Shame on you!
Karl E. Peterson
- Jeff Nuckolls, Microsoft Senior Technologist (Application Platform &
Development),
Visual Basic 6.0 IDE goes out of support, MSDN Blog, April 3, 2008
Last entry, with linkage, on the Wall Of Shame (see my sig).
More background:
Microsoft makes C++ move, discontinues Visual Basic 6.0 support
http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9076558&source=rss_news10
--
.NET: It's About Trust!
http://vfred.mvps.org
Saga
where I render services. Perhaps he can convince them to scrap all the
enterprise apps written in VB6 and convert them to the latest flavor of
.NET as soon as possible.
We are -absolutely- shameless <eg>
Saga
--
"Karl E. Peterson" <kar...@SPAMMEmvps.org> wrote in message
news:ea3TVq0m...@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
Karl E. Peterson
>I would like to invite Jeff Nuckolls to argue his point with the senior IT people
> where I render services. Perhaps he can convince them to scrap all the
> enterprise apps written in VB6 and convert them to the latest flavor of
> .NET as soon as possible.
>
> We are -absolutely- shameless <eg>
What's *really* a shame is that some coward inside MSFT has disabled comments on
that blog, huh? I'm sure he'd love to hear from you! <g>
Bob Riemersma
to a new version of Visual Basic (if there had been one) that are lost now.
Bob O`Bob
also there: "Windows is 'collapsing,' Gartner analysts warn"
http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9076698
--
Karl E. Peterson
VALIDATION!!! :-D
This definitely isn't ME/XP-All-Over-Again. The Visionthing is gone.
Bill Hileman
news:ea3TVq0m...@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
So the rumors of an SP7 and even an SP8 were just that: rumors.
I couldn't sell you my new, expensive, need-to-relearn-how-to-drive,
state-of-the-art car. Shame on you for continuing to use the one you have.
Stefan Berglund
in <#fEn3h1m...@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl>
heh
---
Stefan Berglund
Kevin Provance
Seriously? Even when VB6 was new and supported I would comes here or one of
the many MVP sites before considering phoning MSFT support. Mostly because
the idea of being on hold forever and speaking to someone whose first
language is not English was not very appealing. I can't see how much will
change. MSFT would have to disband these newsgroups, which as I understand
it is not possible.
"Karl E. Peterson" <ka...@mvps.org> wrote in message
news:ea3TVq0m...@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
Robert Morley
> I couldn't sell you my new, expensive, need-to-relearn-how-to-drive,
> state-of-the-art car. Shame on you for continuing to use the one you have.
Don't forget that on at least some roads, the car has a speed limit
significantly slower than what the road requires. :)
Rob
Gene Wirchenko
>I would like to invite Jeff Nuckolls to argue his point with the senior IT people
>where I render services. Perhaps he can convince them to scrap all the
>enterprise apps written in VB6 and convert them to the latest flavor of
>.NET as soon as possible.
"I beg your pardon. When what freezes over?" -- Lily Tomlin,
phone company skit riff on Gore Vidal
>We are -absolutely- shameless <eg>
Are you sure you do not have a leetle bit of shame? <bigger,
more evil grin>
I mean, are you writing *NEW* apps in VB6? I am for a course
project. VB6 is a nice tool for it.
I refuse to nuckoll under!
Sincerely,
Gene Wirchenko
Computerese Irregular Verb Conjugation:
I have preferences.
You have biases.
He/She has prejudices.
Saga
Since this was in Mexico, the support was from some one whose first (and only)
language was Spanish. Digressing horribly, some times, here in the US, I request
Spanish speaking people when calling for help (non IT stuff) because I sometimes
can't understand the English of the client service people (who I some times think
know English as a third language!)
Saga
--
"Kevin Provance" <case...@SPAMMEtpasoft.com> wrote in message
news:OXnyjT3m...@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
Saga
following prayer for VB6.
Our VB6 who art in Windows
hallowed be thy IDE
thy classes come
thy compilation be done in P-Code
as it can be in native code
give us our daily joy
forgive our syntax and logic errors
as we include error handlers and
ask questions in the VB6 group,
lead us not into .NET
and deliver from Java
1.0 Initial release by Angel Zapata
1.1 Engineering changes by Federico A. Colli
1.11 Translated and slightly changed by Saga
I found it amusing and thought I'd share<g>
--
"Karl E. Peterson" <kar...@SPAMMEmvps.org> wrote in message
news:ea3TVq0m...@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
BeastFish
news:uo0Zy2#mIHA...@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> Some guys in the Spanish language VB6 group put together the
> following prayer for VB6.
>
> Our VB6 who art in Windows
> hallowed be thy IDE
> thy classes come
> thy compilation be done in P-Code
> as it can be in native code
> give us our daily joy
> forgive our syntax and logic errors
> as we include error handlers and
> ask questions in the VB6 group,
> lead us not into .NET
> and deliver from Java
>
> 1.0 Initial release by Angel Zapata
> 1.1 Engineering changes by Federico A. Colli
> 1.11 Translated and slightly changed by Saga
>
> I found it amusing and thought I'd share<g>
For more amusement, say it aloud using the traditional latin chant <g>
MM
wrote:
>Saga wrote:
>>I would like to invite Jeff Nuckolls to argue his point with the senior IT people
>> where I render services. Perhaps he can convince them to scrap all the
>> enterprise apps written in VB6 and convert them to the latest flavor of
>> .NET as soon as possible.
>>
>> We are -absolutely- shameless <eg>
>
>What's *really* a shame is that some coward inside MSFT has disabled comments on
>that blog, huh? I'm sure he'd love to hear from you! <g>
He wouldn't like to hear from me. I'd tell the tosser where to stick
his dot.net.
MM
MM
<filt...@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
Yeah, my bro is a Gartner analyst and they don't make predictions
lightly.
MM
Dick Grier
Dick
--
Richard Grier, MVP
Hard & Software
Author of Visual Basic Programmer's Guide to Serial Communications, Fourth
Edition,
ISBN 1-890422-28-2 (391 pages, includes CD-ROM). July 2004, Revised March
2006.
See www.hardandsoftware.net for details and contact information.
Jimmy B
would take about $300,000 for me to do that. Maybe Microsoft would
subsidize that for me!
amdrit
here, or the amount of code you have in place, I am just questioning your
statement. I would have to think that you have very specialized code (a lot
of it too) for you to commit to such a high price tag. Pure, straight
conversions from legacy code to .Net (VB or C#) have never taken me so much
time and energy. And yes, I have been on some large projects. Certainly,
to refactor them later in to common patterns and practices "the .net way"
would take considerably more time and energy, perhaps that was what you were
thinking about when you through out a number like that.
I've often said that you can run a virus on the network, you can run c++ on
the network and you can run VB on the network, but you cannot run .Net on
the network. That said, I think you guys are taking the VB/.net thing a bit
too far, and are pulling at straws to keep your pity party going.
So VB6 is dying, we've known that was coming before the beta of .Net 1.0.
Now you feel that you have been slighted by the Microsoft machine, the
necessary evil that keeps us all in jobs. You feel that your accumulation
of code over the past 2 decades is for naught and obnoxiously belligerent
about .Net.
You have to know that your base of code was not the real piece of
importance, and that it was actually your understanding of that code and it
application that made you valuable, right? I mean come on, if you all were
doing it right to begin with, and were able to reuse the code anyway,
porting it to .Net wasn't really all that big of an issue, was it?
True, we are now forced to know the difference between a UI thread and a
background thread. True, we have some compatibility issues between
frameworks. True, there are differences in VB7-8 and VB4-6. It is still
basic, with a few more bells and whistles. Along with them whistles, come
some nuances that are contrary to the way we think about code in legacy VB.
Now you are big fish in the pond and the pond is draining to the lake.
There are going to be bigger fish in the lake and you feel that you are not
going to be able to compete with them at the same level. I tell you, you
are dead wrong there. Those of you whom have been integral to the success
of this forum, the MVP's with your own web sites, you are going to do quite
well in the new world. You can then add to your repertoire all the new and
once again assist new comers has you have always done.
Some of you feel too old to track to the new place, well perhaps you are.
Perhaps an old dog doesn't want to learn new tricks. There is nothing wrong
with that, none in the slightest. But how can you old dogs bark about
rock-n-roll and prefer the big bands instead? You all know better than
that, times are always changing. Work is still getting done, albeit some
not as well as other work.
Personally, I am not a "C" guy; I am not big on "C, C++, or Java". That is
just me, which is how I roll. I like the basic language (I'll lump C# in
here) and have found the transition from VB6 to VB.Net pretty smooth and C#
a doable second.
Don't get me wrong, I have several dozen floppies (now converted to CD-ROM)
of old source for me to come back to should I ever need it. But then, I
have some tapes of basic for my TR-80 model III too.
Would it be cool to be able to use the old legacy VB6 and add extension for
the new UI, yes it most certainly would. Would it be cool for VB6 to have
better support for asynchronous callbacks rather than the addressof call,
yes it would. Would it be cool for VB6 to have wrapper classes for all the
API's for native usage, YES IT WOULD?
Regardless of the version, VB had always had the weakest documentation from
Microsoft for how-tos. The API's are still shown in c/c++ form.
Multithreading is still a guessing game for many developers. Lets us not
forget DLL hell many of you have faced time and again.
Now we (basic developers) are given a more equal footing in the development
world. We are given a tool that is on par with the rest of the framework
languages. Do I think that there could have been some changes in
implementation, certainly (I just think that was sales beating out R&D
there).
I am not saying give up your old VB ways, or to forget the accomplishments
that you each have made. I am saying that Semitism that you demonstrate is
wrong and is not helping those of us who are not stuck in decades old code
bases.
So the sense of "RAD" has left the building, I say to you it is not as bad
as people make it out to be, especially once you have your code libraries
back in place (granted built over time). UI Development was still manual,
but there is no significant change on that front (except for the dynamic
resizing, UI controls and the like)
Mr. Peterson says .Net is about trust, I say that is such a small part of
the whole. Again, this goes back to the bells and whistles and it has
nothing to do with the language, merely the framework. Today there was a
flame war between two about the XP retention list and the VB retention list,
(personally, I think they were married in a former life and one was tired of
always sleeping on the couch.) To what end was the point?
Anyway, as I wind down my diatribe, I just get frustrated by the direction
these forms are heading as of late. Fewer and fewer posts for assistance or
novel ideas are appearing and more and more porn, flame wars, and anti .Net
rhetoric posts are replacing them.
"Jimmy B" <an...@anon.com> wrote in message
news:ez2FzERn...@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
Stefan Berglund
in <ucE4Ktkn...@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl>
<snipped .net drivel and politically motivated hate speech>
You have an awful lot to say but unless you run your own enterprise and
all of your enterprise's code assets happen to be in VB6 you'll never
understand how right Karl is in saying "It's About Trust".
---
Stefan Berglund
amdrit
understand" statement. You are a very foolish and naive person Stefan.
Where you got the political motivation from, I have no idea. Not only do I
not own MS stock, I am not an employee, nor do they lavish me in gifts.
My post was more of a diatribe than drivel. The post at least made sense
and had some rational thought in it. Your response on the other hand
offered no rational thought, offered no counter to any of the points I
brought, nor did it go into any new discussion.
To rely merely on work accomplished will never grow your business. The fact
that those assets exist was to fulfill a need, at the time in VB6. To
restrict your market place only in the VB6 world is short sighted, and
potential for downsizing. There is potential to offer the same services to
a newer market that you seem keen to avoid. Your enterprise lacks the drive
that I would not want to be a part of.
If you are telling me that your code was so perfect that there was no
opportunity for refactoring, alterations and so forth. First I applaud you
for bug free code. Second I challenge why you cannot still incorporate
those libraries into newer projects. I further challenge that that bug free
code has a place being converted to .Net, if for no other reason than to
prepare for future competition.
If you have further issues with .Net, I've lost interest in your scandalous
self induced pity. You are missing the boat and can't see the forest for
all the trees. Adapt and overcome or stifle, flounder and die. The choice
is yours and yours alone.
Attacking me did nothing for you. Perhaps you were the one sleeping on the
couch in that former marriage.
"Stefan Berglund" <sorry.no...@for.me> wrote in message
news:ln27045q3052ijvda...@4ax.com...
Stefan Berglund
in <u8aaYUln...@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl>
>To rely merely on work accomplished will never grow your business. The fact
>that those assets exist was to fulfill a need, at the time in VB6. To
>restrict your market place only in the VB6 world is short sighted, and
>potential for downsizing. There is potential to offer the same services to
>a newer market that you seem keen to avoid. Your enterprise lacks the drive
>that I would not want to be a part of.
You clearly don't get it so I won't waste any more bandwidth, but I do
need to say that I'm currently refactoring my code in such a way that it
will target not just windows but also MAC and Linux and I'll never trust
micro$oft to use their development tools ever again.
It's just not OK that they tossed millions of developer's code assets
into the recycle bin. There will never be any justification for that.
You have jumped to several mistaken conclusions as to what I think and
do but I realize that having a small mind makes it difficult to think
for yourself and leaves you with no way to win arguments other than to
put false words in others' mouths. I pity you.
---
Stefan Berglund
Mike Williams
news:ucE4Ktkn...@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> Personally, I am not a "C" guy; I am not big on "C,
> C++, or Java". That is just me, which is how I roll.
> I like the basic language
That's nice, because Micro$oft certainly don't like it! Even in their own
advertising they describe vb.net as being suitable only for casual or
hobbyist programmers.
> Anyway, as I wind down my diatribe, I just get frustrated
> by the direction these forms are heading as of late. Fewer
> and fewer posts for assistance or novel ideas are appearing
> and more and more porn, flame wars, and . . .
A bit like this post of your own? It contains *nothing* in the way of
assistance for people who have asked technical questions about VB, and I
don't recall you EVER having posted a useful answer on this group.
Mike
Henning
church. You certainly will get more hurrays in a .net group.
The sad thing about all this is that I know you all can give good VB(6)
replies to VB(6) questions, why not keep it that way. At least in this and a
few more groups.
We, in this group, have each our own reasons to stay with VB(6). I can see
nothing wrong with that, and none can speech or preach us out of that
reallity.
/Henning
"amdrit" <amd...@hotmail.com> skrev i meddelandet
news:u8aaYUln...@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
Bob O`Bob
> 300K, really? I mean seriously, 300K? I am not belitteling your efforts
> here, or the amount of code you have in place, I am just questioning your
> statement. I would have to think that you have very specialized code (a lot
> of it too) for you to commit to such a high price tag. Pure, straight
> conversions from legacy code to .Net (VB or C#) have never taken me so much
> time and energy. And yes, I have been on some large projects. Certainly,
> to refactor them later in to common patterns and practices "the .net way"
> would take considerably more time and energy, perhaps that was what you were
> thinking about when you through out a number like that.
>
>
>
> I've often said that you can run a virus on the network, you can run c++ on
> the network and you can run VB on the network, but you cannot run .Net on
> the network. That said, I think you guys are taking the VB/.net thing a bit
> too far, and are pulling at straws to keep your pity party going.
>
>
>
> So VB6 is dying, we've known that was coming before the beta of .Net 1.0.
And that's where you lost me... and I won't be reading any more.
That's just so wrong, on so many levels.
We did not even know, until *well after beta 1.1*, that they were
lying (or at best mistaken) about their intentions of fixing
all but a tiny few of the incompatibilities
(specifically deterministic finalization - we'd have been okay
if it was just that).
They even flew a group of us up to Redmond *supposedly* to listen
to us, but it turned out to be yet another preaching session.
Bob
--
Michael Cole
> Some guys in the Spanish language VB6 group put together the
> following prayer for VB6.
He missed a couple of lines...
> Our VB6 who art in Windows
> hallowed be thy IDE
> thy classes come
> thy compilation be done in P-Code
> as it can be in native code
> give us our daily joy
> forgive our syntax and logic errors
> as we include error handlers and
> ask questions in the VB6 group,
> lead us not into .NET
> and deliver from Java
For i = 1 to Whenever
Next i
Amen
--
Regards,
Michael Cole
Paul Clement
¤ >To rely merely on work accomplished will never grow your business. The fact
¤ >that those assets exist was to fulfill a need, at the time in VB6. To
¤ >restrict your market place only in the VB6 world is short sighted, and
¤ >potential for downsizing. There is potential to offer the same services to
¤ >a newer market that you seem keen to avoid. Your enterprise lacks the drive
¤ >that I would not want to be a part of.
¤
¤ You clearly don't get it so I won't waste any more bandwidth, but I do
¤ need to say that I'm currently refactoring my code in such a way that it
¤ will target not just windows but also MAC and Linux and I'll never trust
¤ micro$oft to use their development tools ever again.
¤
¤ It's just not OK that they tossed millions of developer's code assets
¤ into the recycle bin. There will never be any justification for that.
Boy you sure are playing the helpless one. You're responsible for your own code assets - no one else
is.
Quite obviously people continue to use Classic Visual Basic so their code assets must be of some
value. There's no justification for allowing someone else (such as you) to dictate that.
Paul
~~~~
Microsoft MVP (Visual Basic)
Jeff Nuckolls
comments... just not anonymous comments. So just like this site, you
have to log in to leave a comment.
What's a real shame is when blogs recklessly quote only partial comments
from my blog to spin it a way that only serves their personal agenda.
I'd encourage any/everyone to read my "FULL" comments and leave a
comment. http://blogs.msdn.com/jeff
Jeff Nuckolls
*** Sent via Developersdex http://www.developersdex.com ***
Stefan Berglund
<jeffrey...@hotmail.com> wrote:
in <#XgsGj#qIHA...@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl>
>With all do respect my blog is open (and always has been) open for any
>comments... just not anonymous comments. So just like this site, you
>have to log in to leave a comment.
>
>What's a real shame is when blogs recklessly quote only partial comments
>from my blog to spin it a way that only serves their personal agenda.
>I'd encourage any/everyone to read my "FULL" comments and leave a
>comment. http://blogs.msdn.com/jeff
>
>Jeff Nuckolls
With all due respect, what's really a shame is that micro$oft lied to
the world and continues to lie to the world. Adopt a migration plan,
eh? That's a joke and you know it unless you mean migrate away from
micro$oft's developer tools.
Here's Ballmer's migration plan:
http://blog.internetnews.com/apatrizio/2008/04/steve-ballmers-presentation-co.html
Here's Scoble's migration plan:
http://twitter.com/Scobleizer/statuses/800474897
A little honesty goes a long way. Too bad we'll never see it from
micro$oft.
---
Stefan Berglund
Karl E. Peterson
> With all do respect my blog is open (and always has been) open for any
> comments... just not anonymous comments. So just like this site, you
> have to log in to leave a comment.
DUdE, this isn't a site. It's a newsserver. No login is required. If you had to
login, you were duped into looking at someone's corporate branding, and likely
advertising, for what is totally free and freely accessible information.
> What's a real shame is when blogs recklessly quote only partial comments
What's a real shame is someone making light of other people's tragedy. Treating it
as a revenue producing opportunity. Hoping to profit off it. There are words for
people like that.
> from my blog to spin it a way that only serves their personal agenda.
Hard to spin a those words. They were pretty darned clear.
> I'd encourage any/everyone to read my "FULL" comments and leave a
> comment. http://blogs.msdn.com/jeff
Yeah, me too. (If you can find them!)
Robert Morley
> DUdE, this isn't a site. It's a newsserver. No login is required. If you had to
> login, you were duped into looking at someone's corporate branding, and likely
> advertising, for what is totally free and freely accessible information.
Well, maybe the fact that he doesn't know a newsgroup from a site, and
apparently also doesn't know the difference between "do" and "due"...maybe
that might explain why Microsoft is having so much trouble lately.
>> from my blog to spin it a way that only serves their personal agenda.
>
> Hard to spin a those words. They were pretty darned clear.
Yeah, I gotta say, I agree. I DID read the entire thing shortly after it
came out, and in or out of context, the message is pretty much the same,
though I'll admit it's a BIT more tempered in context.
My personal feeling is that if you're so hell-bent on switching everyone to
VB.NET that you refuse to open up and listen to the voices of those who
don't like it, shame on you. It's for this very reason that I'm moving more
towards CodeGear...you know the one..."Where Developers Matter" !?!
Microsoft still has time to convince me that they're the better choice, but
not a whole lot of it. Vista has come out to critical derision, as has
VB.NET; WMP 11 isn't well-liked in a lot of quarters; Office 2007 has also
been derided by many...I'm sure I could come up with a few other recent
examples of Microsoft's "innovation", if I tried hard enough. When are you
going to wake up and smell the coffee?
Rob
Stefan Berglund
<rmo...@N0.Freak1n.sparn.magma.ca> wrote:
in <u9txFyAr...@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl>
>Karl E. Peterson wrote:
>> DUdE, this isn't a site. It's a newsserver. No login is required. If you had to
>> login, you were duped into looking at someone's corporate branding, and likely
>> advertising, for what is totally free and freely accessible information.
>
>Well, maybe the fact that he doesn't know a newsgroup from a site, and
>apparently also doesn't know the difference between "do" and "due"...maybe
>that might explain why Microsoft is having so much trouble lately.
>
Yup, that stands out a mile, but Karl's jab was more subtle. :-)
>>> from my blog to spin it a way that only serves their personal agenda.
>>
>> Hard to spin a those words. They were pretty darned clear.
>
>Yeah, I gotta say, I agree. I DID read the entire thing shortly after it
>came out, and in or out of context, the message is pretty much the same,
>though I'll admit it's a BIT more tempered in context.
>
>My personal feeling is that if you're so hell-bent on switching everyone to
>VB.NET that you refuse to open up and listen to the voices of those who
>don't like it, shame on you. It's for this very reason that I'm moving more
>towards CodeGear...you know the one..."Where Developers Matter" !?!
>
>Microsoft still has time to convince me that they're the better choice, but
>not a whole lot of it. Vista has come out to critical derision, as has
>VB.NET; WMP 11 isn't well-liked in a lot of quarters; Office 2007 has also
>been derided by many...I'm sure I could come up with a few other recent
>examples of Microsoft's "innovation", if I tried hard enough. When are you
>going to wake up and smell the coffee?
>
>
>
>Rob
Yup, they've lost touch. They've simply become too big and too full of
themselves to have to have any consideration for what was once their
customer base. We simply don't matter anymore. We're throwaways.
<shrug>
---
Stefan Berglund
Mike Williams
> With all due respect, what's really a shame is that micro$oft
> lied to the world and continues to lie to the world. Adopt a
> migration plan, eh? . . . Here's Ballmer's migration plan:
> http://blog.internetnews.com/apatrizio/2008/04/steve-ballmers-presentation-co.html
Excellent! An Apple a day keeps the doctor away :-) How can we possibly
trust them when they don't even trust themselves!
Mike
Robert Morley
> Yup, that stands out a mile, but Karl's jab was more subtle. :-)
Subtlety has never been one of my strong suits. :)
Rob
Tony Proctor
realised how emotive the subject is, I can hardly blame you for leaving it
I couldn't decide whether to contribute here or not since the subject has
come up so often that I've just become tired of it, and of the lack of
understanding from people outside of the 'problem' (i.e. the Press,
Microsoft themselves, and the .Net evangelists). Still, maybe one last
try...
The problem comes down to money and resources - plain and simple business
logic - not lost features, or difficulty using new skills, or any of the
other so-called reasons. The gulf between VB Classic and VB.Net is huge.
It's made all the more worse because Microsoft cast adrift its loyal VB
community with nothing more than a half-working migration tool. With all its
resources, why couldn't it have generated one more version of VB Classic to
try and bridge the gap, and help those people into the .Net world.
As it is, it's virtually impossible to keep any source-level compatibility
between old and new code bases. Since development/selling/support of one's
old code base cannot stop while some team re-writes it then this is a
fundamental requirement to help with the transition
Tony Proctor
"Jeff Nuckolls" <jeffrey...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23XgsGj%23qIH...@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
Karl E. Peterson
Not something I'm often accused of, either. <g>