I suggest you ...

11,355 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…)
    EugeneEugene shared this idea  ·   ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Sue GeeSue Gee shared a merged idea: On the 25th anniversary of Classic VB, Return It To Its Programmers  ·   · 
    Dr. Mihai Bush, PhD (MPV)Dr. Mihai Bush, PhD (MPV) shared a merged idea: Make Visual Basic 6 as a part of Windows (by default)  ·   · 
    Luis Fernando Echeverri LozanoLuis Fernando Echeverri Lozano shared a merged idea: VB6 Honoris Causa  ·   · 
    Anonymous shared a merged idea: Please bring back Visual Basic 6.0 !  ·   · 
    Anonymous shared a merged idea: The silent majority of VB6 users did not ask VB.NET  ·   · 
    MaryMary shared a merged idea: Merge the core of VB6 into Office or the Windows OS.  ·   · 
    BravoBravo shared a merged idea: Bring back Classic Visual Basic, an improved version of VB6  ·   · 
    HMan2828HMan2828 shared a merged idea: Make a new Classic Visual Basic, an improved version of VB6  ·   · 
    Ana-Maria (VB6 software programmer)Ana-Maria (VB6 software programmer) shared a merged idea: Bring back Classic Visual Basic 6.X, an improved version of Visual Basic 6.0  ·   · 
    Anonymous shared a merged idea: Bring back Classic Visual Basic 6.X, an improved version of Visual Basic 6.0  ·   · 
    Marius OrionMarius Orion shared a merged idea: Bring back Classic Visual Basic, an improved version of Visual Basic 6.0  ·   · 
    PacManiPacMani shared a merged idea: Close the suggestion to "bring back VB6"  ·   · 
    VB6 FireVB6 Fire shared a merged idea: Bring back Classic Visual Basic, an improved version of Visual Basic 6.0 (the old idea has been stoped at 7400 votes for no good reason)  ·   · 
    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 !  ·   · 
    Nitesh PatelNitesh Patel shared a merged idea: The Old classic visual basic 6.0 bring it back  ·   · 
    I_A_WI_A_W shared a merged idea: Visual Basic 6.0: A giant more powerful than ever  ·   · 
    Anonymous shared a merged idea: Full vb6 Compatiablity, dammit  ·   · 
    your nameyour name shared a merged idea: shove .net up your boss's butt. bring me VB6-A already.  ·   · 
    Anonymous shared a merged idea: Open Source VB 6  ·   · 
    leoleo shared a merged idea: make it easier. In VB6 i don't have to know what classes are. It has been to complicated for simple programms.  ·   · 

    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

        C# is an entry level language that is slow and over-complicated.

        Any computer language that runs with a garbage collector in the background assumes the developer doesn't have the skills necessary to allocate a simple block of RAM and then clean it up when they are done.

        If performance is absolutely necessary then don't write code in anything that has a VM (java/.net framework).

      • mm commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Microsoft: Sorry Windows 10 Anniversary Update killed your webcam
        Microsoft apologises for failing to tell users about an important change in Windows that has broken many USB-connected webcams.
        Today microsoft is a mess, and microsoft is dying day by day.

      • MikeBMikeB commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate


        "Visual Basic was the most popular programming language in the world, yet Microsoft froze its development in favour of a new and different VB.

        "Microsoft itself still uses VB. VBA remains the macro language of Microsoft Office. For that matter, Office is still primarily based on COM. This isn't only because of legacy code. The .NET Framework does not have any equivalent to Object Linking and Embedding, which is used to great effect in Office. COM is not going away"

        "Microsoft never listen, never learn.
        They always know best. Even now when they are laying off 18,000 employees they cannot understand that it is their own decisions that have lead to this.
        Their decision not to support VB6 programming was wrong back in 2002. It is wrong now."

        "Why would anyone choose a Microsoft development tool knowing that at anytime it may be abandoned?"

      • MikeBMikeB commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Microsoft say...

        "The Visual Basic team is committed to “It Just Works” compatibility for Visual Basic 6.0 applications on the following supported Windows operating systems: Windows Vista, Windows Server 2008 including R2, Windows 7, Windows 8 and Windows 8.1, Windows Server 2012 including R2, and Windows 10.

        The Visual Basic team’s goal is that Visual Basic 6.0 applications continue to run on supported Windows versions."

      • MikeBMikeB commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate


        Please stop posting your spam here. Nobody here is interested in what you copy from elsewhere.

      • MikeBMikeB commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Microsoft don't really have offerings for Web or Mobile.

        In Mobile Windows Phone is an expensive failure. Apple and Android have the market. Even Xamarin is largely irrelevant, iOS and Android developers aren't going to use it.

        In Web development emphasis has now moved to front-end development, JavaScript is the overwhelming choice. And Linux is market leader in web servers.

        .Net is only suitable for Windows desktop now (and supporting legacy applications).

      • Sawa TamaraSawa Tamara commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        ... One of the main reasons VB6 developers didn't move to VB.Net was lack of backwards compatibility.
        This lack of compatibility meant you had to continue to support legacy apps. There was no business case for rewriting them, just to have the identical application in a different language.
        And if they did move from VB6, what VB6 developer would choose a Microsoft language knowing Microsoft had just abandoned them and would be likely to do so again ?
        And if you developed for Office you would still need to use VB6's twin sister VBA.
        As many VB6 developers said at the time, Microsoft were right to develop C#/.Net, but they made a mistake in abandoning backwards compatibility in VB.Net. A compatible VB7 would have retained VB6 developers, instead Microsoft lost the majority of these forever.
        Sadly, Microsoft didn't learn the backwards compatibility lesson. Windows Phone 7 was quite promising. Then Microsoft launched the incompatible Windows Phone 8 and lost the mobile phone market forever.
        Now that C# is rapidly losing popularity and VBdotNet is being abandoned it looks like VB6 users were right all along.
        The replacement of VB6 with VB .NET lost many of its RAD aspects simply because it had to be hard line object oriented. That's why VB.Net never achieved the success of VB6.
        I support VB6 programming, VBA programming and VBScript programming

      • Sawa TamaraSawa Tamara commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        MikeB commented · August 21, 2016 12:47 ·
        Only 12% of .Net developers use VB.Net. And now it is no longer to be kept in parity with C# or updated as frequently. VB.Net will soon be abandoned.

        C# is losing popularity, now it is only half as popular as it was in 2012.
        C# and .Net first appeared in 2000, over 15 years ago, it is old technology now.

        Meanwhile VB6 apps written for Windows 95 or 98 continue to run unchanged on Windows 10 and VB6 will be supported by Microsoft until at least 2025.

      • Sawa TamaraSawa Tamara commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        VB6 = Mustang GT500
        VB.Net 2003 = Covered Wagon 4 X 1
        VB.Net 2005 = Covered Wagon 4 X 2
        VB.Net 2008 = Covered Wagon 4 X 3
        VB.Net 2010 = Covered Wagon 4 X 4
        VB.Net 2013 = Covered Wagon 5 X 4

      • Sawa TamaraSawa Tamara commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        It is true that .net is just plain awful. Slow, buggy, incompatible tripe. The code isn't even very readable. I know, I've had to use it professionally, however given the choice, to start a new project in ever tighter timescales, VB6 is the ONLY option. Period. I'll be honest, I don't need a new version, just keep it running in your new OS's MS, that's all I need to hear. However, if it does ever die it would actually be less trouble for me to just move to a new platform completely, as other have suggested, so it would be just one more nail in the coffin for Windows generally. If I wasn't a programmer (ok .net peeps, I'm not a programmer in your book), I think it would be quite perverse for a company to ignore a product that is obviously as popular as VB6, even today a top 10 ranking development tool. And one which only exists on Windows. Bearing in mind the ebbing away of Windows fans as it is, can they really throw the baby out with the bath water? Nobody like to admit their wrong, but they should really take their heads out of their ***sses occasionally and see what their own community actually want. By all means, keep developing .net, if that makes you feel any better, but I think most VB6 developers will have already trodden that path and decided it's not for them. I don't think any new version based on the .net model will ever change that, even if people bothered to try it out again (I think I tried out all of them, up to VS 2010 (?)), it didn't get better, fancier, definitely, more complex, absolutely, more powerful, depends on what you think power is (as it's generally slower each rendition), a joy to program in, not at all, anything like VB6, no - it's a totally different language. In another post somewhere, the point was made that .net is the future, but I think VB6 will out-last that entire generation of tools, because it's 'better' for what we, in the real world, need to do. Would it be nice to have an updated, supported and entirely code compatible version of VB6, absolutely. Would it be successful, more than I think even MS could imagine. Will they ever do it, absolutely not. Why? I haven't a clue, it defies logic. Perhaps, like a small child, they just can't admit they where wrong and have become totally absorbed with trying to prove their right. But, as we all seem to know, they did get it very very wrong. -

      • Sawa TamaraSawa Tamara commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        -- Dot not is a junk platform for junk apps... hardly anyone uses it. Some do, and some love it. I notice a ***** towards putting vb6 in a past tense, and .net as some 'future'. But to go that route makes Java or Python or any number of other platforms just as good. Why would I choose your next platform, what happens when you dump that one... same argument again... no thanks. And if support stops in 2014 and windows 8.1 then so does my upgrade path... (Think it actually works in windows 10 too). You make big claims for .net, but it never has delivered on them. It's over bearing, over engineered, long winded and designed for a corporate developer, which is great... for them. BUT you've cut loose an awful lot of other developers, the majority in the process. You keep talking about the needs of the developers, whilst ignoring an awful lot of them. I had the displeasure of working with .net to maintain and application for a couple of years, and whilst the GUI design tools where very nice indeed, the language was just plain bad.. long winded and I felt OTT for a small developer of tools like myself. Let me ask you this... there where courses for programming VB6 at the local collage.. no longer.. nobody wanted to learn .net... IT ISN'T FUN... People wan't something approachable.. the .net suites are not. I also note the popularity of Python for teaching programming now.. and can't help feeling that it's because Microsoft has lost sight of a massive portion of it's users. Take care they don't all lose site of MS. If I end up learning something that runs cross platform why would I stick with you guys.. you've already proven you have no idea what people want in a desktop OS and now have confirmed you have no idea what people need to learn programming. I'm really sorry if this sounds offensive BTW, it's not supposed to. I see 10K signings for a development tool as old as this.. name me anything else from back then that people want... no I can't think of anything either.. does that not compute?

      ← Previous 1 3 4 5 334 335

      Feedback and Knowledge Base