Microsoft not content with "dissing" just the Classic VB Developer Army....

[Jim Hubbard]

It seems that Microsoft not only does not need the classic Visual Basic
developer army (the largest army of developers the world has ever seen), but
now they don't need ANY Windows developer at a small or mid-sized business.

http://groups-beta.google.com/group/...9ca99eb0e7c328

Damn! To be that powerful....to be so rich and smug....... It must be
nice.

Jim Hubbard

[Jim Hubbard]

"Otis Mukinfus" <ot**@mukinfus. com> wrote in message
news:4q******** *************** *********@4ax.c om...

On Wed, 6 Apr 2005 08:53:37 -0400, "Jim Hubbard" <re***@groups.p lease>
wrote:

I don't know anything about you, Jim, but Brian was right about doing it
for
free, and if you've had an MSDN subscription in the past, then you already
have
a license to use the tools that came with it forever. So why don't you
continue
to use the tools you have (the MSDN subscription has included VB6 since
it's
release, so you have a copy of it) and get on with making money instead of
whining. I suspect you spend more time writing crap like that below than
working anyway...

You are right. You can use the tools forever. But, Microsoft is actively
breaking backwards compatability with the old tools. Case in
point....Outloo k 2003.

Now, you'd think that Outlook 2003 would be backwards compatible with Office
2002. I mean, most professional companies provide backwards compatability
for 2 major versions. Microsoft used to.....but now they've chosen a path
of abandonment and intentionally breaking backwards compatibility. Why?

Nevermind the why......that's another thread.....

VB6 runtimes will not be supported on Longhorn. So, if you keep using the
VB6 tools, your audience dwindles to nothing. Can't do that.
just my opinion. I could be wrong.

"Brian Henry" <br**********@n ewsgroups.nospa m> wrote in message
news:Oi****** ********@tk2msf tngp13.phx.gbl. ..

why use the IDE at all? the framework and compilers are free, so there
is
really nothing to complain about and get all biased about when you can
do
it all for free anyways.. there are 3rd party IDE's out there for the
.NET
framework that are free also. Why don't you look into them if you dont
want to pay for microsoft's IDE. Just because it's visual studio doesn't
mean you need visual studio to create programs for .NET. just get the
.NET
framework SDK and you have all you need, then pick up a free IDE if you
need a graphical experience also.

Sure you need the .Net IDE to develop for .NET....well, if you want to be
competitive with other .Net development shops.

The 3rd party IDEs are always behind (sometimes WAAAY behind) Microsoft's
development tools in features because they don't innovate - they copy.
That
puts you at a disadvantage among other .Net framework developers.

Like the Mono project. It's far behind the Microsoft C# IDE and the VB
version of the Mono project is even worse.

You have to be able to compete in the arena that you choose to fight in.
That's one reason all developers want the highest MSDN subscriptions.
Besides having to wear many hats at their jobs (especially at small
businesses) , they also need to be able to do anything that is possible
with
.Net (like when your boss sees another competing app do something and says
to make your do it too) . With free IDEs, most of the time, this simply
isn't possible.

The IDE is only the tip of the iceberg. Breaking backwards compatibility
and the ridiculous cost of the Microsoft OS and software ($500 for Office
2003 pro - give me a break) are also main factors in the decision that
needs
to be made by all small businesses before they got to .Net and on to
Longhorn.

If you can do your business on a different OS for less money, that's the
financially responsible thing to do.

Increasingl y I am coming to see that there's simply no reason to continue
to
allow your business to be held for ransom by Microsoft.

Jim Hubbard

Otis Mukinfus
http://www.otismukinfus.com

[Aaron Smith]

Jim Hubbard wrote:

VB6 runtimes will not be supported on Longhorn. So, if you keep using the
VB6 tools, your audience dwindles to nothing. Can't do that.

So Microsoft has been lying about the VB6 runtime being included in
Longhorn and supported? I think not..

--
---
Aaron Smith
Remove -1- to E-Mail me. Spam Sucks.

[Jim Hubbard]

"Aaron Smith" <th**********@s mithcentral.net > wrote in message
news:ks******** *********@newss vr17.news.prodi gy.com...

Jim Hubbard wrote:

VB6 runtimes will not be supported on Longhorn. So, if you keep using
the VB6 tools, your audience dwindles to nothing. Can't do that.

So Microsoft has been lying about the VB6 runtime being included in
Longhorn and supported? I think not..

I hadn't seen anything from Microsoft indicating support of the VB6 runtime
in Longhorn. And, since you did not feel the need to back up your statement
with a link - I went on a fact-finding mission to see if Microsoft said
anything like this on their website.

After searching for over an hour, I finally found somebody at Microsoft that
says (via his blog - not on an official Visual Basic page on the Microsoft
website) that the VB6 runtime will be shipped with Longhorn and supported
for the lifecycle of Longhorn. Read it here - http://blogs.msdn.com/JRoxe/.

I doubt this is the reference that you had in mind as it was just posted
yesterday. Could you please post your Microsoft references? I am curious as
to when this was first stated openly by Microsoft. Was it yesterday, or did
I miss something earlier (which could also be the case).

In fact, the blog directly speaks to the millions of concerned VB6
programmers and directly addresses the petition at
http://classicvb.org/petition. It seems Microsoft is trying to make the
petition go away without actually DOING anything to make up for tossing out
a language that so many are so dependent on.

In part, Jay's blog states "There are strong feelings on all sides of the
issue that sparked this petition and I know that this note is not going to
address all of these concerns. However, I hope that we can continue to have
an open dialog around this issue. Some of these discussions will continue
in the public forum, but please also feel free to contact me directly."

That's just great. Whenever a company doesn't want to do anything about a
problem, but they want the bad press and problem to go away, they send out
the talkers. I'm tired of talking. FIX THE DAMNED ISSUE BY PUTTING
UNMANAGED VB6 SUPPORT INTO THE VISUAL STUDIO IDE! Nothing else is going to
make this go away.

You did it for C++, and you can do it for classic Visual Basic......the
question is will you? Or, will you continue to walk away from the largest
army of programmers the world has ever seen......the people that made you
great?

Speaking of going away, I am setting up my Novell Linux box and MAC today to
do more thorough testing of REALbasic. Looks like fun. At least I won't
have to worry about Microsoft abandoning me if I finally choose the
MAC/Linux/REALbasic route. (Go to www.realbasic.com for your FREE copy of
REALbasic 5.5 standard until April 15, 2005.)

There is one thing, and only one thing, that will get Microsoft's attention.
Mass defection to Linux/MAC and a different programming language. They have
forgotten that the customer is always right. And, only something big will
drive that point home for them.

Although that sounds quite radical, it is no more radical than the change
that classic Visual Basic developers already have to go through with
Microsoft. And, you will at least be the partial master of your own destiny
then.....not a gnat to be swatted by the monopolistic hand of Microsoft.

And, it's much cheaper than the Microsoft solutions. Only $89.95 for a
COMPLETE desktop in Novell Linux (SUSE) 9.2 Professional. That includes
Open Office, free email clients, free IM clients, free photo editing
clients......re ally everything you need for day-to-day operations in most
businesses. Contrast that to XP Professional at $279.99 (for a new install)
and Office Professional 2003 at $499.99 and the $89.95 option is at least
worth a test drive.

The $780 for basic daily activities with a Microsoft desktop is more than
the hardware needed to run it......twice as much as the hardware for a
simple business workstation. And, for what? So we can say we work on a
Windows desktop? Who gives a rat's ass what desktop is in place as long as
I can accomplish my daily job of making more, cheaper and better widgets to
sell.

Most company's don't get paid because they are using Microsoft
products.....th ey get paid to deliver goods and services, and their clients
really don't care what OS or desktop the company uses internally. Come to
think of it.....neither do the workers.

So, who does care (besides Microsoft, of course)?

Jim Hubbard

[Jim Hubbard]

"Ron Ruble" <ra******@att.n et> wrote in message
news:19******** ***********@bgt nsc04-news.ops.worldn et.att.net...

Jim Hubbard wrote:

"Brian Henry" <br**********@n ewsgroups.nospa m> wrote in message
news:Oi******** ******@tk2msftn gp13.phx.gbl...

why use the IDE at all? the framework and compilers are free, so there is
really nothing to complain about and get all biased about when you can do
it all for free anyways.. there are 3rd party IDE's out there for the
.NET framework that are free also. Why don't you look into them if you
dont want to pay for microsoft's IDE. Just because it's visual studio
doesn't mean you need visual studio to create programs for .NET. just get
the .NET framework SDK and you have all you need, then pick up a free IDE
if you need a graphical experience also.

Sure you need the .Net IDE to develop for .NET....well, if you want to be
competitive with other .Net development shops.

The 3rd party IDEs are always behind (sometimes WAAAY behind) Microsoft's
development tools in features because they don't innovate - they copy.
That puts you at a disadvantage among other .Net framework developers.

That may not always be true. With sufficient numbers of
developers jumping ship, that adds a significant incentive
to make better 3rd party IDEs faster. Also, while those
who -copy- MS tend to be inferior, there are a number
of third parties who offer superior features that use
a different idea of how to do things.

I wish this were the case. But, it seems that no other company has put 2
and 2 together yet.....

Sun, Borland, Novell......all of them are missing the main 2 ingredients
that are absolutley neccessary to give Microsoft a run for their money and
the people of the world a real choice in desktop operating systems and
applications.

You have to have an affordable desktop....Lins pire, Novell (SUSE), Mandrake,
even the MAC OS (only $199 for 5 licenses - and you don't have to lie and
say you're a student) are all more affordable than Microsoft. The thing
they are missing is an easy way to develop applications (like Visual Basic
was for Microsoft).

You see, the combination of affordable desktop, plus and affordable,
easy-to-use development platform is the key to winning the war with
Microsoft. You win the war in the trenches.....by defection - like
introducing democracy into a totalitarian society.

When you have an affordable desktop, people WILL buy it. People will try
it. And, if there is an easy development platform for it
(say.....REALba sic), millions of disatisfied classic Visual Basic
programmers (and many non-programmers) will write applications for the
cheaper OS, because (A) they can afford to and (B) they like to write
applications for fun and to sell.

Once this starts, more and more applications become available for your
affordable OS. Then, more and more poeple will buy the OS because of the
vast number of applications available for it.

This model has been proven (and evidentally forgotten) by none other than
Microsoft itself. I told my sister, just the other night, that had I a
compnay that produced an OS like Apple's MAC, Linspire or Novell Linux and
if I could acquire a product like REALbasic to bundle with my OS.....that I
would change the world.

And, I would.

Jim Hubbard

[james]

Inline:
"Jim Hubbard" <re***@groups.p lease> wrote in message news:ON******** ************@gi ganews.com...

<snip>
Sun, Borland, Novell......all of them are missing the main 2 ingredients that are absolutley neccessary to give Microsoft a
run for their money and the people of the world a real choice in desktop operating systems and applications.

You have to have an affordable desktop....Lins pire, Novell (SUSE), Mandrake, even the MAC OS (only $199 for 5 licenses - and
you don't have to lie and say you're a student) are all more affordable than Microsoft. The thing they are missing is an easy
way to develop applications (like Visual Basic was for Microsoft).
Windows XP Home Edition can be had for less than $100.00 (USD) almost anywhere. And extra licenses are not that expensive.

You see, the combination of affordable desktop, plus and affordable, easy-to-use development platform is the key to winning
the war with Microsoft. You win the war in the trenches.....by defection - like introducing democracy into a totalitarian
society.
I think the affordable desktop Windows XP & development platform , Visual Basic Express (announced to be $49) will be a good,
cheap, combination for the non- programmers you mention in the paragraph below.

When you have an affordable desktop, people WILL buy it. People will try it. And, if there is an easy development platform
for it (say.....REALba sic), millions of disatisfied classic Visual Basic programmers (and many non-programmers) will write
applications for the cheaper OS, because (A) they can afford to and (B) they like to write applications for fun and to sell. RealBasic, is not a cheap alternative to VB. Especially comparing their cheapest version , Standard, which sells for $99. ( I
know it's free for now, they are moving to a new version and it might pay them to give the Standard(curren t version) version
away to VB developers for free)
Where as , Visual Basic Express , will be sold for $49 and might be bundled in some other products (like books maybe) . And
having used VB Express Beta1, I can say it is and will be , a great product for the price.
To get full cross platform capability from RB requires their PRO version which sells for almost $500.00.
That is more than Visual Studio 2003 PRO currently sells for. And you get access to more than one programming language. Pretty
good deal if you need it.

Once this starts, more and more applications become available for your affordable OS. Then, more and more poeple will buy the
OS because of the vast number of applications available for it.

This model has been proven (and evidentally forgotten) by none other than Microsoft itself. I told my sister, just the other
night, that had I a compnay that produced an OS like Apple's MAC, Linspire or Novell Linux and if I could acquire a product
like REALbasic to bundle with my OS.....that I would change the world.

And, I would.

Jim Hubbard

In fact, Linux can be had for free. Along with all kinds of development tools. They are available for download everywhere.
Where the free part ends, is in the support department. Although there is plenty of online support for Linux from users and
developers, the real costs appear when a business decides to use Linux and has to retrain people to use it and support it
in-house. And for home users that are not
real computer knowledgeable, Linux is a real problem. In this case, Windows XP (to me) is a clear winner. If a home user
manages to get a Linux destro installed, (which has improved a lot) they had better be satisfied with the installed apps.
Because, if there is a special application they need or want, it may not be so easy to install (or available). And a messed up
install in Linux CAN kill the entire OS. Something, that I have not seen in a while in XP (except for Norton products.....).
I don't think the "Classic VB Developers" will be dumping Microsoft Products in favor of Linux solutions. Better to do what
they are doing and pressuring Microsoft for more support. And at least
a better migration path to newer tools. ( I tried moving a couple of my apps. to VB.NET 2003 and had so many ToDo's that it
turned out to be easier to just do a rewrite)
Anyway, I just wanted to jump in here and add my .02 to all this. I have tried RB Standard. And it is no replacement for VB6.
The only thing that RB has going for it in my opinion is being able to compile
executables for more than one OS. But, the Standard edition only does that in a very limited way. And is not good enough for
complete testing. As you probably did, I received an email from RS offering a FREE(one of my favorite words) copy of RB PRO ,
if I managed to be one of the top 100 people to get others to download and try RB Standard, thru a specialized link. Well, I
tried that and promptly got flamed for it. (in the "classic" VB newsgroups & one Linux newsgroup) So, I won't be doing that
again!!
Good luck on your quest (whatever it is)........ ( I don't think you are going to convience people to drop MS products)
james

Help me get free software at: http://www.realbasic.com/vb6/index.php?id=CMZJCYDC
Good till April 15, 2005

[geoff]

james wrote:

Where as , Visual Basic Express , will be sold for $49 and might be bundled in some other products (like books maybe) . And having used VB Express Beta1, I can say it is and will be , a great product for the price. To get full cross platform capability from RB requires their PRO version which sells for almost $500.00. That is more than Visual Studio 2003 PRO currently sells for. And you get access to more than one programming language. Pretty good deal if you need it.> Help me get free software at: http://www.realbasic.com/vb6/index.php?id=CMZJCYDC Good till April 15, 2005

James,

I believe VB Express does not include the ability to create a stand
alone application so that's not a fair comparision. VB Express will not
be a good solution for anyone that wants to distribute their
applications. It's also not available at the moment so we don't know
what will happen with it ultimately. BTW, students can get REALbasic
Standard Academic Edition for $69.95.

Lastly, the comparison of our Pro product to Visual Studio Pro is not a
good one. Visual Studio only compiles for one platform: Windows. And
while REALbasic provides only one language, I wonder how many VB
programmers use the other languages that are a part of Visual Studio?

Geoff Perlman
President and CEO
REAL Software, Inc.

[Gerry Hickman]

Hi Jim,

Sun, Borland, Novell......all of them are missing the main 2 ingredients
that are absolutley neccessary to give Microsoft a run for their money and
the people of the world a real choice in desktop operating systems and
applications.

I agree.

Not only that, but I've always hated dealing with all the big
non-Microsoft vendors. Up until 2001, Microsoft were a dream company to
deal with. It was XP, and now Longhorn that put me off.

However, regarding desktops and servers; the route I'm looking into now,
is very powerful servers (e.g. Quad 64bit Sun SPARC with a big-iron
fibre SAN) This could run Solaris, or if no using Sun hardware, maybe
something like OpenBSD? There's plenty options for all the web stuff,
databases, full-text indexing and XML, and it will run a lot faster and
more stable than Windows 2003, and it would also be easier to migrate to
other servers and platforms at a later date.

This would cover all the mission critical stuff I need to do and all
apps would be available world-wide and would run x-platform and x-browser.

The desktop could be something completely unrelated, e.g. one of the
free Linux builds, but all our apps are web-enabled anyway so I'm not
sure it would matter much. The problem would arise for when we need to
use graphics - e.g. a flowchart, but I'm sure we'll find something.

The big piece of the jigsaw that's missing for our corporates internally
is how to replace Active Directory, all the user accounts and NTFS ACLs
and also an "Exchange" style mail server. These are areas I have no
solution for as yet.

--
Gerry Hickman (London UK)

[james]

<ge***@realsoft ware.com> wrote in message news:11******** **************@ l41g2000cwc.goo glegroups.com.. .

james wrote:

Where as , Visual Basic Express , will be sold for $49 and might be bundled in some other products (like books maybe) . And

having used VB Express Beta1, I can say it is and will be , a great

product for the price.

To get full cross platform capability from RB requires their PRO

version which sells for almost $500.00.

That is more than Visual Studio 2003 PRO currently sells for. And

you get access to more than one programming language. Pretty

good deal if you need it.>

Help me get free software at:

http://www.realbasic.com/vb6/index.php?id=CMZJCYDC

Good till April 15, 2005

James,

I believe VB Express does not include the ability to create a stand
alone application so that's not a fair comparision. VB Express will not
be a good solution for anyone that wants to distribute their
applications. It's also not available at the moment so we don't know
what will happen with it ultimately. BTW, students can get REALbasic
Standard Academic Edition for $69.95.

You are correct that VB Express does not include the ability to create stand alone exe's.
But, I have not found that to be as big a problem with current versions of VB as some
people like to think it is. Most end-users of an app, will (using a properly setup installer)
never notice wheather or not an application they install is a stand alone or has other files
included for it to run.
And I shouldn't have compared RB Standard to VB Express, which is not available , except
in Beta. Instead I should have used VB 2003 Standard which is available from Amazon.com
for $89.00. And the Academic Edition is cheaper too, $49.00 thru ccvsoftware.com .

Lastly, the comparison of our Pro product to Visual Studio Pro is not a
good one. Visual Studio only compiles for one platform: Windows. And
while REALbasic provides only one language, I wonder how many VB
programmers use the other languages that are a part of Visual Studio?

Geoff Perlman
President and CEO
REAL Software, Inc.

Yes, RB PRO does compile for more than one platform, which is my main reason for being interested in it in the first place. And
also why I jumped on the chance to try the Standard version, and then after receiving the promotional email, try to get others
to download the "currently" free Standard Edition, in hopes of
getting a chance to win a copy of the PRO version to better test the cross-platform abilities of RB.
The Standard version does compile to other OS's but, because of the 5 minute runtime limit, it is not suffecient to test an app
properly in another OS. ( in my case Linux, using KDE) Hence, my trying to get others to download the Standard edition. Which,
I have stated in another post I got flamed for, even though I made sure to put OT in the Subject line.
That does not mean I have completely given up on RB. But, looking thru comp.lang.basic .realbasic, I have read a lot of posts
about the short-comings of RB compared to VB6. Maybe, the next version will address those issues. If so, then, I will be more
interested in it. That does not mean I will stop using VB6 or VB.NET (or other languages for that matter) as I believe in using
the correct tool for the job. And for one prospective client, I had hopes that RB would fill that need. I need to build an app
that will work both in Windows XP & Linux ( Redhat Fedora Core 3 & KDE) and would like to use something that is familiar to me
in both enviroments. RB, might be it. But, short of me winning a copy of RB PRO, I will have to at least for now, write the
demo app in two different Basic IDE's. Gambas for Linux and VB.NET 2003 for Windows XP. ( I cannot afford to spend a lot to
find out that the potential client has changed his mind).
And before I get too carried away, I have used some of those other languages in Visual Studio besides VB, at one time or
another. Which made it worth the money I paid for Visual Studio at the time.
james
Download & register ,RealBasic Standard Edition and help me win free software at:
http://www.realbasic.com/vb6/index.php?id=CMZJCYDC
Free download good till April 15, 2005

[C-Services Holland b.v.]

Jim Hubbard wrote:

Now, REALbasic still has some growing to do. Don't expect it to be anything
except REALbasic.

yay, another REALbasic advocacy thread! whoopdiedoo

--
Rinze van Huizen
C-Services Holland b.v.

[Paul Clement]

On 6 Apr 2005 15:21:07 -0700, ge***@realsoftw are.com wrote:
¤ I believe VB Express does not include the ability to create a stand
¤ alone application so that's not a fair comparision. VB Express will not
¤ be a good solution for anyone that wants to distribute their
¤ applications. It's also not available at the moment so we don't know
¤ what will happen with it ultimately. BTW, students can get REALbasic
¤ Standard Academic Edition for $69.95.
¤
¤ Lastly, the comparison of our Pro product to Visual Studio Pro is not a
¤ good one. Visual Studio only compiles for one platform: Windows. And
¤ while REALbasic provides only one language, I wonder how many VB
¤ programmers use the other languages that are a part of Visual Studio?

It's all about choice. While we may not use more than one language we do have a choice. We also have
a choice with respect to other features, such as the development of components for distributed
applications and shared code libraries, the development of web applications and services - choices
notably absent from REALBasic.

While touting the advantage of a multi-platform development tool I think it's also important to note
that this feature is not particularly significant with respect to demand. The cost to support
multiple platforms is typically a deterrent.
Paul
~~~~
Microsoft MVP (Visual Basic)