
AtmaWeaponThe Official VB6 vs VB.NET Thread AtmaWeapon is offline
Fabulous Florist

Forum Leader
* Guru *
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 9,500
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dilettante View Post
I despair of all of it when I see so many people struggling to understand that a String is not a Date and turn themselves into knots based on a false mental model that insists they're the same thing as long as the String "looks like" a "date."
Yes. This is the kind of thing that makes me applaud strict typing. I have seen so many questions that were overcomplicated because the user has no clue there's an actual number behind the date. A close second: "I know how to convert it from a number to a hex number but now how do I add it?" ahhhhhhhhhhhhhh
__________________
.NET Resources
My FAQ threads | Tutor's Corner | Code Library
I would bet money 2/3 of .NET questions are already answered in one of these three places.
Reply With Quote
  #263  
Old 02-06-2013, 03:00 PM
hDC_0The Official VB6 vs VB.NET Thread hDC_0 is offline
Contributor

* Expert *
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 559
Default MDX never given a chance..and XNA wasn't a great option for VB6/VB.Net coders either

Quote:
MDX sort of deserved to be cancelled; it was buggy and leaky and even when you used it right there were crashes for which the solution was "restart the program".
Do you look at the page I linked to?
Version 1.0 of anything from Microsoft is bound to be buggy and the version 2.0 was cancelled while still in beta.
So it was no surprise it was buggy and leaky at the point it was discontinued.

Or in other words..
It was cancelled before it had a chance to achieve any sort of stability, but I certainly don't think it deserved to be cancelled.
It had potential.

Look at it this way.
The "managed" part of MDX was tied to managed coding, which is basically
the .Net environment "managed" visual studio languages VB.Net and C#.
Who makes (and sells) VisualStudo.Net?
Microsoft

What about the "DX" part of MDX?
This stands for DirectX.
Who invented/developed DirectX?
DirectX is pretty much proprietary to one company.
Microsoft

Do you see the commonality here?
If MDX was "buggy and leaky" then there is really only one company to blame.
Guess which one?

There was also really only one company, that if they had preservered
(and not thrown in the towel prematurely), could have fixed MDX.
Guess which one?



The other thing way to look at things..
Given that DirectX is now so deeply embedded at the Windows operating system level,
(a DirectX9 video card is part of the minimum requirement for both Vista and Win7),
the company that sells the operating system that has DirectX integrated into it
has the most to gain if .Net managed language programmers (including VB.Net programmers)
are able to access DirectX features easily (and stably) from its own VS.Net product.

If MDX had been fully developed and had achieved a certain level of success,
both Microsoft and the users of its Visual Studio coding products would have gained.
It could have been Win, Win.
Now with MDX abandoned its Lose Lose.

XNA was (and is) heavily skewed to the C# crowd and anyone looking to convert
VB6 DX code to VB.Net XNA code doesn't have a lot of resources from Microsoft to help them.

Microsoft, in its arrogance, has always made the assumption, if we decided to replace technology "A" with "B" then
then, because we control the marketplace tied in with the Windows "ecosystem",
everyone should just be prepared to abandon technology "A" (whether its really "obsolete" or not) because Microsoft says so.

This is so not only arrogant and myopic but a poor business practice on Microsoft.

Let the marketplace decide when its ready to abandon all hope for a certain technology.

Until then milk the customers to offset the "long tail" support costs.

Make a point of selling "bridging" products, where the most expensive bridging products convert the oldest to the newest.

Could you imagine how much a Quickbasic to WPF/XAML/Silverlight comvertor could/would cost?

I can't even imagine what the thought of such a ridiculous conceptual monstrosity does for a WPF supporter like AtmaWeapon,
but I'm sure a least a few people would buy it with the Microsoft label on the package.

On the other hand more milder upgrade step utilities could cost less
because those developers are sort of "following along" with (and are "in tune" with)
Microsoft's timely developer upgrade game plan.


I think the reason that MDX didn't get a strong embrace from the marketplace at the time it came out was
because of all the resentment from VB6'ers having VB.Net "shoved down their throat"
without having any real code upgrade options.

The "migration assistant" was a joke.

Microsoft could have done a lot to "salve" the wound created when they abandoned VB Classic by
buying Artinsoft and made a point of including a full VBUC in with the various VB.Net versions.

The reason they didn't do that - they totally underestimated the "resistance" of people who loved VB6
and had no desired to deal with the unfamiliarity (and code incompatibility) of VB.Net.

What would have happened if they told all users of Windows95 and Windows 98:
Quote:
We're abandoning you.
We're cutting off all support because we've decided to move to Windows Unix.
Get on board or get lost
we don't care either way, because we're moving past DOS with or without you..
In case there are some clueless people out there.
Windows NT kernel = Windows Unix (or the closest Microsoft O/S equivalent to Unix)

However the transition didn't happen that way.

Instead Microsoft made sure the Windows98 UI was carried forward
as the Windows NT micro kernel was "slipped in underneath",
first in the "transitioning" Windows Me then full on in Windows2K.

By the time WindowsXP came out if you asked the typical Windows user:
Quote:
Aren't you concerned that there is no trace on DOS left in a the current Windows O/S product?
They would look at you with a quizzical look.

In other words - if Microsoft wants to, it can do a switch from one underlying technology to another
without missing a beat and without customers even knowing (or caring).

So there's a right way to smoothly phase out (or transition) technologies and there is a "shock and dictate" way.

So why has Microsoft almost consistently chosen the later since the Vb6 to Vb.Net debacle?

And after Microsoft's Lost Decade, will it ever get its act together internally, and start making smarter decisions again?

Last edited by hDC_0; 02-06-2013 at 03:31 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #264  
Old 02-06-2013, 04:48 PM
AtmaWeapon's Avatar
AtmaWeaponThe Official VB6 vs VB.NET Thread AtmaWeapon is offline
Fabulous Florist

Forum Leader
* Guru *
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 9,500
Default

MDX was an attempt to write a plain old .NET wrapper around .NET and as such had a lot of complexities that were very difficult to address without what would be extensive breaking API changes in 2.0. It takes a lot of smarts to write a managed wrapper around a large C library that works, and it also places a huge burden on the developer to understand they're still dealing with a lot of unmanaged constructs.

XNA was an attempt to write a managed .NET library that used DirectX behind the scenes. As such, the learning curve was much smaller and the amount of effort it took to maintain was much smaller compared to making a full DirectX that worked.

It probably also didn't help that MS knew there were completely new DirectX libraries coming that MDX didn't address, that entire portions of DirectX were being obsoleted so there was no point in working on them for MDX, and that more newbie game developers were picking up XNA if they didn't just opt to use C and DirectX.

Personally I'm more surprised MS is giving XNA the boot, but I think they want everything to focus on Windows 8 tablets right now and my guess is they just can't get XNA ported to WinRT as fast as they can convince C/DirectX developers to jump aboard.

But this is what happens when you hitch your horse to a company. They don't owe you anything unless you get them to sign a contract. Their obligation is to shareholders, and shareholders want growth. You don't grow by providing stable platforms and OSes for 30 years; that's a side business. You grow by being the first guy to come up with the next big thing, and the MS platform got blindsided by another guy who did it more successfully. Now they've got 10 years of catch-up and everything's topsy-turvy.

I don't like it, but the alternatives aren't compelling. Both iOS and Mac OS are going through some interesting rapid changes too, though nothing as dramatic as what MS has tossed us. Windows is paying the bills right now, but I'm not touching Metro until it's gone 36 months without a replacement and/or my boss tells me I have to.
__________________
.NET Resources
My FAQ threads | Tutor's Corner | Code Library
I would bet money 2/3 of .NET questions are already answered in one of these three places.
Reply With Quote
  #265  
Old 02-07-2013, 02:00 PM
Rockoon's Avatar
Rockoon Rockoon is offline
Joseph Koss

* Guru *
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Unfashionable End
Posts: 3,615
Default

I'm not sure that I agree entirely.

The things they are doing undermine the stable platform, ultimately hurting that "side business" that provides the fuel for growth.

Suppose you are a C# or VB.NET developer using MDX or XNA, now what do you do? Do you dive into C++ and pure DirectX or do you dive into something like Python and OpenGL? The thing is that .NET, MDX, XNA, and DirectX keep the resulting products in the Microsoft ecosystem, but C++, Python, and OpenGL does not.

The upshot is that developers have increasing freedom to leave the MS world simply by doing what MS is now forcing them to do. They might end up still producing MS-specific products, but suddenly they either dont have to or its a much smaller step not to.

I'm not bashing Metro at all, as I think that it is inevitable that touch will join the mouse and keyboard and be an ubiquitous form of user input (eventually voice and gestures will do the same.) What I'm bashing is the continuing trend to convert perfectly suitable development paths into what are second class citizens at best.

When you place your own mountain in front of me, don't expect me to climb yours instead of someone else's. I might. I might not.
Reply With Quote
  #266  
Old 07-21-2015, 09:53 AM
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

Such nostalgia.

But here's the cool news. Much to my continued surprise, and flying in the face of most of the expert predictions in this thread (including my own), 10+ years after this thread was first started, Visual Basic 6 still runs flawlessly on every Microsoft OS out there, from Windows 2k to Windows 8.1, 32 and 64 bit. We have so far never been forced to upgrade our (massive) VB6 code base.

I'll let you know about Windows 10 in a few weeks (should there be anyone here still interested).
__________________
~ Quod non mortiferum, fortiorem me facit ~

Avatar by lebb
Reply With Quote
  #267  
Old 07-21-2015, 08:27 PM
dilettante's Avatar
dilettanteThe Official VB6 vs VB.NET Thread dilettante is offline
Underclocked lifestyle

Forum Leader
* Guru *
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Michigan, USA
Posts: 4,524
Default

I just tested a simple VB6 program on a fresh Windows 95 OSR2 VM the other day and there isn't even a need to deploy the runtime there (probably was installed with IE 5.1 when the image was built).

So that's an even broader range when it comes right down to it.
Reply With Quote
  #268  
Old 07-23-2015, 09:20 AM
PrOpHeT's Avatar
PrOpHeTThe Official VB6 vs VB.NET Thread PrOpHeT is offline
Hopelessly confused...

* Expert *
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Tyler, Tx.
Posts: 3,055
Default

This place is still here

wow, imagine my surprise when I got an email alert that a dead relative had come back...

On that note, I can tell you this, I do have an old project, that was a com inter opp active x control wrapper for a .NET assembly (so an even older app could consume my net code without driving it from VBA)

It is still chugging along well in the few machines that still use it

But I will not claim to *miss* vb6 one iota
__________________
When you earnestly believe you can compensate for a lack of skill by doubling your efforts, there's no end to what you can't do ;)

For the love of Gold...
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
 
-->