Dot not is a junk platform for junk apps: a comment by Anonymous

Dot not is a junk platform for junk apps... hardly anyone uses it. Some do, and some love it. I notice a ***** towards putting vb6 in a past tense, and .net as some 'future'. But to go that route makes Java or Python or any number of other platforms just as good. Why would I choose your next platform, what happens when you dump that one... same argument again... no thanks. And if support stops in 2014 and windows 8.1 then so does my upgrade path... (Think it actually works in windows 10 too). You make big claims for .net, but it never has delivered on them. It's over bearing, over engineered, long winded and designed for a corporate developer, which is great... for them. BUT you've cut loose an awful lot of other developers, the majority in the process. You keep talking about the needs of the developers, whilst ignoring an awful lot of them. I had the displeasure of working with .net to maintain and application for a couple of years, and whilst the GUI design tools where very nice indeed, the language was just plain bad.. long winded and I felt OTT for a small developer of tools like myself. Let me ask you this... there where courses for programming VB6 at the local collage.. no longer.. nobody wanted to learn .net... IT ISN'T FUN... People wan't something approachable.. the .net suites are not. I also note the popularity of Python for teaching programming now.. and can't help feeling that it's because Microsoft has lost sight of a massive portion of it's users. Take care they don't all lose site of MS. If I end up learning something that runs cross platform why would I stick with you guys.. you've already proven you have no idea what people want in a desktop OS and now have confirmed you have no idea what people need to learn programming. I'm really sorry if this sounds offensive BTW, it's not supposed to. I see 10K signings for a development tool as old as this.. name me anything else from back then that people want... no I can't think of anything either.. does that not compute?

VB6 will out-last that entire .NET generation of tools: a comment by Anonymous

.net is just plain awful. Slow, buggy, incompatible tripe. The code isn't even very readable. I know, I've had to use it professionally, however given the choice, to start a new project in ever tighter timescales, VB6 is the ONLY option. Period. I'll be honest, I don't need a new version, just keep it running in your new OS's MS, that's all I need to hear. However, if it does ever die it would actually be less trouble for me to just move to a new platform completely, as other have suggested, so it would be just one more nail in the coffin for Windows generally. If I wasn't a programmer (ok .net peeps, I'm not a programmer in your book), I think it would be quite perverse for a company to ignore a product that is obviously as popular as VB6, even today a top 10 ranking development tool. And one which only exists on Windows. Bearing in mind the ebbing away of Windows fans as it is, can they really throw the baby out with the bath water? Nobody like to admit their wrong, but they should really take their heads out of their ***sses occasionally and see what their own community actually want. By all means, keep developing .net, if that makes you feel any better, but I think most VB6 developers will have already trodden that path and decided it's not for them. I don't think any new version based on the .net model will ever change that, even if people bothered to try it out again (I think I tried out all of them, up to VS 2010 (?)), it didn't get better, fancier, definitely, more complex, absolutely, more powerful, depends on what you think power is (as it's generally slower each rendition), a joy to program in, not at all, anything like VB6, no - it's a totally different language. In another post somewhere, the point was made that .net is the future, but I think VB6 will out-last that entire generation of tools, because it's 'better' for what we, in the real world, need to do. Would it be nice to have an updated, supported and entirely code compatible version of VB6, absolutely. Would it be successful, more than I think even MS could imagine. Will they ever do it, absolutely not. Why? I haven't a clue, it defies logic. Perhaps, like a small child, they just can't admit they where wrong and have become totally absorbed with trying to prove their right. But, as we all seem to know, they did get it very very wrong.

A comment by SuperDre

Standards are just what you use yourself, .NET itself doesn't have any real standards just like VB6 didn't have.. As I've said before, bad code is all down to the developer, and with that, bad code is also very much in the eye of the beholder.. VB6 doesn't stand in your way to use actual development standards, but some people are just too lazy to actually use them, those are the same people who won't use any real standards when they develop in .NET..

Yes, for some stuff you need to 'hack' your way around it, but that's exactly the same with .NET, I've had to 'hack' my way around certain stuff because the .NET framework (at that time) didn't support what I needed or did it in a very unlogical way.. Yes it's nice you can extend you classes and add a lot of attributes, but to me, using those things it's just another fancier way of 'hacking your way around stuff'.. I've sweared a lot at for instance having to use standard .NET components because they just didn't do what they were supposed to do, yeah, unless you are a dummy developer who doesn't actually use it, exactly how you describe VB6 developers (as in NON professional developers)..

And what is exactly spagheti-code, because when I look at a lot of .NET code, to me it also looks a lot like the VB6 code we use (I specifically say 'we use' as I have no real clue to how others work with it)..

Also with .NET you have the problem of having to update your code if you want to use the latest additions, and not all companies have the money to keep updating to the latest version of Visual Studio, or the full version so they can use stuff like the complete testing suite. Yes, only now you have a free version which actually is acceptable to use in a professional enviroment (Express editions had too many commercial license problems), but the last 15 years you had to upgrade every 2-3 years if you wanted to use the latest features..

But just like there is still unmanaged C(++) in the latest version of Visual Studio, why not also have an unmanaged (classic) VB...

I'm an engineer: VB6 programs work fine in Windows 10 by Kevin Matney

I've been working with VB.Net for a few years, but still maintain (and update with new features!) a lot of VB6 programs. I was pleased that all of my VB6 programs work fine in Windows 10, so that's another 10 years I'll be working with VB6. . One thing I absolutely miss in VB.Net is having out-of-process servers - a rock-solid way for VB6 users to get multi-threading. I have to work with some shaky .Net EXE servers (not my code) and when they crash, my program crashes. To solve this I had to write a VB6 COM wrapper. VB6 to the rescue again.

I'm an engineer, and a self-taught programmer, and was (is) able to do some amazing things with VB. With VB.Net, I spend more time on Google than I do writing code. In fact, I would have been dead in the water if I wasn't able to search for code snippets online (and I have found the MS Help online to be the least useful - not very many examples).

I find it frustrating that Microsoft must be spending time and effort creating obscure languages like LightSwitch or F#, when it seems obvious that VB7 would be way more popular. I have forced myself to do new development in VB.Net, but the keyword is "force". I hate it, but at least with Google's help I can get things done.

I could go on and on...

Microsoft has "tried" to ignore the VB6 demographic but that is just a recurring miscalculation on their part.

Just curious, how many posts need to happen here before Microsoft will act on updating VB6?

Many of us like the idea of simply incorporating VB6 as part of the OS for current and future Windows versions. That may allow MS to save face if that is any kind of road block for them.

Microsoft has "tried" to ignore the VB6 demographic but that is just a _recurring_ miscalculation on their part. VB6 is bigger than any vision they had\have for it. It does not perfectly fit into a senior stock holders pigeon hole. Kinda like trying to squish soap in a shower with your foot. Very illusive. That seems to confuse their decision makers.

I think the Star Trek analogy is 100% accurate. Here is the truth Microsoft: we are not going away! Please align your business model to THAT fact. Thank you.

A comment by: JillS

Bill Gates PhD thesis on Visual Basic 6.0 (Anno Domini 2015)

Bill Gates PhD thesis on Visual Basic 6.0 (Anno Domini 2015):

http://www.docdroid.net/s87b/bill-gates-phd-thesis.pdf.html

A comment by Tim Chambers

VB6 was RAD. VB.NET is no longer the "Rapid" programming VB6 once was. The amount of hoops to jump through, reinventing the wheel, obfuscated code and horrible data methods drive programmers crazy. The problem is the people making the decision never used the programming languages & tools and no deep understanding of "what", "how" and "why". 
They may believe the marketing and finance people more than the expert users. If Microsoft don't believe there could be a future for VB6 and no benefit in keeping the tools then there shouldn't be any problem with selling or gifting it to the community. If your 16 year old car had travelled >200'000 Miles, rust, holes in the dash/carpet/upholstery and you thought it wasn't worth maintaining then would you mind your 16yr old son from driving it or converting it to a rally car ?? If you want to keep it then look after it, if it's not worth keeping then give it way or sell it for scrap. That goes for VB6 : If they think the Intellectual Property (IP) is so precious then keep it and update it; if the IP is not precious then MS won't loose much if they give it away or sell it for cheap. Once it's opened up or sold then if it has no value then no one else could make a profit from it and MS looses nothing. What is MS afraid of ? Are they scared that people outside of MS are actually better at efficient and creative programming, better at designing user friendly software and better at keeping customers happy ? Microsoft should stop complaining about bad customers hurting MS staff feelings and concentrate more on the wider user base instead of the PR focus group.