to Ken Halter and the other dedicated VB MVPs

[smith]

The intense off-topic VB6/VB.Net thread "Where is the Key in Treeview.Net"
(started Dec 2 2004 and cross-posted to every VB group under the sun) really
got me to thinking.

And that thinking got me to typing this:

http://www.smithvoice.com/C1swf.htm

All the best in 2005 and here's hoping that this year's Visual Basic release
will be more to the VB core's liking.

Robert Smith
Kirkland, WA
www.smithvoice.com

 

[Ken Halter]

The intense off-topic VB6/VB.Net thread "Where is the Key in Treeview.Net"
(started Dec 2 2004 and cross-posted to every VB group under the sun)
really got me to thinking.

And that thinking got me to typing this:

http://www.smithvoice.com/C1swf.htm

"With .Net VB got what most everyone said that they wanted"

All I have to say is.... I can't recall anyone saying that they wanted to
re-write every stinking app they have just so they can say "it's running in
..Net". Can't recall anyone saying that control arrays were inconvenient so
get rid of them. Can't recall anyone saying that Tree/ListViews are too
convenient so lets muck them up by removing the Key.

Like I've said 10 dozen times now, the company I work for has code that's
been running great for *years*. To re-write that would be suicide. We'd have
to pay our test engineers plus the 3rd party test engineers plus months and
months of documentation changes plus redistribute everything to our
customers (and explain why everything takes longer now) and convince them
that.... no, there are no changes, we just re-wrote "the world" so we could
say we're using .Net...

Then, no doubt, a couple of years from now, when .Next comes out, start over
from scratch again. That's just plain silly.

"1) RAD. High level object interfaces with the ability to get finer and
deeper control if you want it"

There is nothing more "RAD" than VB5/6. Control Array support alone almost
makes that statement true by itself.

"What of C#? To me, it's little more than a marketing trick"

Actually, B#'s the marketting trick. MS doesn't use B# for anything
internally. All 3rd party vendors that claim "written entirely in .Net" have
a "using C#" tag somewhere on the same page... zero 3rd party vendors admit
to even touching B#.

No one at MS wants to admit to using VB(insert version here) for anything at
all... nothing has changed since B#'s release.

 

[alpine]

"With .Net VB got what most everyone said that they wanted"

All I have to say is.... I can't recall anyone saying that they wanted to
re-write every stinking app they have just so they can say "it's running in
.Net". Can't recall anyone saying that control arrays were inconvenient so
get rid of them. Can't recall anyone saying that Tree/ListViews are too
convenient so lets muck them up by removing the Key.

Like I've said 10 dozen times now, the company I work for has code that's
been running great for *years*. To re-write that would be suicide. We'd have
to pay our test engineers plus the 3rd party test engineers plus months and
months of documentation changes plus redistribute everything to our
customers (and explain why everything takes longer now) and convince them
that.... no, there are no changes, we just re-wrote "the world" so we could
say we're using .Net...

Then, no doubt, a couple of years from now, when .Next comes out, start over
from scratch again. That's just plain silly.

"1) RAD. High level object interfaces with the ability to get finer and
deeper control if you want it"

There is nothing more "RAD" than VB5/6. Control Array support alone almost
makes that statement true by itself.

"What of C#? To me, it's little more than a marketing trick"

Actually, B#'s the marketting trick. MS doesn't use B# for anything
internally. All 3rd party vendors that claim "written entirely in .Net" have
a "using C#" tag somewhere on the same page... zero 3rd party vendors admit
to even touching B#.

No one at MS wants to admit to using VB(insert version here) for anything at
all... nothing has changed since B#'s release.

Yeah, it is clear that Robert doesn't get it.

*It* is about trust and the fact that we can no longer trust MS to
consider the value of existing source code assets when creating the
next release of any language that they have not invested any of their
own source code assets in. It really is that simple.

I don't see the "VB core" _ever_ "getting with the program" given this
lack of trust in MS.

HTH,
Bryan
____________________________________________________________
New Vision Software "When the going gets weird,"
Bryan Stafford "the weird turn pro."
alpine_don'(e-mail address removed) Hunter S. Thompson -
Microsoft MVP-Visual Basic Fear and Loathing in LasVegas
____________________________________________________________
New Vision Software "When the going gets weird,"
Bryan Stafford "the weird turn pro."
alpine_don'(e-mail address removed) Hunter S. Thompson -
Microsoft MVP-Visual Basic Fear and Loathing in LasVegas

 

[Herfried K. Wagner [MVP]]

Ken,

Actually, B#'s the marketting trick. MS doesn't use B# for anything
internally.

Wrong.

<URL:http://blogs.msdn.com/somasegar/archive/2004/08/01/204540.aspx>:

| our internal systems have typically been written in VB6, and
| now are being written in VB.NET.

 

[Ken Halter]

Wrong.

<URL:http://blogs.msdn.com/somasegar/archive/2004/08/01/204540.aspx>:

| our internal systems have typically been written in VB6, and
| now are being written in VB.NET.

MS using VB6? That's FUNNY! I doubt it very seriously. VBA6 maybe... but
VB6? LOL. I'm wondering which "internal systems" he's referring to.

Well... where's the proof? Oh... it's in a blog so it must be true eh? ;-)
Here's another blog (bunch of Doogie Howser want-to-be's if you ask me)

Microsoft drops C#
http://weblogs.asp.net/hpreishuber/archive/2004/07/05/173067.aspx

"we're 120% committed to the language and the product not just today but for
a long, long, long time to come, as we have been in the last decade now"

LOL

"I know that when we moved from VB6 to VB.NET, we broke compatibility and
that is a sore point with some of our developer customers"

Well.. he got that part right anyway.

"migration wizards"

LOL... you mean the one that adds "ToDo: Rewrite your app from scratch" at
the top of each project? That's the same "wizard" that used to host the
Fractured Fairy Tales cartoons each saturday.

 

[alpine]

Ken,



Wrong.

<URL:http://blogs.msdn.com/somasegar/archive/2004/08/01/204540.aspx>:

| our internal systems have typically been written in VB6, and
| now are being written in VB.NET.

ROTFLOL! Can you say. "Lip service"? ;-)

They'll toss out that piddly amount of code in a heartbeat. Come back
and talk to us when they have Word or Excel written in VB#.

Bryan
____________________________________________________________
New Vision Software "When the going gets weird,"
Bryan Stafford "the weird turn pro."
alpine_don'(e-mail address removed) Hunter S. Thompson -
Microsoft MVP-Visual Basic Fear and Loathing in LasVegas

 

[Herfried K. Wagner [MVP]]

MS using VB6? That's FUNNY! I doubt it very seriously. VBA6 maybe... but
VB6? LOL. I'm wondering which "internal systems" he's referring to.

Well... where's the proof? Oh... it's in a blog so it must be true eh? ;-)
Here's another blog (bunch of Doogie Howser want-to-be's if you ask me)

Microsoft drops C#
http://weblogs.asp.net/hpreishuber/archive/2004/07/05/173067.aspx

Well, one of them is written by a Microsoftie, the other one by an MVP ;-).
Great joke blog entry, BTW...

 

[smith]

I don't work at Microsoft, but living in Kirkland (the town between Redmond
and Lake Washington) within biking distance of the MS main gate, I have a
number of friends and aquaintences who do. You can't throw a dead cat
around here without hitting a 'Softie.

My neighbor is an IT Dev Lead on the main campus, his group uses VB.Net. An
old VB6 friend of mine who worked with me for years at drugstore.com is now
at Microsoft and he is doing all VB.Net there. Real apps that are very
important to the company.

I had the opportunity a few weeks ago to meet a few MSDN folks and the ones
I met came from a VB background and use VB.Net in their jobs today. That
floored me because of all the FUD about VB not being used internally by
Microsoft. I said a couple of times "geeze, just a simple public mention of
the amount of VB going on here would go a long way" I don't know if they'll
mention it or not, maybe they don't see the need or maybe they worry over
its perception among other customers, but fact is Microsoft does indeed use
VB for real development.

Office? No. VB itself? No. But VB6 wasn't used for either of these so
how is that a slight on VB.Net? I mean, if Office not being written in VB
is a reason to not use VB, then VB6 was just as pointless as 7 we should all
have just gone to VC a long time ago.

All the best

Robert Smith
Kirkland, WA
www.smithvoice.com

 

[Cor Ligthert]

Smith,

We are not allowed too answer in this thread, however a very nice message
from you.
Compliments,

Cor

 

[Paul Clement]

¤ >Then, no doubt, a couple of years from now, when .Next comes out, start over
¤ >from scratch again. That's just plain silly.
¤ >
¤ >"1) RAD. High level object interfaces with the ability to get finer and
¤ >deeper control if you want it"
¤ >
¤ >There is nothing more "RAD" than VB5/6. Control Array support alone almost
¤ >makes that statement true by itself.
¤ >
¤ >"What of C#? To me, it's little more than a marketing trick"
¤ >
¤ >Actually, B#'s the marketting trick. MS doesn't use B# for anything
¤ >internally. All 3rd party vendors that claim "written entirely in .Net" have
¤ >a "using C#" tag somewhere on the same page... zero 3rd party vendors admit
¤ >to even touching B#.
¤ >
¤ >No one at MS wants to admit to using VB(insert version here) for anything at
¤ >all... nothing has changed since B#'s release.
¤
¤
¤ Yeah, it is clear that Robert doesn't get it.
¤
¤ *It* is about trust and the fact that we can no longer trust MS to
¤ consider the value of existing source code assets when creating the
¤ next release of any language that they have not invested any of their
¤ own source code assets in. It really is that simple.
¤

You mean like the investment they had/have in ASP with VBScript/JScript?


Paul ~~~ (e-mail address removed)
Microsoft MVP (Visual Basic)

 

[alpine]

¤ >Then, no doubt, a couple of years from now, when .Next comes out, start over
¤ >from scratch again. That's just plain silly.
¤ >
¤ >"1) RAD. High level object interfaces with the ability to get finer and
¤ >deeper control if you want it"
¤ >
¤ >There is nothing more "RAD" than VB5/6. Control Array support alone almost
¤ >makes that statement true by itself.
¤ >
¤ >"What of C#? To me, it's little more than a marketing trick"
¤ >
¤ >Actually, B#'s the marketting trick. MS doesn't use B# for anything
¤ >internally. All 3rd party vendors that claim "written entirely in .Net" have
¤ >a "using C#" tag somewhere on the same page... zero 3rd party vendors admit
¤ >to even touching B#.
¤ >
¤ >No one at MS wants to admit to using VB(insert version here) for anything at
¤ >all... nothing has changed since B#'s release.
¤
¤
¤ Yeah, it is clear that Robert doesn't get it.
¤
¤ *It* is about trust and the fact that we can no longer trust MS to
¤ consider the value of existing source code assets when creating the
¤ next release of any language that they have not invested any of their
¤ own source code assets in. It really is that simple.
¤

You mean like the investment they had/have in ASP with VBScript/JScript?

Script is generally considered to be "throw away" code. Stop trying
to compare apples to oranges, Paul.

Bryan
____________________________________________________________
New Vision Software "When the going gets weird,"
Bryan Stafford "the weird turn pro."
alpine_don'(e-mail address removed) Hunter S. Thompson -
Microsoft MVP-Visual Basic Fear and Loathing in LasVegas

 

[smith]

I understand and respect that. MVPs are supposed to be candid and honest
but I'd figure that they are also are expected to consider the influence
that their status gives them over the long-term success of their products.

Don't you guys have an MVP Summit coming up? I just read this about it:
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1752693,00.asp

Maybe Ken and Bryan can make a point to ask the "Is VB used internally"
question when they are there. (And a Q&A session about how far MVPs should
speak publically against their franchises would probably get
standing-room-only attendence.)

They don't have to post the answer, but since it appears to be such an
important issue to many users and some MVPs appear to bring it up quite
often in response to customers looking for information from Experts on the
product, it would be a shame for a dedicated Professional to go to the
Summit and walk away without getting an official, even if non-discloseable,
statement.

All the best.

Robert Smith
Kirkland, WA
www.smithvoice.com

 

[Ken Halter]

I understand and respect that. MVPs are supposed to be candid and honest
but I'd figure that they are also are expected to consider the influence
that their status gives them over the long-term success of their products.

Don't you guys have an MVP Summit coming up? I just read this about it:
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1752693,00.asp

I've been an MVP now for 4 years. Never have and never will attend a summit.
There's nothing there for VB Classic developers. No use travelling 1000+

Maybe Ken and Bryan can make a point to ask the "Is VB used internally"
question when they are there. (And a Q&A session about how far MVPs
should speak publically against their franchises would probably get
standing-room-only attendence.)

Forget "Ken and Bryan", there are plenty of MVPs that are B# fans that can
ask that question.... and, "how far MVPs should speak publically against
their franchises"? "franchises"? What are you talking about?! Microsoft
doesn't pay MVPs. We can say anything that's on our mind to anyone that's in
front of us at any given time (as long as it's non NDA). MS surely doesn't
have control over our opinions just because they gave us an award for
helping out in the previous year(s).

They don't have to post the answer, but since it appears to be such an
important issue to many users and some MVPs appear to bring it up quite
often in response to customers looking for information from Experts on the

The only reason it's an issue is because no one can show any proof at all
that anything "real" is written in B#. Every single (check it out for
yourself) vendor that sells .Net apps or components, say that it's 100%
If it's so darn cool, why isn't anyone creating commercial apps/components
with it?

Plus.... "customers looking for information from Experts"? I have nothing to
do with "customers". I'm not an evangelist. I don't go door to door begging
people to try .Net.

When I provide help in the VB Classic groups, I'm helping VB Classicthey start paying me, they'll be "customers"

 

[Paul Clement]

¤ On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 11:55:20 -0600, Paul Clement
¤
¤ >
¤ >
¤ >¤ >Then, no doubt, a couple of years from now, when .Next comes out, start over
¤ >¤ >from scratch again. That's just plain silly.
¤ >¤ >
¤ >¤ >"1) RAD. High level object interfaces with the ability to get finer and
¤ >¤ >deeper control if you want it"
¤ >¤ >
¤ >¤ >There is nothing more "RAD" than VB5/6. Control Array support alone almost
¤ >¤ >makes that statement true by itself.
¤ >¤ >
¤ >¤ >"What of C#? To me, it's little more than a marketing trick"
¤ >¤ >
¤ >¤ >Actually, B#'s the marketting trick. MS doesn't use B# for anything
¤ >¤ >internally. All 3rd party vendors that claim "written entirely in .Net" have
¤ >¤ >a "using C#" tag somewhere on the same page... zero 3rd party vendors admit
¤ >¤ >to even touching B#.
¤ >¤ >
¤ >¤ >No one at MS wants to admit to using VB(insert version here) for anything at
¤ >¤ >all... nothing has changed since B#'s release.
¤ >¤
¤ >¤
¤ >¤ Yeah, it is clear that Robert doesn't get it.
¤ >¤
¤ >¤ *It* is about trust and the fact that we can no longer trust MS to
¤ >¤ consider the value of existing source code assets when creating the
¤ >¤ next release of any language that they have not invested any of their
¤ >¤ own source code assets in. It really is that simple.
¤ >¤
¤ >
¤ >You mean like the investment they had/have in ASP with VBScript/JScript?
¤
¤
¤ Script is generally considered to be "throw away" code. Stop trying
¤ to compare apples to oranges, Paul.
¤

Yeah, considered by those who don't develop web applications. ;-)

Code is code Bryan. Web applications are no more or less important than desktop applications.

I guess the only code that matters to you is that which suits your argument. ;-)


Paul ~~~ (e-mail address removed)
Microsoft MVP (Visual Basic)

 

[alpine]

Maybe Ken and Bryan can make a point to ask the "Is VB used internally"

question

Do you seriously think this question hasn't been asked already? You
appear to have a lot to learn, young one. ;-)


I think you also need a better understanding about what an MVP is and
isn't. The fact that MS has given someone the MVP award doesn't make
them beholden to MS in any way, shape or form. I appreciate being
awarded as an MVP and the benefits that go along with the award but
that doesn't influence my views of MS or the advice I offer in the MS
product related communities I frequent. If the best advice I can give
is for someone to not use a particular MS product then that is the
advice I will give.

Being awarded as an MVP doesn't make one an MS sycophant, following
the MS marketing line like a love sick puppy. Some MVPs may choose to
become that way, but it isn't something that is "required" and IMO,
those who do, lose a significant amount of credibility when they do
so.

HTH,
Bryan
____________________________________________________________
New Vision Software "When the going gets weird,"
Bryan Stafford "the weird turn pro."
alpine_don'(e-mail address removed) Hunter S. Thompson -
Microsoft MVP-Visual Basic Fear and Loathing in LasVegas

 

[smith]

Thank you both. I was wondering about the program (because of that article
I URLed ijn the previous) and you've filled in some blanks.

The groups are great because of the passion and as a customer considering
how to break down the Tools budget this year, I appreciate your sharing your
information, insights and experiences.

All the best and thanks again. That was most all I was looking for.

Robert Smith
Kirkland, WA
www.smithvoice.com

 

[alpine]

¤ On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 11:55:20 -0600, Paul Clement
¤
¤ >
¤ >
¤ >¤ >Then, no doubt, a couple of years from now, when .Next comes out, start over
¤ >¤ >from scratch again. That's just plain silly.
¤ >¤ >
¤ >¤ >"1) RAD. High level object interfaces with the ability to get finer and
¤ >¤ >deeper control if you want it"
¤ >¤ >
¤ >¤ >There is nothing more "RAD" than VB5/6. Control Array support alone almost
¤ >¤ >makes that statement true by itself.
¤ >¤ >
¤ >¤ >"What of C#? To me, it's little more than a marketing trick"
¤ >¤ >
¤ >¤ >Actually, B#'s the marketting trick. MS doesn't use B# for anything
¤ >¤ >internally. All 3rd party vendors that claim "written entirely in .Net" have
¤ >¤ >a "using C#" tag somewhere on the same page... zero 3rd party vendors admit
¤ >¤ >to even touching B#.
¤ >¤ >
¤ >¤ >No one at MS wants to admit to using VB(insert version here) for anything at
¤ >¤ >all... nothing has changed since B#'s release.
¤ >¤
¤ >¤
¤ >¤ Yeah, it is clear that Robert doesn't get it.
¤ >¤
¤ >¤ *It* is about trust and the fact that we can no longer trust MS to
¤ >¤ consider the value of existing source code assets when creating the
¤ >¤ next release of any language that they have not invested any of their
¤ >¤ own source code assets in. It really is that simple.
¤ >¤
¤ >
¤ >You mean like the investment they had/have in ASP with VBScript/JScript?
¤
¤
¤ Script is generally considered to be "throw away" code. Stop trying
¤ to compare apples to oranges, Paul.
¤

Yeah, considered by those who don't develop web applications. ;-)

Code is code Bryan. Web applications are no more or less important than desktop applications.

I guess the only code that matters to you is that which suits your argument. ;-)

No, Paul, script code has been considered "disposable" for as long as
I can remember. You are grasping at straws in an attempt to give your
argument basis but, I guess that is what those, like you, who have
deluded themselves, do. ;-)

Bryan
____________________________________________________________
New Vision Software "When the going gets weird,"
Bryan Stafford "the weird turn pro."
alpine_don'(e-mail address removed) Hunter S. Thompson -
Microsoft MVP-Visual Basic Fear and Loathing in LasVegas

 

[Douglas Marquardt]

Hi Bryan:

I asked BillG that specific question about a year and a half ago.
He indicated he didn't know for sure if/how much it was being used
internally, but that there was no reason why they couldn't/wouldn't.

Whether or not anything happened internally after that I don't know.

Doug.

 

[alpine]

Hi Bryan:

I asked BillG that specific question about a year and a half ago.
He indicated he didn't know for sure if/how much it was being used
internally, but that there was no reason why they couldn't/wouldn't.

Whether or not anything happened internally after that I don't know.

Doug.

Here we are a year and a half later and the fact that they have yet to
release or even hint at the future release of anything of any
significance written if VB# speaks *volumes*.

Bryan
____________________________________________________________
New Vision Software "When the going gets weird,"
Bryan Stafford "the weird turn pro."
alpine_don'(e-mail address removed) Hunter S. Thompson -
Microsoft MVP-Visual Basic Fear and Loathing in LasVegas

 

[smith]

Again:

"I don't work at Microsoft, but living in Kirkland (the town between Redmond
and Lake Washington) within biking distance of the MS main gate, I have a
number of friends and aquaintences who do. You can't throw a dead cat
around here without hitting a 'Softie.

My neighbor is an IT Dev Lead on the main campus, his group uses VB.Net. An
old VB6 friend of mine who worked with me for years at drugstore.com is now
at Microsoft and he is doing all VB.Net there. Real apps that are very
important to the company.

I had the opportunity a few weeks ago to meet a few MSDN folks and the ones
I met came from a VB background and use VB.Net in their jobs today. That
floored me because of all the FUD about VB not being used internally by
Microsoft. I said a couple of times "geeze, just a simple public mention of
the amount of VB going on here would go a long way" I don't know if they'll
mention it or not, maybe they don't see the need or maybe they worry over
its perception among other customers, but fact is Microsoft does indeed use
VB for real development.

Office? No. VB itself? No. But VB6 wasn't used for either of these so
how is that a slight on VB.Net? I mean, if Office not being written in VB
is a reason to not use VB, then VB6 was just as pointless as 7 and we should
all
have just gone to VC a long time ago.
"

If you consider the systems that help keep that pretty major company running
being of significance then that's the answer.

btw: My nephew worked on parts of Office and wrote some of his test scripts
in Perl ... does that makes it more of a real language than VB?

That's it, I really gotta go. Ken, Bryan, Cor, Paul, Herfried, Douglas:
thanks as always for your time and your information.

Robert Smith
Kirkland, WA
www.smithvoice.com