• subscribe
February 22, 2006 12:00 AM

Time to Move On

SQL Server Pro
InstantDoc ID #49107

As you'd expect following a new product release, companies are building new applications on top of the latest SQL Server 2005 and SQL Server 2005 Express databases.What I've found surprising, however,is that many companies are choosing to build new applications with Visual Basic 6.0 instead of Visual Basic .NET or its follow-on Visual Basic 2005. In fact, a recent survey by SQL Server Magazine found that the same percentage of respondents (44 percent) are currently using Visual Basic 6.0 as are using Visual Basic .NET for application development. Although there's no doubt that Visual Basic 6.0 is a productive development environment, the latest release of Visual Basic not only fills in some important pieces that the early releases of Visual Basic .NET were missing, but adds a lot of capabilities.

In the past, there were good reasons to stay with Visual Basic 6.0, even apart from syntax and other language differences. For example,Visual Basic .NET didn't have the edit-and-continue tool. I worked on one project in which the actual data layout didn't match the layout defined in the specifications. Edit-and-continue let me quickly modify my code and test the changes—steps that would have taken hours without the function. Visual Basic 6.0's Application object provides easy-to-access system and program resources,absent from the early Visual Basic .NET releases. Finally, Visual Basic .NET applications needed the 20MB-plus .NET Framework, which made the Visual Basic 6.0 runtime look trim and lightweight in comparison.

These arguments for staying with Visual Basic 6.0 just don't hold water any longer. Although the Visual Basic 2005 compiled edit-and-continue isn't exactly the same as Visual Basic 6.0's, in my experience, it's equally effective. The Visual Studio 2005 release which includes Visual Basic 2005, now supports the My object, giving easy access to system, application user, and network resources. The base OS for Windows Server 2003 and Windows XP now includes the .NET Framework. Plus, Windows Update, Microsoft Software Update Services (SUS), and Windows Server Update Services (WSUS) can install the latest version of the .NET Framework on the updated systems, making it a common commodity. Moving to the compiled ASP.NET brings a substantial improvement in application performance for Active Server Pages (ASP) developers, as well. Given all these factors, no real technical reasons stand in the way of developing in Visual Basic 2005.

One place to get started with Visual Basic 2005 is the Microsoft Visual Basic Developer Center at http://www.msdn.microsoft.com/vbasic/default.aspx?pull=/library/en-us/dnpag2/html/vb6tovbnetupgrade.asp. This site provides guidelines for moving Visual Basic 6.0 applications to Visual Basic 2005 and an assessment tool that you can run against your existing Visual Basic 6.0 code to identify upgrade issues.

I can understand not migrating existing applications to Visual Basic 2005, but if you're embarking on a new application development project, now's the time to put Visual Basic 6.0 to rest and move ahead with Visual Basic 2005 technology. Using Visual Basic 2005 keeps you ahead of the technology curve for the lifecycle of the application, and you won't add to your backlog of legacy code that you'll eventually have to upgrade. Visual Basic 2005 Express Edition is a free download until November 2006, and you can get it at http://msdn.microsoft.com/vstudio/express/vb/ download/default.aspx.

Who knows? You might even like it better.



ARTICLE TOOLS

Comments
  • Dan
    6 years ago
    Mar 15, 2006

    I would be happy to move on, the problem is the demand for .Net is underwhelming. I have been doing custom applications for IVR, Call Centers and general Telephony for the over a decade and many of the tools I require are still COM. Interop is a kludge and has not worked in some instances for me.I have had zero customers tell me they want .NET. They just want it to work and they don't want more overhead on their clients.
    The second issue I have is database updates with ADO.NET are a pain compared to ADO. I log lots of real time inforamtion one item at a time, and this is just not convienient in .NET.
    .NET looks great if I did web apps, but that is not my universe.
    For specialized developers, .NET is still .NOT.

  • RAkesh
    6 years ago
    Mar 08, 2006

    bigpalooka,
    Its pretty clear from article that you should opt for VB .Net in place of VB, for future development. Also migrating current application depends on the future need and availability (technology experts, support for VB tool etc.). As you have already done ur MCSD, I need not comment on your knowledge of .Net.

    Migration should be done keeping in mind future requirements and not current needs.

  • john
    6 years ago
    Mar 02, 2006

    It doesn't surprise me that so many are using VB6 - count me as one of the 44%. My employer doesn't care if I use VB6, C++, Fortran, or C#, as long as the work gets done on time - and I do deliver on time. My users expect a similar GUI look and feel to all my departmental apps. Should I reuse and modify or build from scratch? In the 8 years I've been here, I developed a large number of hardened utility functions and objects that I reuse frequently. I've really got no incentive to switch to .NET in the office right now. My users haven't requested anything that VB6 can't do.
    I'm no stranger to .NET - I've been studying, using it at home, and have passed 3 of 4 .NET tests to get my .NET MCSD (I have an MCSD in VB5 ca 1998, and recertified in VB6.)
    I just don't think it's worth the trouble to change for change's sake, particularly if the value-added of the change is zero.

  • JOHN
    6 years ago
    Mar 01, 2006

    I am not a developer but understand from those that are is that there is considerable work in migrating an application from VB6 to VB in .Net. My understanding is the lack of a built-in migration tool makes the cost of migration (developer/contractor hrs * $rt) too costly.

    It is surprising how many organizations still use COBOL for key systems. I think it is safe to say that the rationale is that no one was ever willing to bit the bullet and pay for the migration.

You must log on before posting a comment.

Are you a new visitor? Register Here
  • SP1?
    I know there is a SP1 for SQL 2008 R2 available....and there is a "feature pack" as well... ...
  • SQL database mirroring
    I have SQL Server 2008 R2 Enterprise 64bit on Windows 2008 R2 Enterprise 64bit.  Each SQL Server has...
  • Dell Compellent Disk Drive
    Does anybody has experience with Dell Compellent Disk Drive? Basically, this system manages all disk...
  • Sql server performance tuning
    I need to find a tool that help me to optimize sql server,queries,improve the performance and solve ...