*sigh* I'm in love with .NET

[samsmithnz]

After using .NET for nearly a year now, I NEVER want to go back to the crappy-ness known as VB6 and ASP.

 

It always makes me sad when I have to go back and fix a bug in my old VB projects, .NET is so much easier to Design, deploy, develop, deploy and maintain in...

[Denaes]

I like the fact that I know not a single line of code in ASP, but ASP.Net seems more like an advanced topic in VB.Net (or C#.net) rather than its own seperate language.

 

On that note, its nice being able to look at C# and recognize most of the code.

 

The only thing thats annoying is that 2000 and some XP systems don't come standard with the framework (though my XP home system did) so its a hassle with people who try your program and don't want to download the framework.

 

On that note of the framework, I think .Net is only good now. Its going to be great once Linux and Mac gets their own framework and a programming interface. Between .Net and Macromedia, I'd prefer OS X (not anything earlier!!!) to PCs to develop on primarily, but .Net is holding me with the PC currently.

[Jay1b]

XPsp1 and later does come with the Framework installed. Windows Server 2003, doesnt come with the 'framework' of VB6 installed. Or so i heard, i know the upcomming LongHorn definately will not support VB6, without applying a special patch (ie legacy framework).

[samsmithnz]

XPsp1 and later does come with the Framework installed. Windows Server 2003, doesnt come with the 'framework' of VB6 installed. Or so i heard, i know the upcomming LongHorn definately will not support VB6, without applying a special patch (ie legacy framework).

 

When did an operating system EVER come with VB6 installed??

 

is this a typo?

[Merrion]

The VB runtime dlls were includes in Win98 and Me - probably XP as well.

[samsmithnz]

I did some research on the VB6 runtimes. Some of you are partly right... according to this page:

 

http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=http%3a%2f%2fsupport.microsoft.com%2fservicedesks%2ffileversion%2fdllinfo.asp&fp=1 (Do a search for msvbvm60.dll)

 

The runtimes were never included in Windows 95 or 98.

Windows NT 4.0 SP4 had the runtimes, earlier versions didn't.

 

Windows ME,2000, XP & 2003 ALL have the runtimes.

 

Any spectulation about Longhorn is exactly that, spectulation, even MS probably hasn't decided yet. They are getting a lot of pressure to leave in these runtimes... but with 2 years (+??) to go, who really knows....?

[Merrion]

There is a whispering campaign that VB6 programs won't work on Longhorn which nobody in a MS hat is discouraging.

 

However I would be suprised if a standard VB program doesn't run on Longhorn.

 

Of course it is 2 years until this matters at all.

[samsmithnz]

If this is true, it would delay our upgrade to longhorn by at least 2 years, maybe longer. We have a lot of applications to convert to .net...

[Derek Stone]

Visual Basic applications, along with all other Win32 applications, run just fine on Microsoft "Longhorn". Anyone that claims otherwise clearly has no understanding of the platform.

[Denaes]

Visual Basic applications, along with all other Win32 applications, run just fine on Microsoft "Longhorn". Anyone that claims otherwise clearly has no understanding of the platform.

 

The main difference that they're getting at is that it may not come with the .dll runtime files.

 

Unless they totally screw the previous .dll scheme, which I don't think is possible without offending 95% of the software developers and rendering their software incompatable with "longhorn", VB6 apps would run so long as the .dlls are present.

 

I suppose since MS is making the OS, they could go out of their way to purposely disable those .dlls, rendering them inert... but that would seem pretty stupid for the waste of time and preventing compatability.

 

>>Edit<<

 

Is this "Longhorn" going to be the .Net Framework Native OS?

 

If so, wouldn't that make anything .Net run easier, better, faster, etc? Or even open up more options to program by since its not a collection of wrappers, but the OS itself?

 

This isn't the rumored OS were Microsoft was going to start removing peoples choices of downloads and running files "in the name of virus protection", is it?

Edited February 10, 2004 by Denaes

[divil]

Yes, Microsoft will remove all support for everything that isn't written in .net, they'll install trojans all over your computer and will make it necessary to pay them a fee every time you need the bathroom.

 

It's all a giant conspiracy.

[Derek Stone]

Don't give SCO any ideas Tim. Jeez. ;)

[Robby]

LOL

[samsmithnz]

It's all a giant conspiracy.

 

I think conspiracy is the wrong word, I think its called Monopoly...;)

[Robby]

Monopoly? Let's not go there.

[samsmithnz]

nah lets. When I was younger I used to fight over the car or the battleship, but now I like the shoe or the hat. I'd never be the thimble though. thats a stupid piece. :rolleyes:

[Robby]

I was always the car :)

[Merrion]

We played the Monopoly/Risk variant whereby if you landed on someone's hotel with sufficient armies you could take it by force rather than paying out.

[divil]

Haha, that sounds like fun. Haven't played Monopoly for years, but when I did I was the ship.

[samsmithnz]

Now risk is a good game. Before I was old enough to go out, we'd play it EVery Friday night...

 

I can usually guess whos going to win now by about the 3rd turn... so I guesss its been ruined for me now.

[Robby]

Nothing crazy like Newman and Kramer I hope ? :eek:

[Volte]

Hehe.

[Robby]

Simon, how the hell did you find it?

[Volte]

I just typed seinfeld newman kramer risk into Google and it was the 4th result. :)

[samsmithnz]

I hadn't seen that episode of Seinfield before (well still haven't)... looks good, might have to try and track it down...

 

thanks for the link.