Ramz .
ramzcbu at gmail.com
Sun Jan 2 10:09:03 CST 2011
I tried to learn VB.Net, too, out of curiosity as well as the idea that I may be able to learn it quick because I already know VBA. Most of the tools in the previous company that I worked for were from Microsoft, but when I began working for another company that had limited resources, I began to consider open source tools. I looked at php, and also looked at Java. One thing these had in common was their connection with the C language (i.e., their syntax). I figured that if I'd learn C#, at least I'd have also learned something that I can also use in php, javascript and Java when it's time for me to focus on them. I'm already good with VB, so learning a new language like C# should be a welcome addition to whatever I already know. Just my two cents... -- Ramil On Sun, Jan 2, 2011 at 5:36 AM, jwcolby <jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com> wrote: > I think we all want to feel that our decisions are correct, whether it is > the car we drive or the language we program in. > > I propose that in this case, there is almost no discernible difference in > capability between the two languages. I believe that at this instant in > time C# holds the edge in "desirability" with employers and thus in salary > paid, however I also believe that they will probability level out. > > So who cares really? Pick one and get to work! > > One thing I would say is that because of my VB background and the fact that > I have switched to C#, I can easily read and write VB or C# programs, > whereas had I stayed with VB I would only be fluent in VB. Had I come from > C# (no VB background) and I stuck with C# I would not have that advantage. > > > John W. Colby > www.ColbyConsulting.com > > On 1/2/2011 5:22 AM, Shamil Salakhetdinov wrote: > >> Hi Dan -- >> >> I just wanted to ask you what are generally accepted statistics your >> statements are based on? >> >> Thank you. >> >> -- >> Shamil >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com >> [mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Dan Waters >> Sent: 2 ?????? 2011 ?. 6:12 >> To: 'Access Developers discussion and problem solving' >> Subject: Re: [AccessD] Moving to .Net (was Ded Moroz sends you ...) >> >> 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. >> >> >> >> -- >> 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 >