[AccessD] Moving to .Net (was Ded Moroz sends you ...)

jwcolby jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com
Sun Jan 2 00:03:30 CST 2011


An interesting article.

http://improvingsoftware.com/2009/04/19/a-managers-retrospective-on-the-c-versus-vbnet-decision/

Notice his 2nd to the last paragraph. though he makes no coherent argument for that paragraph.

I have been reading that MS is trying hard to align the languages.  There are some definite issues 
in doing so and it is not a trivial task.  Likewise there are (currently) some advantages in either 
language over the other (pre 2010 / .net 4.0).

I am searching for but not finding the language difference matrix, nor the progress made so far in 
the alignment process.

I certainly do *not* believe that C# will ever be deprecated.

VB.net is not significantly easier to program, and I have done both.  C#.net is not significantly 
easier to program, and I have done both.  95% (in fact probably higher) of the effort in learning to 
program in .Net is in learning the framework.  Thus if either language were "10% easier" (whatever 
that might mean) the end result would be that language being .5% easier to learn in total.  99.9# of 
the power of .Net is in the framework.

I hired a kid out of the community college who took VB.net, then took C#. Net.  He prefers C#.Net.

Personally I think that deciding to move to .net is a far more important decision than which 
language to choose.  Pick your poison, either will be fine.  VB will (eventually) be more accepted 
by the programming managers of the world, as they begin to understand that there is no significant 
difference in the language's ability.  Today, and for the next few years, *I* believe that C# still 
holds the "respectability" edge.

.net rocks.  Pick VB.Net or C#.Net and get started.

John W. Colby
www.ColbyConsulting.com

On 1/1/2011 10:11 PM, Dan Waters wrote:
> I'd recommend VB.Net over C# for the following reasons:
> (I know some of you want to scream at me about this, but what I'm doing is
> making logical arguments, not passionate arguments.)
>
> With the release of VS 2010, the capabilities of C# and VB.Net are almost
> identical - there used to be significant differences in previous versions.
> Since both compile to the CLR, you get the same results in the end.
>
> Utility software exists which can convert one language to the other and back
> again.
>
> Because there is effectively no difference, software shops will be looking
> to hire developers not on which language can write, but on what value they
> bring.  There won't be an automatically higher rate for C# developers.
>
> VB.Net is easier to learn than C#.  And if you're an experienced Access
> developer it's easier yet.  (Although easy is a relative term.)
>
> Because VB.Net is easier to learn, college students will learn it instead of
> C#.  (When you were in college and you could save some time what did you
> do?)  This will add to the proportion of VB.Net developers over time who
> will wonder why anyone would pick the more difficult language.
>
> Experienced developers, all other things being equal, can program faster in
> VB.Net.  This makes you more competitive whether working independently or in
> a company.
>
> MS is trying to be leaner than they were in the good old days w/o Google and
> others.  So they need to reduce duplication of resources.  Making two
> similar programming languages identical is a good way to do that.  The next
> step would be to deprecate one of the languages - and C# will stop being
> supported in 10 - 12 years.  MS created C# so that Java developers could
> more easily transition to a .Net language while .Net was becoming
> mainstream.  .Net is now mainstream.
>
> --------------------
> On the cost-benefit:
>
> I'd say that if you want to continue to be an independent professional
> developer then VB.Net is the way to go.  I've lost projects with potential
> customers just because the IT department didn't know what Access could
> really do - they saw it as a toy and my credibility as low.
>
> But if you are using VB.Net&  SQL Server you've got credibility, even if you
> could have done the same project in Access at 1/2 the time and cost.
> Company decision-makers often don't care too much what something costs (even
> while they are screaming to keep the costs down) - they care more that they
> 'look' like good decision makers to keep their career path on track, and
> screaming at a supplier (or developer) to keep costs down looks good too.
> People often buy the more expensive thing because think it's worth more.
> Unless - the person who hires you is directly affected by Profit&  Loss -
> then they really do care!
>
> Good Luck!
> Dan
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
> [mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Mark Simms
> Sent: Saturday, January 01, 2011 7:07 PM
> To: 'Access Developers discussion and problem solving'
> Subject: Re: [AccessD] Ded Moroz sends you links on sample projects... :)
>
> Good stuff John. Would you say based on your time-in-training that you are
> 50% as productive, 25%, ???
>
> I'm just trying to gauge the cost-benefit of moving to C# dot-net.
>
>
>



More information about the AccessD mailing list