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
It seems nobody at MS is lurking UserVoice....
Dennis Johnson commented
Wow, this suggestion is ranked #5 in all ideas for Visual Studio: http://visualstudio.uservoice.com/forums/121579-visual-studio/filters/top
Ok, this is for the Visual Basic 6.0 campaign: http://vb6awards.blogspot.com/2014/05/visual-basic-60-banners-flags.html
This is amazing, our vb6 app runs just wonderful on Win 8.1, our users are delighted, we created a proto in vb.net with a basic functionality and our users rejected it inmediatly because of the poor performance of some functions....Our main competitors have solutions in Java and Web....but ours is three time faster, lighter, complete, efficent and prettier....vb6 still rocks and will in future years
Interesting reading http://www.itwriting.com/frozenvb6.php
I don't care if it is called "VB7" or "RQ444" or "Q#*&4%", and I don't care about its syntax. But currently there is no serious RAD language for Windows anymore apart from VB6. I think there should be one. It should be able to compile to 64-bit, support a Unicode UI, and import VB6 code.
Some animated logos related to VB6:
The only language many of us can is VB6 and it would be awesome to
have a modern one.
Microsoft's CEO Satya Nadella has a Facebook post
quoting Bill Gates ""It's fine to celebrate success but it is more important to heed the lessons of failure."
So now is the time to learn from the abandonment of the VB6 programming language.
Even now, 16 years after the previous version, it isn't too late to bring out a new release.
Satya is reported to have said at Build 2014 "It's crazy to abandon what you built and crazy to not let what you build work on other platforms".
We VB6 developers don't wish to abandon the source code we have developed, and the ability to run on other platforms would certainly be welcome.
Given the stability of VB6 and the extensive library of functions and controls, it would be a very welcomed decision.
I don't need to impress anyone with a linear or religious idea of how an application needs to be written (language, OOP practices etc.). I just need to impress my customers with rock solid applications and nothing does this better than VB6.
I am not re-writing this much code in .Net or Java. My clients do not deserve that kinda of $$$ hit. My apps meet all their requirements and more now.
Could we please have a 64-bit version of VB6. Thanks.
I think Visual Basic 6 was about the best microsoft had come up with.
To replace it with .NET was a bad move, ok if you dont have any previous coding and didnt need to maintain anything but a real poor release to vb6.
Microsoft never listen, they plow ahead regardless of what the user actually wants.
You can do anything with figures, and thats what Microsoft do, the shape there results to fit what they want.
Microsoft are in it for the money, thats all they care about.
If only there was a language that had a GUI to enable RAD by every demographic. HUGE market impact. Did not need a bloated .Net or Java run-time engine. Easy and powerful language. Ran fast on all modern Windows systems and OS's from Windows XP to 8.1. Wait... There is one...VB6!
MS please give us a sound 64-bit IDE\compiler and we'll do the rest.
Huh, tony, I understand your message barely half onwards. You are right, Vb6 is the proper tool for a huge amount of programming tasks. To be honest, VB6 covers any project in any field (with VB6 open source projects that are found on the Internet).
Winston, if Linus Torvalds, the inventor of Linux is saying that, then maybe MS should meet our requirements on the NEW VERSION OF VB6 ! Linux has a version of BASIC because they understood the problem.
Whenever people belittle vb6, they always just echo stuff they have heard. Thier snobbery comes from feeling betrayed that they had to go through allot of pain and knowledge to make something equilivent to a basic program. So instead of crediting the v creators and wisdom of the technology, they deride it and its users. Childish behavior. Vb6 is the proper tool for a huge amount of programming tasks, and it's shortsighted to ignore that. Worse, they are likely blind to see it because they cling to some ideas of conceptual programatic language purity which goes hand in hand with bloat and over complexity. Basic is basic, and that's beautiful.
"For example, I personally believe that Visual Basic (vb6) did more for programming than Object-Oriented Languages did. Yet people laugh at VB and say it's a bad language, and they've been talking about OO languages for decades."
Linus Torvalds-inventor of Lunix
> But still no response from Microsoft.
Maybe that's good. My VB6 is working still.
Over 6000 votes and over 800 comments.
But still no response from Microsoft.
Mark Walls commented
Why don't we just create an open source project for building a compiler for VB6 in Visual Studio? Wouldn't it be interesting to have all the IDE improvements in VS with the legacy code support? It could on the back end either map to .NET or just compile directly with the command line VB6 compiler.