Success of VB

[Nicholas M. Makin]

Well I have gone and done it. I started a fight with C/C++ programmers over
whether VB was a good language. They seem to think it is a toy. Now I read
SOMEWHERE that VB was either the most successful language of one of the most
successful languages ever. I can not however find a source to support such a
statment.

I know that VB has lower development costs than C/C++ due to its speed of
development and its memory mannagement, but again I don't know where to find
the data/articles/higher athority to make such a claim.

Now don't get me wrong I am a C/C++ developer, but this VB bashing is just
not right, the language has earned its place as one of the top development
platforms -- how do I prove that?

Any idea where such information might be found? Who wirtes articles on what
the industry is using and how much it is costing them?

 

[Cor Ligthert [MVP]]

Nicholas,

This include all versions VBA, VBS, VB6, VBNet.

The one who want to learn VBA users C++ is probably a fool while those who
wants to make technical applications with VBA are in the same categorie,
althoughs those fools exist.

However it is a fact that applications which were in past only possible with
C++ are now possible with C#/VBNet as well.

Cor

 

[Robin Tucker]

Hi Nicholas,

I was a C++ developer. To be honest I tend to work in whatever language I'm
asked to work in. The difference between the managed and unmanaged world is
very large from a productivity point of view. Things like garbage
collection and background compilation really make VB.NET a joy to use
(although I can imagine it being a pain in other circumstances). The point
is to choose the right tool for the job I think and as a Professional you
are limiting yourself if you stick to one language/thought pattern and
dismiss all others. This kind of debate goes on in all language groups with
one group evangelising one kind of technology over another. It isn't
suprising when you consider the amount of knowledge people invest in their
particular paradigm and the fact their pay-cheques depend on it to an
extent. If you learn the basic form/patterns and concepts however, you
should be able to code in any language.

With VB.NET I'm very pleased to not have to write *, &, :: { } and == quite
so much and it's a royal pain to develop a rich, good looking, modern,
usable and maintainable UI with C++ and MFC.



Robin

 

[aaron.kempf]

VB was the worlds most popular language

Microsoft took a swan dive because they don't know how to innovate any
longer


VB6 rocks.

Vb.net is neither 'Visual' or 'Basic'

the newest version of Visual Fred is coming out in a couple of months


If I were you, I'd move to dreamweaver and use PHP

 

[aaron.kempf]

we never had to do garbage collection in the first place

that isn't a feature-- that's been around since the 90s

 

[Robin Tucker]

Garbage collection isn't something you "do", it's something that happens.
It doesn't happen in C++, which is why my comments were in context. To be
fair, this isn't a thread about VB, it's a thread about VB.NET.



Robin

 

[pvdg42]

Well I have gone and done it. I started a fight with C/C++ programmers
over whether VB was a good language. They seem to think it is a toy. Now I
read SOMEWHERE that VB was either the most successful language of one of
the most successful languages ever. I can not however find a source to
support such a statment.

I know that VB has lower development costs than C/C++ due to its speed of
development and its memory mannagement, but again I don't know where to
find the data/articles/higher athority to make such a claim.

Now don't get me wrong I am a C/C++ developer, but this VB bashing is just
not right, the language has earned its place as one of the top development
platforms -- how do I prove that?

Any idea where such information might be found? Who wirtes articles on
what the industry is using and how much it is costing them?

Regardless of what "evidence" you find, you've picked a fight that you're
unlikely to win. It boils down to emotion and beliefs, rather than facts.
There's a long history of prejudice against VB in all forms as an amateur
tool where the developer didn't really know what was going on. CO/CO++ guys
were using derisive terms like "VB Monkey" when describing VB developers
(haven't heard that much, lately). Do you hear the same thing about C#? I
don't. Yet VB .NET and C# have basically the same capabilities and
limitations when compared to C/C++.
Time will overcome prejudice as major products are developed using managed
code. For example, Visual Studio 2005 has portions rewritten in C# that were
previously C/C++ in prior versions. Your argument of lower
development/maintenance costs was probably used to support that decision. If
you cite this "fact" to your C/C++ friends, they'll immediately counter by
citing performance issues in VS 2005 (and the argument will continue).
My philosophy (and gratuitously provided advice) is: get comfortable with
the notion that there is no single best language for all purposes and that
others will always disagree in one way or another.

 

[Nicholas M. Makin]

Regardless of what "evidence" you find, you've picked a fight that you're

unlikely to win. It boils down to emotion and beliefs, rather than facts.
There's a long history of prejudice against VB in all forms as an amateur
tool where the developer didn't really know what was going on. CO/CO++
guys were using derisive terms like "VB Monkey" when describing VB
developers (haven't heard that much, lately). Do you hear the same thing
about C#? I don't. Yet VB .NET and C# have basically the same capabilities
and limitations when compared to C/C++.
Time will overcome prejudice as major products are developed using managed
code. For example, Visual Studio 2005 has portions rewritten in C# that
were previously C/C++ in prior versions. Your argument of lower
development/maintenance costs was probably used to support that decision.
If you cite this "fact" to your C/C++ friends, they'll immediately counter
by citing performance issues in VS 2005 (and the argument will continue).
My philosophy (and gratuitously provided advice) is: get comfortable with
the notion that there is no single best language for all purposes and that
others will always disagree in one way or another.

I suppose you are correct. I have been down the BASIC bashing route myself.
Of course for me it was because QuickBasic didn't offer the VESA graphics
abilities that I was able to get at with C/Assembly. So I moved on. Then
windows began to change and become less and less DOS-Like and things like
DirectX and OpenGL surpassed my neat little VESA libraries and I wake up one
day to find all my little applications to be obsolete. Problem is I hated
writing windows applications in C/C++. Not being a programmer by trade at
the time I didn't have all that much time to muck about the windows API and
messaging system. So someone suggested VB4 (Actually the suggestion was for
rapid development of a database application I had in mind). I discovered a
platform where I could quickly develop windows applications without all of
the heartache of C. I was able to quickly produce applications and as a
graphics minded programmer I quickly found that most of the big objections
had been overstated. As you said it was mostly and emotional point BASIC vs
C or in point of fact BASIC vs Any-NonBASIC-Language-Here -- there were
Pascal programmers who hated BASIC, there were Fortran programmers who hated
BASIC, even COBOL programmers who hated BASIC, which I, having spent a
little time in COBOL, thought was unfair.

Even the statistics I have found recently have been VB Bashing. It seems
that I am not the only one who hates the advent of .NET (don't get me wrong
there are lots of great thing about .NET... And VB has always needed its
"runtime" libraries... so really there should not be such a problem). But
seeing how there are the regular BASIC-bashers, and now the dotNET-bashers
what is the point in trying to defend VB's dignity?

 

[pvdg42]

I suppose you are correct. I have been down the BASIC bashing route
myself. Of course for me it was because QuickBasic didn't offer the VESA
graphics abilities that I was able to get at with C/Assembly. So I moved
on. Then windows began to change and become less and less DOS-Like and
things like DirectX and OpenGL surpassed my neat little VESA libraries and
I wake up one day to find all my little applications to be obsolete.
Problem is I hated writing windows applications in C/C++. Not being a
programmer by trade at the time I didn't have all that much time to muck
about the windows API and messaging system. So someone suggested VB4
(Actually the suggestion was for rapid development of a database
application I had in mind). I discovered a platform where I could quickly
develop windows applications without all of the heartache of C. I was able
to quickly produce applications and as a graphics minded programmer I
quickly found that most of the big objections had been overstated. As you
said it was mostly and emotional point BASIC vs C or in point of fact
BASIC vs Any-NonBASIC-Language-Here -- there were Pascal programmers who
hated BASIC, there were Fortran programmers who hated BASIC, even COBOL
programmers who hated BASIC, which I, having spent a little time in COBOL,
thought was unfair.

Even the statistics I have found recently have been VB Bashing. It seems
that I am not the only one who hates the advent of .NET (don't get me
wrong there are lots of great thing about .NET... And VB has always needed
its "runtime" libraries... so really there should not be such a problem).
But seeing how there are the regular BASIC-bashers, and now the
dotNET-bashers what is the point in trying to defend VB's dignity?

A lot of the anti-VB.NET stuff you'll read comes from a not-so-small and
very vocal group of VB 6 (pre .NET) advocates who are resisting change to
their collective dying breath. If you want to find them, just post a .NET
question in one of the non-.NET VB groups.
Personally, I disagree with their position and resistance to change, but my
opinion doesn't mean much. I used VB 6 for several years and I welcome the
transition to a true object oriented language with greater capabilities and
a far better class library.

 

[sloan]

Read this:
http://www.codeproject.com/dotnet/CSharpVersusVB.asp

and find the "follow up"
http://www.codeproject.com/useritems/C___Versus_VB.asp


It'll give you some "bird's eye view" of the situation.

Its two sides of the same coin.

 

[Cor Ligthert [MVP]]

Sloan,

Read this:
http://www.codeproject.com/dotnet/CSharpVersusVB.asp

I like this sentence from the article.

80% of C# programmers are good, while 80% of VB programmers are not good.

This means that there are in fact confirm the writter much more good VB
programmers than C# programmers in absolute figurs.

Cor

 

[sloan]

That's what he implies.

The real magic trick is finding them.

I'm on my company's interview team. My rate is about 1 in 15 I'd guess.

RDU/NC, which isn't the worst stomping grounds.

 

[Nicholas M. Makin]

You know the big problem with such a culture is that it makes getting a job
very difficult. I come form a hobbiest background (my degree is in
Mathematics not CS) and can't seem to get an interview to save my life. I
understand that the emplyers are just afraid that my 15 years of experiance
(as a hobbiest) amount to unstructured experiance and imagine that am a poor
risk. Yet I can assure you (and them) that those 15 years have been well
spent. I may have always been about a decade behind state-of-the art (I can
only use what I can afford) but I am a solid programmer nonetheless. I just
need to find a way to convey that. Not so great at selling myself.

I guess I will give up on defending VB. I suppose that I like it because I
work just was well in C/C++, or Java, and found that its limitations were
just "challenges" to be faced.

 

[Johnny Jörgensen]

Nicholas - don't give up. It can be hard for a person to persuade an
employer that "hobby programming" can actually be useful. I've programmed in
almost every language for the past 25 years, but I'm a self taught
programmer - no CS education here either. I am also a solid programmer and
do a better job than most educated programmers.
Interest means a great deal.

Because of the lack of education, I've always been reluctant to apply for a
job in the computer business and have worked in other businesses throughout
the 25 years - while hobby programming on the side. It was not until ½ year
ago when I decided I really needed to change my life that I got the nerve to
apply for a programmers job. I was astounded: I got a job on my first
interview! Ok, it was as a C# programmer, not as a VB programmer where my
real strength lies - but all the same...

There seems to be a high demand for programmers right now, and I think it's
great that the IT business is recovering from a long dip.

Good luck,
Johnny J.

 

[Terry Olsen]

I've not had any formal CS education either and found it very difficult to
get an interview for a programming position. I took a job with a major
company in their Tech Support department. Every time an opening for a
programming position came up, I applied, but was never accepted.

I've written quite a few apps, both windows & web, that makes our jobs
easier. At first I was chastised for distributing "rogue" applications...but
when our region couldn't get the corporate programmers to develop apps that
we could actually use, they came to me. I hardly work on hardware any more,
except when I'm needed to take up the slack. I've been un-officially
converted to a full time programmer for the region.

 

[Robin Tucker]

Terry/Others,


The main reason CS professionals don't usually employ people without a
formal CS education is because they have no way of gauging your basic
knowledge (beyond a one hour interview and a few technical questions). With
a CS degree you are basically demonstrating an understanding of the basic
form and it is then easier for the potential employer to see that you have
the foundations of knowledge neccessary to progress and learn further.

There are many people who think they are skilled coders, who wouldn't know
how to construct some fairly basic data structures (in whatever language),
such as a Binary Tree or Linked List. Although these things are less
important today, having basic knowledge about how things work is fundamental
to producing good software and more particuarly to the process of innovation
and making the right choices with the algorithms and structures your work
promotes. Unless you can demonstrate these things with a previous
substantial piece of work, it is only left for the employer to take your
word for it. I don't know many employers who can justify to their bosses
taking a punt on a new team member without formal qualifications or
demonstrable knowledge and ability. In any case, after your initial
employment, your formal education becomes less important than where you have
worked before and what you were doing there.

In short, if you want to work in CS and can't get a break, go get yourself
some formal CS qualifications. The process is the same in most other
industries, CS is no different.


Robin

 

[sloan]

I got over the "self taught" hump by two things.

A few classes at some MS certified place. Week long, ~$2500.
Yeah, $2500 out of pocket sucked, but it helped.

And I took 3 grad level classes (1 per semester). It was easy, because I
live 8 miles from NCSU (with a good CSC grad program).

I took 3 classes I ~thought I was good in.

Database Fundamentals
OO
Security

I did ok with a 3.6 GPA in those.

They kicked my butt. I thought I would breeze thru at least the db class.
I put the work in, it was a part time job.

But it got me over the hump.

The reason I stopped at 3, is because NCSU would let you take up to 3
classes without having to actually apply and get into the grad program.
If I did apply and get in, they would count towards the degree.

Anyway, just throwing some ideas out there.

http://courses.ncsu.edu/csc.html
Go Pack!

http://courses.ncsu.edu/csc540/

It also got me out of the "microsoft only" nutshell.

 

[dgk]

Terry/Others,


The main reason CS professionals don't usually employ people without a
formal CS education is because they have no way of gauging your basic
knowledge (beyond a one hour interview and a few technical questions). With
a CS degree you are basically demonstrating an understanding of the basic
form and it is then easier for the potential employer to see that you have
the foundations of knowledge neccessary to progress and learn further.

There are many people who think they are skilled coders, who wouldn't know
how to construct some fairly basic data structures (in whatever language),
such as a Binary Tree or Linked List. Although these things are less
important today, having basic knowledge about how things work is fundamental
to producing good software and more particuarly to the process of innovation
and making the right choices with the algorithms and structures your work
promotes. Unless you can demonstrate these things with a previous
substantial piece of work, it is only left for the employer to take your
word for it. I don't know many employers who can justify to their bosses
taking a punt on a new team member without formal qualifications or
demonstrable knowledge and ability. In any case, after your initial
employment, your formal education becomes less important than where you have
worked before and what you were doing there.

In short, if you want to work in CS and can't get a break, go get yourself
some formal CS qualifications. The process is the same in most other
industries, CS is no different.


Robin

When I decided to switch careers and go into programming (around 1984)
I went to NYU to ask about getting a masters in computer science. The
guy I spoke to told me that it would take at least two years at night
and then I would need to get my first job. Instead, he sent me to the
Continuing Education department where they had a "14 weeks to a
computer certificate" course. There was a summer session coming up
that took 9 weeks full time. I took their aptitude test and came in
6th out of 140.

Twelve weeks later, Banker's Trust hired seven trainees, and six of us
came from the "quickie" computer courses. They explained that a
computer science degree taught folks lots of theory, but the quickie
programs taught how to solve business problems using computers.

Another interesting thing was the breakdown of careers that went into
that quickie program. I came from a biology background, working as a
lab tech, but most folks were musicians. Musicians seem to make good
programmers.

 

[Robin Tucker]

Yes, but to be honest dg there are still a lot of programmers out there
without that basic knowledge. They tend to struggle more when their career
takes an unexpected turn or they need to change fields within CS. The
foundation of knowledge is what makes you adaptable in a learning context.
Of course there are always exceptions. A huge number of programmers back in
the 80's were self-taught (we all had home PCs) but that is not the case
these days. You don't sit down with your new x86 in the lounge and try to
write HELLO WORLD in BASIC any more. The fundemantals are hidden from view.

Perhaps the most important thing a CS degree will give you is confidence in
your ability to learn. There are so many advantages to it I could hardly
recommend the University experience enough. But training courses are just
as good if you want a hand-up to get a real job, it doesn't have to be a
college degree. They are just more fun to do .



Robin

 

[jeff]

degree or no degree .... does not matter!

it is a person's ability to solve problems 'in the real world' and ability
to listen and understand instructions - that will put them above others and
make 'em an asset to any team. Regardless of profession. Before I started
'programming', i was a construction superviser that worked on road and
bridge projects for a forestry company. my last season, I supervised the
installation of 24 bridges (varing lenght 40 feet to 240 feet) and 120 kms
of new road construction. I had many issues that I had to manage ... and
once I figured what out they were, I pulled out ms access (never used it
before but understood the basic concepts of databases). After the
construction season (9 months), i sat down with the client to review how
things went. I pulled out my 'chicken wire' access database and start
pulling the necessary information out and putting it into excel to present
to the client ... remember, my day job was to bady sit a bunch of machine
operators. He was blown away. Upon my return to my office, my boss said
the client wanted me on site the next day for a meeting with their technical
team to develop software. Yes I was disappointed (9 months of camp work = 3
months of time off, until the next construction season ... and 27, just
married, no children, meant a lot of time sitting and travelling with my
wife). Anyhow, met with their 'top' programmers and was assigned as their
business analyst to help them develop an application that would reproduce
what I had done my evenings and spare time. Well, lets say these 'top'
programmers (educated and certified with the latest and greatest technology)
were absolutely useless. Why? Two reasons ... they could not think for
themselves and they would not listen ... if you have at least one of these
skills, you can go without the other ... if you can think, you only need to
listen at a high level; if you can listen, you do not need to think. I got
so frustrated with these 4 morons, I threatened to quit! My boss and the
client asked me want I needed to make this project work, I said some
training how to use MSAccess and VBA ... and these 4 morons as far away as
possible ... done. Over the next 4 months I wrote a consutruction
management package for the client. And since that day, I have not looked
back...I have been developing software for 10 years.

Over these 10 years, I have hired and fired a lot of unversity 'top notch
programmers' ... I have turned projects away due to 'top notch programmers'
that work for the client. So, to say you are unversity educated, and have
this certification, and that certification means absolutely nothing to me!
Show me what you have done, and what real world experience you have. And
give me two reference to call!

Again, if you can think and solve problems ... perfect ... if you can sit,
listen and understand, perfect ... if you have a god complex, good luck!!!

Sure university teaches theory, teaches you a lot about nothing, teaches you
how to get drunk on the littlest amount of money possible ... but it does
not teach you how to listen, it does not teach you how to think, it does not
teach you how to solve problems (i do not mean going to the library and
scamming last years exam to study from - trust me i did it for 8 years!).

If you want to become a professional <insert profession here>, all you need
is a big set of ears and the desire to learn. Do you think I knew how to
launch a 250 foot piece of steel across a 100 foot raven ... not likely ...
yet I was in charge of the construction site. I simple sat back and watched
and asked questions, why ... gained the respect of the crew, and learned a
hell of a lot about their job - what a D9 can push, what are the concerns
beside the obvious - dropping the steel do the hole ... blah blah blah ... i
wanted to understand the processed involved and issue to watch for!!!

Point of thread ... if you want to become a programmer, learn to listen,
learn to solve problems, learn to understand the technologies and techniques
required by your position. In that order. If you can not listen, you are
absolutely no good to any team, I do not care how well you code, you will
not go far.

Jeff.

PS: I have a University degree in mathematics and computer science, I have
another university in engineering ... I am a member of a professional
engineering association ... and to this day, after 18 years of being in the
work force (summer work included), I have learned more from listening to the
people that I work with adn for than I have learned from any book,
professor, course, seminar ... you listen, you are two steps ahead of many
programmers today. 66% of IT projects fail because of communication!