|
|
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
Top |
| 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
Top
|
| 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
Top
|
| 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
Top
|
| 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
Top
|
| 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
Top
|
| 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
Top
|
| 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
Top
|
| 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 |
| I hate .net!! There is too much stuff and it takes
too long to create a simple project! It is also hard
to make sure it works on other servers. I will go to
another product before I go to .Net. |
US |
| we are currenlty using both vb6
and vb.net, that should be an option for the survey |
US |
| Our projects usually involve interfacing computer
systems running VB programs to industrial sensors/measuring
systems. These require little in the way of internet
capability. |
US |
| We do new development in VB.Net
but it is not feasible to move our entire suite of applications
developed in VB6. Lack of complete migration tools hampers
our efforts. |
US |
| I use both VB6 & VB.Net, I still like VB6 very much. |
US |
| Yes dotnet is the future but vb6
is the present |
US |
| Pretty much for network intensive projects, we find
PowerBasic's built in networking functions, which support
both inline and callback (object oriented) network models,
is superior to any other language. It also supports
in-line Assembly and of course, like other languages,
has no problem allowing direct API/SDK access. And it
usually compiles to smaller binaries than any high-level
language. |
US |
| Would love to learn .NET but time
is scarce |
US |
VB6 is now a very old programming language, but if
you use
Win32 API and a little hooking and subclassing, you
can achieve almost anything - when programming Windows
based applications. The embedded ActiveX controls are
a little outdateted, but with just a little work one
could make superior controls in no time.
So, you see, I have no real need to move on to .NET,
or anything else for that matter. Since I am still working
on some applications for Win95/98, I don't think those
old machines could chew something as robust as the Framework. |
US |
Why does your survey assume you
only can use one type of VB.
Personally I presently use VB6 and VB.net.
If section 9 you ask about VB projects, however the
third question assumes you only have one project. I
have projects I am maintaining and other projects that
I am actively developing.
I must say this is the worst survey I've ever written. |
US |
I typically write small interfaces that allow companies
to configure embedded products that I design. I want
to wrap these up in a few hours. I don't want to get
too involved in using the macros required to talk to
the comm port in vb.net.
I have used .NET and found it cumbersome for do |
Il reste très peu d'applications en VB5. En revanche,
beaucoup d'entreprises utilisent encore VB6.
