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:
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.
Group Program Manager
Microsoft Visual Studio Cloud Tools
The inexorable decline of C# ...
Jan 2012 - 8.76%
Jan 2013 - 6.19%
Jan 2014 - 5.85%
Jan 2015 - 5.04%
Jan 2016 - 4.70%
Jan 2017 - 4.03%
Jan 2018 - 3.75%
>>Microsoft is unbeatable with .NET anyways
Again utter nonsense. .Net is declining. C# has lost half its popularity since 2012.
I've no need to repeat the Tiobe and StackOverflow results that show large falls in C#'s popularity.
And VB.Net never has been popular. Microsoft say it has only one tenth the number of users that C# has.
The point is, VB.Net has dragged C# down. It has taken resources (both money and people) away from C# to work on VB.Net. And it has held C# back because of the need to keep C# and VB.Net aligned (only recently abandoned). With those extra resources C# could have been successful. As it was C# has never been able to challenge Java.
>>Around 10million .NET users
That is utter nonsense. You are spelling C# J-A-V-A when you google it.
It is Java that has those numbers, not the failing C#.
"Just imagine how it would have been with C# and an updated VB6, Microsoft would have been unbeatable."
"I've seen those figures quoted a lot over the last year or so,...."
LOL. I've seen also the following figures quoted a lot. Around 10million .NET users with a few thousand active VB6 developers left in 2018.
>> "Microsoft say there are 'around' 2 million .Net users, 1.8 million of them are C# users."
No, Microsoft has never said that. You pulled that figure, like so many other "facts" VB6 clingers pass around, out of your rear end.
I've seen those figures quoted a lot over the last year or so,
Usually the figures quoted are:
C# users 1.8 million : VB.Net users 180,000 : F# users 18,000
Sometimes I have seen this rounded up to:
C# users 2 million : VB.Net users 200,000 : F# users 20,000
I understand they did originate from Microsoft.
@Microsoft VBA programming and VB6 programming support
>> "According to IDC, out of 13 million developer seats worldwide in 1999, Visual Basic had 7.2 million vs. 3.6 million for C/C++ seats and 1.3 million Java seats. By 2003, Visual basic should still be ahead with 7.4 million, but the race will be closer with 5.2 million C/C++ developer seats, and 4.4 million Java seats."
It's a long time since I saw those figures. It does remind you just how much Microsoft lost. And the stupidity of abandoning the leading product to replace it with a couple of products that were never as popular as VB6,
No one really has an issue with Microsoft launching C#. They perceived a threat from Java, and offered a competitor.
But in abandoning VB6 and attempting to replace it with VB.Net (which always was just C# with a VB face) Microsoft lost two-thirds of their developers.
Never since have Microsoft had a leading development tool.
Just imagine how it would have been with C# and an updated VB6, Microsoft would have been unbeatable.
@Anonymous Hugo Lalumiere
Here's a tip: if you think it is 2015 you are living in the past.
Hugo Lalumiere says
Here's a tip: if you think VB6 is good in 2015, you are not qualified to write an article about it.
VB6 was a huge pile of hacks, and applications written in it are unmaintainable messes of spaghetti code for the most part. Yes it was nice back when the only other alternative was MVC, but today, the only good reason to still be using VB6 is to maintain an existing application that has not yet been updated. Anything else is foolish and unbecoming of a programmer worth the name.
VB6 is the mark of someone who cannot be bothered to learn a modern technology.
"Currently C# is number 2 which should be obvious to any working developer these days. I doubt that describes you since all you seem to know is old and dead VB6 given the way you keep whining to Microsoft about it. Companies have no use for the Basic language these days or for "developers" who are not capable of learning modern languages."
Cannot agree more with Mark Dunn
OK, let me make this simpler for you.
Is the claim by an anonymong on this thread that "There are around 10 millions .NET users according to reliable reports" True or False?
Easy question True or False?
Do you have an answer?
While you are thinking of an answer, here are some figures from pre-.Net times.
"According to IDC, out of 13 million developer seats worldwide in 1999, Visual Basic had 7.2 million vs. 3.6 million for C/C++ seats and 1.3 million Java seats. By 2003, Visual basic should still be ahead with 7.4 million, but the race will be closer with 5.2 million C/C++ developer seats, and 4.4 million Java seats."
Then .Net was launched. And Microsoft have been also-rans in development tools ever since.
Exactly. Microsoft have said that. You pick up on the figures Microsoft giive.
But not a word from you about the claim my posting was in response to. A claim that there are "10 millions" .Net users.
Get off your high horse. How many .Net users do you believe there are? Easy enough question. But not one you dare answer.
Mark Dunn commented
Quit ducking the issue and being such a weasel. What I believe is not the question here. You have stated that Microsoft has said that there are only 2 million .NET developers. Note the difference: You have not said that this is what YOU believe; you have stated that this is what MICROSOFT believes. You have put words in Microsoft's mouth. PROVE that they said this. Put up or shut up.
As for the number of .NET developers have a look at the Trendy Skills website. They pull actual job postings from job sites like Monster.com and others. Currently C# is number 2 which should be obvious to any working developer these days. I doubt that describes you since all you seem to know is old and dead VB6 given the way you keep whining to Microsoft about it. Companies have no use for the Basic language these days or for "developers" who are not capable of learning modern languages.
>> >> "Microsoft say there are 'around' 2 million .Net users, 1.8 million of them are C# users."
>> No, Microsoft has never said that. You pulled that figure, like so many other "facts" VB6 clingers pass around, out of your rear end.
>> You have proof otherwise? Then post an official Microsoft source saying that. Put up or shut up.
A snide and whining little comment, Mark Dunn.
It also implies you believe the comment by one of the anonymongs that "There are around 10 millions .NET users according to reliable reports."
You didn't ask this poster for proof of these 'reliable reports'.
You didn't accuse this poster of 'pulling' this figure out of anywhere.
You didn't tell this poster to 'put up or shut up'.
The users of this forum can only assume you actually believe "There are around 10 millions .NET users according to reliable reports".
So, Mark Dunn, here is your chance to set the record straight - do you believe there are around 10 million .NET users?
I do not even understand why there are people who spend tremendous effort to talk to other people about something bad.
If something does not interest me - igorate - go on - do not use - done.
Why use effort and lifetime for extensive reasoning.
If you do that, it shows that you are scared.
Or lobbyist is.
Shows that the VB6 is good and important.
Unimportant things are simply ignored.
Or why such attention and energy.
I've written before: why ban chocolate pudding
>> 2) Now that .NET is also on its way out, Developers should not start new projects using .NET
You would have thought they would go for C#, Microsoft's "premier" language. They didn't.
You would have thought they would go for VB.Net, Microsoft's claimed "successor" to classic VB. They didn't.
You would have thought they would go for F#, - OK, no that's taking things too far.
2) Now that .NET is also on its way out, Developers should not start new projects using .NET
Let it die.
VB6 a terrible language and it should die a death. don't open source it or you'll just encourage a new wave of cheapskate programmers to start learning bad habits and producing garbage code.