Converting projects to VB.NET


DevX Home    Today's Headlines   Articles Archive   Tip Bank   Forums   

Page 1 of 8 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 117

Thread: Converting projects to VB.NET

  1. #1
    Frank Oquendo Guest

    Re: Converting projects to VB.NET

    Dave Doknjas <dave_doknjas@yahoo.ca> had this to say:

    > I'm converting apps that I've written, so I should have some
    > advantage (right?)


    Not necessarily. What does VB.NET allow your apps to do that VB6
    doesn't? The answer to that one question will go a long way towards
    addressing the concerns you've raised in your post.

    > This doesn't make MS look very good.


    Microsoft has enough money to afford the occasional black eye. I'm
    sure people like you and I do not. With that in mind, you really need
    to rethink your reasons for upgrading. It does not follow that just
    because you *can* upgrade that you *must* upgrade.

    --
    http://www.acadx.com
    "If you want to be somebody else change your mind"







  2. #2
    Dave Doknjas Guest

    Converting projects to VB.NET


    I've finally got around to begin converting projects to VB.NET and I have
    to say I think VB6 is going to be around a LONG time (supported or not).

    I'm converting apps that I've written, so I should have some advantage (right?),
    but given the vast amount of work to convert a real-world app (most writers
    have apparently only written hobby apps) from VB6 to VB.NET, I can't imagine
    that there's an unlimited amount of money, time, and patience out there for
    companines to have the incentive to convert (I'm doing some of the conversions
    for clients on my own time in order to jump into the .NET world without further
    delay). Certainly, it's irresponsible to say that companies need web services
    - web services are irrelevant to most architectures since you normally don't
    need to have parts of a system running on different networks.

    Once you convert, you have to expain to clients why developers will now need
    machine upgrades to run the excessively bloated and slow .NET IDE, and why
    the users will notice that the apps are much slower. Good Luck!!

    I'm committed to .NET, but I can't imagine why most companies should be.
    If they're presented with an honest argument for converting they would naturally
    conclude that the only reason for converting is to attract developers when
    the market heats up again. This doesn't make MS look very good.


  3. #3
    Bob Butler Guest

    Re: Converting projects to VB.NET

    "Frank Oquendo" <franko at acadx dot com> wrote in message
    news:3cf507cd@10.1.10.29
    > Dave Doknjas <dave_doknjas@yahoo.ca> had this to say:
    >
    >> I'm converting apps that I've written, so I should have some
    >> advantage (right?)

    >
    > Not necessarily. What does VB.NET allow your apps to do that VB6
    > doesn't? The answer to that one question will go a long way towards
    > addressing the concerns you've raised in your post.


    I read the advantage as being familiar with the existing code so that'd make
    upgrading easier as compared to trying to upgrade an app that somebody else
    wrote.

    >> This doesn't make MS look very good.

    >
    > Microsoft has enough money to afford the occasional black eye. I'm
    > sure people like you and I do not. With that in mind, you really need
    > to rethink your reasons for upgrading. It does not follow that just
    > because you *can* upgrade that you *must* upgrade.


    In the not-to-distant future there's going to be more XP upgrades and
    eventually a 64-bit windows. I have no confidence that VB6 apps will be
    supported under those or will even run at all. That means a rewrite one way
    or another. The only question is whether or not VB.Net is the best option.
    From what I've seen it isn't.



  4. #4
    Frank Oquendo Guest

    Re: Converting projects to VB.NET

    Bob Butler <butlerbob@earthlink.net> had this to say:

    > I read the advantage as being familiar with the existing code so
    > that'd make upgrading easier as compared to trying to upgrade an
    > app that somebody else wrote.


    Ok, I can see that. That reason alone still doesn't justify switching
    to VB.NET so we would all do well to consider our reasons for moving
    to VB.NET.

    > In the not-to-distant future there's going to be more XP upgrades
    > and eventually a 64-bit windows. I have no confidence that VB6
    > apps will be supported under those or will even run at all. That
    > means a rewrite one way or another.


    True enough but that day has not yet arrived. Unless a programmer
    intends to avail himself of features only available in .NET, there is
    currently no good reason to make the switch.

    > The only question is whether or not VB.Net is the best option.
    > From what I've seen it isn't.


    I don't understand this argument. Anyone who makes money at
    programming should be smart enough to know that brand loyalty is a
    luxury they can't afford. Evangelism be damned; if VB.NET doesn't give
    you what you need in a language, use something that does.

    --
    http://www.acadx.com
    "If you want to be somebody else change your mind"







  5. #5
    Bob Butler Guest

    Re: Converting projects to VB.NET

    "Frank Oquendo" <franko at acadx dot com> wrote in message
    news:3cf50a67$1@10.1.10.29
    > Bob Butler <butlerbob@earthlink.net> had this to say:
    >
    >> I read the advantage as being familiar with the existing code so
    >> that'd make upgrading easier as compared to trying to upgrade an
    >> app that somebody else wrote.

    >
    > Ok, I can see that. That reason alone still doesn't justify switching
    > to VB.NET so we would all do well to consider our reasons for moving
    > to VB.NET.


    Agreed; all I was saying is that I read the original as saying that given
    that the decision has been made to port to VB.Net there is an advantage to
    migrating code that you know well already.

    >> In the not-to-distant future there's going to be more XP upgrades
    >> and eventually a 64-bit windows. I have no confidence that VB6
    >> apps will be supported under those or will even run at all. That
    >> means a rewrite one way or another.

    >
    > True enough but that day has not yet arrived. Unless a programmer
    > intends to avail himself of features only available in .NET, there is
    > currently no good reason to make the switch.


    No, but it's close enough that continuing to develop in VB may not make much
    sense. I'd rather start planning now so that when the day comes I'm done.

    >> The only question is whether or not VB.Net is the best option.
    >> From what I've seen it isn't.

    >
    > I don't understand this argument. Anyone who makes money at
    > programming should be smart enough to know that brand loyalty is a
    > luxury they can't afford. Evangelism be damned; if VB.NET doesn't give
    > you what you need in a language, use something that does.


    I do not disagree with that. I'd prefer to stick with VB if I could upgrade
    my apps easily since that'd be the path of least resistance. The situation
    now is that migrating to VB.Net is no more difficult than migrating to any
    of a number of other options. If I do decide on VB.Net I have to
    acknowledge that MS has burned me pretty badly on this upgrade and I have to
    wonder when they'll do it again.





  6. #6
    Dan Barclay Guest

    Re: Converting projects to VB.NET

    On Wed, 29 May 2002 19:10:18 +0100, "Kunle Odutola"
    <kunle.odutola@<REMOVETHIS>okocha.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:

    >>
    >> I've finally got around to begin converting projects to VB.NET and I have
    >> to say I think VB6 is going to be around a LONG time (supported or not).

    >
    >Given that COBOL, FORTAN, dBASE, Pascal et al are still around, this is
    >hardly worth saying. All version of VB since VB3 will be around a long time.


    I've got QuickBasic 2.0 on this machine. What's that got to do with
    any application of value today?

    Dan
    Language Stability is a *feature* I wish VB had!
    (#6)
    Error 51
    Error 3
    Error 9
    ....

  7. #7
    Kunle Odutola Guest

    Re: Converting projects to VB.NET


    "Dave Doknjas" <dave_doknjas@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
    news:3cf4fd4f@10.1.10.29...
    >
    > I've finally got around to begin converting projects to VB.NET and I have
    > to say I think VB6 is going to be around a LONG time (supported or not).


    Given that COBOL, FORTAN, dBASE, Pascal et al are still around, this is
    hardly worth saying. All version of VB since VB3 will be around a long time.

    > I'm converting apps that I've written, so I should have some advantage

    (right?),

    Yes. Familiarity with the code. And you do.

    > but given the vast amount of work to convert a real-world app (most

    writers
    > have apparently only written hobby apps) from VB6 to VB.NET, I can't

    imagine
    > that there's an unlimited amount of money, time, and patience out there

    for
    > companines to have the incentive to convert


    There is no situation in which anyone has an unlimited anount of money,
    time and patience. If you are alluding to the fact that upgrading from VB6
    to VB.NET is more difficult than upgrading from VB5 to VB6, you will be
    correct.

    > (I'm doing some of the conversions
    > for clients on my own time in order to jump into the .NET world without

    further
    > delay).


    Do you clients *need* or *want* to jump into the .NET world with those apps
    you are converting?
    If yes, is VB.NET their best option or would another language be a better
    option?
    If no, why are you converting? [Personal development is a good reason
    here.]

    > Certainly, it's irresponsible to say that companies need web services
    > - web services are irrelevant to most architectures since you normally

    don't
    > need to have parts of a system running on different networks.


    Who has said this?

    > Once you convert, you have to expain to clients why developers will now

    need
    > machine upgrades to run the excessively bloated and slow .NET IDE, and why
    > the users will notice that the apps are much slower. Good Luck!!


    The VS.NET IDE requires more resources than VS6 but it's plainly absurd (and
    inaccurate) to describe it as "excessively bloated". All the top Java IDEs
    require more resources, perform worse and have less features). Hasn't
    hampered Java's success...

    > I'm committed to .NET, but I can't imagine why most companies should be.


    *Why* are you committed to .NET?.

    > If they're presented with an honest argument for converting they would

    naturally
    > conclude that the only reason for converting is to attract developers when
    > the market heats up again. This doesn't make MS look very good.


    It would be more fruitful to ask the companies (that are savvy enough to
    understand) and *listen* to their answers. Forming an opinion based on what
    you _think_ they _might_ say is unhelpful to you at best.

    Kunle



  8. #8
    Kunle Odutola Guest

    Re: Converting projects to VB.NET


    "Dan Barclay" <Dan@MVPs.org> wrote in message
    news:lt4afu89ist7cn6g44dp9ukhlho8f4mhaf@4ax.com...
    > On Wed, 29 May 2002 19:10:18 +0100, "Kunle Odutola"
    > <kunle.odutola@<REMOVETHIS>okocha.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
    >
    > >>
    > >> I've finally got around to begin converting projects to VB.NET and I

    have
    > >> to say I think VB6 is going to be around a LONG time (supported or

    not).
    > >
    > >Given that COBOL, FORTAN, dBASE, Pascal et al are still around, this is
    > >hardly worth saying. All version of VB since VB3 will be around a long

    time.
    >
    > I've got QuickBasic 2.0 on this machine. What's that got to do with
    > any application of value today?


    You tell me. It's on *your* machine. ;-)

    Kunle



  9. #9
    Dan Barclay Guest

    Re: Converting projects to VB.NET

    On Wed, 29 May 2002 21:05:59 +0100, "Kunle Odutola"
    <kunle.odutola@<REMOVETHIS>okocha.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:

    >I don't agree with Dan's position that MS needs to keep *selling* and
    >supporting VB6.


    Huh? Which Dan are you talking about?

    FWIW, that's not my position. VB has been advertised as a serious
    development tool. That being the case, MS needs to provide for VB
    code on its strategic platform. That is, and has been, my position.

    In fact, my comments to those who were pushing for a longer life for
    VB6 was that it was a good solution to the wrong problem.

    Pay closer attention, willya?

    Dan
    Language Stability is a *feature* I wish VB had!
    (#6)
    Error 51
    Error 3
    Error 9
    ....

  10. #10
    Frank Oquendo Guest

    Re: Converting projects to VB.NET

    Dan Barclay <Dan@MVPs.org> had this to say:

    > I've got QuickBasic 2.0 on this machine. What's that got to do with
    > any application of value today?


    You and I both know that the value of an application has nothing to do
    with the language used to write it. It has to do with how well it
    meets the client's needs.

    --
    http://www.acadx.com
    "If you want to be somebody else change your mind"







  11. #11
    Kunle Odutola Guest

    Re: Converting projects to VB.NET


    "Dave Doknjas" <dave_doknjas@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
    news:3cf52743$1@10.1.10.29...

    > >> Certainly, it's irresponsible to say that companies need web services
    > >> - web services are irrelevant to most architectures since you normally

    > >don't
    > >> need to have parts of a system running on different networks.

    > >
    > >Who has said this?

    >
    > If you read beyond the hype, web services are purely for accessing

    functionality
    > available beyond a single network (which happens to not be relevant for

    99%
    > of apps out there).


    I meant who has said "companies need web services" ?

    > >*Why* are you committed to .NET?.
    > >

    > I'm committed because I want to keep working. I don't think there's a

    lucrative
    > future in VB6 beyond the next year or so.


    You've missed out Java, C++ and COBOL. The other sought-after skills in the
    market.
    And C# looks set to join them.

    Kunle



  12. #12
    Phil Weber Guest

    Re: Converting projects to VB.NET

    > Given the vast amount of work to convert a real-world app...
    > from VB6 to VB.NET, I can't imagine that there's an unlimited
    > amount of money, time, and patience out there for companies
    > to have the incentive to convert.


    Dave: Agreed. See
    http://www.fawcette.com/dotnetmag/20.../guestop/defau
    lt.asp
    ---
    Phil Weber



  13. #13
    Guest

    Re: Converting projects to VB.NET


    >
    >Microsoft has enough money to afford the occasional black eye. I'm
    >sure people like you and I do not. With that in mind, you really need
    >to rethink your reasons for upgrading. It does not follow that just
    >because you *can* upgrade that you *must* upgrade.
    >


    I'm upgrading because I know that there's not a lucrative future in VB6.
    That said, I still think clients are not getting much in return (that's why
    I'm currently doing one conversion without charge).

    I still think VB has an advantage since it causes developers to focus on
    business problems rather than forcing developers to think like geeks, but
    it's a shame Microsoft is trying to kill off this large and practical group
    of developers by making it so hard to upgrade and by catering shamelessly
    to the geek crowd. Only geeks need zero-based arrays and despise the common
    sense shortcuts of VB6 (just look at the .NET equivalent of the 'App' object).



  14. #14
    Kunle Odutola Guest

    Re: Converting projects to VB.NET


    "Phil Weber" <pweber@nospam.fawcette.com> wrote in message
    news:3cf52df4@10.1.10.29...
    > > Given the vast amount of work to convert a real-world app...
    > > from VB6 to VB.NET, I can't imagine that there's an unlimited
    > > amount of money, time, and patience out there for companies
    > > to have the incentive to convert.

    >
    > Dave: Agreed. See
    >

    http://www.fawcette.com/dotnetmag/20.../guestop/defau
    > lt.asp


    I don't agree with Dan's position that MS needs to keep *selling* and
    supporting VB6. For people with code to port, this is a non-issue. If you
    don't already have VB6, where did you get the codebase that you have to
    port?

    MS has already made public it's support plans for VB6 and as long as the
    executables still run on Windows, MS is doing it's part. I wonder if Dan
    believe MS should still sell and support VB1-5. If not, why the asymmetry?

    Kunle



  15. #15
    Dave Doknjas Guest

    Re: Converting projects to VB.NET


    >
    >Do you clients *need* or *want* to jump into the .NET world with those apps
    >you are converting?
    >If yes, is VB.NET their best option or would another language be a better
    >option?
    >If no, why are you converting? [Personal development is a good reason
    >here.]


    Definitely, I want to keep making a living for a few years yet.

    >> Certainly, it's irresponsible to say that companies need web services
    >> - web services are irrelevant to most architectures since you normally

    >don't
    >> need to have parts of a system running on different networks.

    >
    >Who has said this?


    If you read beyond the hype, web services are purely for accessing functionality
    available beyond a single network (which happens to not be relevant for 99%
    of apps out there).

    >*Why* are you committed to .NET?.
    >

    I'm committed because I want to keep working. I don't think there's a lucrative
    future in VB6 beyond the next year or so.


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