.Net: 3 Years of the 'Vision' Thing

java-programmer, .Net: 3 Years of the 'Vision' Thing asj wrote:
> Ben wrote:
>>
>> Here here!
>
>
> i believe that's "hear! hear!"
>
> and i ask again:
>
> "really? so where are most of the c#/.net people coming from? what
> with all the questions from vb and other microsoft developers around
> here, sure sounds like a mass migration of the herd from vb and other
> older microsoft tech to c# and other .net.....and that sounds like
> pure cannibalism of old by the new to me."

I think you're clutching at straws here, so what if people using dotnet were
using VB6 or C++ in the past to do development?

java-programmer >> .Net: 3 Years of the 'Vision' Thing asj wrote:
> Ben wrote:
>>
>> Here here!
>
>
> i believe that's "hear! hear!"
>
> and i ask again:
>
> "really? so where are most of the c#/.net people coming from? what
> with all the questions from vb and other microsoft developers around
> here, sure sounds like a mass migration of the herd from vb and other
> older microsoft tech to c# and other .net.....and that sounds like
> pure cannibalism of old by the new to me."

I think you're clutching at straws here, so what if people using dotnet were
using VB6 or C++ in the past to do development?

java-programmer >> .Net: 3 Years of the 'Vision' Thing
"Kent Paul Dolan" <email***@***.com> wrote in message
news:email***@***.com...
> "Frank Mulvenny" <email***@***.com> wrote:
>
> > Kent Paul Dolan wrote:
>
> >> Former VB programmers are abandoning that tool, and thus
> >> providing revenue lossage there for M$, in droves.
>
> > Of course they presumably have already purchased VB6, and so are not
> > bringing in further revenue for MS by sticking with it.
>
> Except that M$'s standard practice has been to release alphas as
> commercial releases, and then sell bugfixes as "upgrades", making for a
> perpetual revenue stream among those who didn't learn to avoid that kind
> of slavery when the phone company was broken up and had to allow phones
> to be sold rather than rented forever as before.

This really isn't true. Most point upgrades to Microsoft tools were free
downloads or minimal cost. The last VS.NET upgrade was what, $20.00. Major
upgrades are every 18 - 24 months, and upgrades are discounted heavily
compared to full retail price. This is the same schedule that most tool
vendors follow. The other thing is that the revenue that is generated by
development tools is barely a blip on Microsoft's radar screen. They have
never "made" money on development tools. The anti-MS drones like to use the
money argument all the time. In the case of dev tools it's a lame argument.
There is no money there.

>
> > If they move to .NET and buy VS.NET they will provide revenue to MS.
>
> Not, in particular, more per year than they were before as captive
> developers to a proprietary environment, and now there are fewer of
> them.
>
> >> Now mix in the earlier documented > 30% lossage
> >> to other camps (such as Java) in the process,
>
> > Can you provide a link to the documentation? Thanks.
>
> Nope. It was posted in this newsgroup, [within the last couple of
> months, or I wouldn't remember it], and I'm not about to go wading
> through all this drivel trying to find one particular piece of drivel.

If it's posted in a newsgroup then it must be true. I've seen numbers going
both ways. I file those the same place I file the benchmarks.

java-programmer >> .Net: 3 Years of the 'Vision' Thing Jay Glynn wrote:
> If it's posted in a newsgroup then it must be true. I've seen numbers going
> both ways. I file those the same place I file the benchmarks.

here ya go (it's actually 31% moving to java):
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&threadm=WMGta.2319%24P%25.81935%40news.uswest.net&rnum=1&prev=/groups%3Fq%3D%2Bjava%2Bvb%2B.net%2Bdisenchanted%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26oe%3DUTF-8%26selm%3DWMGta.2319%2524P%2525.81935%2540news.uswest.net%26rnum%3D1

A new survey of developers shows that existing Visual Basic developers
are moving to Microsoft's upgraded Visual Basic .Net as well as to Java
and other language alternatives to build their applications going
forward.

A survey to be released Tuesday by Evans Data Corp., Santa Cruz, Calif.,
shows that 43 percent of developers surveyed who said they are Visual
Basic developers, plan to cut back on their use of the popular Microsoft
development platform.

Of those saying they plan to reduce their use of Visual Basic, 37
percent said they plan to migrate to Visual Basic .Net.條argely from
Visual Basic 6.0, the last non-.Net version of the product. Yet, 31
percent said they plan to move to Java and 39 percent said they will be
migrating to C#, Microsoft's Java-like language for building Internet
applications and Web services.

Although, Visual Basic is used by 52 percent of all software developers,
this survey梬hich Evans Data completed in April梚ndicates that not only
is the Visual Basic follow-on language popular amongst VB developers,
but so is Java and C#.

http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,3959,1054906,00.asp

java-programmer >> .Net: 3 Years of the 'Vision' Thing Kent Paul Dolan wrote:
> "Frank Mulvenny" <email***@***.com> wrote:
>
>> Kent Paul Dolan wrote:
>
>>> Former VB programmers are abandoning that tool, and thus
>>> providing revenue lossage there for M$, in droves.
>
>> Of course they presumably have already purchased VB6, and so are not
>> bringing in further revenue for MS by sticking with it.
>
> Except that M$'s standard practice has been to release alphas as
> commercial releases, and then sell bugfixes as "upgrades", making for
> a perpetual revenue stream among those who didn't learn to avoid that
> kind of slavery when the phone company was broken up and had to allow
> phones to be sold rather than rented forever as before.
>

Strange, emdollar never charged for any VB6 service packs. Dunno what you
are referring to here at all.

>> If they move to .NET and buy VS.NET they will provide revenue to MS.
>
> Not, in particular, more per year than they were before as captive
> developers to a proprietary environment, and now there are fewer of
> them.
>

See above - microdollaroft received no income from existing VB6 developers
stemming from them being VB6 developers.

If I was being uncharitable I'd reckong you suffer from a World View that
may cloud your perception of reality...

>>> Now mix in the earlier documented > 30% lossage
>>> to other camps (such as Java) in the process,
>
>> Can you provide a link to the documentation? Thanks.
>
> Nope. It was posted in this newsgroup, [within the last couple of
> months, or I wouldn't remember it], and I'm not about to go wading
> through all this drivel trying to find one particular piece of drivel.
>

Hmmmmm, fair enough.

java-programmer >> .Net: 3 Years of the 'Vision' Thing asj wrote:

> http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,3959,1054906,00.asp

Well, that article describes a survey that talks about peoples plans, rather
than current reality.
As a VB6 [now legacy I suppose] developer I can't see the attraction of
VB.NET - it has no benefits over C#, and it's horribly verbose. So, it's the
37% VB.NETters that have me confused :-)

java-programmer >> .Net: 3 Years of the 'Vision' Thing asj wrote:
> Frank Mulvenny wrote:
>>
>> asj wrote:
>>
>>> http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,3959,1054906,00.asp
>>
>> Well, that article describes a survey that talks about peoples
>> plans, rather than current reality.
>
> well, people's plans a few months ago are now current reality....the
> point being vb is now "dead" (the gospel accg to microsoft) and people
> have to move over to another platform...and it looks like java will be
> getting a big proportion of that (not that i'm that too enthusiastic
> about it, since i'd rather have the supply of developers low and
> demand high).

Well, plans dont always pan out, do they?
Bit of wishful thinking until some concrete figures turn up methinks.

java-programmer >> .Net: 3 Years of the 'Vision' Thing asj wrote:
> Frank Mulvenny wrote:
>> Well, plans dont always pan out, do they?
>> Bit of wishful thinking until some concrete figures turn up methinks.
>
> so, what do you think is happening? people are sticking to vb's
> carcass?

No.

>pleeezzzzz....you're sorta as naive as those j++ developers
> who suddenly had the rug pulled out from under them..
>
> now, instead of playing "monkey don't see, don't hear", why not give
> some link that shows otherwise?

Oh do calm down.

java-programmer >> .Net: 3 Years of the 'Vision' Thing Frank Mulvenny wrote:
>
> Oh do calm down.

hmmm... am i otherwise? i point out a survey that shows support for my
argument, you give me platitudes...pretty effective thinking there,
dude...

java-programmer >> .Net: 3 Years of the 'Vision' Thing
"asj" <email***@***.com> wrote in message news:email***@***.com...
> Frank Mulvenny wrote:
> >
> > asj wrote:
> >
> > > http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,3959,1054906,00.asp
> >
> > Well, that article describes a survey that talks about peoples plans,
rather
> > than current reality.
>
> well, people's plans a few months ago are now current reality....the
> point being vb is now "dead" (the gospel accg to microsoft) and people

asj,

MS just announced the VB6 SP6 Beta. It is still a supported product. You
can even buy it new through the MS downgrade program. It is going to be
supported until 2008 - and will probably have another SP or two. It isn't
dead. Yes, MS has discontinued that line of the product, but you still have
a few years to migrate. A lot of VB developers aren't going to be able to
transition for another year or two. I see this discussion all the time on
the VB groups. Most VB'ers that I've talked to like VB.NET or C#, but they
just can't justify the migration yet - though they plan to eventually.

> have to move over to another platform...and it looks like java will be
> getting a big proportion of that (not that i'm that too enthusiastic
> about it, since i'd rather have the supply of developers low and demand
> high).

You might want to talk to Sun... They are pushing that 10 million developer
thing (Never going to happen!). That's like 3 times the number of VB
programmers.... So I guess if Sun gets it's way, Java programmers will be
making about $25,000 / year...

Tom Shelton

java-programmer >> .Net: 3 Years of the 'Vision' Thing Tom Shelton wrote:

> asj,
>
> MS just announced the VB6 SP6 Beta. It is still a supported product. You
> can even buy it new through the MS downgrade program. It is going to be
> supported until 2008 - and will probably have another SP or two. It isn't
> dead. Yes, MS has discontinued that line of the product, but you still have
> a few years to migrate. A lot of VB developers aren't going to be able to
> transition for another year or two. I see this discussion all the time on
> the VB groups. Most VB'ers that I've talked to like VB.NET or C#, but they
> just can't justify the migration yet - though they plan to eventually.
>

heh, well it does have a death sentence written all over it, mayhaps
like those hopeless dudes in stephen king's the green mile: just killing
time waiting for the chair.......sorta like buying a car that you know
will fall apart a few years later...good deal....really SMART move....

> You might want to talk to Sun... They are pushing that 10 million developer
> thing (Never going to happen!). That's like 3 times the number of VB
> programmers.... So I guess if Sun gets it's way, Java programmers will be
> making about $25,000 / year...

i don't believe it either..it's a marketing ploy...they'll increase it
by a lot, but never to 10 million, thank god.

java-programmer >> .Net: 3 Years of the 'Vision' Thing asj wrote:
> Frank Mulvenny wrote:
>>
>> Oh do calm down.
>
> hmmm... am i otherwise? i point out a survey that shows support for my
> argument, you give me platitudes...pretty effective thinking there,
> dude...

Well let's see, oh, you snipped your comments, conveniently. You did go into
standard rant mode a little, and I dont enjoy debating with someone who's
'jumping up and down on the table' as it were.
Also, you not being able to back up a survey of a few months ago with
concrete figures is not my fault, and I'm afraid the solution to that is not
for me to disprove your postulations with hard facts. In summary, the onus
lies with you.

Cheers

java-programmer >> .Net: 3 Years of the 'Vision' Thing asj wrote:
> Tom Shelton wrote:
>
>> asj,
>>
>> MS just announced the VB6 SP6 Beta. It is still a supported
>> product. You can even buy it new through the MS downgrade program.
>> It is going to be supported until 2008 - and will probably have
>> another SP or two. It isn't dead. Yes, MS has discontinued that
>> line of the product, but you still have a few years to migrate. A
>> lot of VB developers aren't going to be able to transition for
>> another year or two. I see this discussion all the time on the VB
>> groups. Most VB'ers that I've talked to like VB.NET or C#, but they
>> just can't justify the migration yet - though they plan to
>> eventually.
>>
>
> heh, well it does have a death sentence written all over it, mayhaps
> like those hopeless dudes in stephen king's the green mile: just
> killing
> time waiting for the chair.......sorta like buying a car that you know
> will fall apart a few years later...good deal....really SMART move....
>

You should go public with this insidious 'self destruct' feature you've
found in VB6 ;-) emdollar shouldnt be allowed to get away with it.

java-programmer >> .Net: 3 Years of the 'Vision' Thing Frank Mulvenny wrote:
> You should go public with this insidious 'self destruct' feature you've
> found in VB6 ;-) emdollar shouldnt be allowed to get away with it.

i believe it's going to be "strangled", not "self-destruct"......like i
said, mayhaps you like building your apps using a platform that you KNOW
will be gone in just a few years...i like building my house with
sturdier stuff, and i'm sure many others agree (which explains why
people are leaving vb and going to java or .net).

java-programmer >> .Net: 3 Years of the 'Vision' Thing Frank Mulvenny wrote:
> Also, you not being able to back up a survey of a few months ago with
> concrete figures is not my fault, and I'm afraid the solution to that is not
> for me to disprove your postulations with hard facts. In summary, the onus
> lies with you.
>

sorry, insulting is just not going to work...i back up arguments with
link and a survey, you seem to think you can hold up your end by passing
the ball back with nothing on it.

here's an earlier report of its decline:

---------------------------------------------------------

http://www.advisor.com/doc/08156
"A survey of VB developers shows VB use is declining while Java, XML,
and C# are becoming more popular.

ARTICLE INFO
MICROSOFT VISUAL BASIC ADVISOR PORTAL

It seems that new, Internet-focused programming technologies are having
an effect on Visual Basic (VB) use. VB programming has been on the
decline since spring of 2000, reports Evans Data Corporation in its
North American Developer Survey, a continuing research series based on
in-depth interviews with over 600 developers.

In the spring of 2000, 62 percent of developers were using Visual Basic
some of the time; among survey participants, mean time spent using the
language was 27.8 percent total programming time. But today, only 46
percent report using Visual Basic, and the average time spent using it
is down to 20.8 percent. Developers say they will use VB less in the
future."

----------------------------------------------------------

now, will you actually back up your arguments with something more solid
than an insult?
hmmm.................i would guess not.

java-programmer >> .Net: 3 Years of the 'Vision' Thing asj wrote:
> Frank Mulvenny wrote:
>> Also, you not being able to back up a survey of a few months ago with
>> concrete figures is not my fault, and I'm afraid the solution to
>> that is not for me to disprove your postulations with hard facts. In
>> summary, the onus lies with you.
>>
>
>
> sorry, insulting is just not going to work...i back up arguments with

Insulting? Hmmm cant see an insult there. Sounds like you might be going
into jumpy-up-and-down rant mode again...

> link and a survey, you seem to think you can hold up your end by
> passing
> the ball back with nothing on it.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: If you wish to make assertions
without basis in hard fact then it really is your responsibility to deal
with that, not other peoples'

Sorry, I dont feel like indulging in the meaningless back-and-forth that you
seem so keen on. If you want to play, go and ask another of the kids.

Cheers.

java-programmer >> .Net: 3 Years of the 'Vision' Thing Frank Mulvenny wrote:
> I've said it before and I'll say it again: If you wish to make assertions
> without basis in hard fact then it really is your responsibility to deal
> with that, not other peoples'

i give two links and surveys showing VB usage dropping and developers
planning on leaving VB, you give me fluffy talk, not one single example
backing up your case, and seem to be totally blind to the two
URLs...hey, good job there! you must have been in the debating team in
high school eh?