Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.lang.basic.visual.misc > #2193

Re: Am I mistaken, or was .NET originally offered only as a "subscription"?

From "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam>
Newsgroups comp.lang.basic.visual.misc
Subject Re: Am I mistaken, or was .NET originally offered only as a "subscription"?
Date 2014-12-20 14:40 -0500
Organization A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID <m74jan$9h$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References <316f98fa-3f4e-478f-b59e-ee231d032419@googlegroups.com>

Show all headers | View raw


  I don't think it was ever a subscription. But if that
was the only reason you hesitated then you might
want to read up on it. There are lots of pros and
cons comparing VB to VB.Net. And now with MS
pushing Metro apps, the landscape is dramatically
changing. Which tools make sense will depend on
what you're wanting to do.


| For whatever reason, I remember thinking it might be nice to try to move 
to VB.Net many years ago, but part of what turned me off was the thought 
that I could no longer "own" the development program the way I owned VS6, 
but instead had to subscribe to it.
|
| Perhaps I was wrong then.  It appears that now this is not the case. 

Back to comp.lang.basic.visual.misc | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Am I mistaken, or was .NET originally offered only as a "subscription"? jsigmo@gmail.com - 2014-12-20 11:35 -0800
  Re: Am I mistaken, or was .NET originally offered only as a "subscription"? "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> - 2014-12-20 14:40 -0500
    Re: Am I mistaken, or was .NET originally offered only as a "subscription"? jsigmo@gmail.com - 2014-12-20 11:53 -0800
      Re: Am I mistaken, or was .NET originally offered only as a "subscription"? GS <gs@somewhere.net> - 2014-12-20 18:32 -0500
      Re: Am I mistaken, or was .NET originally offered only as a "subscription"? "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> - 2014-12-20 22:01 -0500
        Re: Am I mistaken, or was .NET originally offered only as a "subscription"? GS <gs@somewhere.net> - 2014-12-20 22:08 -0500
          Re: Am I mistaken, or was .NET originally offered only as a "subscription"? "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> - 2014-12-20 22:34 -0500
            Re: Am I mistaken, or was .NET originally offered only as a "subscription"? GS <gs@somewhere.net> - 2014-12-21 04:46 -0500
        Re: Am I mistaken, or was .NET originally offered only as a "subscription"? jsigmo@gmail.com - 2014-12-21 10:34 -0800
          Re: Am I mistaken, or was .NET originally offered only as a "subscription"? ralph <nt_consulting@yahoo.com> - 2014-12-21 18:57 -0600
            Re: Am I mistaken, or was .NET originally offered only as a "subscription"? jsigmo@gmail.com - 2014-12-21 20:52 -0800
              Re: Am I mistaken, or was .NET originally offered only as a "subscription"? GS <gs@somewhere.net> - 2014-12-22 01:24 -0500
                Re: Am I mistaken, or was .NET originally offered only as a "subscription"? GS <gs@somewhere.net> - 2014-12-22 01:25 -0500
          Re: Am I mistaken, or was .NET originally offered only as a "subscription"? "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> - 2014-12-21 18:08 -0500
          Re: Am I mistaken, or was .NET originally offered only as a "subscription"? GS <gs@somewhere.net> - 2014-12-21 19:52 -0500
          Re: Am I mistaken, or was .NET originally offered only as a "subscription"? GS <gesansom@netscape.net> - 2014-12-21 19:51 -0500

csiph-web