Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.basic.visual.misc > #645
| From | GS <gs@somewhere.net> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.basic.visual.misc, microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.vb |
| Subject | Re: Upgrading older VB programs (sans Project Files) to VB.NET |
| Date | 2012-01-13 14:31 -0500 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <jeq0qp$m4v$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | (2 earlier) <jehhcq$otj$1@dont-email.me> <jehrlu$nk4$1@dont-email.me> <jekpsc$e1c$1@dont-email.me> <jen22c$n55$1@dont-email.me> <jepvvp$h89$1@dont-email.me> |
Cross-posted to 2 groups.
Schmidt has brought this to us : > Am 12.01.2012 17:34, schrieb Tom Shelton: >> 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. > The VB6-IDE is not *supported* anymore - the essential > technology under the covers (an underlying C/C++ compiler > and COM is by no means deprecated). > > On the other hand, Winforms are deprecated in > the meantime, as is the usage of Silverlight... > (more to come, just wait). > >>> 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. > > I was not talking about "Metro-Apps" - I was talking > about "native Desktop-Apps" - and the only secure > way (the word "recommended" was not that well-choosen) > in terms of code-investments is apparently C/C++ > (33 year old "technology" in the meantime). > > >> You are living in some sort of dream world, where all >> tech is good forever. Doesn't happen. > That's what you try to sell us for years now. > I say, tech *can* be "good forever", when there's not > much left to optimize (just look at "the wheel" <g>). > > And apparently C/C++ is such a wheel. > Everything on top of it (in case you want to > construct a bicycle for example) - is just > different shortcuts (e.g. if you use different > frames (aka frameworks/libraries) in combination > with a highlevel-language, to be able to > build "customized cycles" a little bit faster). > > And the VBClassic-runtime-lib (in conjunction with > the VBClassic language) does its job just fine > at the moment - as well as in the near future. > > And it is "less far" from the current base-tech > (C/C++ and COM) than .NET is - that's my whole point. > > It remains to be seen (I'd say, let's talk about it again > in 10 years or so), whether a thin runtime-layer on top > of C/C++ - or a bloated VM, will better survive over time. > > From my point of view, it is you who's living in a > dream world, not acknowledging, that both approaches > (from MS' point of view) were only temporary cash-cows, > sold to "crowds of RAD-believers". > > The difference between .NET- and "still VB6"-users is, > that the latter ones recognized "the pattern" much > earlier (fool me once) - and didn't invest that much > time again into "the next distraction". > > Olaf Very well said! -- Garry Free usenet access at http://www.eternal-september.org ClassicVB Users Regroup! comp.lang.basic.visual.misc
Back to comp.lang.basic.visual.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 GS <gs@somewhere.net> - 2012-01-05 14:57 -0500
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 GS <gs@somewhere.net> - 2012-01-12 23:58 -0500
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 GS <gs@somewhere.net> - 2012-01-13 14:31 -0500
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
Re: Upgrading older VB programs (sans Project Files) to VB.NET GS <gs@somewhere.net> - 2012-01-13 19:35 -0500
Re: Upgrading older VB programs (sans Project Files) to VB.NET GS <gs@somewhere.net> - 2012-01-13 22:46 -0500
Re: Upgrading older VB programs (sans Project Files) to VB.NET Tom Shelton <tom_shelton@comcast.invalid> - 2012-01-13 23:50 -0700
Re: Upgrading older VB programs (sans Project Files) to VB.NET GS <gs@somewhere.net> - 2012-01-14 14:31 -0500
Re: Upgrading older VB programs (sans Project Files) to VB.NET Tom Shelton <tom_shelton@comcast.invalid> - 2012-01-14 22:47 -0700
Re: Upgrading older VB programs (sans Project Files) to VB.NET GS <gs@somewhere.net> - 2012-01-15 01:26 -0500
Re: Upgrading older VB programs (sans Project Files) to VB.NET Tom Shelton <tom_shelton@comcast.invalid> - 2012-01-15 07:54 -0700
Re: Upgrading older VB programs (sans Project Files) to VB.NET GS <gs@somewhere.net> - 2012-01-15 14:09 -0500
Re: Upgrading older VB programs (sans Project Files) to VB.NET Tom Shelton <tom_shelton@comcast.invalid> - 2012-01-15 16:47 -0700
Re: Upgrading older VB programs (sans Project Files) to VB.NET Tom Shelton <tom_shelton@comcast.invalid> - 2012-01-15 16:49 -0700
Re: Upgrading older VB programs (sans Project Files) to VB.NET GS <gs@somewhere.net> - 2012-01-15 21:16 -0500
csiph-web