Is it true that Microsoft will not support Visual Basic anymore? If it is then what is in store for us VB Programmers?
Printable View
Is it true that Microsoft will not support Visual Basic anymore? If it is then what is in store for us VB Programmers?
Some info about the end of MS support to VB6:
http://blogs.msdn.com/brad_mccabe/ar...10/393704.aspx
1-Switch to vb.net (it will be relatively easy to invest your current vb6 knowledge)Quote:
If it is then what is in store for us VB Programmers?
2-support and upgrade lagacy systems made in vb5,6
No....the mainstream support just ends at the end of March 2005....for further information take a look here...
Everyone concerned should also know that .net (also known as .not) is no replacement for vb. One very important difference, is that .net is decompileable, and therefore not a choice for commercial applications whatsoever (unless you want your work stolen). You can Google your way to a lot of info about this, and also look here: http://www.remotesoft.com/salamander/
Take a look at petition to extend support here:
http://www.vbforums.com/showthread.php?t=328415
If you are interested please sign the petiton at:
http://classicvb.org/petition
Herman
Microsoft are probably hoping that we'll all run out and buy the latest version of .net.Quote:
Originally Posted by d-u
Personally, I'm saying goodbye to microsoft and becoming more involved with Linux (open source programming languages).
Regards
DISCLAIMER: before reading this, I agree with you. I don't like runtime languages, both for the point raised by wizbang, and for the other (more obvious)points such as decreased performance.
While this is true, and you probably already knew what I'm about to say, you can get tools that make the IL almost impossible to understand. so even though it can be decompiled very easily, comprehending the decompiled code is next to (if not) impossible.Quote:
Originally Posted by WizBang
of course, it just adds another layer to the development. And you probably have to pay for all the tools that can do this for you.
Delphi is a very good alternative. It is available for both Windows and Linux. The development environment for Linux (Delphi & C++ Builder) is called Kylix.Quote:
Originally Posted by HairyMonkeyMan
Hi All,
Seems like everybody is worried about .NET coz it is easily decompilable. However even Java is build using the same concept (like CLR in .NET, Java has Virtual Machine) and there are tools available where you can do the decompilation for Java also.
Java Decompilers:
http://members.fortunecity.com/neshkov/dj.html
http://www.brouhaha.com/~eric/software/mocha/
To all those who have concern regarding the Source Code security, there are tools available on the net for both Java & .NET code security. But you have to pay for them..
Link:http://www.preemptive.com/obfuscator.html
I personally agree with the above posts that VB.NET is not a replacement for VB 6.0 or earlier versions, simply because it is unmanaged and you do not require additional tools to make your code secure like you need to do with VB.NET/Java..
I have already signed on the petition and I hope Microsoft does something about this....
--Shuja
.NET Obfuscator community edition is included in VS.NETQuote:
Originally Posted by Zeb
http://www.preemptive.com/
Does this mean that all my VB 6 applications will not run in the future?
I'm a bit worried about this.
Thanks.
Rich.
I think this is still far to happen
the discussion is about support to fixing bugs and so on
not the support to run VB which I don't know alot about it in fact.
You can still run most DOS programs, so I don't think that will be an issue in the near future.Quote:
Originally Posted by powerfull_king
Thanks a lot guys.
Rich.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sahir
If I switch to Delphi now, what I am worry about is, if Delphi will do the same thing as microsoft did. I don't know what is the concern of the programming language in the future.
If you mean if Borland will withdraw support or cease to exist, then that is a risk that we all have to live with. There is no certainty Microsoft itself will exist n years from now. What if the sun dies or if the polar ice cap melts ?Quote:
Originally Posted by sukarso
If you mean, is it as good as VB, C# or Visual C++ ? I would say yes, and then some :cool:
My few thoughts:
1) It is not true that U have to pay to secure your .NET application. Beside the fact that U can obfuscate assembly, U can also hide an assebly in unmanaged code using CLR hosting API and cryptography. But it is true that it needs an extra work to achieve it.
2) .NET cannot be ignored. It will be part of all new products from MS and I think it will be better to get know it a little bit more.
3) .NET is no more dedicated to only 1 platform. It is now available on UNIX & Mac OS (see Mono - .NET for linux for example) and portable solutions too.
4) Running unmanaged code can become very quickly as obscure as using DOS application today.
5) .NET application can be as fast as unmanaged code - it is simply a question of design. I know few exaples that show situations in which .NET application can be even faster.
6) C# language was designed by guy that develop pascal language - so it can be seen as pascal (delphi) derrived :D .
7) U can develop your application (in C# for example) totally free (which is IMHO immpossible with Borland Delphi :rolleyes: )
8) Personally I hate VB (disregarding the fact that I was forced to write some applications in it). For example: It is not supporting (directly) multithreading, so it is very hard to develop good nonblocking GUI in it (only COM can help with it). So I won't miss it at all :D
Best regards,
Krzemo.
Yes what you say are true except for the last one (#8), I think our very own Cimperiali has something to tell you with that :D (kidding aside)
Yes, I think VB has come to an end but there are still large number of programmers who are using VB as companies are still embracing the COM technology in their system, some reasons I think because it is cheaper and practical.
It also seems that obfuscators aren't much protection anyway, as the site I pointed to shows.
Anyway, I don't think vb is anything great, but it does have a large developer base, and plenty of user support, since you'll hardly find a windows system without the runtime files. While nothing lasts forever, .net is just not a replacement for vb. At least not from all the facts thus far. Just because we won't be seeing vb in a continuous stream of new versions doesn't mean you can't still use it. It will work until the OS won't run it, and that's not for awhile yet, if at all. The fact that we can take advantage of the system API means we can access newer system capabilities without the language supporting it internally.
Yes...But this depends on the Win32 API future ...?Quote:
Originally Posted by WizBang
"All good things must come to an end".
I'm afraid VB6's days were numbered for a good number of years ? Why ?
Because the programming community has embraced object orientation as the design methodology to use in commercial systems.
You can't go to a job interview in C++ or .NET without getting some OO questions.
VB6 isn't object oriented. And I've seen first hand what a mess can be created for a relatively simple commercial project when it's not designed properly.
You seem to forget : I don't think that Microsoft ever intended commercial applications to be written in VB. I remember VB1 which was simply a rapid-prototyping tool. I get the impression it was first intended either as this or as a teaching tool to gently lead people into using C++/MFC. I don't believe that MS ever intended it to become a language which people would use to code commercial systems.
Eventually C++/Win32 will go away too... or rather become like Machine Language, used for time critical applications.
However C++ is a standard, cross platform language meaning that its longevity will be assured in one form or another until the other platforms start to change. Unfortunately VB6 isn't so it's death has come earlier.
No bad thing either in my book.
Besides if you don't like change why are you in an industry which makes money from it ? Everything in computers (certainly desktop) changes about once every 10 years or so... and remember, this is still a very, very young industry. It's only really 15-20 years old or so and is still trying to find a standard that it can sit comfortably with for a long period of time.
Darwen.
It's not probbable that VB apps will not run on windows platforms in future, but,
when MS will publish a new Office (with new Access), I suppose old VB6 apps will not be able to install on such systems if using Access database.
If MS will not provide a new service pack for VB.
So, we all have to expect problems in about 2-3 years.
Microsoft is positioning C++/CLI as the "systems" language for the managed runtime, analogously to the way that unmanaged C++ is the systems language for Win 32. So in the new MS world, when you want to get close to the metal in the managed runtime you'll reach for C++/CLI.Quote:
Originally Posted by darwen
I for one would embrace .NET tommorow IF I could protect it.
Nothing is 100% secure I know .. but from what I hear in cracking circles .NET stuff is easy pickings .. obfescated .. or not.
So for now its.
NOT .NET
.NET is definetly not easy crackings.
Personally, I am friends with atleast a dozen crackers or so and a few game emu teams. ATM, C# is the language of choice for game emu servers. For example, if any of you play WoW (World of Warcraft), the best emu team right now is WoWEmu, a server completely written in C#. However, this server isn't free, it's $100 USD. Naturally, this priced emu attracts crackers, but even some of the best of them that i know are unable to crack his emu and WoWEmu has only implemented a callback system to make it even harder to crack.
C# and .NET oriented languages ARE the languages of the future. Many have said it, and it's true. If you want my advice, go for C# and learn it quick. Linux and Unix aren't taking over anytime soon, so .NET languages are here to stay, for now.
As far as the MS leaving VB, its good in my eyes. VB has ugly syntax and format and I still to this day am not sure how ppl put up with it and understand it.
Anyway,
Peace.
MAL1C3: A program compiled in C#, C++, and so forth is not the same as one compiled or .net. I keep referring to Salamander, which is just one decompiler you will find just by searching on Google. Here is the URL: http://www.remotesoft.com/salamander/
It is true that .NET assemblies can be decompiled and there are tools available on the internet which can do that for you. But As I had written in previous post, so is Java and you can decompile Java Classes as well. But then people haven't stopped using Java. And it has been around for quite some time now. The reason being that Java is platform independent and complies with the Open Source Standard..
But then .NET has lots of other features which are excellent. With .NET MS is moving slowly in to Open Source Standard.
However, software which is to be sold commercially won't be written in .net, just as Java is not used for this purpose either. Almost any language has a chance to maintain a developer base in some corner of the market, but not all are appropriate for any given task.Quote:
Originally Posted by vb_the_best
So does this mean I should stop learning VB?
I could start learning .NET or C++ or C#
I just liked the easy VB syntax
So does that mean only C/C++ is the language in which we can write commercial software.. I have seen companies like Intel/IBM/HP and lots of biggies using .NET for one purpose or the other.Quote:
Originally Posted by WizBang
And what actually is a commercial software?
Thanx for the insight..
There are still many choices, and that will never change. The reason why .net and Java can be decompiled is that neither is fully compiled, but made into a kind of "intermediate" code. This is because it is managed, for garbage collection and so forth.Quote:
Originally Posted by vb_the_best
Here is a nice explanation:
http://dotnetjunkies.com/WebLog/bhar...les/44112.aspx
I think of commercial software as that which is sold publicly to multiple users (not used proprietarily).Quote:
Originally Posted by vb_the_best
Thanx..
So that doesn't mean that .NET is .NOT!!
Even if .NET will not be a choice for developing commercial software, but i think the best part in .NET is Web Services, the number of languages it supports, the Open Source standard which it is using and the ease of developing customized applications in .NET. Don't these features make it a better platform for development.
I've no doubt that .net will maintain a share of the Web services market. It's just not a replacement for vb, nor languages like C, Assembly, etc..
I totally agree with you..Quote:
Originally Posted by WizBang
C/C++ have been the best things that have happened to computers after Assembly Language.
I personally like VB, but as market changes you have to change so I have moved to .NET.
I am a bit more concerned about difficulty in learning .Net at a good level in few
time rather than in "security" of sources I write, as I am coding for customers
which at last keep the sources, and do not own my code. The sad part is that I
have spent a lot of time and effort on Vb (started with 3, stepped trough 4 an 5,
and landed on 6), and now I feel as if I have to restart quite from the beginning:
what I know is more confusing me than helping in dealing with net, no matter
what pubblicity says: I need more time to do same thing I can do in Vb, or I end
up with poor solutions.
The "commercial" matter is an issue, of course, and I believe Wizbang is right:
.net is not the tool to make "commercial" (=desktop) products but web ones,
held by the owner of a company which has the server where they are installed.
But it seems as if this is the guess: in the future, even more products (at least, all
services, aty first glance, but sooner or later also what till now has been a
product, like a book-keeping software or even a text editor) will be accessed via
internet, and even few will be on client machines.
In any case, even if Vb 6.0 could actually die in a not too distant future, other
compiling languages should not. And, by the way, remeber many said Cobol
should have disappeared more than 10 years ago, but is seems as if it is still
here... ;)
Maybe we'll see Cobol .NET ? How about Forth .NET ? Lisp .NET ? Smalltalk .NET ? *laughs a lot*Quote:
And, by the way, remeber many said Cobol
should have disappeared more than 10 years ago, but is seems as if it is still
here...
I think we already have Pascal .NET kind of with Delphi .NET.
Darwen.
If I am not mistaking, cobol .net is already here.
We will see if Cobol (not dotNet) will survive also at this...
Maybe after sometime we will see myOwnLanguage.NET.. :D
here is what I came across today on the internet....
http://www.apress.com/book/bookDisplay.html?bID=213
This book is titled : Build Your Own .NET Language and Compiler
Will there be issues if one deploys an application made in vb.net to a win98 os?
Don't quote me on this, but I think there might be two different types of cobol.Net. Fujitsu responsible for one, and I'm not sure who did the other... again.. don't quote me. Just a rumour I heard.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cimperiali
Hey, what can you say about this site?
Just what will happen to me if Microsoft would leave VB? I am only just beginning to learn the language and i'm forcing myself to much because i hope that sometimes i can make a good application too. The idea was really frightening.
I disagree with this. We use .NET simply because of the fast turn around times, slowely but surely I think we will see (infact we already are seeing) a shift toward using .NET.Quote:
Originally Posted by WizBang
As the issues around .NET are resolved (including reverse engineering) more programmers will move over to the new technology. The Dotfuscator is one of the first attempts to make code "irrerevsable". But at the end of the day nothing is irreversable... once you have a file that you can run you can decifer what it does and that is essentially reverse engineerig. Even asembler and machine code. The only thing you can do is make it more and more difficult to understand.
If reverse eng proves to be a huge problem M$ will eventually do some thing about it (they'll have to). Over the last few years M$ has become more concious of giving people what they want instead of trying to give people something and MAKING them use it (Office moving to XML is a case in point).
I am not evangalising .NET... its just where I think the market is heading. Time to market is probably on of the most important factors in the current businesses world of coding. (From my experience, companies that haven't realised this tend to go under).
But, how right I am will be determined in time...
At the end of the day most languages are pretty much the same. If you can code in one then you can code in another. It is just the instruction set and syntax notation that differs. The general concepts and algorithm structures stay the same. So, learn VB it is a nice language to write in. Very simple, nothing trying to confuse you, and if you make a mistake VB will try to tell you about it (unlike C).Quote:
Originally Posted by rtolledo
You can still write apps in VB. It will still be of some value for several more years.
But yes, one day you will have to move away from it. But then you'll have a good idea about what is going on inside the PC (and you'll have the option of moving over to VB.NET, which has similar syntax).
I find it hard to believe that, as currently .Net calls the API's. Could you show me an example that shows this situation?Quote:
Originally Posted by Krzemo
packetvb
I think if ms doesnt want to support us as developers wanting to use vb
let them, ill switch my platform to somthing else linux and mac are looking for developers and with better conditions:
1. ill have less competion in my product class, with higher prices
2. nothing like embedded vb-conditions like winsock recv bug are nice reminders that our software cant be better than its operating system
3.open source and in apples case discounts towards dev systems
4.free tools
5.linux and apple need developers, in macs case this quarter ended i think i reads 3 folds higher than last years. im sure linux is used about that much more
6.example if i wanted to test my software on media center edition, i could one buy a whole new system, or buy a major hardware part and the software from a online retailer, i think that is funny
if im going to learn a new language its going to be somthing else and im not paying the bill gates tax to continue supporting his stock .net does sound like a improvement to go to just a bad move, its not like processors are getting slower, vb is fine the way it is for every one looking to do somthing basic
microsoft might not leave vb but we can leave microsoft to making their own pdf editors and software, bugs
Maybe you should have learned C++ instead of VB ? If you're going to switch OSes then you're going to have to now... :D
Come on, VB was only intended to be a learning language/rapid prototyping tool right from the off. In the modern day of object oriented languages VB6 really doesn't have anywhere left to hide.
Darwen.
I've come across a few claims which have asserted this. Last year I had an interview where they told me that they'd rewritten one of their apps. in C# from C++ and it was faster. I think the situation here is that the design of C# or other managed languages is such that you may more easily be able to express certain designs and that you get the performance boost because of this rather than because of a line-by-line comparison.Quote:
Originally Posted by packetvb
For example there is a case study on Eiffel Software's site, where one of their customers rewrote an app. from C to Eiffel and found that it was 10 times faster.
http://www.eiffel.com/executives/cas...xa/study1.html
Eiffel also uses a "managed" environment but in its case it gets compiled down to C. This means you will get at least comparable performance to C. Nonetheless in this case they got a 10 times boost, so this must be due to the OO design, resulting in more efficient code organisation, e.g., generics and multiple inheritance.
It dosen't matter b'cos we all know we have to upgrade to .net.
That's Microsoft Programmer