From: not.my.real@email.address   
      
   On Wed, 10 Jun 2009 08:30:26 GMT, Dee Earley wrote:   
      
   > On 10/06/2009 06:48, Moiv wrote:   
   >> Is Visual Basic 6 still widely in use or is it dead in the water?   
   >>   
   >> I have downloaded Visual Basic 2008 Express. Applications built with   
   >> this require the latest .net framework to be installed. I would much   
   >> prefer to build lightweight&  fast applications that do not require   
   >> users to download the latest .net framework. The .net applications also   
   >> seem to run a lot slower due to the framework overhead. I assume VB6   
   >> does not have this .net requirement?   
   >   
   > VB6 is still very widely in use.   
   > If you are learning, don't even bother with vb6.   
   > There is nothing wrong with .NET and is very prevalent.   
      
   As much as I would like it to be otherwise, I *sort of* agree with this. MS   
   might not support the VB runtime files beyond Windows 7, whereas .Net will   
   *probably* be supported for much longer -- but VB.Net is not really BASIC.   
      
   If I was going to recommend a BASIC to start with, I'd have to say something   
   besides VB entirely. FreeBASIC is pretty good, although still technically a   
   work in progress. PowerBASIC is my preferred flavor, but it's not free (in   
   any sense of the word) and GUI programming is not *nearly* as easy as VB.   
   REALbasic has a powerful GUI designer, but the language takes some getting   
   used to (although it has the advantage of being able to write a single   
   program that works under MacOS, x86 Linux, and Windows, without changes) and   
   it's... expensive.   
      
   --   
   How do you know? Are you a doctor of ghostology?   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)