Visual Studio 6 and Vista
Norm
I asked this question in the VB Install group, but did not get an answer. I
was hoping someone in this group might know.
Has anyone gotten Visual Studio 6 and Service Pack 5 to install on Vista?
I can install Visual Studio 6 OK, but when I try to install Service Pack 5
it tells me I need MDAC 2.5 or greater. I installed MDAC 2.6 and still get
the same message.
Thanks,
Norm
Stefan Berglund
wrote:
in <7604D066-D802-41B6...@microsoft.com>
Why would you even bother? Really.
Just a hunch but I'd bet a large amount of $$ that that's ~by design~.
---
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties and no guarantees either express or implied.
Stefan Berglund
Ralph
"Norm" <Nor...@newsgroups.spoof> wrote in message
news:7604D066-D802-41B6...@microsoft.com...
We have been totally unsuccessful in installing SP5 on vista. (Or 2003 Svr
for that matter). You have to go with SP6. But we didn't try too hard.
Installing any MDAC other than MDAC 2.8 SP1 usually fails or leads to other
problems down the road if it succeeds.
It looks like Vista is the final platform for VB.
-ralph
Norm
Thanks for the information and I was able to install Service Pack 6, but
since I have never used it I will be anxious to see what difference there
is. I know a lot of the VB community has not been real fond of Service Pack
6.
Thanks again,
Norm
"Ralph" <nt_cons...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:XY6dnY8nDvA...@arkansas.net...
Ralph
"Norm" <Nor...@newsgroups.spoof> wrote in message
To some what ease your mind, most (not all!) of the complaints have been
about SP5 code not migrating to SP6. Searching the microsoft.public.vb.bugs
will help. Many of the problems can be 'coded' around, ie, changing what you
were doing. Also there are Hot Fixes available from MS for some problems
that you might run into.
All of that made SP6 not worth the aggravation. But if you are going to do
most of your VB development targeting WinXP SP2 (or later) boxes, which
comes with SP6 installed, you have little choice. Unless you are willing to
fight it out.
At least MS Support is willing to listen if you have an issue with SP6. <g>
-ralph
Norm
"Stefan Berglund" <sorry.no...@for.me> wrote in message
news:fo7h72hqcbp806gv2...@4ax.com...
Stefan,
The reason I was trying to install Visual Basic on Vista was to make sure my
programs would run on Vista.
The information Microsoft has put out is that they will support Visual
Studio 6 on Vista, at least until 2008.
I can install Visual Studio 6, but Service Pack 5 will not see the MDAC and
shuts down with the message that MDAC 2.5 or greater needs to be installed.
If I try to install MDAC 2.5 it tells me that MDAC 2.6 is already installed.
I was hoping someone had found a work around for this problem.
Norm
MikeD
> wrote:
> in <7604D066-D802-41B6...@microsoft.com>
>
>>Hi,
>>
>>I asked this question in the VB Install group, but did not get an answer.
>>I
>>was hoping someone in this group might know.
>>
>>Has anyone gotten Visual Studio 6 and Service Pack 5 to install on Vista?
>>
>>I can install Visual Studio 6 OK, but when I try to install Service Pack 5
>>it tells me I need MDAC 2.5 or greater. I installed MDAC 2.6 and still get
>>the same message.
>
> Why would you even bother? Really.
>
> Just a hunch but I'd bet a large amount of $$ that that's ~by design~.
Your consistant negativity and criticism isn't really helping anyone. Yes,
many of us feel that MS abandoned VB (and us), but that was 5 years ago. It
is what it is. Let it go.
--
Mike
Microsoft MVP Visual Basic
alpine
wrote:
Naw, I think we should keep rubbing MS's nose in the pile of crap
they've made every chance we get.
Bryan
_________________________________________________________
Bryan Stafford "Don't need no more lies"
New Vision Software - Neil Young -
www.mvps.org/vbvision Living With War : The Restless Consumer
alpineDon'tS...@mvps.org
Bob O`Bob
> On Mon, 29 May 2006 21:06:16 -0400, "MikeD" <nob...@nowhere.edu>
> wrote:
>> "Stefan Berglund" <sorry.no...@for.me> wrote in message
>> news:fo7h72hqcbp806gv2...@4ax.com...
>>> On Sat, 27 May 2006 08:56:56 -0700, "Norm" <Nor...@newsgroups.spoof>
>>> wrote:
>>> in <7604D066-D802-41B6...@microsoft.com>
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I asked this question in the VB Install group, but did not get an answer.
>>>> I
>>>> was hoping someone in this group might know.
>>>>
>>>> Has anyone gotten Visual Studio 6 and Service Pack 5 to install on Vista?
>>>>
>>>> I can install Visual Studio 6 OK, but when I try to install Service Pack 5
>>>> it tells me I need MDAC 2.5 or greater. I installed MDAC 2.6 and still get
>>>> the same message.
>>> Why would you even bother? Really.
>>>
>>> Just a hunch but I'd bet a large amount of $$ that that's ~by design~.
>>
>> Your consistant negativity and criticism isn't really helping anyone. Yes,
>> many of us feel that MS abandoned VB (and us), but that was 5 years ago. It
>> is what it is. Let it go.
>
>
> Naw, I think we should keep rubbing MS's nose in the pile of crap
> they've made every chance we get.
After five-plus years, what has it delivered that we didn't already have?
In another forum, I recently noted an MVP seeking assistance with choosing from
among the many tools of which at least one is necessary for preparing installations.
Well, gee ... what happened to xcopy?
Bob
--
Stefan Berglund
Hi Mike-
I appreciate your opinion. But I don't intend to ever let it go because
I find it unconscionable and I'd hate for any poor unsuspecting newbies
to get sucked into the ~your code assets are immaterial to us~ vacuum
that Redmond seems willing to gleefully persist.
Paul Clement
¤ I appreciate your opinion. But I don't intend to ever let it go because
¤ I find it unconscionable and I'd hate for any poor unsuspecting newbies
¤ to get sucked into the ~your code assets are immaterial to us~ vacuum
¤ that Redmond seems willing to gleefully persist.
Doubt that the poster cares about your opinion. He's just looking for a technical solution to his
problem.
You're not helping anyone...not even yourself.
Paul
~~~~
Microsoft MVP (Visual Basic)
Michael B. Johnson
Nonsense: Forewarned is forearmed. Besides, Paul, you can't be sure what the OP
is thinking, unless /you/ *are* the OP; for all you know, he may have found
Stefan's post useful and enlightening.
_______________________
Michael B. Johnson
Norm
Sorry to have stirred up all the controversy, but I solved the problem with
Service Pack 6.
I too am not very happy with Microsoft pulling the rug out from under Visual
Basic and am getting ready to start on a new programming language. After
trying Visual Basic Net for awhile, I am pretty sure that won't be it. Does
anyone else have any expierience with a language similar to Visual Basic
that will be supported for a while.
Norm
Geoff Perlman
Take a look at REALbasic. It's very similar to Visual Basic and is
cross-platform. For the sake of complete disclosure, I am the CEO of
REAL Software, the developer of REALbasic. http://www.realbasic.com.
Paul Clement
wrote:
¤ On Tue, 30 May 2006 08:52:11 -0500, Paul Clement
I'm not a mind reader and neither are you. We both know what he asked and a
*rant* clearly did not address it.
I think you know that from his response, but just wanted to make something up to
amuse me. ;-)
Stefan Berglund
<UseAdddressA...@swspectrum.com> wrote:
in <h78s729lspi7ln9g2...@4ax.com>
Hi dweeb-
Please provide evidence that proves beyond a reasonable doubt that
microsoft or whatever their name is gives two hoots about anyone's code
assets other than their own.
If that was a rant then you must be a kindergartner. No?
Disclaimer:
We do intend to use your response in court so please try to be accurate.
Never mind. My attorneys aren't interested in any Paul Clement drivel.
Sorry.
---
Stefan Berglund
Paul Clement
wrote:
¤ >¤ Nonsense: Forewarned is forearmed. Besides, Paul, you can't be sure what the OP
¤ >¤ is thinking, unless /you/ *are* the OP; for all you know, he may have found
¤ >¤ Stefan's post useful and enlightening.
¤ >
¤ >I'm not a mind reader and neither are you. We both know what he asked and a
¤ >*rant* clearly did not address it.
¤ >
¤ >I think you know that from his response, but just wanted to make something up to
¤ >amuse me. ;-)
¤ >
¤ >Paul
¤ >~~~~
¤ >Microsoft MVP (Visual Basic)
¤
¤ Hi dweeb-
¤
¤ Please provide evidence that proves beyond a reasonable doubt that
¤ microsoft or whatever their name is gives two hoots about anyone's code
¤ assets other than their own.
¤
¤ If that was a rant then you must be a kindergartner. No?
¤
¤ Disclaimer:
¤ We do intend to use your response in court so please try to be accurate.
¤ Never mind. My attorneys aren't interested in any Paul Clement drivel.
¤ Sorry.
¤
Yeah well just because you pee down your own pant leg doesn't mean you have to
piss in someone else's back yard. If you have a problem you can't control then
seek help.
Tom Shelton
With .NET, xcopy deployment is only an option if:
1. The target machine already has the .NET framework
2. You don't distribute any shared assemblies (those installed in
the GAC)
3. You don't use any COM components.
Very few applications of any real complexity fit those requirements.
--
Tom Shelton [MVP]
Bob O`Bob
...and of those which do, the same thing written **in VB5** would have
even wider 'xcopy' deployability, and, -very likely- higher performance.
Bob
Tom Shelton
The framework has been on windows update for years now. All new
machines I've seen come with it already installed. But, you're right -
there are likely more machines with a vb5 runtime then a .net
framewok... I was simply answering your question about what happened
to xcopy deployment. Oh, and I thought of one other reason you might
want an installer - to run ngen on your binaries after install.
As for performance - it really depends on what the application does,
and which framework version you are comparing to. I've noticed a
fairly good performance gain with the 2.0 runtime. Anyway, I don't
want to rehash years worth of old arguments. Some of us like Kool-Aid
;)
--
Tom Shelton [MVP]
Paul Clement
¤ > >>>> I asked this question in the VB Install group, but did not get an answer.
¤ > >>>> I
¤ > >>>> was hoping someone in this group might know.
¤ > >>>>
¤ > >>>> Has anyone gotten Visual Studio 6 and Service Pack 5 to install on Vista?
¤ > >>>>
¤ > >>>> I can install Visual Studio 6 OK, but when I try to install Service Pack 5
¤ > >>>> it tells me I need MDAC 2.5 or greater. I installed MDAC 2.6 and still get
¤ > >>>> the same message.
¤ > >>> Why would you even bother? Really.
¤ > >>>
¤ > >>> Just a hunch but I'd bet a large amount of $$ that that's ~by design~.
¤ > >>
¤ > >> Your consistant negativity and criticism isn't really helping anyone. Yes,
¤ > >> many of us feel that MS abandoned VB (and us), but that was 5 years ago. It
¤ > >> is what it is. Let it go.
¤ > >
¤ > >
¤ > > Naw, I think we should keep rubbing MS's nose in the pile of crap
¤ > > they've made every chance we get.
¤ >
¤ >
¤ > After five-plus years, what has it delivered that we didn't already have?
¤ >
¤ >
¤ > In another forum, I recently noted an MVP seeking assistance with choosing from
¤ > among the many tools of which at least one is necessary for preparing installations.
¤ > Well, gee ... what happened to xcopy?
¤
¤ With .NET, xcopy deployment is only an option if:
¤
¤ 1. The target machine already has the .NET framework
¤ 2. You don't distribute any shared assemblies (those installed in
¤ the GAC)
¤ 3. You don't use any COM components.
¤
¤ Very few applications of any real complexity fit those requirements.
Actually .NET supports registration-free COM interop using manifest files so
that isn't really an issue anymore.
Gacutil.exe is a command line utility so there's no really issue installing to
the GAC.
About the only issue left is the .NET Framework.
Tom Shelton
hmm... I didn't know about that one. Is it new in 2.0 or has it
always been there?
> Gacutil.exe is a command line utility so there's no really issue installing to
> the GAC.
>
Yes, gacutil.exe is a commandline app - but, that isn't exactly an
xcopy install either. At best, your talking about a batch file that
runs gacutil and copies your assemblies. At worst, manually calling
gacutil. Might as well have an install program. Same goes for ngen.
> About the only issue left is the .NET Framework.
Another reason to just use an install package - and probably the
biggest one, so you can include the .net framework bootstrapper.
--
Tom Shelton [MVP]
Paul Clement
¤ > ¤
¤ > ¤ With .NET, xcopy deployment is only an option if:
¤ > ¤
¤ > ¤ 1. The target machine already has the .NET framework
¤ > ¤ 2. You don't distribute any shared assemblies (those installed in
¤ > ¤ the GAC)
¤ > ¤ 3. You don't use any COM components.
¤ > ¤
¤ > ¤ Very few applications of any real complexity fit those requirements.
¤ >
¤ > Actually .NET supports registration-free COM interop using manifest files so
¤ > that isn't really an issue anymore.
¤ >
¤
¤ hmm... I didn't know about that one. Is it new in 2.0 or has it
¤ always been there?
¤
Since 1.1:
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/fh1h056h.aspx
¤ > Gacutil.exe is a command line utility so there's no really issue installing to
¤ > the GAC.
¤ >
¤
¤ Yes, gacutil.exe is a commandline app - but, that isn't exactly an
¤ xcopy install either. At best, your talking about a batch file that
¤ runs gacutil and copies your assemblies. At worst, manually calling
¤ gacutil. Might as well have an install program. Same goes for ngen.
¤
¤ > About the only issue left is the .NET Framework.
¤
¤ Another reason to just use an install package - and probably the
¤ biggest one, so you can include the .net framework bootstrapper.
Yes, I wouldn't disagree that overall an install would probably be more appropriate.