The only reason
for me staying in VB6 is the time migrating to .net
will require, and the actual phase development/maintenance
don't permit to take this time.
Probably i won't, probably new projects will be
developed usin VB.net and the old projects will
remain in VB6. |
US |
| I tried to migrate to .NET and I found that the
wizard is not good enough, it cannot generate something
useful and a lot of work was necesary to make something
that is ALREADY working to compile! |
US |
| .NET and VB.NET should also
support for Linux. |
US |
| I use both VB6 and .Net. New program i have written
in .NET |
US |
| As usual, the questions seek
a very pointed opinion and the flavor and significance
seems to be lost in the quest for brevity. The .Net
Framework and Visual Studio.net are just too important
a tool to be discussed in this manner. Most people
have no clue what it is and the kind of impact it
could have for them and their organization. I have
never been an evangelist but I am afraid that I
am running the risk of becoming one. I love the
product, the concept and I believe that Microsoft
got it right this time. It is only a matter of time
before .Net becomes the de facto standard for software
development. |
US |
| I see no advantage in moving to .net - unless
someone can show me one, i doubt we'll ever change. |
US |
| Visual Basic 6 is a rapid application
development tool. I was using this version for the
past 3 years. I find this version very user friendly.
Since I didnt get a chance to migrate to VB.Net,
I am not much aware of this new version. Any how,
I would like to work on this soon. |
US |
| I would have evolved to .NET but cannot make our
project from the scratch. The upgrading tool of
.NET is the worse thing made by microsoft. I know
that VB6 is dying and cannot do anything at the
moment. |
US |
| THanking you for survey from
other countrying. Nice day having. |
US |
| At first glance, VB.NET presents a real issue
of re-training. |
US |
Question 3 is not clear, what
do you want to know:
When are we shipping product .NET to user or when
do we start developing using .NET. Our time to market
is approx 2 years |
US |
| just too busy to get up on the learning curve
and convert my projects otherwise I would have already
converted just for the OOP featues to wrap everything
up |
US |
There is a lot of development
in our company, under government contract (and in
the government in general) being done with Visual
Studio 6 (not .Net), because that is how the project
started and they did not change the platform midway.
I think it will eventually become a problem.
My only problem with Microsoft's support is that
MSDN is not updated for Visual Studio 6. It's essentially
held at the Oct 2001 release. I have no idea if
I can expect more service packs for Visual Basic
6. |
US |
| Fear of the unknown is about the only barrier
to taking up .Net, once you dive in the water's
lovelly ;-) |
US |
| There are many ways to accomplish
a programming task. .NET is just one more tool on
the bench. |
US |
| I'm not a big time programmer, but have enjoyed
VB6 very much. It is unfortunate that VB.NOT was
such a huge departure from VB6. The VB.NET IDE seems
to take longer to startup (more bloated). I miss
not being able to step through my code, and dislike
how many commands have been replace (look how hard
it is to draw a shape). I've used VB Script for
programming Windows CE devices and it is no longer
supported. I'm very disappointed. |
US |
| use VB mostly for small applications
|
US |
| PLEASE add the capability to compile to machine
code in .NET Development platform. Interpreted code
is simply NOT secure enough, even with obfuscation.
We will move to it as soon as that is present. |
US |
| vb.net sucks the arse... May
aswell use a real lanuage if not using vb for its
simplistic approach... |
US |
| We have both VB.net and VB6 in my org. My org
is <10% of the entire company, so my answers pertain
only to my small area. |
US |
| dotNet is just a Bill Gates
knee jerk ego reaction to having lost the java kidnapping
court case. Everyone knows that dotNet in its final
form is just going to be VC++ with some good internet
classes. |
US |
| .net range of base classes and documentation are
excellent. |
US |
| I expect our VB6 products will
still be shipping 5 years from now. |
US |
| I love VB. However, I am starting to do more c#
programming. |
US |
I'm developing For Fun in my
place....
i just love my pc ;) |
US |
| We develop standalone tools for our salesforce:
.Net is a bloated architecture that has not done
any better than java at overcoming the performance
obstacles of an interpreted UI. Ultimately processing
power and inclusion of the .Net Framework in the
operating system may overcome these problems, but
there is a constant battle with every other application
to consume all available resources. |
US |
| I use both VB6 for maintenance
of older projects and tweaking and VB.NET for new
projects. I prefer .NET as it's faster (now that
I'm up to speed with it) and also it can produce
much more professional looking results. |
US |
| the structure of this survey is very biased. You
should NOT limit the choices to a single item, on
each question, as several are equally applicable. |
US |
| I like VB6 because all you need
is the VB6 runtime to work. It is a reasonable language,
except that it does not do very well with classes
and objects. If it were totally object-oriented,
it's perfect. VB.NET is good because it is object-oriented.
But there is the fact that you need the .NET framework
(and the right version of it) on the machine to
run the application, and the application does run
a bit slower. |
US |
Yes. I feel that Microsoft is still in the HYPE
stage of .NET and is not providing correct info
on the % of programmers that have moved to .NET
technologies.
WE develop desktop stand alone financial planning
applications and do not see any intregal benifit
from moving to VB.net. However, we will probably
be forced to the .NET technologies because Microsoft
will not be supporting VB6 forever and interest
in it will wain.
.NET iz impressive but has lost its RAD properties. |
US |
| I m new in this section, i did't
have any specialized tranining |
US |
| MS has not provided any understandable/useful
knowledge of .net, or its benefits to those not
working on www applications. I'm still trying to
find MS or other info on regular expressions Perl
type scripting for VB6 database type applications,
the old Commodore, TRS80 type string handling commands
are limiting. Don't know if .net would help. MS
need to publicise the benefits of their .net product
better. |
US |
| I enjoy using VB, it is a simple,
straight forward language that allows quick results.
I personally have never found the lack or Object
Orientation to be a particular detriment. |
US |
| I would never go back to VB6! |
US |
| bad feature: the use of unmanaged
code, espacially String-conversion |
US |
| I use VB from time to time as a reasonably useful
RAD tool. I have no interest in VB.NET and see it
primarily as a move by Microsoft to force users
to move to new, incompatible technology. On balance,
for the kind of work we do, I much prefer Tcl/Tk,
as it is just as simple to use as VB, free, open
and cross-platform. I would urge developers disgruntled
with Microsoft tools to check it out. |
US |
| I am not yet sold on object
oriented programming. It seems like things that
used to be easy in VB are now extremely complicated
and difficult in .Net. |
US |
| I have heard a lot of horror stories from professional
programmers about the problems associated with converting
VB 6 applications to VB.Net. Microsoft's misrepresentations
about the ease of the task have not helped. Since
all of the applications I have developed are in
VB 6, I will not consider making the switch until
we have a new concept that would be designed from
scratch with VB.Net. And we will probably not be
using any of the new web-aware features of the language. |
US |
| We envisage to move away from
VB6 (except for maintenance) and all new development
will be done in C# or Java, because the learning
curve from VB6 to VB.NET or C# is about the same.
It's easy to cross-skill developers between C# and
Java and vice-versa. .NET projects tend to be easier
to deploy. However, prior to .NET, VB6 was the best
tool to quickly develop Windows-based applications.
I personally use VB6, VB.NET and C#. I prefer C#
over VB.NET. |
US |
| everything about MS programming is good BUT hate
the way microsoft launches newer OS every now and
then :( |
US |
| Spending a considerable amount
of time looking at .net and trying to get my head
round it. Not yet convinced about the benefits.
Its bigger, slower and much more complex, but not
found much on the plus side yet! |
US |
This questionnaire appears to be geared to determine
who is moving from VB6-->VB.NET. My path is VB6-->C#
and is not apparent from this questionnaire. A lot
of people are moving to C# as opposed to VB.NET
and you're going to miss them here (or maybe you're
not really intrested in .NET generally - just VB.NET???)
Also - The 'Benefits' section only allows 1 selection
- there are dozens of other good reasons to move
to .NET and associated tools.
You should also ask what percentage of time is spent
in VB4/5/6 etc
Generally this is a very, very poor questionnaire
and i'm not sure what 'real' statistics can be taken
from it and/or read from it. Still I'll click the
Submit button and see what happens! I guess this
is just a sales/marketing tool to meet your own
ends?? |
US |
| I love VB6. I without the ability
to create apps without depending on the .NET framework,
I am not interested in VB.NET except for web-based
development. |
US |
| We use both right now. But would prefer to be
entirely in .NET |
US |
| Again, the survey needs to have
more check boxes and less option buttons... some
of the questions had more than one answer. |
US |
| VB6 itself is a great modeling tool. .NET development
takes longer, and we are still having problems with
.NET instability. MS software in the past has been
better. I am not sure I understand the QC problems
they are now having. |
US |
| VB6 does all that my App which
I sell needs to do, so I see no reason to switch
to .net |
US |
| I think VB is great! I have been using VB since
version 3, have had most experience with version
6 but have been moving to .NET over the past year.
I can't knock VB6 and in some respects it is more
friendly to use than .NET - but, .NET brings loads
of exciting new developments to the equation and
in a couple of years I'm sure I won't have any cause
to be using VB6 again. |
US |
| I don't have enough time to
spend learning the .NET framework and have been
fornced to maintain my coed in VB6. We have to move
to .NET soon, so it will cause a complete work stoppage
while we retool the apps. Bad planning on Microsofts
side, and I resent their approach to VB. |
US |
| Regardning quick application development, I think
VB.NET is a step in the wrong direction. Nothing
beats the VB6 debugger tools. |
US |
| I think VB6 is the best VB ever
and I can't see why we need to go to .net just because
MS says it's great. There seems to be a lot of headaches
that will accompany that conversion and I'm not
going to jump into that. |
US |
Bugs present in VB4 are still there in VB6...
and some of them make your programs look un-professional.
VB should be able to deploy like RealBasic - WITH
THE .EXE FILE ONLY. All this .dll garbage is also
very un-professional. |
US |
| I think the move up to the next
version or else model that Microsoft uses is causing
me to look more at Linux development. I do not like
to have my investment in money, time, and effort,
made obsolete. I am willing to advance, but do not
like feeling like I'm losing all of my effort if
I don't go with the latest and greatest bug. |
US |
| VB6 still alive ! |
US |
| I'm still using VB6 as well
as .NET, your survey needs to allow for the selection
of both. |
US |
| VB 6.x very useful for small or midsize project.
We use VB 6.x only to support our projects that
was developed before appearance of Microsoft .NET.
For current projects we use Visual Studio .NET and
C#. |
US |
| All our VB6 is legacy, but will
likely be around for a while since it is useful
for using old-style classic COM objects for some
of our legacy products. All our new development
is C#. |
US |
| As a company we decided to move from VB completely
and make the transition to C#. We saw the power
of C# and the ease of development of .Net with Winforms
and decided to use C#. VB6 was a good tool however
there was many limitations such as OOP, specific
keywords... VB.Net was intruiging to us however
we just thought that C# was a better language and
was a better fit with .Net. The syntax is much more
universal (similiar to Java and somewhat C++). |
US |
| Look forward to a balanced result
not like most marketing gimmics. |
US |
| I wish that MS would update VB6 for those of us
who may not be able to go to VB.NET right away.
I hope they continue supporting it. |
US |
.Net is the absolute future.
Look at longhorn, I can´t see a software house survive
without .NET.
Development time in .NET is reduced - in proven
cases I´ve worked on - by at least 50%. I can develop
an application in .Net in one week, that would take
at least a month in VB6. |
US |
| .net is great. but the speed degradation for windows
applications is noticeable. requires all our users
to upgrade hardware to meet performance desired.
not likely anytime soon. and not every piece of
software should have to be managed, would like the
option myself as a developer. |
US |
| The main reason we are still
on VB 6 and haven't moved on is that we don't see
that the benefits justify the learning curve. |
US |
| I must very disappointed to hear that VB.net does
not support arrays of Controls; they're so powerful!
VB was built for easy GUI development; VB.net seems
like it's making GUI development MORE difficult. |
US |
I have dropped VB 5.0 in favor
of the PowerBasic compiler.
.NET concerns me because it seems that non-Microsoft
compilers
will be discouraged as development tools. The Windows
API, of which
I have spent much time learning may even become
obsolete, which means
valuable training and research may be wasted. |
US |
| Your survey doesn't provide for this but I use
both VB.NET and VB6 - currently doing projects in
both. |
US |
| I've been using vb.net for over
a year and I've had no complaints. I haven't ported
much to .net though only new projects. After getting
past the learning curve .net is much easier to develop
with and being able to have a more true OO language
is welcomed. The only thing I miss is breaking and
changing code and then being able to continue without
a totaly rebuild. |
US |
| We're ready for VB7, however Microsoft continues
on the VB.NET tract, |
US |
| We decided to switch to C# as
native .Net language. The reason is that VB.NET
doesn't resemble VB6 at all, so mastering VB6 has
no added value to moving to VB.NET being an entirely
new language. |
US |
| I would love to see MS make a VB6.5 to help the
transition to .Net |
US |
I have developed a development
utility which allows programmers familiar with generic
'Business Basic' to convert these programs to Visual
Basic 6.0. The ability to emulate Business Basic
verbs with Visual Basic routines and syntax is very
high...IF we stick with VB6. Once we try to use
VB.NET, the 'look-and-feel' is not even close.
See http://www.kolafa.com/Downloads/ReadMe.txt (Note
2)
Don Kolafa |
US |
| VB 6 is still an excellent product and should
be around for a long time. |
US |
My main problems with .NET are:
1. I couldn't immediately see how scroll thru records
programatically in ADO.NET and know which record
the user is on.
2. There is no 'in line' bug fixing (while the prog
is running)
3. It is slow to compile the app. When 2 of those
three issues get addressed (and future faster hardware
will help) I will be willing to go thru the slow
painful process of re-learning everything in the
new .NET world.
BTW I have lots of apps out there with customers
(in maintenance) and a couple still under development. |
US |
| I'm happy with VB6. The reasons to want to upgrade
is two fold. Staying with VB6 long term would be
like remaining with DOS apps 10 years ago - have
to change to keep up. The main reason to look at
changing earlier is the drop of support for ActiveX
components by many 3rd party component suppliers.
Their .NET versions often have new features they
have no intention of adding to their ActiveX equivalants. |
US |
| I still love working with VB6.
There was much excitement moving from VB5 to VB6
- but moving from VB6 to VB.NET hasn't produced
near the excitement. We in IT know that we always
have to continually learn new technologies, but
we also want to take comfort in technologies that
are getting the job done - like VB6. Remember, VB6
soared when IT was the latest and greatest career
choice. That is one reason for the success of VB6.
Since the IT economy essentially flatlined after
the glory days of the 90's, programmers and companies
aren't near as qucik to invest time and money into
new technologies - like VB.NET. |
US |
| The whole concept behind the .NET development
is superb. The resulting software really empowers
the stand alone developer. This is the most exciting
thing Microsoft has ever done. It will result in
a quantum leap in software perfomance and reliability. |
US |
| vb6 needs some advanced programming
improvements but is stable, reliable, flexable and
needs little maintanance if 3rd party controls are
not used. |
US |
| Microsoft is a marketing company, not a computer
company. They are introducing .NET mainly to create
a whole new business/income stream. |
US |
| I would love to use VB.Net but
it is extremely expensive for me. |
US |
| I love vb6 because it is so straight forward,
but because of the .net improvement in front end,
I might have to consider learnig newer language
to migrate eventually, ....oh well, I guess it is
a sign of the times...;( |
US |
| VB 6 is a greate language ,
but lacking some certain areas , like inability
inherit , function overloading but i think .net
have nicely implemented those |
US |
| Move to C# |
US |
| I don't like VB.NET for it's
debugger... you could alter code during testing
runs in VB6's debugger, but no, Microsoft had to
change that... Imagine the complication of rebuilding
a large project just to change one variable behaviour...
make it so 5-6 times per working day and all you've
been doing the whole day was rebuilding the application.
NET sux |
US |
VB is excellent language i have seen with lots
of supportive features.
I dont know about .NET as now am in testing. But
3 new projects which started in our company were
in .NET and some Projects were rewritten in .NET
Hope .NET will have good feature too. |
US |
| We will be staying with VB6
until such time it cannot do the job or our clients
say we should move to .net. |
US |
| Till VB.Net settles down I will stick with VB
6. |
US |
| Microsoft should rethink .net
and worry more about system integration issues with
their flagship products. |
US |
I am a doctor and an amateaur developer ( migrated
from Clipper some years ago) of VB6 applications
running on the
network at my hospital. At the moment I have 9 application
in use (some rather big) , but rather soon professional
softwares will take over most of my programs - so
the future for my hobby is threated. The other reason
is that I am 61 y - has invested quite a lot i VB6
books and knowledge - so the inclination to learn
something new is not too great. |
US |
As we are a very small software
development company, we generally only operate on
a maximum of 2 projects at a time.
It took us a while to get used to .NET, but now
we can do the entire development phase in half the
time as was possible with VB6 or Borland C++ or
Delphi. |
US |
We use and will continue to use both VB 6 and
VB.NET
As a consultant I will recommend to most clients
needing standard EXE apps that VB 6 will meet their
needs much better than VB.NET ( VB 6 apps being
faster and requiring less memory on computer )
As a developer of components ( OCX and .NET ) we
will continue to develop, market and support OCX's
for VB 6 as well as .NET components. |
US |
VB6 still fine for 3 tier client-server
to SQLServer - performance on todays PC is fine.
ASP, XML with Flash does web,
so .NET (= .TRAP for Microsoft) - prefer non-branded
solution. SOAP is also good for using VB middle
tier - swapping out the VB GUI layer. |
US |
| Is good if we can get rid of Deployment Tools
and across OS platform. |
US |
VB6 is a very good tool for
windows develop, and i like it , it is easy to use.
and no need much support system,
easy to use activeX componense |
US |
| vb.net is awesome |
US |
| VB.NET will be a long tortuous
path, for developers to follow. |
US |
í'm very interesting in upgrade to .net but we're
developing and having not time to learn the new
version now,
but i like to know the time spend aproximately in
to learn it. Sorry by my English I'm Chilean |
US |
well, for me althought we've
been trained on .NET but still there is resistance
as to the current requirements.
we need sometime to completely and totally moved
to .net as single tool for development. |
US |
Many bugs in the DB area.
When working with database must do loops and hoops
to overcome it. |
US |
| VB.Net only used for new developments.
Ongoing projects & maintenance with VB6. |
US |
| I think use several language in one project,please
introduce some experience about it,thanks! |
US |
Hope VB.NET has the convenience
of editing while debuging.
This is the key point we love VB and do not like
to loose it in .NET. |
US |
We are heavily vested in COM, RPC, SOAP, and ActiveX
Controls. Migrating to .Net
will be costly and time consuming in the short-run.
However, we are also investigating development in
other languages entirely |
US |
| I like VB6 and can do everthing
I need to do with VB6 |
US |
It's a darn shame Microsoft would just give up
on VB6 and leave everyone the way they did! VB6
has such solid foundation, and so many users! I
think they should continue to maintain VB6 to support
the millions of applications that are already written
in VB6.
Just because they come out with a new Dev Platform
does not not mean that it's the best thing for everyone
else, and I see it as MS turning it's back on what
they started. |
US |
I'm finding many shortcomings
in .NET, but I'm still willing to use .NET occasionally,
when it is advantageous to do so,
otherwise, I still slam new projects out with VB6
or Access, whatever my clients want. |
US |
| I also just updated an exising VB6 application,
deciding not to convert to .Net because of time
constraints. This was part of a large database project
that my client was using a lot of offshore people
to program. They were all still using VB6 with SQL
Server. |
US |
| Not sure if I undrestand the
central question--.NET is not a language, it is
a development/deployment framework. VB is supported
by the .NET framework, just as are C++ and C#. .NET
permits developers to use their language of choice--again,
.NET is not a language. |
US |
| I planned to upgrade to vb7 but it obviously never
came out. What happened? Is NET the vb7? Where can
I find out about NET? |
US |
| Creating DLL tools for ASP or
Windows is the easier alternative to deliver quick
results. |
US |
| I think for some of your questions, you should
provide the option to include more than 1 answer
- e.g. #1, I use both VB.NET and VB 6 for projects
but given that I only have one choice, I choosed
VB.NET. Another question I would be interested in
would be reasons why they have not migrated to .NET
yet. |
US |
| Management are terrified of
.Net. The developers understand it, management does
not (nor do they need to, but that's another story),
therefore it does not get implemented, and is actively
blocked. |
US |
| Microsoft should release VB 7.0 as a true descendant
to VB 6.0. Fix the bugs and finaly add true class
inheritance. Then I would have the best tool for
maintaning and upgrading my projects at Svenska
Mätcenter. |
US |
| We are currently using VB 6.x on project because
customers still use this development tool for developing.
Some customers are using VB .Net, but not all of
them. Also customers using VB 6.x don't want to
migrate to VB. Net. |
US |
| I feel there is no proper easy
support for interfacing low level machines via LPT/COM/USB
ports or need to write codes in C! means no use
of VB migration to .NET |
US |
I use VB/Delphi/Alpha 5 for small apps to do specific
jobs.
I have long been thinking that these tools are getting
too complicated and there is too much overhead.
I long for something that is quick and easy, some
database facilities, etc
I shall NOT be using .NET instead i shall be looking
for tools ahat are uncomplicated and easy to use.
Now where did i put my copy of ObjectVision |
US |
| I see no real benefit in using
MS tools at all. I used to be a VB6 man, using MS
Access as a database. Now I use Java, MySQL, PHP
- all free, open-source and OS-independent - Microsoft
VB6 come in handy only to show my client how to
things can be done (as a GUI, non working sample...) |
US |
| Thank you |
US |
| we're gradually moving components
to c#, which has found great favor among our developers
(for expressiveness, syntax). we'll migrate some
of our vb6 components to vb.net to allow easier
integration with our ASP.Net site. All of us are
glad to escape VB's frustrating limitations. |
US |
| I am currently using both VB 6 and VB .NET. I
admit that my education in .NET has been been a
slow one. |
US |
We are in the printing solutions
business. We have no driving need to move to .Net
as our customers do not use it or the overhead baggage
that is required to run it. VB works fine for 95%
of our projects and in fact we use MicroFocus Cobol
in a 'Dos Box' for some projects. This may sound
ridicules to some but we are not in business to
follow trends. We do have some ASP products that
may benefit from .NET but there is no driving force
to migrate these products at this time. The biggest
improvements we might see are user interface enhancements
versus the clunky style of ASP and HTML.
We provide solutions and answers that's how we stay
in business. I have yet to encounter a customer
that demands .Net. But don't get me wrong. Depending
on what business you are in .Net may certainly be
needed. For back end production work we have not
yet encountered the demand. Maybe one day we will
and as we see that curve develop we will migrate
to it as it probably is inevitable as MS continues
development. Following the latest trend sometimes
has no place in production, efficiency and profitability.
As for the trade press you are right, you would
never know VB is still used. But that media doesn’t
get out on sales calls and sell solutions. It’s
market is the techno junkie. There is a need as
technology moves on though. Customers for the most
part don’t care at all if this object can do this
or that and this is a topic a lot will disagree
with me on. The bottom line is the techno junkie
is paid by sales and customers have a business to
run.
|
US |
| I'd like to see more develo0pment with Access
and VBA |
US |
| Hate to see VB 6 going away
but it's not upto us to decide. However, not every
company is planning to completely migrate their
business to dot net and that's a good news for now
for all VB6 developers all arround the world. |
US |
| I used to use version 6 because of school, but
now that i'm graduated i got my own version of vb.net |
US |
| I love it I love it I love it
I love it I love it |
US |
The superior about the VB generation is the ability
for a programmer to create applications in no time.
This means that the developing-time from getting
an idea to creating it is so much smaller than if
you had been using c++ or another language.
I'm working at making some electronic game and by
using 10-20 min developing it in VB first I can
quickly judge which features that are necessary
in order to make the game work proper. |
US |
| Other than the new stuff they
offer in re .net technologies, I don't see any reason
to move to the new versions of VB; perhaps my biggest
draw is philosophical, because now they offer true
oob in the language. |
US |
| Our software program must run on all versions
of Windows all the way back to Win 95. Therefore
we can never convert it to VB.Net which only works
on the later releases. Also the conversion process
is famous for not going smoothly. Our program is
very large and it will be a big task to convert
it. See our website for more information on our
program. www.servicelife.co.uk |
US |
| Although we still use VB6, we
are migrating to VB.NET as we upgrade our obselete
systems. Developing web applications with .NET has
allowed us to develop robust client/server programs
utilizing a web browser, ending the deployment of
applications on client machines. |
US |
| The .Net Framework has many troubles with dll
function calls. IDE works very slow. No Edit & Continue
in current vetsion. Good luck! |
US |
| It would be nice to have VB6
going for a few more years. |
US |
| Having a million or so lines of code (just a guess
but we have been creating / extending / maintaining
this product (Printcost) for over 20 years) the
cost of converting to another language is astronomical
There are some fundamental changes that affect us
in a major way - like using indexed controls. |
US |
| VB is a great tool for rapid
development. Now as far as new technology is concern
everyone is goin for globilization and the use of
internet. for that purpose we have to switch to
.net or any other internet related technologies. |
US |
| The report designer is the worst thing in VB 6.0,
microsoft did not concentrate on building a powerful
report designer in vb 6.0, crystal reports maybe
better. |
US |
| Microsoft developed a very good
application with VB6 and are now moving to web based,
My company only use VB for small interim developments
to fill gaps in the larger systems and so web based
is nice, but by far not essential. The cost of developement
for VB is very small and hence we develope systems
on OPEX without the need for projects. I doubt very
much .NET would allow us to develope quicker and
cheaper.. |
US |
| We will be running our VB6 projects at client
sites for at least another 5 to 10 years, but new
clients are not interested in the VB6 products anymore
- we are only selling dot Net stuff |
US |
| We are currently working on
several projects. New ones are developed in .NET.
Existing ones are maintained with VB6 |
US |
| VB6, excellent development tool both in the Visual
Basic and VBA environment |
US |
| I think we all had better learn
vb.net fast! And it's not that hard. |
US |
| I don't think Microsoft understand that not all
companies have the resources available to constantly
be migrating platforms. We have spend 4 years on-going
development with the systems we run and to migrate
everything to .NET is an insumountable task. We
will have no choice but to continue to develop and
maintain our systems in VB 6 with or without Microsoft
support. |
US |
| When is VB 7 coming out? Why
not buy out Power basic and make VB programs not
dependent on runtimes? |
US |
| I use both VB6 and .Net VB6 for small in house
apps and C# (.Net) for webpages |
US |
| have not yet uesed any of the
above tools. |
US |
| Why migrate when there is little benefit. The
cost of retrainnig and the cost of the tool itself
does little to provide any added value to the customer
or to my business |
US |
| VB6 is still the most productive
tool balancing ease of deployment |
US |
| The additional programability found in VB.NET
would be nice to use in VB 6.x, but I would not
want the .NET framework, as it seems to be a limiting
factor. |
US |
| I have decided not to go through
another Microsoft update cycle. I have enough invested
in VB6 enough challenges in using it that upgrading
to VB.net seems too expensive and painful. I would
rather switch to Java. I believe Java is not marketed
this way. |
US |
| Do not give my email address to anyone .. do not
need any more spam! |
US |
Most of our work is in Access
VBA. I studied like crazy to get up to speed on
.net-- but we just aren't moving into it.
If there was a customizeable accounting package
in .Net that we could do VAR stuff with, then we
might have options, but the package we currently
support still hasn't rolled out their dot net version.
It bothers me that we are in this situation when
MS has been saying for years that all new development
needs to be done in .Net. We do have an in-house
project in .Net and also an ASP.Net project we did,
but there is no interest in our mgt. to try to do
more. |
US |
| VB is a great language, the best for me, is simple
and powerful for my job, and it's not create fool
programs!. Unfortunately, someday Microsoft will
retire the support to the developer community and
we must migrate to .Net |
US |
VB6 is very useful. It can stay
as VB6 and it will do find. I treat it as an another
language in it self to use for Rapid Application
Development; not as a version of a computer language.
VB6 will be here forever because its not .Net dependent,
the language is easy to use, and because you can
create high caliber software in faster time than
any other language. VB6 will be use as a language
of choice.
When you see people donate real good and innovative
programs and codes, they are usually in VB6. Microsoft
have missed the point with .NET, they have neglected
to respect VB6 itself as a platform.
If some how MS is able to allow VB6 code to run
as it is on .NET without any code changes, then
maybe people will view it as real 'improvement'.
I have seen and used VB.NET, its cumbersome and
time consuming to use. If I want to accomplish something
on a code for a program, I usually can find and
understand an answer/sample use for VB6 than for
VB.NET. Thats the case because many people can understand
VB6 easily and get on track to write good code.
Not .NET.
MS can only capitalize on VB6 if they only understand
and produce software development program that provide
the tolerance for imperfect code and the high probability
of running code effectively like VB6 and its IDE
does. But I doubt they will do the right thing. |
US |
| We actually use both VB 6.0 and VB.NET. New applications
are developed in .NET but migrating older applications
is somewhat difficult and are being developed in
VB 6. |
US |
| We like VB V6 a lot and hope
Microsoft continue to support it for a few years |
US |
| My projects are decidedly small for local small
businesses that cannot afford the huge and expensive
programs similar in content to MS Office Pro. Suites
of that type are a waste of their finances because
they contain too much that is not required by these
people. |
US |
| We have multiple VB projects.
The only VB.NET projects are for in-house only at
this time. All of our projects developed for customers
are only being developed in VB6. |
US |
| Thanks... no more |
US |
| Your survey should use a spell
checker, and questions should 1 and 9 be multiple
choice. There are good business cases for VB6 and
.NET. The issue should be which one best fits the
project's needs. |
US |
| VB.Net ROCKS ! |
US |
| We currently use StarTeam for
version control- it is a much better product than
VSS. |
US |
| I do VB6 programming for our personal household.
.NET seems pretty complex for what I need. I do
significant projects (85 KLOC, 11 KLOC), both VB6
standalone and MS Office coding [excel, word, access].
What I've looked at for .NET seems overwhelming.
It might be useful for business use, but I STILL
want something robust for home use. I don't quite
need industrial strength. VB6 is quite good - except
for needing better (more packaged) facilities to
get to Windows system information and features. |
US |
| One of the major problems I
see in upgrading from VB6 to VB.NET is the code
and component conversion. My OCX's I used in VB6
won't work in VB.NET and code conversion is not
automatic. I like that VB.NET doesn't suppose to
need DLL's, but even C++ needs MFC DLLs, so will
that make my VB.NET distribution much larger than
in VB6? Who knows. I can find very few answers to
these questions, and when I do, they're not ones
I want to accept. |
US |
| One of the major problems I see in upgrading from
VB6 to VB.NET is the code and component conversion.
My OCX's I used in VB6 won't work in VB.NET and
code conversion is not automatic. I like that VB.NET
doesn't suppose to need DLL's, but even C++ needs
MFC DLLs, so will that make my VB.NET distribution
much larger than in VB6? Who knows. I can find very
few answers to these questions, and when I do, they're
not ones I want to accept. |
US |
| microsoft's biggest mistake
is dropping VB6 for VB.NET. compare today's environment
to that of 2008 and you'll see. |
US |
| VB 6 is still a very viable tool for small business
development, VB.NET is too complicated and over
kill for that niche. |
US |
| VB.net is great, but its deployment
side is a bit heavy due to the framework that you
need to install. Overall more productive than VB6. |
US |
| VB.NET component developers are slow in providing
ALL the shipped vb6 functions in their released
.NET components. They have ruched to market with
incomplete products and poor documentation. It is
very frustrating providing the same functions in
the .NET part of the program as we do in the VB6
part of the porogram. We ship a joint VB6/VB.NET
package. All new development is in the .NET module
and as current functions are added to the .NET part,
they are removed from the VB6 module. Duplicate
menu pages send the user to the correct module and
utility. |
US |
| I'm not a professional programmer.
I just use VB to make a few programs for my computer.
My last version was VB4 which I used on 1996 computer.
I now have a newer 2002 computer and figured I had
better get the latest VB version for it and so bought
.NET |
US |
| I still USE VB6 for some kind of projects which
are mostly based on my exising framework library
developped till the date. Use this is faster to
develop new project and offers fewer testing/development
cycle. If it is brand new project then I use the
VB.NET. And ofcource afer 1-2 years .NET will only
be my development language as my framework is virtually
ready for every new project. I realy imppressed
with the fewture exist in the VS.NET IDE. |
US |
| I'm an occasional programmer
and VB.NET is just to expensive and difficult to
make it worthwhile to change from VB6. I’m looking
at some other language/framework (REALbasic??) maybe
I’ll just stick to VB6 until it’s no longer viable? |
US |
| I think development in VB is quicker than NET,
at least for small-medium proyects. |
US |
| Your survey is not flexible
enough to reflect my actual usage. I work as a consultant
in a group doing Microsoft-based custom application
development and systems integration for multiple
clients. My colleagues and I actively use VB6 and
.NET (VB.Net, C#, and ASP.NET; .NET Framework 1.0
and 1.1; Visual Studio 7.0 and 7.1). Furthermore,
I find clients are also using VB6 for support and
extension of legacy COM+ as well as doing new development
in VB.Net, C# or even J2EE. |
US |
| It is like I have heard from a lot of people that
used VB6 extensively: Why would you use VB.NET when
you have Java? VB6 filled a niche - there was nothing
else like it. Sure it did not have classes, overloading,
and so on - but if anyone was and is going to need
objects, we have and will use a true OO language,
like Java or even C++ |
US |
| I think MS is making a mistake
'forcing' developers into the .Net corner. It might
cause their 'loyal' developers to junk VB and go
with Java. If I need to learn a 'new' VB, I might
as well learn Java. |
US |
| We will probably try to migrate to VB .Net later
this year. If it wasn't so steep a learning curve,
we would try to move to it for my current project. |
US |
| I haven't switched to VB.net
since I don't work in a multi-member development
team which VB.net seems to have an advantage. Using
VB6 in a single developer environment allows me
to produce significant windows programs in a very
short period of time. |
US |
| We cannot justify the man months to upgrade our
app to vb.net. We need the ability to run VB6 code
directly in vb.net...fat chance! |
US |
VB.NET offers limited benefits
given:
1. cost of re-training
2. effort to rewrite existing base
3. effort to support dual platforms with one platform
constantly changing
Why won't MS take a VFP type approach (enhancements
w/compatibility) to VB vs. huge change? VB.NET is
just C# with a different syntax. Let VB be VB (hint:
the B stands for BASIC). MS missed or is missing
marketplace for development tools for average (hint:
BASIC) development previously held by VB. I understand
and appreciate all the cool VB.NET technical features
- BUT!!!! - where's the real world ROI? For small
and medium businesses I just don't see it.
Speaking as CTO of a 15 year software development
firm, MS needs a VB 7.0 that builds a BRIDGE to
VB.NET vs. the huge chasm they've created between
VB 6.0 and VB.NET.
Happy to discuss my thoughts further.
Malcolm Greene, CTO
Brooks-Durham Software
mgreene@bdurham.com |
US |
| If only VB.NET wasn't so incredibly different
for the kinds of projects we need to create, we
would have converted already. We use Crystal Reports
integration heavily, and many of our projects are
1-3 day custom reports/utilities for customers.
I develop many products as well, that range in size/complexity. |
US |
| I would like to hear the advantages
of moving to .net. |
US |
