On Tue, 1 May 2007 19:18:01 -0700, Sandy wrote:

> Suupport is definitely an issue -- not just in support from Microsoft, but I
> have noticed the amount of .net stuff you can find on the Internet far
> outweighs the amount of solutions you can get if you just look for VB6.
> Also, unless there is a better way to search for VB6 solutions for times when
> you may get "stuck," I noticed that I always get zillions of .net solutions
> in a search; even if I include "not .net" in my searches.
>
> Don't know that I want to point out that developers ever "get stuck," though.
>
> As far as productivity is concerned, I assume you're talking about RAD. Can
> you point to a few specific examples?

=?Utf-8?B?U2FuZHk=?= <Sandy@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
>Aren't there limits? I have about 250 users. There are two developers.
>What does Microsoft leave out of the Express version?

"Sandy" <Sandy@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:7A2AE7E3-7890-4978-A31A-3653FC2ABD7A@microsoft.com...
> So far, VB6 has been pretty good as far as the needs of the organization.
>
> I am concerned, however, that we are using Sql Server 2005. Seems to me
> there is a whole lot of functionality that is more compatible with VS.Net,
> although I don't know how to present that argument.

>
> Just about all of our apps involve saving in a database and retrieving
> information for reports, etc.

>
> Also, by way of example, one solution I am in the middle of right now is
> writing an application that incorporates MS Word. It basically grabs
> records
> from an outside Oracle database, pulls it into Sql Server, and it is used
> to
> provide information to form letters in MS Word (amongst other things it
> does).

>
> We are in the middle of migrating to Windows Server 2003 and Windows XP
> for
> client machines. We will probably be upgrading Office applications in the
> future as well. I wonder if my application incorporating MS Word may
> "break."
>
> Future applications will need RAD, but I have to admit, I am not convinced
> on that issue from what I've seen yet; let alone convince someone else.

>
> Because the new techology relies on real O-O technology, what is going to
> happen to all of the old dlls? Will VB6 apps "break"?

>
> As far as my professional career is concerned, it is certainly in my best
> interests to receive .Net training and advance to the next level; I
> certainly
> don't want to become obsolete . . . yet another one of my concerns, but
> definitely something I cannot use as an argument.
>
> Another question I have to ask is, due to Microsoft's inclination to
> release
> tools before they are completed is (i.e. service packs and fixes), what
> recommendation would you give me for the Visual Studio version to go to?

>
> I am sure you can see from my response how difficult it is for me to
> implement a sales pitch . . . I am not even convinced myself. Perhaps the
> best way to approach this is for someone to try to convince me to upgrade
> and
> then use their arguments!

>
> (I do have to admit, though, that I have worked with .Net on Web
> development
> for about a year outside of work and I think it's fun. That certainly
> will
> not work as an argument!!)
>
> Any help in this regard will be appreciated -- and please forgive my
> rambling!!
> --
> Sandy
>
>
> "pvdg42" wrote:
>
>>
>> "Sandy" <Sandy@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:E7758730-1293-47D8-AFF6-3BB42C58F8B4@microsoft.com...
>> > Hello -
>> >
>> > I need a justification for the powers that be on the purchase of Visual
>> > Studio .Net. We are currently using Visual Studio 6.
>> >
>> > Any reasons and/or points to make will be appreciated!
>> > --
>> > Sandy
>>
>> A lot of what you write will depend on the type(s) of work you intend on
>> doing with VS. You want to avoid generalizations in the justification
>> with
>> no supporting specifics.
>>
>> The biggest general differences, IMHO, are the introduction of the .NET
>> Framework and much better support for web app development. Add to that,
>> that
>> ..NET is the present and future (you'll want to look up when VS 6 will no
>> longer be supported as part of your justification), and then add
>> pertinent
>> details.
>>
>> If you tell us what type(s) of applications you are currently, or plan
>> on,
>> developing, more detailed feedback can be provided.
>>
>>
>>
>>

>So far, VB6 has been pretty good as far as the needs of the organization.
>
>I am concerned, however, that we are using Sql Server 2005. Seems to me
>there is a whole lot of functionality that is more compatible with VS.Net,
>although I don't know how to present that argument.

>Just about all of our apps involve saving in a database and retrieving
>information for reports, etc.

>Also, by way of example, one solution I am in the middle of right now is
>writing an application that incorporates MS Word. It basically grabs records
>from an outside Oracle database, pulls it into Sql Server, and it is used to
>provide information to form letters in MS Word (amongst other things it does).
>
>We are in the middle of migrating to Windows Server 2003 and Windows XP for
>client machines. We will probably be upgrading Office applications in the
>future as well. I wonder if my application incorporating MS Word may "break."

>Future applications will need RAD, but I have to admit, I am not convinced
>on that issue from what I've seen yet; let alone convince someone else.

>Because the new techology relies on real O-O technology, what is going to
>happen to all of the old dlls? Will VB6 apps "break"?

>As far as my professional career is concerned, it is certainly in my best
>interests to receive .Net training and advance to the next level; I certainly
>don't want to become obsolete . . . yet another one of my concerns, but
>definitely something I cannot use as an argument.

>Another question I have to ask is, due to Microsoft's inclination to release
>tools before they are completed is (i.e. service packs and fixes), what
>recommendation would you give me for the Visual Studio version to go to?

>I am sure you can see from my response how difficult it is for me to
>implement a sales pitch . . . I am not even convinced myself. Perhaps the
>best way to approach this is for someone to try to convince me to upgrade and
>then use their arguments!
>
>(I do have to admit, though, that I have worked with .Net on Web development
>for about a year outside of work and I think it's fun. That certainly will
>not work as an argument!!)
>
>Any help in this regard will be appreciated -- and please forgive my
>rambling!!

>My only serious complaint about VS2005 and .NET is that some of the
>features (or even removal of from VS6) kind of give the impression that
>MS wanted to encourage NON-DEVELOPERS to start developing.

"Andrew D. Newbould" wrote:

> In message <7A2AE7E3-7890-4978-A31A-3653FC2ABD7A@microsoft.com>, Sandy
> <Sandy@discussions.microsoft.com> writes
> >So far, VB6 has been pretty good as far as the needs of the organization.
> >
> >I am concerned, however, that we are using Sql Server 2005. Seems to me
> >there is a whole lot of functionality that is more compatible with VS.Net,
> >although I don't know how to present that argument.
>
> More "Integrated" would be a better term to use. Personally, I like SQL
> 2005; it has some really good new features. There is a comparison sheet
> on MSDN somewhere. In saying that, we still use SQL 2000 for all our
> production databases (over 50 at the last count) and probably won't
> start migrating till towards the end of the year. IMO past experience
> has proven its better to wait for the first couple of service packs to
> be released which has now happened.
>
> >Just about all of our apps involve saving in a database and retrieving
> >information for reports, etc.
>
> This is supposed to be easier in .NET however I have to admit that IMO
> there is no real difference over classic ADO. Subsequently, we use both
> depending on what we are trying to achieve. The biggest difference is
> that ADO.NET ONLY ever uses DISCONNECTED recordsets (ie: no server side
> cursors at all). There are times when a server side cursor does have an
> advantage. There are still some things that ADO.NET can't do so you will
> be forced back to Classic ADO.
>
> >Also, by way of example, one solution I am in the middle of right now is
> >writing an application that incorporates MS Word. It basically grabs records
> >from an outside Oracle database, pulls it into Sql Server, and it is used to
> >provide information to form letters in MS Word (amongst other things it does).
> >
> >We are in the middle of migrating to Windows Server 2003 and Windows XP for
> >client machines. We will probably be upgrading Office applications in the
> >future as well. I wonder if my application incorporating MS Word may "break."
>
> With MS its always likely that it will break. All you can do is test the
> new environments and patch your software if required. Using Virtual
> Server to create these environments is far better than the old Ghosting
> method. Last time I looked 70% of Office is still traditional COM based,
> so MS certainly are not practising what they preach.
>
> >Future applications will need RAD, but I have to admit, I am not convinced
> >on that issue from what I've seen yet; let alone convince someone else.
>
> For Windows Forms applications this is true. Apart from some subtle but
> useful differences, you will not see much improvement over VS6. However,
> when it comes to Web Services (ie: ASP.NET) or even BI (using the new
> Reporting Services in SQL 2005) things get interesting and have improved
> ALOT.
>
> >Because the new techology relies on real O-O technology, what is going to
> >happen to all of the old dlls? Will VB6 apps "break"?
>
> The MS line is that current COM dlls etc will still work in Vista's life
> cycle but they won't guarantee that for future versions on Windows. So
> your safe for the time being. That being said, Vista has alot more
> security features which can quickly break existing traditional
> applications and therefore you will almost certainly need to look at the
> Best Practices for developing on Vista. Specially, when it comes to what
> areas of the "Program Files" and the "Registry" you can / can not
> access.
>
> Moving to OO; this is where .NET has come full circle and offers many
> benefits for developers and the application life cycle in general. For
> example, we write plug-ins for our core components to satisfy individual
> clients needs. In VS6 and the like this leads to much replicated /
> similar code for each plug-in etc. In .NET we have defined a few Base
> Classes which our new / converted plug-ins Inherit from. This has
> removed an awful lot of repetative / similar code. We only need to
> Override the elements that we really need to tweak etc. Error handling
> is another major improvement. We have probably reduced our coding to
> about 1/3 of the normal requirement under VS6. This allows us to
> concentrate of other areas like improving usability, performance, new
> projects etc.
>
> >As far as my professional career is concerned, it is certainly in my best
> >interests to receive .Net training and advance to the next level; I certainly
> >don't want to become obsolete . . . yet another one of my concerns, but
> >definitely something I cannot use as an argument.
>
> Why not!!!
>
> Would they prefer to lose valuable team members with important knowledge
> of their systems etc. Secondly, as the company grows you are going to
> find it harder to recruit new staff with the right skill set unless the
> company moves forward.
>
> We still have millions of lines of VB6 code to maintain. If it ain't
> broke then don't fix it. Nobody likes being forced to change (specially
> by a behemoth like MS) however, there comes a point when you need to
> make a decision as to what's best for the future of the company. We have
> built our systems in such a way that we can continue to use our old code
> and migrate it when a changes is required or we have the time (its
> fairly well planned).
>
> After all there are other choices. If you are going to have to rewrite
> you code and systems then there are plenty of alternatives to .NET. What
> about Java or Delphi !!!
>
> >Another question I have to ask is, due to Microsoft's inclination to release
> >tools before they are completed is (i.e. service packs and fixes), what
> >recommendation would you give me for the Visual Studio version to go to?
>
> IMO your nearly always better applying the Service Packs etc in a test
> environment first, before deploying. We still have not deployed SP1 for
> Visual Studio 2005 as there seems to be concerns over its stability and
> changes to functionality relied upon. Personally, I prefer to wait a
> month or two and see what problems everyone else has first.
>
> >I am sure you can see from my response how difficult it is for me to
> >implement a sales pitch . . . I am not even convinced myself. Perhaps the
> >best way to approach this is for someone to try to convince me to upgrade and
> >then use their arguments!
> >