Micro$oft was going to open source Visual Basic 6 but...

For other topics related to the FreeBASIC project or its community.
joseywales72
Posts: 206
Joined: Aug 27, 2005 2:02
Location: Istanbul, Turkey

Micro$oft was going to open source Visual Basic 6 but...

Postby joseywales72 » May 20, 2011 12:41

as you can see in the Slashdot post it has been denied. :-)

It would be nice I suppose, not that I use VB or Windows for that matter, but many smarter people here would find a use for it.
On the other hand, I'm happy with my beloved Linux and Freebasic. (and Gambas and Lazarus.)
Anil
Dr_D
Posts: 2398
Joined: May 27, 2005 4:59
Contact:

Postby Dr_D » May 20, 2011 21:04

lol...


deinol wrote:That's nice and all, but does anyone care?

I mean, I guess there are some legacy projects out there that are still being maintained, but I'm sure those developers bought VS a long time ago.

Or is there some secret in the VB6 code that the open source community can actually learn from?


fragfoo wrote:Probably yes, you can learn a lot from past mistakes.
ike
Posts: 387
Joined: Jan 17, 2011 18:59

WHo needs it now??

Postby ike » May 21, 2011 4:53

WHo needs it now??

1. FB will get GUI Toolkit and IDE in a about a year
2. Gambas on Linux is there
===================================
I would never ever use any MSFT programming language

Fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again.

---------------------
It sounds like W. :)
ike
Posts: 387
Joined: Jan 17, 2011 18:59

I dont trust them

Postby ike » May 21, 2011 5:13

I dont trust them. They are probably switching back to VB6, because .NET is a garbage
anonymous1337
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sep 12, 2005 20:06
Location: California

Postby anonymous1337 » May 21, 2011 18:39

.NET is amazing, IMO. Visual Studio is a top-knotch suite, as well.
Destructosoft
Posts: 88
Joined: Apr 03, 2011 3:44
Location: Inside the bomb
Contact:

Postby Destructosoft » May 22, 2011 2:55

.NET let me down. I had downloaded and printed lots of nice articles about VB6, then when I went to order VB6 I was told they had stopped selling it and I would get VB7 instead. I assumed the articles would still hold up. Instead I received VB .NET, which was nothing like it whatsoever, AND there were no books or anything on it at the time. It was like paying cash for a car that you weren't told required special gasoline (or for the UK readers, petrol) which you weren't told how to mix.

All previous versions of BASIC I used were free; TRS-80; Applesoft; QBasic. I was willing to shell out for VB before .NET, but now thanks to the disaster, I am never going to pony up for Microsoft's donkey ride.
TJF
Posts: 3600
Joined: Dec 06, 2009 22:27
Location: N47°, E15°
Contact:

Postby TJF » May 22, 2011 7:44

Destructosoft wrote:It was like paying cash for a car that you weren't told required special gasoline (or for the UK readers, petrol) which you weren't told how to mix.

Nice words!

I can't talk about VB, VS or .NET, because I never used one of them. But this is how I felt when I tried QB45 first time in the mid 80's. And when I heard that VB is based on QB, I decided to avoid further deliberate self-harm.

I switched to OMIKRON basic (the interpreter was free). I bought the compiler and I spent money on each update.

I guess I won't use an open source VB6, even if m$ will pay for that. And I'm pretty happy that I can switch off compatiblity in FreeBasic!
marcov
Posts: 3010
Joined: Jun 16, 2005 9:45
Location: Eindhoven, NL
Contact:

Postby marcov » May 22, 2011 8:54

Even if you don't switch to VB6 (and I don't plan either), its sourcecode release would be a interesting for nearly all independant compiler makers on Windows.

There certainly is a lot of COM stuff I'd like to have a look at.

But I still have some nice property on the moon on offer for the people that really believed that MS would open source VB under a suitable license :-)
Richard
Posts: 3030
Joined: Jan 15, 2007 20:44
Location: Australia

Postby Richard » May 22, 2011 10:28

It would be a mistake to read the MS VB6 source, no matter how fascinating it might be. There are several reasons;

Firstly; Anything you wrote that used the same structure as the MS source might be a breach of ©. You need to be able to swear and prove that you have never looked at their source or you become a target for their lawyers.

Secondly; 1000 MS programmers have generated much complexity and a huge bug collection. Surely it is better to write your code correctly the first time rather than to try to understand and then fix theirs.

Thirdly; You become a puppet of MS since you are fascinating on their legacy code rather than generating code that will ultimately saturate their market with freeware.

As interesting as the MS source might be to a compiler writer, it represents a real liability.
roook_ph
Posts: 402
Joined: Apr 01, 2006 20:50
Location: philippines
Contact:

Postby roook_ph » May 22, 2011 12:09

We are not lawyers here so I will not delve on legal issues. But here is one huge company feeling the crunch of apple and google. Call me puppet or sucker hell I will try anything if it is free!
marcov
Posts: 3010
Joined: Jun 16, 2005 9:45
Location: Eindhoven, NL
Contact:

Postby marcov » May 22, 2011 12:19

Richard wrote:
As interesting as the MS source might be to a compiler writer, it represents a real liability.


Note that this was all abbreviated in my post as "suitable license" :-)
ike
Posts: 387
Joined: Jan 17, 2011 18:59

CEO of MSFT

Postby ike » May 22, 2011 17:29

It sounds like perfection. Microsoft had perhaps the largest number of developers in the world
hooked on a language which in turn was hooked to Windows.
Yet Microsoft took this asset, of incalculable value, and apparently tossed it aside
* SO HOW I KNOW THEY WILL NOT DO SIMILAR WITH NET PLATFORM

Just look at this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wvsboPUjrGc
------------------------------------------------------------------






VB was never intended to be a complete development language. It was intended to be a language for
high-level composition of low-level components, a glue language if you like. For this reason, VB
created a highly successful third-party industry in components, mostly ActiveX controls.
These components were built mainly using C++, but used mainly from VB.
Without ActiveX, VB would have been severely underpowered.
ike
Posts: 387
Joined: Jan 17, 2011 18:59

Postby ike » May 22, 2011 17:39

If I ever see V1ctor jumping like Steve Ballmer, I will quietly close my account here, and will never use FB :)
roook_ph
Posts: 402
Joined: Apr 01, 2006 20:50
Location: philippines
Contact:

Postby roook_ph » May 22, 2011 20:28

If I ever see V1ctor jumping like Steve Ballmer, I will quietly close my account here, and will never use FB :)

I assure you V1ctor will never do that ! Ballmer is in a hierarchy called corporate world . His bossed probably told him to jump and dance if possible to explain to the buying people that their product is not ridiculous.If I have his six figure salary I would do that too.

PS
Maybe Microsoft is feeling the crunch called FREEBASIC
Jim Barlow
Posts: 42
Joined: Sep 23, 2005 0:37

Postby Jim Barlow » May 23, 2011 2:09

IKE:
1. FB will get GUI Toolkit and IDE in a about a year


Will there be an "official" toolkit and IDE? There are some independently created ones out there now.

By the way, MS says the story isn't true and they will NOT be opening up the source for VB6.

Return to “Community Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests