Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.basic.misc > #201
| From | Tom Shelton <tom_shelton@comcast.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | alt.comp.lang.vb, alt.comp.lang.visualbasic, comp.lang.basic.misc, comp.lang.basic.visual.misc, microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.vb, microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.vb.upgrade |
| Subject | Re: Upgrading older VB programs (sans Project Files) to VB.NET |
| Date | 2012-01-12 09:34 -0700 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <jen22c$n55$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | <je49ej$37u$2@dont-email.me> <elbng7hgfr19n3iogrj1t3hhv3gna0obel@4ax.com> <jehhcq$otj$1@dont-email.me> <jehrlu$nk4$1@dont-email.me> <jekpsc$e1c$1@dont-email.me> |
Cross-posted to 6 groups.
Schmidt expressed precisely : > Am 10.01.2012 18:14, schrieb Tom Shelton: > >> ... but, .net is not dead. > > It's now in the same way "not dead", as VB6 is... > Welcome to the club! > VB6 has been deprecated - .NET has not. It is still being actively developed. New capabilities, new technologies being added, and new versions being produced. So, I fail to see how .NET is anything like VB6. Sure, there will be some changes comming. It's 10 year old tech - of course it's going to change, and I expect at some point it will be deprecated... > Really funny, that we are back now, to the combination > of 'C++ and COM' as the only recommended way to develop > serious and new "native Desktop-Apps" (because any other > (MS-)tools cannot be considered "future-proof" or > "safe with regards to line-of-code-investments"). > What I want to know is where you got that C++ and COM is the only recommended way to develop metro apps. Have you even loaded VS11? I guarentee you that VB and C# are there. > IIRC we had this C++/COM combination already some 15 years ago, > followed up by VB5/6-RAD to "develop COM-Apps even faster". > So VB6 is yet a good tool, working "directly on top" of > the current "state of the art tech". I think it's more like C++/WinRT - COM is part of winrt, but asfict it's not out in the forefront. Just like COM is part of .NET - but, it's pretty much invisible for the most part. > That much to selling us .NET as "technologic innovation" > and urging us "to move on". > Seems that the serious code-bases will always be C/C++ (as the > best compromise, to abstract a language from the hardware). > > All the rest on top of it is (at least in MS' Book) > apparently considered "throw-away software". > > The invention of COM, as a kind of objectoriented, > (class-hosting and selfdescribing) library-format > seems at least a well-surviving idea. As was VB-classic, > as a glue-language for COMponents as well. It does > its job even today, and will do so also on Win8. > > Aside from, that the new RAD-kid on the "blog" is now > apparently the HTML/JS combination (and accompanying new > IDEs, to "glue stuff together this way", including > automatic uploads into the great new world of App-Stores). > > Let's see, how this works out - and what VB6/COM-based > Apps on the Win8-Desktop are good for in the long run. > > Olaf You are living in some sort of dream world, where all tech is good forever. Doesn't happen. And, I seriously don't see how my .net code base is in anyway threatend going forward at this time. Might have to do some new UI's - but, since all of my real code is in libraries, I really don't see this as a huge deal. -- Tom Shelton
Back to comp.lang.basic.misc | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
Upgrading older VB programs (sans Project Files) to VB.NET Ubiquitous <weberm@polaris.net> - 2012-01-04 18:23 -0500
Re: Upgrading older VB programs (sans Project Files) to VB.NET "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> - 2012-01-05 09:25 -0500
Re: Upgrading older VB programs (sans Project Files) to VB.NET "Thorsten Albers" <gudea@gmx.de> - 2012-01-05 16:33 +0000
Re: Upgrading older VB programs (sans Project Files) to VB.NET Helmut_Meukel <Helmut_Meukel@bn-hof.invalid> - 2012-01-05 22:32 +0100
Re: Upgrading older VB programs (sans Project Files) to VB.NET "Auric__" <not.my.real@email.address> - 2012-01-06 02:50 +0000
Re: Upgrading older VB programs (sans Project Files) to VB.NET Tony Toews <ttoews@telusplanet.net> - 2012-01-09 20:29 -0700
Re: Upgrading older VB programs (sans Project Files) to VB.NET "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> - 2012-01-10 09:22 -0500
Re: Upgrading older VB programs (sans Project Files) to VB.NET Tom Shelton <tom_shelton@comcast.invalid> - 2012-01-10 10:14 -0700
Re: Upgrading older VB programs (sans Project Files) to VB.NET "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> - 2012-01-10 17:04 -0500
Re: Upgrading older VB programs (sans Project Files) to VB.NET Schmidt <sss@online.de> - 2012-01-11 21:02 +0100
Re: Upgrading older VB programs (sans Project Files) to VB.NET "Henning" <computer_hero@coldmail.com> - 2012-01-12 15:33 +0100
Re: Upgrading older VB programs (sans Project Files) to VB.NET Tom Shelton <tom_shelton@comcast.invalid> - 2012-01-12 09:34 -0700
Re: Upgrading older VB programs (sans Project Files) to VB.NET Schmidt <sss@online.de> - 2012-01-13 20:17 +0100
Re: Upgrading older VB programs (sans Project Files) to VB.NET Tom Shelton <tom_shelton@comcast.invalid> - 2012-01-13 13:22 -0700
Re: Upgrading older VB programs (sans Project Files) to VB.NET "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> - 2012-01-13 16:07 -0500
Re: Upgrading older VB programs (sans Project Files) to VB.NET Tom Shelton <tom_shelton@comcast.invalid> - 2012-01-13 14:14 -0700
Re: Upgrading older VB programs (sans Project Files) to VB.NET "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> - 2012-01-13 20:58 -0500
Re: Upgrading older VB programs (sans Project Files) to VB.NET Tony Toews <ttoews@telusplanet.net> - 2012-01-19 19:10 -0700
Re: Upgrading older VB programs (sans Project Files) to VB.NET Schmidt <sss@online.de> - 2012-01-14 00:12 +0100
Re: Upgrading older VB programs (sans Project Files) to VB.NET "Henning" <computer_hero@coldmail.com> - 2012-01-14 00:24 +0100
Re: Upgrading older VB programs (sans Project Files) to VB.NET Schmidt <sss@online.de> - 2012-01-14 00:58 +0100
csiph-web