VB/WinAPI, Why are you still using VB?

Why are you still using VB?

Author	Message
Alex Kaufma #1 / 29	Why are you still using VB? Dear VB developpers, I mean no disrespect, I have been a VB developper myself for a year or so, but delphi is better than VB in every aspect. (1) Delphi applications are almost as fast as a C[++] apps, while VB is about 2.5 times SLOWER than C[++]. (2) Furthermore, Delphi provides all the controls you need to write a professionaly looking app without the headache of distribution of separate files and version conflicts. (3) With VB you have to distribute all the runtime libs that weight easy a full 1.5 meg, while Delphi apps are compact and self contained. (And if your app uses DAO, the runtime libs will weight 4+ megs) (4) Delphi is a true OOP language, which allows you to easily extend an object's fonctionnalities using inheritance, not avaliable under VB. (5) Now that Delphi provides the same IDE features such as code completion and some other unique fonctions, (code templates for instance) writing Pascal code is just as simple as VB. Take this into consideration next time you claim that VB is better than Delphi. Best regards, Alex Kaufman.
Thu, 05 Oct 2000 03:00:00 GMT

Gunne #2 / 29	Why are you still using VB? To you... All I really remember about the meaning of BASIC is B stands for Beginner...... most of us start out by using basic beause we don't have to "get our hands dirty" if people started straight out with C, C++, Delphi... and the such MANY programs will have errors and OS crashes becuse they are too tough to write Low level stuff... basic is easier to start out with...... sorry if you "KNOW TOO MUCH" after learning basic I went to C++ but I still like basic for it's simplicity....... -- Gunner Semper Fi Quote: >Dear VB developpers, > I mean no disrespect, I have been a VB developper myself for a year or so, >but Delphi is better than VB in every aspect. >(1) Delphi applications are almost as fast as a C[++] apps, while VB is >about 2.5 times SLOWER than C[++]. >(2) Furthermore, Delphi provides all the controls you need to write a >professionaly looking app without the headache of distribution of separate >files and version conflicts. >(3) With VB you have to distribute all the runtime libs that weight easy a >full 1.5 meg, while Delphi apps are compact and self contained. (And if your >app uses DAO, the runtime libs will weight 4+ megs) >(4) Delphi is a true OOP language, which allows you to easily extend an >object's fonctionnalities using inheritance, not avaliable under VB. >(5) Now that Delphi provides the same IDE features such as code completion >and some other unique fonctions, (code templates for instance) writing >Pascal code is just as simple as VB. >Take this into consideration next time you claim that VB is better than >Delphi. > Best regards, > Alex Kaufman.
Thu, 05 Oct 2000 03:00:00 GMT

Tony Selk #3 / 29	Why are you still using VB? I don't normally get involved in what I consider childish and petty arguments like this (My daddy can beat up your daddy!), but I do whish that people who do get involved would use facts, instead of rumors. Quote: >(1) Delphi applications are almost as fast as a C[++] apps, while VB is >about 2.5 times SLOWER than C[++]. If you look at the file that is used as the native code compiler for VC's latest version you will see that it is the exact same file that VB's latest version uses as well. Also, if you read your benchmarks correctly, you will find that in all of the integer based functions, VB was within a couple microseconds of the equivilent VC code. Sometimes it was faster, sometimes slower. In string based functions, or disk I/O functions, it is true that VB executes faster when compiled to pseudocode rather than native code, but the number of these types of functions in an application is normally quite low compared to integer functions. Quote: >(2) Furthermore, Delphi provides all the controls you need to write a >professionaly looking app without the headache of distribution of separate >files and version conflicts. I don't find the application setup wizard to be a 'headache' (especially some of the really nice third-party ones) and if you are having problems with version control of controls you are writing, then take a look at how you are writing them. If you are following the COM modle properly, this shouldn't be an issue. If you are refering to Microsoft objects, then I am confused. In five years the only problems I have ever had were related to people who installed beta Microsoft software (VB CCE and lately Visual InterDev). Quote: >(3) With VB you have to distribute all the runtime libs that weight easy a >full 1.5 meg, while Delphi apps are compact and self contained. (And if your >app uses DAO, the runtime libs will weight 4+ megs) Lots of people complain about this, but frankly I have never understood why. Floppy disks are all but free, and it isn't like a 5 meg setup set takes 5 meg of hard drive space. For the most part you are just providing for the worst case scinerio. Most people will have a significant number of these files already, in which case they won't even be transfered. If you are distributing to a group of people with known machine configurations (like developers), you can easily remove all those extra files. Quote: >(4) Delphi is a true OOP language, which allows you to easily extend an >object's fonctionnalities using inheritance, not avaliable under VB. Granted. Delphi allows inheritance and VB does really does not. The fact is most applications do not require such functionality. In five years I have never seen a need to sub-class a control. Opportunities, yes, but if I had done so it would have been for my own education, not becuase of some program requirement. Besides, Microsoft had to keep something back to justify the continued use of VC. Quote: >(5) Now that Delphi provides the same IDE features such as code completion >and some other unique fonctions, (code templates for instance) writing >Pascal code is just as simple as VB. One of Delphi's problems over the years has been their awful time to market. Great, so they are catching up to VB. It's been what? A year? And VB 6 is slated for the fourth quarter this year. If you look back at computer software and operating systems, the companies that have fallen by the wayside have always been the ones that allowed development (and thereby time to market) to slip more and more, eventually dying off altogether. Quote: >Take this into consideration next time you claim that VB is better than >Delphi. I don't claim that VB is better or worse than Delphi. You like Delphi, I like VB. We can both turn out fast, full featured programs and have them in front of users in a reletivly short amount of time. Why do some programmers feel this need to compare programming languages in this tone like 12 year old boys measuring their{filter}s to see who's cooler? How about if we use this newsgroup for what it was intended? -- Tony Selke (please remove the _No-Junk-Mail_ prior to responding) /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
Thu, 05 Oct 2000 03:00:00 GMT

Benjamin H. Anderse #4 / 29	Why are you still using VB? I do not know where you get your numbers.... sure for things like games you are right. In fact I use both Delphi and VB but vb is much better as far as Rapid development and is quite simply easier to use. For one, Borland continues to be completely ignorant about putting documentation out there. But, sure if you are talking filling an array or 5 million elements you may be right (but again with certain optimizations you may not be). But for the run of the mill application there is NO visible difference and for the user that is all that matters. As far as the runtimes I completely agree, but that is a trade off. Again, depending on what you are distributing it may not matter. With 16 GB hds avail for under $350, 4 megs is not much of a dent for db access. You should not make such overstated comments. Ben Quote: >Dear VB developpers, > I mean no disrespect, I have been a VB developper myself for a year or so, >but Delphi is better than VB in every aspect. >(1) Delphi applications are almost as fast as a C[++] apps, while VB is >about 2.5 times SLOWER than C[++]. >(2) Furthermore, Delphi provides all the controls you need to write a >professionaly looking app without the headache of distribution of separate >files and version conflicts. >(3) With VB you have to distribute all the runtime libs that weight easy a >full 1.5 meg, while Delphi apps are compact and self contained. (And if your >app uses DAO, the runtime libs will weight 4+ megs) >(4) Delphi is a true OOP language, which allows you to easily extend an >object's fonctionnalities using inheritance, not avaliable under VB. >(5) Now that Delphi provides the same IDE features such as code completion >and some other unique fonctions, (code templates for instance) writing >Pascal code is just as simple as VB. >Take this into consideration next time you claim that VB is better than >Delphi. > Best regards, > Alex Kaufman.
Thu, 05 Oct 2000 03:00:00 GMT

Alex Kaufma #5 / 29	Why are you still using VB? Don't get this message wrong. I didn't mean this to become a petty argument. What I wanted was to create a serious debate that will state out the best programming language out of the two. Thank you all for your replies. Kaufman Alex.
Thu, 05 Oct 2000 03:00:00 GMT

Alex Kaufma #6 / 29	Why are you still using VB? I wasn't overstating about the distribution size. When you need a CD-ROM to distribute your "Hello world", you don't call THAT an overstatement. Just see how many floppies you'll need to distribute an empty project that uses DAO. (And don't get me all wrong, I do like VB. I just don't think it's as good as Delphi) Regards, Kaufman Alex.
Thu, 05 Oct 2000 03:00:00 GMT

Jerome Ga #7 / 29	Why are you still using VB? Folks, I've been programming in Basic, Pascal, C, C++, fortran, Lisp, Python, Perl... (I've not tried Delphi yet !), I think VB is good tool for simple applications that require a Windoze look-n-feel. The problem of VB is that it looks like good ol' Basic too much, it's lacking advanced data structures, string manipulation features... found in languages like python and Perl. That's my 0.02 cent worth ! Cheers /jerome
Fri, 06 Oct 2000 03:00:00 GMT

Tony Selk #8 / 29	Why are you still using VB? Quote: > I don't understand how VB is written or why 'compiled' VB runs so much slower >than C but isn't it true that VB does line by line error checking while it's >running, or something like that? And is it not therefore true that VB runs >considerably slower than C? I feel that if VB were to run as quickly as C VB >would gain a new respect and much wider audience (of programmers) because apps >requiring speed could then be written in VB. I have had to call functions in >Fortran DLL's I wrote more than once to get computation speed. Are you claiming >that the next version of VB will execute as quickly as compiled C? I'm still in >the process of learning about this stuff, and I would be quite happy if VB ran >faster. First, native code (compiled) VB v/s VC++. The statements I made about speed comparisons in my previous post came from two articles I read on the topic. One was in VBPJ and the other was in InfoWorld. Both were published shortly after VB 5's release. Neither (that I recall) included Delphi in the benchmark comparison. I'm not certain if your 'next version' reference meant VB 5 or 6, but everything I have read and/or spoken of has been VB 5. Second, (someone feel free to correct me if I slip up here) VB only does line-by-line error checking when it is compiled to p-code (pseudocode). This was the only way that you could compile VB code in versions previous to 5.0, and it is the (default) way that VB compiles the code when run inside of the IDE. It is a slower way of compiling your code, because you end up with what is called an interpreted language. Meaning that any computer that must run your EXE has to read a line of code, interpret it into a valid processor instruction, and then submit it to the processor. Compiled code skips this extra step, and the line of code that is read from your EXE is already a valid processor instruction, so it is sent immediatly. -- Tony Selke (please remove the _No-Junk-Mail_ prior to responding) /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
Fri, 06 Oct 2000 03:00:00 GMT

#9 / 29	Why are you still using VB?
Fri, 19 Jun 1992 00:00:00 GMT

Damit Senanayak #10 / 29	Why are you still using VB? Quote: >Dear VB developpers, > I mean no disrespect, I have been a VB developper myself for a year or so, >but Delphi is better than VB in every aspect. [various points, which I will not answer] Quote: >Take this into consideration next time you claim that VB is better than >Delphi. FWIW, NONE of the VB(3-5) apps that I have developed have ever crashed, even when compiled to native code. My C++/Pascal apps, OTOH usually crash on API calls...yet my VB programs use the very same API calls and don't crash. Does that say something about the relative stability of VB code compared to C++/Pascal?? FYI, a comparison chart: Speed: ASM>C++>Pascal>VB native-code>VB p-code>>Java Stability: VB native-code>VB p-code>Pascal>=C++>Java(?)>>ASM Sure, assembly,C++ & Pascal are fast, but also quite unstable (for e.g. a rogue C++/Pascal program can call INT13 (even under Win95) and kill your PC), and they have pointer problems, too. Since VB doesn't support interrupts (not directly, anyway) & doesn't use pointers, it has none of these problems. In the end, it boils down to the program design and your style of coding (including short-cuts, optimizations etc.) -- My e-mail address may have 2 bugs in it; deBUG to reply. Damit Senanayake Damit's Home; http://web.singnet.com.sg/~apesena/ ICQ UIN: 6930718 "It's one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind." -- Neil Armstrong
Fri, 06 Oct 2000 03:00:00 GMT

erussel #11 / 29	Why are you still using VB? Visual Basic is a good language for taking generalized components like OLE controls (written using low level tools such as C++) and weaving them together into a more specific end user application with only a few hundred or thousand lines of simple straightforward code that is easy to maintain. Whether or not VB is an ideal language for predicting weather patterns or processing image files is irrevelent, because a C++ wizzard in a lab somewhere can create an OLE component to do the tricky or heavy stuff, and VB can provide the customization, front end, report generation etc. As more and more of our society becomes centered around computer applications, we need an ever increasing pool of programmers to call upon. Often times an employee has to be a pseudo programmer. They may be an accountant or a network administrator 90% of the time, but they also have to maintain the company's in house software. Having everyone learn a language that is too complex for their own personal needs would only slow the process. Visual Basic is simply becomming the common language being spoken, and it makes since, at least from my own personal perspective, to speak it.
Fri, 06 Oct 2000 03:00:00 GMT

#12 / 29	Why are you still using VB?
Fri, 19 Jun 1992 00:00:00 GMT

Russell Davi #13 / 29	Why are you still using VB? I just have one comment -- why does everyone despise the 1.5 meg runtime file so much? Sure it might be a large file to distribute, but I actually like it that way. Most people distributing VB programs over the net have separate downloads for a version that doesn't include the runtime. This means you only have to download the executable file itself (and any data it may need), which is generally really small, since most of the functions are in the runtime file. If static linking became available and people started linking all the runtime files in the program's executable, I know my hard drive would be a lot more full! Russell Davis
Fri, 06 Oct 2000 03:00:00 GMT

Ian Fir #14 / 29	Why are you still using VB? Quote: > Dear VB developpers, > I mean no disrespect, I have been a VB developper myself for a year or so, > but Delphi is better than VB in every aspect. I make a $150k a year with VB.. Why switch ? -- Regards, Ian Firth - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Diversions Software - Game Development - http://www.divsoft.com Home of Prairie Dog Hunt PRO '97 - DS Sporting Clays
Fri, 06 Oct 2000 03:00:00 GMT

Ian Fir #15 / 29	Why are you still using VB? Quote: > I wasn't overstating about the distribution size. When you need a CD-ROM to > distribute your "Hello world", you don't call THAT an overstatement. > Just see how many floppies you'll need to distribute an empty project that > uses DAO. Floppies ? I haven't used a floppy in 4 years... What planet still uses floppies for distribution ? -- Regards, Ian Firth - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Diversions Software - Game Development - http://www.divsoft.com Home of Prairie Dog Hunt PRO '97 - DS Sporting Clays
Fri, 06 Oct 2000 03:00:00 GMT

Page 1 of 2

[ 29 post ]

Go to page: [1] [2]