re: moving from VB to C# -- more reasons


DevX Home    Today's Headlines   Articles Archive   Tip Bank   Forums   

Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: re: moving from VB to C# -- more reasons

  1. #1
    Jeff Johnson Guest

    re: moving from VB to C# -- more reasons



    Here's some more of my reasoning (which I do not assume is 100%)--

    1) I don't like C/C++.

    2) I am intrigued by the .Net framework (as opposed to the win32 API.)

    3) I write database apps... probably mostly for SQL server over the next
    while (not Oracle.) I like the ability to put Access front ends on the thing--
    yes, out of a fondness for VBA. This makes also makes me lean toward a .Net
    language.

    4) I don't like Linux, but I wouldn't mind if my .Net code could run on
    it.


    C# offers the "The power of C" with the "ease of VB." (That's the pitch,
    anyway.) The RAD stuff matters to me. Raw C/C++ does not excite me. I
    hope that C# encapsulates away enough of the obnoxious stuff.

    If I support Microsoft products because I like them and I have experience
    with them... it seems I pretty well HAVE to learn a .Net language. If Microsoft
    languages are volatile, C# is less volitile than VB.

    As far as the ability of the various companies to implement a "vision" for
    a great platform... for some reason I have faith that Microsoft will have
    made the right decisions for what I will need to be doing 5 years from now.
    Every langauge choice seems to be a major gamble at this point.... and
    though I want stability, I don't want it bad enough to code in C!!!

    >So, I believe it is better to have skills to apply to all systems rather
    >than Windows alone.


    I've always felt that way-- that's why I'm majoring in Accounting instead
    of ComSci!!!



    "Don" <donaldg@varysoft.com> wrote:
    >
    >Hi Jeff,
    >
    >You have made some excellent points. Find some consolation in the fact that
    >DLLs and EXEs written in VB6 will most likely run on WindowsXP. They currently
    >run on Win2K and Windows NT without hitches. Consequently, you have at least
    >3 years before your skills become completely obsolete.
    >
    >But take a warning from the fate of the dedicated 3 million VB coders. They,
    >like the FoxPro and J++ programmers depended upon Microsoft to maintain

    a
    >stable, reliable code base from which to build programs. Microsoft rewrote
    >FoxPro, abandoned J++ and has re-written VB. Consider the possibility that
    >C# is another transitory MS attempt to remain competitive. Granted, it has
    >the 'future' emphasis from MS and VB will almost certainly die, so it MIGHT
    >be here in 3 years to pick up the slack left by the death of VB but there
    >are no guarantees with a new language.
    >
    >The world is getting a lot bigger than the MS vision allows for what with
    >Linux and PalmOS and other potential soft technologies on the horizon. The
    >one and only language that will always work on Unix, Linux, Windows, PalmOS
    >and in the little robot that crawled around on Mars is C.
    >
    >Second to that is C++. Since you have 3 years to learn it, why waste your
    >time on C# when it is entirely possible that MS will decide it doesn't need
    >to support it after all? Believe it or not, there are armies of coders that
    >use C and C++ and these are vastly superior to C# or Java.
    >
    >I have been a VB coder since version 3.0 and before that I was a basic programmer.
    >I have loved the language as useful and profitable tool. However, I began
    >my focus on C and C++ some time ago and redoubled my efforts when it became
    >apparent that MS was tanking VB. I can't believe it is wise to depend upon
    >one company to define the technical vision of my or any one else's future.
    >So, I believe it is better to have skills to apply to all systems rather
    >than Windows alone. Hope this informs your decision.
    >
    >Happy coding!
    >
    >Don - just one more former Microsoft employee and current "Techno-Retro-Grouch"



  2. #2
    Jonathan Allen Guest

    Re: moving from VB to C# -- more reasons

    > If Microsoft
    > languages are volatile, C# is less volitile than VB.


    I think the volatility of VB is one thing we can all agree on. No other
    language has changed so much in so little time.

    --
    Jonathan Allen


    "Jeff Johnson" <johnsonjs@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    news:3b4da36e$1@news.devx.com...
    >
    >
    > Here's some more of my reasoning (which I do not assume is 100%)--
    >
    > 1) I don't like C/C++.
    >
    > 2) I am intrigued by the .Net framework (as opposed to the win32 API.)
    >
    > 3) I write database apps... probably mostly for SQL server over the next
    > while (not Oracle.) I like the ability to put Access front ends on the

    thing--
    > yes, out of a fondness for VBA. This makes also makes me lean toward a

    ..Net
    > language.
    >
    > 4) I don't like Linux, but I wouldn't mind if my .Net code could run on
    > it.
    >
    >
    > C# offers the "The power of C" with the "ease of VB." (That's the pitch,
    > anyway.) The RAD stuff matters to me. Raw C/C++ does not excite me. I
    > hope that C# encapsulates away enough of the obnoxious stuff.
    >
    > If I support Microsoft products because I like them and I have experience
    > with them... it seems I pretty well HAVE to learn a .Net language. If

    Microsoft
    > languages are volatile, C# is less volitile than VB.
    >
    > As far as the ability of the various companies to implement a "vision" for
    > a great platform... for some reason I have faith that Microsoft will have
    > made the right decisions for what I will need to be doing 5 years from

    now.
    > Every langauge choice seems to be a major gamble at this point.... and
    > though I want stability, I don't want it bad enough to code in C!!!
    >
    > >So, I believe it is better to have skills to apply to all systems rather
    > >than Windows alone.

    >
    > I've always felt that way-- that's why I'm majoring in Accounting instead
    > of ComSci!!!
    >
    >
    >
    > "Don" <donaldg@varysoft.com> wrote:
    > >
    > >Hi Jeff,
    > >
    > >You have made some excellent points. Find some consolation in the fact

    that
    > >DLLs and EXEs written in VB6 will most likely run on WindowsXP. They

    currently
    > >run on Win2K and Windows NT without hitches. Consequently, you have at

    least
    > >3 years before your skills become completely obsolete.
    > >
    > >But take a warning from the fate of the dedicated 3 million VB coders.

    They,
    > >like the FoxPro and J++ programmers depended upon Microsoft to maintain

    > a
    > >stable, reliable code base from which to build programs. Microsoft

    rewrote
    > >FoxPro, abandoned J++ and has re-written VB. Consider the possibility

    that
    > >C# is another transitory MS attempt to remain competitive. Granted, it

    has
    > >the 'future' emphasis from MS and VB will almost certainly die, so it

    MIGHT
    > >be here in 3 years to pick up the slack left by the death of VB but there
    > >are no guarantees with a new language.
    > >
    > >The world is getting a lot bigger than the MS vision allows for what with
    > >Linux and PalmOS and other potential soft technologies on the horizon.

    The
    > >one and only language that will always work on Unix, Linux, Windows,

    PalmOS
    > >and in the little robot that crawled around on Mars is C.
    > >
    > >Second to that is C++. Since you have 3 years to learn it, why waste your
    > >time on C# when it is entirely possible that MS will decide it doesn't

    need
    > >to support it after all? Believe it or not, there are armies of coders

    that
    > >use C and C++ and these are vastly superior to C# or Java.
    > >
    > >I have been a VB coder since version 3.0 and before that I was a basic

    programmer.
    > >I have loved the language as useful and profitable tool. However, I began
    > >my focus on C and C++ some time ago and redoubled my efforts when it

    became
    > >apparent that MS was tanking VB. I can't believe it is wise to depend

    upon
    > >one company to define the technical vision of my or any one else's

    future.
    > >So, I believe it is better to have skills to apply to all systems rather
    > >than Windows alone. Hope this informs your decision.
    > >
    > >Happy coding!
    > >
    > >Don - just one more former Microsoft employee and current

    "Techno-Retro-Grouch"
    >




  3. #3
    Patrick Troughton Guest

    Re: moving from VB to C# -- more reasons


    Actually, this might not be as big of a problem as you fear. Microsoft has
    been very willing to break compatibility in VB (see my other posts), however,
    MS treats C a bit differently. Now that VB.NET and C# are very much tied
    together by the same architecture, .NET, radical alterations to VB.NET would
    probably mean radical alterations to C#. I don't think MS would treats it
    C programmers the same as their VB programmers. To my knowledge, MS bends
    over backwards to protect its C investments, which is why MS is continuing
    to support VC++.

    Note to Dan Barclay - It's hard to predict the future, but .NET may actually
    be the language stability you've been looking for.

    /Pat

    "Jonathan Allen" <greywolf@cts.com> wrote:
    >> If Microsoft
    >> languages are volatile, C# is less volitile than VB.

    >
    >I think the volatility of VB is one thing we can all agree on. No other
    >language has changed so much in so little time.
    >
    >--
    >Jonathan Allen
    >
    >
    >"Jeff Johnson" <johnsonjs@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    >news:3b4da36e$1@news.devx.com...
    >>
    >>
    >> Here's some more of my reasoning (which I do not assume is 100%)--
    >>
    >> 1) I don't like C/C++.
    >>
    >> 2) I am intrigued by the .Net framework (as opposed to the win32 API.)
    >>
    >> 3) I write database apps... probably mostly for SQL server over the next
    >> while (not Oracle.) I like the ability to put Access front ends on the

    >thing--
    >> yes, out of a fondness for VBA. This makes also makes me lean toward

    a
    >..Net
    >> language.
    >>
    >> 4) I don't like Linux, but I wouldn't mind if my .Net code could run

    on
    >> it.
    >>
    >>
    >> C# offers the "The power of C" with the "ease of VB." (That's the pitch,
    >> anyway.) The RAD stuff matters to me. Raw C/C++ does not excite me.

    I
    >> hope that C# encapsulates away enough of the obnoxious stuff.
    >>
    >> If I support Microsoft products because I like them and I have experience
    >> with them... it seems I pretty well HAVE to learn a .Net language. If

    >Microsoft
    >> languages are volatile, C# is less volitile than VB.
    >>
    >> As far as the ability of the various companies to implement a "vision"

    for
    >> a great platform... for some reason I have faith that Microsoft will have
    >> made the right decisions for what I will need to be doing 5 years from

    >now.
    >> Every langauge choice seems to be a major gamble at this point.... and
    >> though I want stability, I don't want it bad enough to code in C!!!
    >>
    >> >So, I believe it is better to have skills to apply to all systems rather
    >> >than Windows alone.

    >>
    >> I've always felt that way-- that's why I'm majoring in Accounting instead
    >> of ComSci!!!
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> "Don" <donaldg@varysoft.com> wrote:
    >> >
    >> >Hi Jeff,
    >> >
    >> >You have made some excellent points. Find some consolation in the fact

    >that
    >> >DLLs and EXEs written in VB6 will most likely run on WindowsXP. They

    >currently
    >> >run on Win2K and Windows NT without hitches. Consequently, you have at

    >least
    >> >3 years before your skills become completely obsolete.
    >> >
    >> >But take a warning from the fate of the dedicated 3 million VB coders.

    >They,
    >> >like the FoxPro and J++ programmers depended upon Microsoft to maintain

    >> a
    >> >stable, reliable code base from which to build programs. Microsoft

    >rewrote
    >> >FoxPro, abandoned J++ and has re-written VB. Consider the possibility

    >that
    >> >C# is another transitory MS attempt to remain competitive. Granted, it

    >has
    >> >the 'future' emphasis from MS and VB will almost certainly die, so it

    >MIGHT
    >> >be here in 3 years to pick up the slack left by the death of VB but there
    >> >are no guarantees with a new language.
    >> >
    >> >The world is getting a lot bigger than the MS vision allows for what

    with
    >> >Linux and PalmOS and other potential soft technologies on the horizon.

    >The
    >> >one and only language that will always work on Unix, Linux, Windows,

    >PalmOS
    >> >and in the little robot that crawled around on Mars is C.
    >> >
    >> >Second to that is C++. Since you have 3 years to learn it, why waste

    your
    >> >time on C# when it is entirely possible that MS will decide it doesn't

    >need
    >> >to support it after all? Believe it or not, there are armies of coders

    >that
    >> >use C and C++ and these are vastly superior to C# or Java.
    >> >
    >> >I have been a VB coder since version 3.0 and before that I was a basic

    >programmer.
    >> >I have loved the language as useful and profitable tool. However, I began
    >> >my focus on C and C++ some time ago and redoubled my efforts when it

    >became
    >> >apparent that MS was tanking VB. I can't believe it is wise to depend

    >upon
    >> >one company to define the technical vision of my or any one else's

    >future.
    >> >So, I believe it is better to have skills to apply to all systems rather
    >> >than Windows alone. Hope this informs your decision.
    >> >
    >> >Happy coding!
    >> >
    >> >Don - just one more former Microsoft employee and current

    >"Techno-Retro-Grouch"
    >>

    >
    >



  4. #4
    Jonathan Allen Guest

    Re: moving from VB to C# -- more reasons

    > Actually, this might not be as big of a problem as you fear.

    Fear, no. Enjoy, yes. What I like about VB is that it takes the opportunity
    to grow, something languages like C rarely do. That does make the language
    somewhat unstable, but I see no harm in keeping older versions of VB around
    for older projects.

    > Now that VB.NET and C# are very much tied
    > together by the same architecture, .NET, radical alterations to VB.NET

    would
    > probably mean radical alterations to C#.


    Still, there is a lot of room for growth in VB without affecting C#. Inline
    documenting, Operator Overloads, matrix operations, etc. We may even see
    templates before C#, as they have to go through committee.

    --
    Jonathan Allen


    "Patrick Troughton" <Patrick@Troughton.com> wrote in message
    news:3b4ef693@news.devx.com...
    >
    > Actually, this might not be as big of a problem as you fear. Microsoft has
    > been very willing to break compatibility in VB (see my other posts),

    however,
    > MS treats C a bit differently. Now that VB.NET and C# are very much tied
    > together by the same architecture, .NET, radical alterations to VB.NET

    would
    > probably mean radical alterations to C#. I don't think MS would treats it
    > C programmers the same as their VB programmers. To my knowledge, MS bends
    > over backwards to protect its C investments, which is why MS is continuing
    > to support VC++.
    >
    > Note to Dan Barclay - It's hard to predict the future, but .NET may

    actually
    > be the language stability you've been looking for.
    >
    > /Pat
    >
    > "Jonathan Allen" <greywolf@cts.com> wrote:
    > >> If Microsoft
    > >> languages are volatile, C# is less volitile than VB.

    > >
    > >I think the volatility of VB is one thing we can all agree on. No other
    > >language has changed so much in so little time.
    > >
    > >--
    > >Jonathan Allen
    > >
    > >
    > >"Jeff Johnson" <johnsonjs@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    > >news:3b4da36e$1@news.devx.com...
    > >>
    > >>
    > >> Here's some more of my reasoning (which I do not assume is 100%)--
    > >>
    > >> 1) I don't like C/C++.
    > >>
    > >> 2) I am intrigued by the .Net framework (as opposed to the win32 API.)
    > >>
    > >> 3) I write database apps... probably mostly for SQL server over the

    next
    > >> while (not Oracle.) I like the ability to put Access front ends on the

    > >thing--
    > >> yes, out of a fondness for VBA. This makes also makes me lean toward

    > a
    > >..Net
    > >> language.
    > >>
    > >> 4) I don't like Linux, but I wouldn't mind if my .Net code could run

    > on
    > >> it.
    > >>
    > >>
    > >> C# offers the "The power of C" with the "ease of VB." (That's the

    pitch,
    > >> anyway.) The RAD stuff matters to me. Raw C/C++ does not excite me.

    > I
    > >> hope that C# encapsulates away enough of the obnoxious stuff.
    > >>
    > >> If I support Microsoft products because I like them and I have

    experience
    > >> with them... it seems I pretty well HAVE to learn a .Net language. If

    > >Microsoft
    > >> languages are volatile, C# is less volitile than VB.
    > >>
    > >> As far as the ability of the various companies to implement a "vision"

    > for
    > >> a great platform... for some reason I have faith that Microsoft will

    have
    > >> made the right decisions for what I will need to be doing 5 years from

    > >now.
    > >> Every langauge choice seems to be a major gamble at this point....

    and
    > >> though I want stability, I don't want it bad enough to code in C!!!
    > >>
    > >> >So, I believe it is better to have skills to apply to all systems

    rather
    > >> >than Windows alone.
    > >>
    > >> I've always felt that way-- that's why I'm majoring in Accounting

    instead
    > >> of ComSci!!!
    > >>
    > >>
    > >>
    > >> "Don" <donaldg@varysoft.com> wrote:
    > >> >
    > >> >Hi Jeff,
    > >> >
    > >> >You have made some excellent points. Find some consolation in the fact

    > >that
    > >> >DLLs and EXEs written in VB6 will most likely run on WindowsXP. They

    > >currently
    > >> >run on Win2K and Windows NT without hitches. Consequently, you have at

    > >least
    > >> >3 years before your skills become completely obsolete.
    > >> >
    > >> >But take a warning from the fate of the dedicated 3 million VB coders.

    > >They,
    > >> >like the FoxPro and J++ programmers depended upon Microsoft to

    maintain
    > >> a
    > >> >stable, reliable code base from which to build programs. Microsoft

    > >rewrote
    > >> >FoxPro, abandoned J++ and has re-written VB. Consider the possibility

    > >that
    > >> >C# is another transitory MS attempt to remain competitive. Granted, it

    > >has
    > >> >the 'future' emphasis from MS and VB will almost certainly die, so it

    > >MIGHT
    > >> >be here in 3 years to pick up the slack left by the death of VB but

    there
    > >> >are no guarantees with a new language.
    > >> >
    > >> >The world is getting a lot bigger than the MS vision allows for what

    > with
    > >> >Linux and PalmOS and other potential soft technologies on the horizon.

    > >The
    > >> >one and only language that will always work on Unix, Linux, Windows,

    > >PalmOS
    > >> >and in the little robot that crawled around on Mars is C.
    > >> >
    > >> >Second to that is C++. Since you have 3 years to learn it, why waste

    > your
    > >> >time on C# when it is entirely possible that MS will decide it doesn't

    > >need
    > >> >to support it after all? Believe it or not, there are armies of coders

    > >that
    > >> >use C and C++ and these are vastly superior to C# or Java.
    > >> >
    > >> >I have been a VB coder since version 3.0 and before that I was a basic

    > >programmer.
    > >> >I have loved the language as useful and profitable tool. However, I

    began
    > >> >my focus on C and C++ some time ago and redoubled my efforts when it

    > >became
    > >> >apparent that MS was tanking VB. I can't believe it is wise to depend

    > >upon
    > >> >one company to define the technical vision of my or any one else's

    > >future.
    > >> >So, I believe it is better to have skills to apply to all systems

    rather
    > >> >than Windows alone. Hope this informs your decision.
    > >> >
    > >> >Happy coding!
    > >> >
    > >> >Don - just one more former Microsoft employee and current

    > >"Techno-Retro-Grouch"
    > >>

    > >
    > >

    >




  5. #5
    Ted Guest

    re: moving from VB to C# -- more reasons


    "Jeff Johnson" <johnsonjs@hotmail.com> wrote:
    >
    >
    >Here's some more of my reasoning (which I do not assume is 100%)--
    >
    >1) I don't like C/C++.


    Why?

    >C# offers the "The power of C" with the "ease of VB." (That's the pitch,
    >anyway.) The RAD stuff matters to me. Raw C/C++ does not excite me. I
    >hope that C# encapsulates away enough of the obnoxious stuff.
    >though I want stability, I don't want it bad enough to code in C!!!


    Again, why?


  6. #6
    Richard Curzon Guest

    Re: moving from VB to C# -- more reasons

    It's a thing that you can see if you
    a) are new to languages or
    b) are conversant with more than just the C world of languages

    Bjarne Stroustrup designed C++, but concluded that C syntax is "ugly and
    illogical".

    See, if you disagree with the likes of Jeff, you are also disagreeing with
    the likes of Bjarne. Need that reference again <g>?

    regards
    Richard

    --
    -----
    Live without dead time - Raoul Vaneigem
    May I borrow your towel, my car just hit a water buffalo - Chevy Chase



  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Zagreb, Croatia
    Posts
    152
    I'm using both C++ (Borland C++ Builder) and C# to create applications. In my opinion C# is easier to use for creating web based applications. For other things (including desktop and database applications) C++ is usually a better solution. For applications that require ultimate performance such as sound processing C++ is much , much better.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
HTML5 Development Center
 
 
FAQ
Latest Articles
Java
.NET
XML
Database
Enterprise
Questions? Contact us.
C++
Web Development
Wireless
Latest Tips
Open Source


   Development Centers

   -- Android Development Center
   -- Cloud Development Project Center
   -- HTML5 Development Center
   -- Windows Mobile Development Center