VB .NET $$$ Up or Stable?

[Michael D. Kersey]

Bill Storage wrote:
> Hi Mike
> You must see a totally different part of web development
> than I work with. We are looking forward to the prospect of never
> again writing VBScript behind pages.
Perhaps for you scripting languages and HTML were an irritating but
temporary aberration on the Microsoft information highway. For me, they
were like an open door out of the client/server prison that Microsoft
had built. I won't go back into that building again: there's a big world
out here with wonders not available from M$.

..NET, and in particular WebForms and WebServices, are to some degree a
lofty attempt to make the transition to the WWW transparent to VB
developers who have little or no WWW experience. Unfortunately it will
fail to achieve that goal. But before that happens many, many VB
programmers will, in a group act of faith resembling Jim Jones' koolaid
test, buy it and try to use it. Luckily there are other forms of life
after that death!-))

> We find that developers who
> learned only VBScript and not VB are at a great disadvantage.
Only when they need to work with VB!-)) FWIW I worked with VB and
PowerBuilder years before using VBScript. For web development I prefer
VBScript and other scripting languages. They don't carry the
client/server baggage (unnecessary code) that VB carries. To me, using
VB for web development is like using a petrochemical plant to to drive a
nail: wrong tool for the job. So I use it only when necessary, e.g.,
component to do binary i/o, etc. And, when I need a good laugh, I can
always get one by helping out a VB developer!

> The rules of script, without real VB experience confuse people badly;
> for example, the data types within Variants, and dealing with special
> Variant values (Empty, Null, vbNullString, Nothing).
Yes, it helps to explain these in one place. And BTW aren't you lucky:
you soon won't need to worry about these things anymore, right?-))

> BTW, I read your recent VBPJ opinion. Samuel Johnson's quote
> regardling Bolingbroke was "**** is paved with good intentions",
> not "The road to". The "road" modification is usually attributed to
> Karl Marx.
Sorry, you must be speaking of someone else. But both of the above must
be busy laying bricks in that road!

[Frank Carr]

"Bill Storage" <storage@dnai.com> wrote in message
news:39e12d33$1@news.devx.com...

> You must see a totally different part of web development
> than I work with. We are looking forward to the prospect of never
> again writing VBScript behind pages. We find that developers who
> learned only VBScript and not VB are at a great disadvantage.

What I've found is that in most of the ASP development teams out there most
are not using components very effectively. In fact, most are just a bunch of
messy VBScript code with Session object abuse. Here are some typical
comments....

"We don't have any components because....

"We tried them and they're a drain on system resources."

"Nobody here knows how to write them."

"The net admin/boss/client won't allow them. They want a 'clean' IIS
system."

"They're a security risk."

"We don't have anyone on staff who could maintain them."

Keep in mind these are comments from large corporations and development
organizations specializing in web development.

What also annoys me is that my lengthy experience in VB (8 years as of this
month), including highly complex client/server applications with multiple
components, is totally ignored or discounted by these organizations. If I'd
done a couple of years of sloppy ASP/VBScript work I'd get more respect.

--
Frank Carr
jfcarr@msn.com

[Bill Storage]

Frank Carr <jfcarr@email.msn.com> wrote in message
news:39e155e0@news.devx.com...
> What I've found is that in most of the ASP development teams out there
most
> are not using components very effectively.
> ...
> Keep in mind these are comments from large corporations and development
> organizations specializing in web development.
>
> What also annoys me is that my lengthy experience in VB (8 years as of
this
> month), including highly complex client/server applications with multiple
> components, is totally ignored or discounted by these organizations. If
I'd
> done a couple of years of sloppy ASP/VBScript work I'd get more respect.

Hi Frank

I've seen this phenomenon also. It appears that this is changing extremely
rapidly
though. The stock prices of the major web dev companies have dropped in
parallel to a few percent of their March values. The days of rank amateur
..ASP
and .JSP developers conning big corps and dumb dotcoms who needed to get
on the internet fast are probably over for good. Around my company this
has been verbalized as:

"The internet is over. Go home."

Of course, Ford and Chrysler aren't likely to go back to paper based
procurent
systems. So what is likely "over" about the internet is the wild
speculation,
indiscriminant hiring, and bilking clients for crappy work. What is
appearing to
stay is major healthcare, financial, supply chain, and procurement system
over
http. (This seems to be analogous not to the gold rush but to the period of
the transcontinental railroad. Railroad stocks soared and crashed and the
media
forgot about the railroads before any real railroad business had started. In
the
next ten years, without the attention of speculators, railroads made real
money
and the industry prospered.)

We're seeing the sloppy B to C style development disappearing much
faster than we anticipated, and it is being replaced by rather
client-server-like
apps on the internet. So your skills may at last be in demand. It appears to
me
that .NET is well positioned for this.

Bill

[Keith Franklin, MCSD]

> Perhaps for you scripting languages and HTML were an irritating but
> temporary aberration on the Microsoft information highway. For me, they
> were like an open door out of the client/server prison that Microsoft
> had built. I won't go back into that building again: there's a big world
> out here with wonders not available from M$.

Mike,

Your comical...client/server prison...and this is Microsoft...Geez every
vendor out there was preaching client/server....Guess what in many
situations I still find it the proper architecture...Guess what I also
believe that in some cases a Desktop application is still the correct
architecture...But I also believe that things should be architected 3-tier
(Doesnt mean it is deployed that way)...Back to your method of architecting
a Web with ASP...You seem to be the type that keeps everything in Script...3
times this year my firm has had to gut ASP based sites that follow this very
poor style...All were moved to components with very little script (Script
just used to glue things together) and boom almost instantly the sites
improved in performance and scalabilty...But looks to me like you wouldnt
know these things...Let me ask you a question: What do you know about
Microsoft Transaction Server or Microsoft Message Queue Server or COM+
Services? Theres is a big world inside of MS also...To bad you havent take a
look and educated yourself.

>
> .NET, and in particular WebForms and WebServices, are to some degree a
> lofty attempt to make the transition to the WWW transparent to VB
> developers who have little or no WWW experience. Unfortunately it will
> fail to achieve that goal. But before that happens many, many VB
> programmers will, in a group act of faith resembling Jim Jones' koolaid
> test, buy it and try to use it. Luckily there are other forms of life
> after that death!-))
>

Huh...who do you think ASP targeted...VC++ Developers? If you want you can
continue to code in ASP+ just like ASP...Even have the code intermingled
with the HTML...Turn Option Strict Off and you dont even have to type your
variables...I for one will start using the HTML and Web Controls, code
behind forms...And all the very nice changes that ASP+ has added to ASP
(Keyword: Added)..

Mike a little secret for you...The easiest part of Web development is doing
ASP script...Learning how to architect and using tools like Components, MTS,
MSMQ, and proper database design and database access design is the tough
part....

> Only when they need to work with VB!-)) FWIW I worked with VB and
> PowerBuilder years before using VBScript. For web development I prefer
> VBScript and other scripting languages. They don't carry the
> client/server baggage (unnecessary code) that VB carries. To me, using
> VB for web development is like using a petrochemical plant to to drive a
> nail: wrong tool for the job. So I use it only when necessary, e.g.,
> component to do binary i/o, etc. And, when I need a good laugh, I can
> always get one by helping out a VB developer!

Using VBScript throughout the Server side is like using a wiffle bat to bat
against Pedro Martinez...So it is apparent that your a VBScript developer
who works with some not so talented VB developers...Thats not the tools
fault...That is the Developers fault for not learning the tool and the firms
fault for not properly training them...

[Dave Rothgery]

"Michael (michka) Kaplan" wrote:
> Robert, don't confuse the personal experiences of those who HAVE upgraded
> with the fears of those who have not.
>
> Windows 2000 *is* more stable. Its also a much more compelling
> international platform (so you *know* I would be a fan!). But
> that does not change the minds of the skeptical.

Well, there are two brands of skeptical.

There's the 'we've always used Unix (or a mainframe) for things this big;
are you _really_ sure that Windows -- which I use for Diablo II, IE, and
Word -- can handle this app?' mindset. Stats and case studies may change the
minds of such people.

Then there are people who've fallen wholesale for the 'NT doesn't scale'
story (most of who also believe the 'VB is a toy language' BS) despite many
of the busiest sites on the web running NT and/or Win2K. And, well, these
people won't be convinced, at least not quickly. I'm not really sure what to
do with *nix and Java zealots, though.

--
David A. Rothgery
Consultant
Spherion, Inc.
davidrothgery@spherion.com
drothgery@myrealbox.com

[Bertie Wooster]

"Bill Storage" <storage@dnai.com> wrote...
> [...]
> BTW, I read your recent VBPJ opinion. Samuel Johnson's quote
> regardling Bolingbroke was "**** is paved with good intentions",
> not "The road to". The "road" modification is usually attributed to
> Karl Marx.

Neither Johnson nor Marx were originators, in fact.

Here's the full monty courtesy of Robert Wilson in alt.quotations today:
<quote>
In various forms it is an old proverb:

"**** is full of good intentions or desires."
-St Bernard 12th C.

"**** is full of good meanings and wishings."
-George Herbert, (1593 - 1633)

"**** is paved with good intentions."
- John Ray, 17th C.

"I shall have nothing to hand in, but intentions - what they say the wrong
place is paved with."
- J. Froude, 1847

"Sir, **** is paved with good intentions."
- Samuell Johnson, 1775

The earliest known direct addition of 'the road' was Henry Bohn's collection
of proverbs, 1855.

The road to **** is paved with good intentions.
- Karl Marx (1818 - 1883), *Capital*

"**** is paved with good intentions, not bad ones."
-G B Shaw *Man and Superman*

"With mere good intentions, **** is proverbially paved."
- William James, 1890

The evil that is in the world almost always comes of ignorance, and good
intentions may do as much harm as malevolence if they lack understanding.
- Albert Camus, 'The Plague'

Sometimes 'path' is used instead of 'road'.
</quote>

Bertie

[Bob O`Bob]

Dave Rothgery wrote:

> Then there are people who've fallen wholesale for the 'NT doesn't scale'
> story (most of who also believe the 'VB is a toy language' BS) despite many
> of the busiest sites on the web running NT and/or Win2K. And, well, these
> people won't be convinced, at least not quickly. I'm not really sure what to
> do with *nix and Java zealots, though.


I guess I've "fallen for it" then, because NT doesn't scale.

Clustering does serve the same purpose, and often does so at
reduced total cost, but it is not really the same thing.



Bob O`Bob
--
I see the writing on the wall, and even without my reading glasses,
can discern that many of the four-letter-words start with "J".

[--==[ russ ]==--]

Seems like mostly opinion.... I don't think you are giving MS a fair chance
on this one. You've already made up your mind before Beta 1!

--

--------
Russ



"Michael D. Kersey" <mdkersey@hal-pc.org> wrote in message
news:39E0EC4D.CE31B15E@hal-pc.org...
> Mike wrote:
> > I was wondering what your thoughts are. Is this new MS architecture
going
> > to drive up consulting rates?
> No, it will drive down rates for those familiar with the Microsoft
> development toolset. Reason is, the FUD created by .NET will put
> companys off of any new development with the existing or the new
> toolsets until it becomes clear which way to go(e.g., J2EE, .NET, stay
> with VB6, etc.).
>
> > To me, it has to raise it. It seems like it is going to shake out some
people.
> It will shake out at least the following people:
> 1. Early ASP adopters. These developers, who are the best and brightest
> users of Microsoft technology, are getting screwed badly by the decision
> to not use VBScript in the ASP+ framework: the most commonly-used
> Microsoft language on the WWW today is now deprecated. So ASP is now a
> legacy platform and VBScript a legacy internet language. Anyway, many of
> these developers will never adopt the .NET framework. Their knowledge of
> the underlying technologies of the WWW and internet however is
> sufficiently strong and their attitude sufficiently daring that they
> will easily move to other toolsets. The move will unfortunately weaken
> support for the Microsoft IIS platform just when it is most needed by
> Microsoft to support the .NET initiatives.
>
> 2. VB developers and their managers - this will be a delayed effect,
> occurring only once it is realized that ASP+ applications will not scale
> properly and therefore that ASP+ is not appropriate for internet
> development(although it might be OK for use within an intranet). Anyway,
> those VB developers who are not yet familiar with WWW and internet
> technologies(the majority of VB developers IMO), will find their
> situation quite untenable should management adopt VB.NET. The language
> differences (VB6 ->VB.NET) coupled with the learning requirements of the
> new environment (WWW et al) will create a *very* steep learning curve.
> Only a few will be able to adapt. The shortage of early ASP adopters
> will contribute to the situation, since they will no longer be available
> to mentor/instruct the group of people.
>
> Because of the steep learning curve and lack of proper
> preparation/training, initial .NET projects staffed by such personnel
> will fall severely behind schedule; most such projects will be
> terminated. IT managers and CIOs will be churned to correct the problem.
> It will take IT awhile to regroup, possibly perform a post-mortem(to
> determine whether .NET is kept or to move to say, J2EE), and begin a
> second phase of retraining before re-launching new development.
>
> Meanwhile, in the non-Microsoft world, progress will be much smoother,
> without the Pandora's box of surprises that .NET holds in store for it's
> sponsors. The fallout from .NET will sharply increase demand for all
> persons familiar with non-Microsoft web technologies.
>
> > I have to believe some people will not gear up for the .NET or they go
elsewhere.
> Yep.

[Paul Stevens]

Do you spend your weekends on street corners with a banner reading "The End
Of The World Is Here" ??, Just Wondering




"Keith Franklin, MCSD" <ka_franklin@empowered.com> wrote in message
news:39e121f6@news.devx.com...
> > 1. Early ASP adopters. These developers, who are the best and brightest
> > users of Microsoft technology, are getting screwed badly by the decision
> > to not use VBScript in the ASP+ framework: the most commonly-used
> > Microsoft language on the WWW today is now deprecated.
>
> Mike,
>
> Between this post and your previous post about ASP+, IIS, and VB.NET it is
> clear that you are not very familiar to ASP+....The ASP developers that
> command the most respect get out of VBScript and into components asap.
They
> will be very comfortable with ASP+ and ASP+ provides tremendous advantages
> to them. But ASP+ just enhances they way you do things. It is a tremendous
> productivity gain. Go to most of the ASP Sites (Not ones built on ASP but
> the ones devoted to ASP and see what they think of ASP+.)...The early
> adopters are all ready building stuff with ASP+...ASP+ is some of the most
> stable of the technologies introduced in .NET...
>
> >
> > 2. VB developers and their managers - this will be a delayed effect,
> > occurring only once it is realized that ASP+ applications will not scale
> > properly and therefore that ASP+ is not appropriate for internet
> > development(although it might be OK for use within an intranet).
>
> Where do you get your info.. In ASP+ Microsoft has done a tremendous
amount
> of work addressing Scalability and working on the things that were nice in
> ASP but proved to limit scalability (Session objects for instance)...Case
in
> point Session objects can now be cross machine allowing them to work in a
> Server farm environment. A architect can even choose to have them backed
by
> a SQL Server database. This was not the case with Session objects in ASP.
> ASP+ also monitors itself and if it sees a process starting to leak it
will
> start a new process and start forwarding all new requests to that process
> and as soon as all the in process requests complete will shut it down.
There
> are many more...
>
> In regards to failed projects...Since I have been consulted on many an ASP
> project ... I am certain because of the improvements to ASP+ (Session
> objects in particular) VB.NET (Threading model in particular) that even
tho
> some of the same common ASP problems will be done by the uneducated
> developers they will be easier to fix...
>
> For instance sites with high volume were built to use Session
objects...When
> needed more then one server...Architectural changes were needed...in ASP+
a
> Session variable can span machines...Developers did bad things like put VB
> objects in Session variables (While still bad IMHO) it will not cause the
> drastic problems it causes in ASP and VB.
>
>

[Paul Stevens]

Oops sorry Keith that was meant for Micheal


"Keith Franklin, MCSD" <ka_franklin@empowered.com> wrote in message
news:39e121f6@news.devx.com...
> > 1. Early ASP adopters. These developers, who are the best and brightest
> > users of Microsoft technology, are getting screwed badly by the decision
> > to not use VBScript in the ASP+ framework: the most commonly-used
> > Microsoft language on the WWW today is now deprecated.
>
> Mike,
>
> Between this post and your previous post about ASP+, IIS, and VB.NET it is
> clear that you are not very familiar to ASP+....The ASP developers that
> command the most respect get out of VBScript and into components asap.
They
> will be very comfortable with ASP+ and ASP+ provides tremendous advantages
> to them. But ASP+ just enhances they way you do things. It is a tremendous
> productivity gain. Go to most of the ASP Sites (Not ones built on ASP but
> the ones devoted to ASP and see what they think of ASP+.)...The early
> adopters are all ready building stuff with ASP+...ASP+ is some of the most
> stable of the technologies introduced in .NET...
>
> >
> > 2. VB developers and their managers - this will be a delayed effect,
> > occurring only once it is realized that ASP+ applications will not scale
> > properly and therefore that ASP+ is not appropriate for internet
> > development(although it might be OK for use within an intranet).
>
> Where do you get your info.. In ASP+ Microsoft has done a tremendous
amount
> of work addressing Scalability and working on the things that were nice in
> ASP but proved to limit scalability (Session objects for instance)...Case
in
> point Session objects can now be cross machine allowing them to work in a
> Server farm environment. A architect can even choose to have them backed
by
> a SQL Server database. This was not the case with Session objects in ASP.
> ASP+ also monitors itself and if it sees a process starting to leak it
will
> start a new process and start forwarding all new requests to that process
> and as soon as all the in process requests complete will shut it down.
There
> are many more...
>
> In regards to failed projects...Since I have been consulted on many an ASP
> project ... I am certain because of the improvements to ASP+ (Session
> objects in particular) VB.NET (Threading model in particular) that even
tho
> some of the same common ASP problems will be done by the uneducated
> developers they will be easier to fix...
>
> For instance sites with high volume were built to use Session
objects...When
> needed more then one server...Architectural changes were needed...in ASP+
a
> Session variable can span machines...Developers did bad things like put VB
> objects in Session variables (While still bad IMHO) it will not cause the
> drastic problems it causes in ASP and VB.
>
>

[Paul Stevens]

if youre SOOOOOO Anti VB, Anti Microsoft, Anti Live then F--- Off and spread
your story of gloom and doom to someone who is intrested maybe you should go
to alt.anti.cobolo.net or something that resembles your archiac and
uninformed state of mind


"Michael D. Kersey" <mdkersey@hal-pc.org> wrote in message
news:39E13E44.391F7E5D@hal-pc.org...
> Bill Storage wrote:
> > Hi Mike
> > You must see a totally different part of web development
> > than I work with. We are looking forward to the prospect of never
> > again writing VBScript behind pages.
> Perhaps for you scripting languages and HTML were an irritating but
> temporary aberration on the Microsoft information highway. For me, they
> were like an open door out of the client/server prison that Microsoft
> had built. I won't go back into that building again: there's a big world
> out here with wonders not available from M$.
>
> .NET, and in particular WebForms and WebServices, are to some degree a
> lofty attempt to make the transition to the WWW transparent to VB
> developers who have little or no WWW experience. Unfortunately it will
> fail to achieve that goal. But before that happens many, many VB
> programmers will, in a group act of faith resembling Jim Jones' koolaid
> test, buy it and try to use it. Luckily there are other forms of life
> after that death!-))
>
> > We find that developers who
> > learned only VBScript and not VB are at a great disadvantage.
> Only when they need to work with VB!-)) FWIW I worked with VB and
> PowerBuilder years before using VBScript. For web development I prefer
> VBScript and other scripting languages. They don't carry the
> client/server baggage (unnecessary code) that VB carries. To me, using
> VB for web development is like using a petrochemical plant to to drive a
> nail: wrong tool for the job. So I use it only when necessary, e.g.,
> component to do binary i/o, etc. And, when I need a good laugh, I can
> always get one by helping out a VB developer!
>
> > The rules of script, without real VB experience confuse people badly;
> > for example, the data types within Variants, and dealing with special
> > Variant values (Empty, Null, vbNullString, Nothing).
> Yes, it helps to explain these in one place. And BTW aren't you lucky:
> you soon won't need to worry about these things anymore, right?-))
>
> > BTW, I read your recent VBPJ opinion. Samuel Johnson's quote
> > regardling Bolingbroke was "**** is paved with good intentions",
> > not "The road to". The "road" modification is usually attributed to
> > Karl Marx.
> Sorry, you must be speaking of someone else. But both of the above must
> be busy laying bricks in that road!

[Bill McCarthy]

Hi Paul,

Honestly, I don't think that this is needed. If you wish to take issue with
something someone says, by all means do so. But please, do so on a
technical level, or even just express your POV about the
products/technologies being discussed. If you wish to just make personal
attacks on individuals, please do so in the offramp, not here. Okay ?



"Paul Stevens" <pstevens@contlan.com> wrote in message
news:39e2e570@news.devx.com...
> if youre SOOOOOO Anti VB, Anti Microsoft, Anti Live then F--- Off and
spread
> your story of gloom and doom to someone who is intrested maybe you should
go
> to alt.anti.cobolo.net or something that resembles your archiac and
> uninformed state of mind
>
>

[Paul Stevens]

Sorry just had to let go of some steam it seems that a very large ammount of
individuals who have seen nothing about .NET but the word (net) are raising
opinions about the lack of this and that in the .NET platform most of the
time uninformed and incorrectly


"Bill McCarthy" <Bill_McC@iprimus.com.au> wrote in message
news:39e2e846@news.devx.com...
> Hi Paul,
>
> Honestly, I don't think that this is needed. If you wish to take issue
with
> something someone says, by all means do so. But please, do so on a
> technical level, or even just express your POV about the
> products/technologies being discussed. If you wish to just make personal
> attacks on individuals, please do so in the offramp, not here. Okay ?
>
>
>
> "Paul Stevens" <pstevens@contlan.com> wrote in message
> news:39e2e570@news.devx.com...
> > if youre SOOOOOO Anti VB, Anti Microsoft, Anti Live then F--- Off and
> spread
> > your story of gloom and doom to someone who is intrested maybe you
should
> go
> > to alt.anti.cobolo.net or something that resembles your archiac and
> > uninformed state of mind
> >
> >
>
>
>

[Bill McCarthy]

Hi Paul,

Well I think most of us are guilty of not being fully informed about VB.NET,
but considering less than 0.1% of VB developers has even had access to the
PDC documentation, then it is understandable. I can't speak for other
people, but as for myself, I am trying to learn as much about VB.NET as is
posible, given the limited resources available.

Actually, I'd even suggest that at this stage of the product cycle it is
important for people to express their opinions about issues such as what
they'd like to see, backwards compatability, or just the general direction
the product takes. Hopefully those POV's will be taken on board and
incorporated into the product at an early stage. As time goes on though,
and as the betas start rolling out, I imagine that discussions here will
probably be more technical/bug related. But then again, that's just my POV
<g>



"Paul Stevens" <pstevens@contlan.com> wrote in message
news:39e2ea04@news.devx.com...
> Sorry just had to let go of some steam it seems that a very large ammount
of
> individuals who have seen nothing about .NET but the word (net) are
raising
> opinions about the lack of this and that in the .NET platform most of the
> time uninformed and incorrectly
>
>
> "Bill McCarthy" <Bill_McC@iprimus.com.au> wrote in message
> news:39e2e846@news.devx.com...
> > Hi Paul,
> >
> > Honestly, I don't think that this is needed. If you wish to take issue
> with
> > something someone says, by all means do so. But please, do so on a
> > technical level, or even just express your POV about the
> > products/technologies being discussed. If you wish to just make
personal
> > attacks on individuals, please do so in the offramp, not here. Okay ?
> >
> >
> >
> > "Paul Stevens" <pstevens@contlan.com> wrote in message
> > news:39e2e570@news.devx.com...
> > > if youre SOOOOOO Anti VB, Anti Microsoft, Anti Live then F--- Off and
> > spread
> > > your story of gloom and doom to someone who is intrested maybe you
> should
> > go
> > > to alt.anti.cobolo.net or something that resembles your archiac and
> > > uninformed state of mind
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>

[Mark Burns]

"Bob O`Bob" <bob@cluestick.org> wrote in message
news:39E24667.2616@cluestick.org...
>
> I guess I've "fallen for it" then, because NT doesn't scale.
>
> Clustering does serve the same purpose, and often does so at
> reduced total cost, but it is not really the same thing.
>

Bob, uh... ever hear of Windows 200 DataCenter Server?
I think THAT puppy probably "scales" just fine. Never put mits to it myself,
but from what specs I've read...it should f'n ro...uh,..scale well<g>.