C# striking a chord with programmers

CNET News.com | May 3, 2002, 3:35 PM PT | Wylie Wong

[Southack]

"And as others have said, VB.NET is a new language, and thus it's not particularly damning that it's not fully compatible with "other" languages."

You do realize that my first post on this thread was in response to some novice claiming that VB.Net was fully backwards compatible with VB 6.

Is backwards compatibility mandatory? No. Is it a competitive advantage? Of course. Who would have purchased Windows if it hadn't also run older DOS programs?!

What C shops would have experimented with C++ if it hadn't been fully backwards compatible with C?!

In this age of code re-use (the single-most mentioned reason for using object-oriented programming in the first place, by the way), killing off existing corporate code libraries is NOT a competitive advantage.

This is simply a mistake that needs to be acknowleged. Microsoft isn't perfect, and it doesn't have to be. That company makes me a great deal of money, after all.

But as someone who has an investment in technology, I can't be blind to industry-level strategic mistakes, either.

[Dominic Harr]

I have two systems in production.

What kind of systems, what kind of functionality are we talking about, may I ask?

I'm sorry, I truly don't mean to be cheeky, but I'm highly skeptical, given everything that has taken place here, and my knowledge of other .NET attempted implementations. I follow a lot of newsgroups, and hear a lot of buzz. And it doesn't support what you seem to be saying. And, given my experience with other MS salesmen who overpromised the moon and didn't deliver.

And don't forget, there are certainly surprises built in to your "perfect" system that would not affect a similar Java implementation. There are issues that only wide implementation can expose. And those issues usually take a few years to work thru. And those issues are often deal-breakers.

[Dominic Harr]

• Go away, troll.

• freeasinbeerness

• Microsoft-hating techno-luddite

• There are powerful forces who have marked Window for continual attack

• If Windows is ultimately ravaged by the foul forces of the state

Is there some memo of MS-defense 'talking points' going around? There's something awfully familiar about your 'points'.

Interesting. Coincidence?

Developing . . .

[Southack]

"I other words, if you don't like the non-evolution from Windows to .NET, take it up with the Justice Department. They're the one who forced MS to leapfrog several evolutionary steps to .NET."

Nonsense.

MS made the conscious choice to delete VB 6 functionality from VB .Net. Retaining support for the DEFINT command or VB 6 form properties would not have prevented MS from introducing radical new technology, anyway.

Nor is the government responsible for forcing MS to come out with a new product, at least anymore so than California is responsible for car companies inventing the airbag or EGR valve.

But rather than take this up with the Justice Department, my tiny company is working even as we speak on a product that will permit VB.Net users to have full VB 6 functionality and backwards compatibility.

Like I said, Microsoft makes my firm a great deal of money. They leave vast business opportunities in their wake for those who don't act as completely blinded Yes-Men.

[cynwoody]

Do you remember when the UNIX crowd poo-poo'd VB because it was, at the time, byte interpreted, but when Java came out, which is also byte interpreted, they loved it and byte-code interpretation no longer mattered?

Your ignorance is showing. When Java came out, folks loved the language but hated the slow interpretation. That's why Sun (and IBM and Symantec and even Microsoft) added just in time compilation, which translates the byte code to optimized native machine code at run time. For a while, before Sun kicked them out of the game, Microsoft even had the best Java JIT compiler.

You can also buy ahead of time compilers for Java. These translate the Java to a native .exe, just like C++. But they haven't caught on in a big way, because the modern JIT compilers are very effective.

The .NET languages are also byte compiled, to Microsoft Intermediate Language (MSIL), which is in turn translated to native machine code at run time.

[PatrioticAmerican]

One system is a small system that processes private housing data. The other is a larger system that processes medical determination information for Medicaid. The first was built in three months, and due to it being small, it was used as a prototype for the other. The good thing about .NET versus ASP is that it allows for OO development. That is the one thing that ASP.NET and C# bring that ASP didn't have. Of course, the situation was the same as moving fom C to C++. We wrote apps in C but C++ made that a bit easier and developer functional.

[PatrioticAmerican]

My ignorance is NOT showing. Java was accepted, VB was not by the UNIX crowd. VB ran FASTER than Java, by far, but the UNIX crowd still embraced java, enough so that a JIT was created for it. Thanks for playing, try again.

[PatrioticAmerican]

You are really stuck on that survey. Try reading #75 again, and this time think about it, instead of being blinded by your bias against Microsoft.

When Java, C++, or Delphi came out, how many people could or did move to them in the first three months after their initial public release? As I have said before, look in a year and see the movement towards .NET. Every ASP programmer seeems to want to make the move. Not every C++ developer does, but C++ is slowly losing ground. It won't go away, but most companies want their corporate software to be web enabled.

Then again, don't. I love my competition to be ignorant and biased. Between me and my J2EE experts, we love to dominate the market!

[Dominic Harr]

The other is a larger system that processes medical determination information for Medicaid.

"Processes".

Do you mean form-type stuff, or actual number crunching, actual functionality? And you've got 10,000 users banging around on it, and have had no problems? That's very hard to believe.

Is there somewhere, someway I can verify this? If you're talking about something beyond forms, this would be darned near revolutionary, from what I read of .NET development, so forgive me if I get a bit curious. No one has managed to work all the bugs out of a system. In fact, there are several that are built in, and known, and are holding up several R&D projects I'm aware of. The issue about IE dropping the security ball verifying the 'trusted' status of web forms alone is a show-stopper, isn't it?

Altho, if you're just talking about data entry forms, then I believe you. But that's a far cry from a 'web service' or distributed app, so I assume you're not, right? You mean actual functionality?

[Dominic Harr]

You sound like an angry attack-troll.

And you sound very familiar . . .

[Bush2000]

Let's set up a 486/100 system with 32MB RAM, and install a database-backed web site on top of it. I can do it with Linux and it will work perfectly. I can't even install XP or Win2k on such a system.

Translation: "Let's try to run the latest software on obsolete hardware"
Bottom line: "Nobody cares."

[Bush2000]

And ya'll vanished the day the 'UPnP' exploit was announced. Bush2k even stayed away for an entire week, then when he came back tried to pretend no exploit had happened.

Tell us, Harr, how many machines were actually 'exploited' in the real world ... just curious.

[Bush2000]

So why is it that if VB.Net is so great at creating web aps that none of you have a single VB.Net applet or link on your FR homepages? Just curious...

Because we're too busy earning a living with the tools ... grow up.

[Bush2000]

MS made the conscious choice to delete VB 6 functionality from VB .Net. Retaining support for the DEFINT command or VB 6 form properties would not have prevented MS from introducing radical new technology, anyway.

Sure ... and most of that VB6 functionality, pardon me, was crap dragged along the bottom since the old DOS days. You're wasting your time complaining about VB.NET. It's done. It's baked. If you don't like it, don't use it. Use VB6, if it blows up your skirt. But quit whining ... you're giving me a headache...