Insight into VB.Net

[Tim Zych]

What is the future of Excel programming going to look like?

[Gary Brown]

God only knows and he ain't telling.
: o >
Sincerely,
Gary L. Brown
Kinneson Consulting
Gary....@Kinneson.com

Tim Zych <Tim_...@rsco.com> wrote in message
news:e6takiTkAHA.2180@tkmsftngp05...

[Gary Brown]

God only knows and he ain't telling.
: o >
Sincerely,
Gary L. Brown
Kinneson Consulting
Gary....@Kinneson.com

Tim Zych <Tim_...@rsco.com> wrote in message
news:e6takiTkAHA.2180@tkmsftngp05...

[Chip Pearson]

Office10 (officially called "Office XP"), due out this summer, does not use
the VB.NET language. It uses the VBA you know and love. The new VB.NET
language won't appear in Office until at least Office11.

MS has an upcoming product called Visual Studio For Application (VSA),
based on the VB.NET language, but has not indicated if and when this will be
used in the Office product group.

--
Cordially,
Chip Pearson
Microsoft MVP - Excel
Pearson Software Consulting, LLC
www.cpearson.com ch...@cpearson.com

"Tim Zych" <Tim_...@rsco.com> wrote in message
news:e6takiTkAHA.2180@tkmsftngp05...

[Tim Zych]

Thanks Chip.

What does this mean in terms of future skills, i.e. will we have to learn
another language?

How do you perceive the transition from VBA (VB5-6) to VBA (VB.Net)?

Chip Pearson <ch...@cpearson.com> wrote in message
news:OxB4jvTkAHA.864@tkmsftngp04...

[Chip Pearson]

I've been using VB.NET for some time, and I like the language very much.
However, I would recommend (and MS does not share my views on this) that you
think of VB.NET as a *new* development platform, rather than just the next
version of VB6. I think you are better off viewing of VBNET as a new
language with a VB-like syntax, and not just VB7. The differences are such
that you cannot simply "import" VB6 code into VBNET. MS does have a
conversion tool, but you will still need to do some (perhaps more than just
some) manual changes.

I plan on using VB.NET for *new* development, but I'm not sure that I'll
attempt to port my existing applications from VB6 to VB.NET.

> What does this mean in terms of future skills, i.e. will we have to learn
> another language?

More or less, yes, you'll have to learn a new language. However, the new
language will be very easy to learn, because it is very similar to VB. I
have no idea what MS plans to do with the Office platform after Office XP.
If they do decide to replace VBA with VSA (Visual Studio For Applications,
based on the VBNET platform), that will raise serious issues with version
compatibility, much more than the difference between XL97 and XL2000.
Hopefully, they will learn some lessons over the next year from the
transition from VB6 to VBNET. If VBA is replaced with VSA, you would have
to support two independent code bases, one for VBA and another for VSA.

Several Office developers have said that it is time to do a very substantial
overhaul of Excel, rewriting the code from the ground up, rather than just
adding new "gizmos" to the existing application. I very strongly agree with
that. Perhaps that will come with VSA.

In any case, you won't see VSA in Office for at least two years, maybe more.

--
Cordially,
Chip Pearson
Microsoft MVP - Excel
Pearson Software Consulting, LLC
www.cpearson.com ch...@cpearson.com

"Tim Zych" <Tim_...@rsco.com> wrote in message

news:OYrAq0TkAHA.2000@tkmsftngp03...

[Jennifer Campion]

> However, I would recommend (and MS does not share my views on this) that
you
> think of VB.NET as a *new* development platform, rather than just the next
> version of VB6.

Chip, I agree. It's kind of like comparing it to the upgrade from VB3 to
VB6. Sooooo much has changed since VB3 but most of the fundamentals are
still the same. I don't necessarily agree with all the changes in .Net but
at least it will keep me busy over the next year.

> In any case, you won't see VSA in Office for at least two years, maybe
more.

Good. <g>

Jennifer Campion
Microsoft MVP - Excel

[Tim Zych]

Thanks so much for your detailed and on-target answer.

Chip Pearson <ch...@cpearson.com> wrote in message

news:enPZJ#TkAHA.1104@tkmsftngp02...

[James W. Glass]

The should be called "Return to IBM central processing, 1984 - Microsoft
Version", the VERY thing that made the personal computer (note the word
"personal") a viable product. And, I might add, rejection of which made
Microsoft into what it is today.

No one who remembers the IBM workstations and required adherence to white
shirts and black ties would, if sane, want to return to that type of
environment where personal control and freedom of personal action were
nonexistent. .Net is exactly the same thing except for distributed
processing so that MS doesn't need to have all the computing power in its
hand with the attended investment, but retains control over YOU.

.Net should be fought to the bitter end. The VERY bitter end. It will be the
end of Personal Computing as we have come to know and love it. Inovation
will die. The first few years will just be conversion of code by mindless
masses of programmers. The next years will be mindless programmers.

Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Jim

"Chip Pearson" <ch...@cpearson.com> wrote in message
news:OxB4jvTkAHA.864@tkmsftngp04...

[Derek]

In reply to .net being fought to the bitter end... I feel that is a little
extreme. True, MS did totaly revamp VB, but I being not only a VB
developer, but also fluet in Java and C++, am a little irritated about
having to re-learn VB, but I feel in the long run that it will increase my
personal productivity since I can't remember the last time that I had to
switch between JAVA, VB, & C++, and didn't make a cross platform syntax
error, or something related. Also, for anyone who is interested I have
been playing with C# and think that I may only be re-learning VB and
switching from JAVA and C++ to C#, assuming MS makes a few small
changes... To me C# is JAVA power with the VB-Editor... It makes me
drool.

Derek

--
Posted via CNET Help.com
http://www.help.com/