VB6 MSCOMM wroks on one PC and not another

[T.Jackson]

I think if you're going to use .net then you might as well go with C++ or C# (C sharp) I say this because all .net languages are object orientated, and there's really not much more involved with modern versions of C. So I guess the question is, is VB.net really a RAD (rapid application development) language like its predecessor? Would a professional C++ programmer like this person http://www.planet-source-code.com/vb...68164&lngWId=1 ever trade off C++ .net for VB.net like he did with C++.com? He claims that his high-tech calculator would have taken 3 times longer to develop in C++ than it did to do it in VB.

The problem is, unlike with VB6, not everyone is going to be a programmer. Sure, I've gotten my head around OOP (object orientated programming), but it has taken 2 university units to get there.

[mister_e]

I can't agree 100% with you but i understand what you mean.

In fact everyone with a minimum of brain and a load of patience and time can be a programmer. If .NET is your first language, in theory, you'll or should learn it step by step the "recommended way". This include at least Pinvoke, Marshalls, Delegate, Garbage Collector and all other new stuff.

But if you're a long time user of another language, you might have a lot of problem to include and understand some new requirement and loose the "good-ol' way" to do things. But yeah, you can disable almost everything of these and keep using the ol' way... you can even use most, see all, old .COM components.

As long as the framework work great, there's no real problem, but if one day MicroSoft's developers screw something in... your customer could give you a call... and then you'll have to prove 'em it's caused by the Microsoft's Framework problem...

[T.Jackson]

In fact everyone with a minimum of brain and a load of patience and time can be a programmer.

Don't know about that. I came across a group of some very frustrated people on the discussion boards when I did my first unit of Java. They weren't idiots, they certainly had a brain, but they just couldn't get their head around OOP, particularly polymorphism.

[T.Jackson]

I just won a professional academic copy of VB6 on a eBay auction. For years now I have been using VB5, and for just as many years I've always wanted VB6 (there are many significant differences between 5 & 6) Most notably is the "replace" function.

VB6 is still in demand -- ironically I was up against "6" other bidders.

http://cgi.ebay.com.au/ws/eBayISAPI....m=160220000342

I must say that I'm happy with my purchase , considering that the "buy-it-now" price in the States typically ranges from US $250 to $1,000

Any takers on my copy of VB5 I wonder

[tenaja]

I purchased Visual Studio .NET when it was new, and my PC programmer refused to use it. When 2005 .NET finally came out (and with a free version available) I convinced him to give it a try, since they replaced many of the 6.0 features that were eliminated in the original .net release.

Not only has he embraced it, but he's said he'll never go back. For those not looking forward to a new learning curve, I suggest you give it a try. The benefits will outweigh the time taken to learn them.

[T.Jackson]

I purchased Visual Studio .NET when it was new, and my PC programmer refused to use it. When 2005 .NET finally came out (and with a free version available) I convinced him to give it a try, since they replaced many of the 6.0 features that were eliminated in the original .net release.

Not only has he embraced it, but he's said he'll never go back. For those not looking forward to a new learning curve, I suggest you give it a try. The benefits will outweigh the time taken to learn them.

Some people probably think I'm nuts for purchasing an obsolete product for $150 when I can buy .net 2005 for half that. Basically I have an application that I'm too far into to be able to switch over at this point, otherwise I would be going with .net

VB6 is an obsolete 10 year-old product Vs .net which is cutting edge technology. No disputing this much.

[skimask]

VB6 is an obsolete 10 year-old product Vs .net which is cutting edge technology. No disputing this much.

I don't see what's so obsolete about it.
V.B.6 Enterprise is all I've got (actually V.S. 6 Enterprise), except for PBP...
How can it be obsolete if it works so damn good? Kinda like my old Chevy Blazer...32+ years old, still starts every time. Do you have to play with it once in awhile? Yes. Do you have to play nice? Yes.
Would I quit using either of them tomorrow if I got a new one (either .NET or an '08 Blazer) ? Not a chance...
(besides, I can't stand the new improved way of doing things that .NET introduced...makes me cringe...)