I suggest you ...

Bring back Classic Visual Basic, an improved version of VB6

The silent majority of VB6 users did not ask for changes that came with .NET

We request Microsoft brings back classic Visual Basic as COM development is back with Windows 8.

David Platt wrote an excellent article about why classic VB still thrives:

7,433 votes
Sign in
or sign in with
  • facebook
  • google
    Password icon
    I agree to the terms of service
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    Anonymous shared this idea  ·   ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    MeredithMeredith shared a merged idea: Make VB6 Free  ·   · 
    Mike PaulickMike Paulick shared a merged idea: Bring back VB6. I have no interest in .net. VB6 is better for me.  ·   · 
    David KayeDavid Kaye shared a merged idea: Bring back VB 6.0! It's an extremely handy language used on tons of business apps.  ·   · 
    Adam SpeightAdam Speight shared a merged idea: Don't do a Classic VB (VB6). Open Source the VB6 compiler source code.  ·   · 
    VB6 FireVB6 Fire shared a merged idea: Bring back our un-killable cockroach, is ours !  ·   · 
    I_A_WI_A_W shared a merged idea: Visual Basic 6.0: A giant more powerful than ever  ·   · 
    Anonymous shared a merged idea: Open Source VB 6  ·   · 
    declined  ·  Visual Studio teamAdminVisual Studio team (Product Team, Microsoft) responded  · 

    We have read all of the comments on this thread and I’d like to thank you for providing your constructive feedback on this issue. Instead of merely repeating our support and migration guidance that has been laid out on http://msdn.com/vbrun, I’d like to address some of your specific comments here.

    To play back the feedback themes we’re hearing:
    - VB6 is awesome
    - VB6 needs to be brought forward and maintained: in a new release or OSS

    VB6 was and still is without a doubt awesome. VB6 made developers incredibly productive building a breadth of applications and as a result we have a wealth of applications and passionate developers to this day in 2014. One way I see our mission in developer tools is to empower developers to solve problems. This includes both today’s problems AND the problems of tomorrow. VB6, as you all have stated repeatedly in this thread, is an excellent tool for solving the problems of its day. We also stand behind our decision starting in 2002 to meet the current demands of our developers and the industry with .NET. For the scenarios VB6 set out to do, we see VB6 being “complete”. We feel good about VB6 being able to continue maintaining their applications for the past 15 years. Current needs ranging from distributed applications and services, to web applications and services, to devices, to new architectures and languages, required fundamental changes to the whole stack. We looked at how we could accommodate these needs through incremental changes to VB6 while maintaining its essence, and that was not possible.

    To address the modern needs we would need to go far beyond updating the language. We have to remember that VB6 is not just a language. VB6 is a language, a runtime, a platform library, a tool/IDE, and an ecosystem tightly packaged together in a way that made all of them work well together. We’ve worked with many customers on migration from VB6 to .NET and found that while yes, there are language changes, the dominating factor in migration difficulties isn’t the language differences. Even open sourcing the language/runtime wouldn’t solve the fact that VB6 was thought for a different set of problems, and the fact that its strength came from the end-to-end solution provided by all these five pieces working together. Take a change like 64bit, the complete runtime, tools and ecosystem chain would need to be retooled.

    So, moving forward what can we do? Where we have been able to help move forward is in our stance around support and interoperability. The VB6 runtime it is still a component of the Windows operating system and is a component shipped in Windows 8.1. It will be supported at least through 2024. This ensures your apps and components continue to run as you incrementally move forward to .NET. The support policy is here: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/vstudio/ms788708. There are numerous interop strategies that we developed and evolved to enable incremental migration as you upgrade your skills, described here: http://msdn.com/vbrun.

    In summary, VB6 was awesome. We agree. We don’t expect or demand anyone to throw away their code or rewrite from any of our technologies unless it makes business sense for them to do so. We have to innovate to enable our customers to innovate. It is not a viable option to create a next version of VB6. We stand by our decision to make VB.NET and the .NET Framework. We think they are awesome too. It is not feasible to open source VB6 tools chain and ecosystem. The VB6 runtime was last shipped in Windows 8.1 and will be supported for the lifetime of Windows 8.1. Support and interop are great tools to move forward incrementally.

    I hope you feel we’ve listened to your feedback and that I’ve explained things well enough that you understand our decision.

    Paul Yuknewicz
    Group Program Manager
    Microsoft Visual Studio Cloud Tools


    Sign in
    or sign in with
    • facebook
    • google
      Password icon
      I agree to the terms of service
      Signed in as (Sign out)
      • Anonymous commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate


        MS wants to drive all development towards Visual Studio .NET. That's what they want developers to buy and to use. VB6/64bit would distract people away from this and rob VS.NET sales

        A 64-bit VB6 cannot live in the curent VS framework, it's a beast of its own with a separate IDE, similar to the current VB6 and/or Office VBA code editing etc.

      • OliverOliver commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Visual Basic 6 was great, I could sit down and type out an application in an hour flat.

        VB.net is too complicated, it takes days for me to figure out how to do something if I can figure it out at all.

        I don't want to spend my time learning how to program, I want to spend my time programming.

        We're not all engineers with college degrees and 130+ I.Q.'s you know.

      • SuperDreSuperDre commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        @Anoymous: What .NET sales? they sell visual studio, so a new VB7 would be part of visual studio (just like unmanaged c++ is also still part of the current VS).. In all likelyhood they would even sell a few (only a few though) more new visual studio's..

        But I agree, it propably won't happen anyway.. what the real reason would be, will always be a mistery to all of us..

      • Anonymous commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate


        "Why won't Microsoft give the VB6 community their language back?
        What would it cost them?"

        Simple. A new VB 7.0, or whatever you call it, would cannibalize .NET sales.

        Like I said, it's not going to happen. Paul's mumbo-jumbo BS is just a smokescreen.

      • Marius OrionMarius Orion commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        After some time I got cold and I returned here hoping I'd see things with different eyes, WELL, I still see things like a mockery from Paul Yuknewicz ....

      • mlml commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        @Anonymous commented · July 09, 2014 16:34
        There are several guys in www.vbforms.com unremitting opposition vb6, I don't hknow who you are, I don't know you can get what benefits for your so opposed to vb6.

        If you don't like vb6, you can just go away, why you "just here to make some noise?"

        If Microsoft can help his users to upgrade or migrate from vb6 to . Net, then we all are good, we will not be here to Require Microsoft to bring back vb6 or open source vb6. But microsoft can't and don't like to do it! He forced vb6 to death.

        If your parents because you look ugly, your body is not so good, so they don't give food to you and refused to send you to other parents, let your die, what do you think?

        I think you never developed a good product, so you never have feelings to your own software products. You don't want to face and maintain your garbage product, You only want to write it again because your product is too horrible to look at it. But all my products are good, my users are be satisfied to them, my products not like your garbage products, I still want maintain it and continuous make it more perfect.

      • Sten2005Sten2005 commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        "VB6 was once the most used programming language on the planet and then Microsoft killed it. Now that they no longer have any interest in it one way or another, and with a new commitment to open source, why not let the community have VB6?"


        "Why won't Microsoft give the VB6 community their language back?
        What would it cost them?"

      • Anonymous commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        I am a member of www.vbforums.com and I have a high respect for Olaf, his points are deserving of attention but how I wish everyone who wants to resurrect VB6 is the same as him and not just here to make some unnecessary noise.

      • mlml commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        This guy @Anonymous know this vb6 uservoice long ago, but when he leave a comment in this uservoice, he didn't use his old name, he use a new "Anonymous" name.

        So I think this guy "Anonymous commented July 9, 2014 1:24 PM" maybe is from Microsoft or is Paul Yuknewicz himself. Otherwise why this guy @Anonymous didn't leave any votes and comments except commented July 9, 2014 1:24 PM?

      • Anonymous commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        @ml: How I wished I am from Microsoft. ;-). I actually voted for this petition since I also use VB6 among others but I cannot just keep on ranting because the petition has been declined. I do C#/WPF also and would like to try Java in the near future.

      • Sten2005Sten2005 commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Because we expected honesty from Microsoft.

        Instead of being honest, Yuknewicz says it isn't "possible" to put the same changes into the VB6 programming language that they have already done in VB6's sister language VBA.
        Instead of being honest, Yuknewicz says it isn't "feasible" to open source VB6.

        Clearly it is "possible" and it is "feasible". It is simply Microsoft's choice not to do so.
        If they had the honesty to say they "choose" not to do this we could at least have some respect for Microsoft. Instead they hide behind feeble excuses.

        Microsoft are happy to open source VB.Net and C# in the Roslyn compiler as they move towards JavaScript and C++. Why won't they do the same for VB6 ?

      • Anonymous commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Before Microsoft's reply in this petition almost everybody here wanted to hear what MS has to say about this petition instead of the total silence, now that you have the answer you wanted why are you guys still complaining?

      • johnjohn commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        I think that we can safely assume the Microsoft won't be creating a successor to VB6.
        So flogging that dead horse is clearly pointless.

        I can still (just about) do everything I need to in Vb6 but it is becoming harder.
        So I don't think continuing in vb6 for the next decade is a viable option.
        Lazarus attracts me a lot but the conversion of software is non-trivial and I don't want to end up in a ghetto even if it's OSS.
        The 'easiest' (everything is relative) conversion of my software would be to vb.net but doing that feels like a turkey voting for xmas.

        I started out with visual c++. Sometimes I wish I'd never heard of visual basic

      • MichaelMichael commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        So your saying C# is not higher on TIOBE than the many forms of VB?

        Imagine that!

      • Anonymous commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        No matter what's under Rank 5, it's better like C # and VB.Net. And that's bad for Microsoft. Bad for Microsoft's policy and dealing with its customers.

      • ShaggyShaggy commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        The split looks like it was in December 2010 (or later), but I'd accept September 2010.

        The rating certainly isn't a simple total, as the site explains a couple times. They also point out that a simple sum would be biased in a different way from a total, and the most accurate count would be potentially impossibly complex. That's a reasonable explanation, and I'm fine with their choice of metric. I'm just not clear on what the ranking of (Visual) Basic really represents. If people are claiming that it is an indication of the popularity of VB6, I'd say they'd have to get some clarification on that point from Tiobe, because that's not what the category looks like to me.

      • VB CoderVB Coder commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        RealBasic has a category - Xojo is the new name for RealBasic, so both are included in the Xojo group.

        "(Visual) Basic" is meant to include the 2 Microsoft basics - 'QBasic' and 'Microsoft Basic' in a similar way to "(Visual) Foxpro" including 'Visual Foxpro' and the earlier 'Foxpro' (which had DOS, Mac and Unix versions).

        So '(Visual) Basic' is a group of languages. But the rating isn't a simple total of all the hits for all the languages in the group. Instead the maximum of the hits of the individual languages is used for the rating.

        VB.Net was split from (Visual) Basic in September 2010 iirc.

      ← Previous 1 3 4 5 65 66

      Feedback and Knowledge Base