Converting projects to VB.NET - Page 3


DevX Home    Today's Headlines   Articles Archive   Tip Bank   Forums   

Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 117

Thread: Converting projects to VB.NET

  1. #31
    Kunle Odutola Guest

    Re: Converting projects to VB.NET


    "Frank Oquendo" <franko at acadx dot com> wrote in message
    news:3cf54332$1@10.1.10.29...
    > > Why not?. I don't remember any similar comments from Dan when VB4,
    > > VB5 and VB6 were released. The previous versions were discontinued
    > > in the same manner. I don't remember any suggestions of MS
    > > "hastening" their departure.....

    >
    > Perhaps I'm being too subtle. It's one thing for a product to go the
    > way of the buffalo due to ripe old age. It's quite another to
    > cannibalize an existing product's user base in order to establish a
    > new product.


    I am basically saying "there is no evidence of cannibalization so let's stop
    the scaremongering". The pattern has been the same for all VB upgrades. Why
    should it be different now?

    Kunle



  2. #32
    Mike Mitchell Guest

    Re: Converting projects to VB.NET

    On Wed, 29 May 2002 22:09:03 +0100, "Kunle Odutola"
    <kunle.odutola@<REMOVETHIS>okocha.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:

    >Why not?. I don't remember any similar comments from Dan when VB4, VB5 and
    >VB6 were released. The previous versions were discontinued in the same
    >manner. I don't remember any suggestions of MS "hastening" their
    >departure.....


    Now you're just being silly and somewhat disingenuous. Here you are
    equating the severity of the differences between VB4, VB5, and VB6
    with the severity of the differences between VB6 and VB.Net. It is a
    given that the former were much less significant than the latter. This
    is the reason *why* there is so much anger over Microsoft's cavalier
    stance in breaking backward compatibility. In my case, every single
    VB5 app I had (some with 400 kloc) was "migrated" to VB6 simply by
    opening the project in the VB6 IDE and recompiling.

    No one griped then to the extent they are doing now for the very
    simple reason that those earlier version changes were in comparison
    fairly minor, hardly affected existing code, and the new features
    could be added bit by bit, as and when, without first migrating the
    whole code into a different language with a different IDE on a
    different framework.

    *Now* do you see where you lost the plot?

    MM

  3. #33
    Phil Weber Guest

    Re: Converting projects to VB.NET

    > Why not? I don't remember any similar comments
    > from Dan when VB4, VB5 and VB6 were released.


    Kunle: VB4, 5 and 6 could easily recompile code from previous versions.
    VB.NET cannot, so MS should continue to sell a version of VB that can
    compile VB6 code.
    ---
    Phil Weber



  4. #34
    Dan Barclay Guest

    Re: Converting projects to VB.NET

    On Wed, 29 May 2002 13:38:43 -0700, "Phil Weber"
    <pweber@nospam.fawcette.com> wrote:

    > > Huh? Which Dan are you talking about?

    >
    >Dan: Appleman. He wrote the Guest Op to which I linked in the post to which
    >Kunle was replying.
    >
    >Pay closer attention, willya? ;-)


    Yup. Lately the "Dan" has been me and I missed that one <g>.

    Dan

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

  5. #35
    Kevin Moore Guest

    Re: Converting projects to VB.NET


    Kunle,

    I wanted to make sure that I am understanding your point. Are you saying
    that the migration from VB6 to VB.Net is analagous to the migration from
    VB5 to VB6? If you are then I must most definately disagree with your assertion.
    If you aren't they can you explain the following comment you made "The pattern
    has been the same for all VB upgrades. Why should it be different now?"

    Thanks,

    Kevin

    "Kunle Odutola" <kunle.odutola@<REMOVETHIS>okocha.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
    >
    >"Frank Oquendo" <franko at acadx dot com> wrote in message
    >news:3cf54332$1@10.1.10.29...
    >> > Why not?. I don't remember any similar comments from Dan when VB4,
    >> > VB5 and VB6 were released. The previous versions were discontinued
    >> > in the same manner. I don't remember any suggestions of MS
    >> > "hastening" their departure.....

    >>
    >> Perhaps I'm being too subtle. It's one thing for a product to go the
    >> way of the buffalo due to ripe old age. It's quite another to
    >> cannibalize an existing product's user base in order to establish a
    >> new product.

    >
    >I am basically saying "there is no evidence of cannibalization so let's

    stop
    >the scaremongering". The pattern has been the same for all VB upgrades.

    Why
    >should it be different now?
    >
    >Kunle
    >
    >



  6. #36
    Frank Oquendo Guest

    Re: Converting projects to VB.NET

    Phil Weber <pweber@nospam.fawcette.com> had this to say:

    > Kunle: VB4, 5 and 6 could easily recompile code from previous
    > versions. VB.NET cannot, so MS should continue to sell a version of
    > VB that can compile VB6 code.


    Are you saying that VB6 should be an available commercial product
    indefinitely? If so, I have to disagree. No company distributes and
    supports all versions of their product.

    VB6 *will* be discontinued. It is up to developers who require VB6 to
    buy it while they still can.

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







  7. #37
    Dave Doknjas Guest

    Re: Converting projects to VB.NET


    >BTW: I'm talking specifically about the run-speed of apps you build...not
    >the IDE. The IDE is definitely more demanding on resources, no doubt about
    >that.
    >


    "More demanding on resources"...? Do you work for Microsoft? The .NET IDE
    is a PIG!!! My laptop is now useless since it only allows for 192 MG RAM,
    which is still not enough to kickstart some performance out of the .NET IDE!



  8. #38
    Dave Doknjas Guest

    Re: Converting projects to VB.NET


    >I am basically saying "there is no evidence of cannibalization so let's stop
    >the scaremongering". The pattern has been the same for all VB upgrades.

    Why
    >should it be different now?
    >


    Unbelievable...
    I've been through the upgrades from VB3 and I can tell you that there were
    virtually no issues and no cost to my clients to upgrade (as simple as opening
    the project in the new IDE). VB6 to .NET is a major project for any app of
    non-trivial size.



  9. #39
    Dave Doknjas Guest

    Re: Converting projects to VB.NET


    >IMO any professional VB6 developer that does not have a private copy of VB6
    >(particularly via MSDN Universal) has worse problems than the VB.NET
    >changes.
    >


    You and I are geeks, but not every developer codes for fun in their spare
    time...



  10. #40
    Karl E. Peterson Guest

    Re: Converting projects to VB.NET

    Hi Frank --

    > > Kunle: VB4, 5 and 6 could easily recompile code from previous
    > > versions. VB.NET cannot, so MS should continue to sell a version of
    > > VB that can compile VB6 code.

    >
    > Are you saying that VB6 should be an available commercial product
    > indefinitely? If so, I have to disagree. No company distributes and
    > supports all versions of their product.


    Right. Some, like Borland, put them on the web for free download after they've
    outlived their revenue-producing years.

    Later... Karl
    --
    [Microsoft Basic: 1976-2001, RIP]


    PS -- Anyone else wonder what's so scary if MS continues selling VB6?


  11. #41
    Phil Weber Guest

    Re: Converting projects to VB.NET

    > Are you saying that VB6 should be an available commercial
    > product indefinitely?


    Frank: Not indefinitely, but at least as long as Microsoft supports it.

    > VB6 *will* be discontinued.


    VB *has* been discontinued, but MS has committed to supporting it for
    several years. Wouldn't it make more sense if people were still able to
    purchase it easily?
    ---
    Phil Weber



  12. #42
    Kunle Odutola Guest

    Re: Converting projects to VB.NET


    "Kevin Moore" <Kevin@MooreSSI.com> wrote in message
    news:3cf54a46$1@10.1.10.29...
    >
    > Kunle,
    >
    > I wanted to make sure that I am understanding your point. Are you saying
    > that the migration from VB6 to VB.Net is analagous to the migration from
    > VB5 to VB6? If you are then I must most definately disagree with your

    assertion.
    > If you aren't they can you explain the following comment you made "The

    pattern
    > has been the same for all VB upgrades. Why should it be different now?"


    MS discontinues the existing version of VB when the a newer version is
    released. It has done the same this time too.

    Kunle



  13. #43
    Kunle Odutola Guest

    Re: Converting projects to VB.NET


    "Dave Doknjas" <dave_doknjas@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
    news:3cf54f40$1@10.1.10.29...

    > Unbelievable...
    > I've been through the upgrades from VB3 and I can tell you that there were
    > virtually no issues and no cost to my clients to upgrade (as simple as

    opening
    > the project in the new IDE).


    VB3 to VB4-32?
    VB4-16 to VB4-32?

    If yes, your projects were probably pretty "small". No offense mind you.

    Kunle



  14. #44
    Kunle Odutola Guest

    Re: Converting projects to VB.NET


    "Phil Weber" <pweber@nospam.fawcette.com> wrote in message
    news:3cf54a21@10.1.10.29...
    > > Why not? I don't remember any similar comments
    > > from Dan when VB4, VB5 and VB6 were released.

    >
    > Kunle: VB4, 5 and 6 could easily recompile code from previous versions.
    > VB.NET cannot, so MS should continue to sell a version of VB that can
    > compile VB6 code.


    Why?. People who have VB6 code that need compiling already have VB6. Others
    can get the current version of VB -- VB.NET from the shops. VB3 couldn't do
    a great deal with my VB3 code, I didn't ask for VB3 to be kept
    alive.....neither did anyone else if memory serves.

    Kunle



  15. #45
    Kunle Odutola Guest

    Re: Converting projects to VB.NET


    "Dave Doknjas" <dave_doknjas@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
    news:3cf54d91$1@10.1.10.29...
    >
    > >BTW: I'm talking specifically about the run-speed of apps you build...not
    > >the IDE. The IDE is definitely more demanding on resources, no doubt

    about
    > >that.
    > >

    >
    > "More demanding on resources"...? Do you work for Microsoft? The .NET IDE
    > is a PIG!!! My laptop is now useless since it only allows for 192 MG RAM,
    > which is still not enough to kickstart some performance out of the .NET

    IDE!

    I have run VS.NET in a VMWare machine with 128MB allocated. It runs slow but
    is not unusable. I wouldn't recommend that configuration but given what
    $500-700 can buy today, I'm not worrying either.

    Kunle



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