DWUTKA at marlow.com
DWUTKA at marlow.com
Mon Sep 13 09:53:24 CDT 2004
I got the .Net package from watching those movies. I was pretty much in the #4. Category. I think I am still there. I don't think the learning curve is all that big. I didn't have a problem with it. I've played around with Visual C++ before, though, so I was sort of used to some of the quirks a raw VB programmer wouldn't normally experience. Quite frankly, if they would have come out with a VB 7.0, which stuck to VB 6.0, and just added inheritance, I would be as happy as a pig in mud. That is the only saving grace of .Net, in my opinion. Implements is nice, but is a far cry from inheritance, and it requires a lot more work to even use. .Net has a lot of drawbacks too, which makes the transition that much more difficult to swallow. For one, the .Net Framework is not a small 1.4 meg installation. I have heard of many 'versioning' issues too, though I couldn't personally verify any. Then in the development environment, you have things like the forced tabbed text structure. It doesn't tab incorrectly (or at least I haven't seen an example yet), but it is just plain annoying when you are used to tabbing your own code, the way you like it. It tabs more frequently then I normally would. (Not sure if there is a setting to turn that off, I think I looked but didn't find anything). There is a nifty 'code help' feature, that will underscore code that won't work, and give advice as to fix, but I think they did a half baked job on that. One of the first things I got into, in .NET, was to create a class object. In VB 6, you can use Property Get, Let, and Set statements. In .NET, you actually use Get and Set, but not declared the same way. On top of that, it barks if you use a Property statement, with a Get, but no Set. If you don't use Set, you are supposed to declare the property to be read only. Thought that was kind of stupid, because the compiler should be able to determine that on it's own, based on whether or not there is a Set statement. Like I said, if they had just added inheritance to VB 6.0, they would have done a lot better in getting developers to move to a new platform. That's just my opinion though. Drew -----Original Message----- From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com [mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com]On Behalf Of Jim Dettman Sent: Monday, September 13, 2004 7:45 AM To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving Subject: RE: [AccessD] MS Access to VB6 or VB.net Richard, I think rather then the worrying about the front end, you should be considering the BE and the technology behind it. However without knowing a lot more about your app, it's hard to say if that's critical or not. Also, you didn't mention why you were considering moving from developing the FE in Access itself. As for VB.Net, I've been ignoring it for the most part for some of the same reasons you outline (distribution) plus the fact that it has a large learning curve. I can't see spending the time on that when I already have tools at my disposal that do the job fine. And I'm not the only one. Overall it seems that .Net has been poorly received by the development community. Most developers I know are happy (for the most part) with what they already have/know. Of course a lot depends on the types of apps you develop and the end users you target. I think most of us on this list are on the smaller end of the scale developing typical business type apps for 50 concurrent users or less. How about a quick un-scientific poll? 1. Do you currently develop in .Net (you know it and use it on a regular basis) 2. Are you learning .Net for a project (your just starting out with it and have done a small project or two). 3. Don't know anything about it, but are interested in it. 4. Could care less. I'm firmly at #4 for the moment. Jim Dettman (315) 699-3443 jimdettman at earthlink.net -----Original Message----- From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com [mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com]On Behalf Of Griffiths, Richard Sent: Monday, September 13, 2004 5:20 AM To: AccessD at databaseadvisors.com Subject: [AccessD] MS Access to VB6 or VB.net Hi Group After advice and thoughts. I have a piece of commercial software (library s/ware for schools) written with A97 FE and BE. I am about to rewrite and can't decide over VB6 FE/A2K(DAO) BE or VB.net FE / A2K BE.(reason for change to VB as opposed to MS Access is that the VB footprint will be smaller 1-2mb [easier to email/download and manage than my 12-13 mb Access FE]). On one hand the VB6 route will be quicker to develop (no learning curve) and I think to deploy. On the other hand VB.Net is the future (most likely!!)(and learning and developing in this will be more interesting and will spur me on) but I am concerned (mainly) about deployment as my users are not very IT literate and their pc's (at this time) are not up-to-date (some W95 many W98 32-64mb ram - I know .net is no go on W95). So deployment of .net requires not only the framework but they need minimal Data Access 2.7, IE 5.01, Windows installer etc also installed. But 6-12 months down the line I don't want to be in the posistion that having used VB6 to then consider rewriting in Vb.net. What I can't gauge here is how significant these issues are (and any other issues). So what I am hoping to get here is how you would approach this conundrum - tried and tested VB6 or new VB.net? Thanks Richard -- _______________________________________________ AccessD mailing list AccessD at databaseadvisors.com http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com -- _______________________________________________ AccessD mailing list AccessD at databaseadvisors.com http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com