|
web
newsgroups
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Advice Required - Vb or Not VB (or even .NET)I've been developing in MSA97 since it first hit the streets and its been fantastic for what we needed. We have a number of Apps out there all in runtime and all doing sterling work! Time to move on though and we have been pulled from pillar to post (old English expression) looking at Java, .NET and a host of RAD's that build in those languages (Java, VB, C# etc). And just when I though we'd settled on a RAD with Java the licensing and deployment rules and costs are making the whole thing seem untenable! I'm back to square 1 and though this is a .NET group I'd value input from others who have been through this research before. It's Db development and I'd really like my code to be database agnostic - that is if one Client needs it to run on an Oracle Db and another on MSSQL then it needs to do that with minimal code changes. It needs to be secure and handle users and groups effectively with logging. It needs to be easy to deploy and update as there will be regular updates developed. Obviously fast development is desired - after MSAccess everything else seems slow in the development cycle! Feedback, advice and comments / recommendations will all be gratefully accepted. -- Kahuna ------------ "Kahuna" <n***@gonewest.com> wrote in message Take the advice you get carefully. If you ask in a dot net group then you'll news:eMDIKtVLIHA.3356@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... > I'm back to square 1 and though this is a .NET group I'd value input from > others who have been through this research before. get recommended dot net a lot, if you ask in a delphi group then you'll get recommended delphi a lot. :-) > It's Db development and I'd really like my code to be database agnostic - That is no issue and has more to do with your programming style then the > that is if one Client needs it to run on an Oracle Db and another on MSSQL > then it needs to do that with minimal code changes. language you use. > It needs to be secure and handle users and groups effectively with I don't think that is a problem.> logging. > It needs to be easy to deploy and update as there will be regular updates There are plenty of options for this, once dot net is installed it's just a > developed. matter of copying your files over. Certainly it's easier to maintain than an Access app. > Obviously fast development is desired - after MSAccess everything else This could be an issue.Certainly developing in dot net is going to be more > seems slow in the development cycle! labour intensive, quite possibly a significant amount more intensive. Michael "Michael C" <mike@nospam.com> wrote in message Yes - I realise that Michael, but I'm sure others have been through this news:eTF7DnXLIHA.5360@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... > Take the advice you get carefully. If you ask in a dot net group then > you'll get recommended dot net a lot, if you ask in a delphi group then > you'll get recommended delphi a lot. :-) wrangle in the past too - and their experience would be valuable to me I think! i.e. Why end up with dot net? > That is no issue and has more to do with your programming style then the Some RAD's make it a lot easier than others to do that.> language you use. > I don't think that is a problem. e.g. I realise I can roll-my-own Login and verification system but dont have a good handle on how or where to secure login data in VS (hold in embedded Db, Encrypted XML File etc?) > There are plenty of options for this, once dot net is installed it's just After the framework is installed is it just XCOPY for deployment? No > a matter of copying your files over. Certainly it's easier to maintain > than an Access app. challenges with DDL conflicts etc? > This could be an issue.Certainly developing in dot net is going to be more Having looked (glimpsed realy) at tools such as RadVolution for RAD form > labour intensive, quite possibly a significant amount more intensive. development and data linking - it seems like there may be som add-ons that can make development faster and more consistant from a GUI standpoint. Much of our functionality in MSA is hand developed too - where all reports are built on the fly for example and much of the data manipulation is through code rather than QBF etc. I guess one of the big challenges is the Crystal Reports use too. My past experience with this product has NOT be good - mainly the learning curve necessary to get anything approaching useable out of it! Thanks for the feedback Michael > Michael -- Kahuna ------------ "Kahuna" <n***@gonewest.com> wrote in message If you're app has a database then store it encrypted in the database. They news:OhliaqaLIHA.4752@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... > e.g. I realise I can roll-my-own Login and verification system but dont > have a good handle on how or where to secure login data in VS (hold in > embedded Db, Encrypted XML File etc?) are logging into the database really. I don't really see any other option because anything else is machine specific so could be got around by going to another machine. > After the framework is installed is it just XCOPY for deployment? Pretty much you can just copy files over to the users machine although you might need to install components that your app requires. > No challenges with DDL conflicts etc? Dll conflicts? That isn't impossible although fairly easy to avoid in dotnet. > I guess one of the big challenges is the Crystal Reports use too. My past Have a look at activereports, it's fairly similar to access reports.> experience with this product has NOT be good - mainly the learning curve > necessary to get anything approaching useable out of it! Michael "Kahuna" <n***@gonewest.com> wrote in message BTW, go with C# if you are moving to dotnet. You'll get over the syntax news:OhliaqaLIHA.4752@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... > Yes - I realise that Michael, but I'm sure others have been through this > wrangle in the past too - and their experience would be valuable to me I > think! i.e. Why end up with dot net? changes in about a day. Michael "Michael C" <mike@nospam.com> wrote in message Stick with VB unless you already have a C/C++ background. The syntax is a news:O8jz8v6LIHA.4880@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... > "Kahuna" <n***@gonewest.com> wrote in message > news:OhliaqaLIHA.4752@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... >> Yes - I realise that Michael, but I'm sure others have been through this >> wrangle in the past too - and their experience would be valuable to me I >> think! i.e. Why end up with dot net? > > BTW, go with C# if you are moving to dotnet. You'll get over the syntax > changes in about a day. > > Michael lot closer to what you're used to. Also, the C# syntax "hides" a lot of the object oriented features while VB explicitly declares them, which for someone new to true OO development, can be very important as well as useful for code maintenance. You will eventually need to learn both languages. The other major item is forget about the VB project converter. You'll be better off with simple copy/paste for the bulk of your code. That said, you will end up redesigning almost the entire app during the port. This is simply because MS Access has a far richer form model than dotNET or the Windows API. There are GUI events and features in Access 97 that simply don't exist in dotNET. The Access 97 developers didn't use the underlying Windows API - instead, they implemented their own, far richer, API for forms. In addition, dotNET uses the completely new (relative to Access97) ADO.NET for database access, which is completely different from the Jet engine interface built into Access. Good Luck, Mike Ober. "Michael D. Ober" <ober***@.alum.mit.edu.nospam> wrote in message It's much better to go with C#. The syntax difference is pretty minor and news:13kjsl29nmag631@corp.supernews.com... > Stick with VB unless you already have a C/C++ background. The syntax is a > lot closer to what you're used to. Also, the C# syntax "hides" a lot of > the object oriented features while VB explicitly declares them, which for > someone new to true OO development, can be very important as well as > useful for code maintenance. You will eventually need to learn both > languages. The other major item is forget about the VB project converter. > You'll be better off with simple copy/paste for the bulk of your code. can gotten past in literally 1 day. C# is more aimed at the professional programmer and it sounds like Kahuna is a full time programmer. dude, stay with VB, believe me it worth it, even on money side. i do
all sorts possible BASICs since 1992, and nothing gonna change me, i can do C#, actionScript, Java, but hey, VB is something remains... "Skitsanos" <skitsa***@gmail.com> wrote in message C has been around longer and pays more.news:a088d6e6-ada5-4c6a-a811-50284eda04e5@s36g2000prg.googlegroups.com... > dude, stay with VB, believe me it worth it, even on money side. i do > all sorts possible BASICs since 1992, and nothing gonna change me, i > can do C#, actionScript, Java, but hey, VB is something remains... On Nov 26, 2:18 am, "Michael C" <m...@nospam.com> wrote: Right, longer, indeed, but about pays more, i'm really not sure. The> > C has been around longer and pays more. way i see it now is exactly in a way why PHP guy is cheaper that, let's say ASP.NET or AS3 guy, - they are just all over, very easy too find... "Skitsanos" <skitsa***@gmail.com> wrote in message While I disagree, there isn't much point arguing how much C++ programmers news:b732a05c-a485-44d1-80a1-944c4d372418@e4g2000hsg.googlegroups.com... > Right, longer, indeed, but about pays more, i'm really not sure. The > way i see it now is exactly in a way why PHP guy is cheaper that, > let's say ASP.NET or AS3 guy, - they are just all over, very easy too > find... get because it's going to make little difference with C#/VBnet. In a professional role there isn't really any reason to use VB over C# and there are several reasons for that. - C# is more aimed at the profession - C# allows pointers which can come in handy - C syntax requires less typing Michael "Michael C" <mike@nospam.com> wrote in news:O0jhr1GMIHA.5160 @TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl:> - C# is more aimed at the profession I don't think Microsoft has made that statement.> - C# allows pointers which can come in handy True, but very limited use in a managed language> - C syntax requires less typing Debatable ... case sensitivity and curly brackets are not condusive to human readability, so it can be argued VB.NET code is cheaper to maintain ;-) "Spam Catcher" <spamhoneypot@rogers.com> wrote in message Of course not but they most definately absolutely have done exact that. eg news:Xns99F4B1821CB8Eusenethoneypotrogers@127.0.0.1... >> - C# is more aimed at the profession > > I don't think Microsoft has made that statement. C# doesn't have an option strict statement. >> - C# allows pointers which can come in handy That is true although if you do need it one day you are stuck. Something as > > True, but very limited use in a managed language simple as modifying a bitmap requires pointers (well it can be done in VB but at much slower rate as data has to be copied to an array). >> - C syntax requires less typing Not really. There are less keystrokes required in C#.> > Debatable ... "dim x as int" vs "int x;" "implements" vs ":" "function" vs "" "end if", "next", "Wend", "End Function", "End Sub" etc vs "}" > case sensitivity and curly brackets are not condusive to I find it more readable myself.> human readability, > so it can be argued VB.NET code is cheaper to maintain Considering most sample code you download is C# and most of the community is > ;-) using C# I would think C# code would be cheaper to maintain. :-) Michael On Nov 26, 3:27 pm, Spam Catcher <spamhoney...@rogers.com> wrote:
> "Michael C" <m...@nospam.com> wrote in news:O0jhr1GMIHA.5160 I agree with both the above for the most part, but I have used> @TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl: > > > - C# is more aimed at the profession > > I don't think Microsoft has made that statement. > > > - C# allows pointers which can come in handy > > True, but very limited use in a managed language > pointers in C# before. Of course, that was when I was working on a port of the venerable ncurses lib to mono :) > > - C syntax requires less typing Case sensivity rocks. In fact, the non-case sensitive nature of VB is> > Debatable ... case sensitivity and curly brackets are not condusive to > human readability, so it can be argued VB.NET code is cheaper to maintain > ;-) primarily why I don't use it. I have to use stupid prefixes, like _, to differentiate member variables from properties, etc. Drives me nuts. Besides, if you ask me since VS 2005, I find the C# editor MORE productive then the VB.NET editor. There's nothing more obnoxious then that stupid background compile VB.NET is always doing. Sure, it gives you "instant" feed back for some kinds of syntax errors - but, it sure can bring the system to a halt on a large project. -- Tom Shelton "Skitsanos" <skitsa***@gmail.com> wrote in message Hey Kahuna, remember what I said in my first reply in this thread? Ask in a news:a088d6e6-ada5-4c6a-a811-50284eda04e5@s36g2000prg.googlegroups.com... > dude, stay with VB, believe me it worth it, even on money side. i do > all sorts possible BASICs since 1992, and nothing gonna change me, i > can do C#, actionScript, Java, but hey, VB is something remains... VB group and you'll get recommended VB. Well that is certainly turning out to be true. If you go over to the C# group you'll see there are 3 times as many posts and most samples on the internet for dot net are in C# so I think the majority of developers would recommend c#. "Michael C" <mike@nospam.com> wrote in Considering both VB and C# support almost the same feature set, it's really news:#EBcNs7LIHA.2140@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl: > It's much better to go with C#. The syntax difference is pretty minor > and can gotten past in literally 1 day. C# is more aimed at the > professional programmer and it sounds like Kahuna is a full time > programmer. a moot point. "Spam Catcher" <spamhoneypot@rogers.com> wrote in message Almost being the operative word :-)news:Xns99F46CF82858Fusenethoneypotrogers@127.0.0.1... > "Michael C" <mike@nospam.com> wrote in > news:#EBcNs7LIHA.2140@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl: > >> It's much better to go with C#. The syntax difference is pretty minor >> and can gotten past in literally 1 day. C# is more aimed at the >> professional programmer and it sounds like Kahuna is a full time >> programmer. > > Considering both VB and C# support almost the same feature set, it's > really > a moot point. "Michael C" <mike@nospam.com> wrote in news:eno451GMIHA.4808 @TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl:>> Considering both VB and C# support almost the same feature set, it's Pointers is the only major difference I see between the two languages ... >> really >> a moot point. > > Almost being the operative word :-) and there are very limited situations where you'll want to use pointers in a managed langauge. "Spam Catcher" <spamhoneypot@rogers.com> wrote in message There's a lot more differences than that :-)news:Xns99F4B13EED5EEusenethoneypotrogers@127.0.0.1... >> Almost being the operative word :-) > > Pointers is the only major difference I see between the two languages ... > and there are very limited situations where you'll want to use pointers in Still, why restrict yourself?> a managed langauge. "Michael C" <mike@nospam.com> wrote in message One other thing, either set your VB defaults to Option Strict On/Option news:O8jz8v6LIHA.4880@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... > "Kahuna" <n***@gonewest.com> wrote in message > news:OhliaqaLIHA.4752@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... >> Yes - I realise that Michael, but I'm sure others have been through this >> wrangle in the past too - and their experience would be valuable to me I >> think! i.e. Why end up with dot net? > > BTW, go with C# if you are moving to dotnet. You'll get over the syntax > changes in about a day. > > Michael Explicit On/Option Text On or put these three lines at the top of every source file. The Option Text On should actually match your Option Database statement in Access if you have one. Mike Ober. "Kahuna" <n***@gonewest.com> wrote in Crystal is bad - but not horrible (well...)news:OhliaqaLIHA.4752@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl: > I guess one of the big challenges is the Crystal Reports use too. My > past experience with this product has NOT be good - mainly the > learning curve necessary to get anything approaching useable out of > it! But thankfully there are other reporting solutions: SQL Reporting Services, ActiveReports, etc. -- Kayma
How long is the live cycle of your applications? Less then one year? Then stay with ms Access. Has it to be robust for multi user purpose as well, then your first logical step will be VB.Net Just my idea. Cor "Cor Ligthert[MVP]" <notmyfirstn***@planet.nl> wrote in message Cor - thanks for that feedback.news:D7241BFA-ED85-4862-A989-3878A80D5605@microsoft.com... > Kayma > > How long is the live cycle of your applications? Less then one year? Then > stay with ms Access. Has it to be robust for multi user purpose as well, > then your first logical step will be VB.Net > > Just my idea. > > Cor The app has a 5 + year life cycle and its currently multi-user (between 3 and 25 users per deployment). We're still in the A97 stone age I'm afraid - and have been reluctant to upgrade to later versions because it seems sensible to switch to a more 'Developer' oriented environment (rather then the Access Desktop environment) if we're going to need to make a change - upgrade - anyway! -- Kahuna ------------
Show quote
Hide quote
On Nov 22, 5:58 pm, "Kahuna" <n***@gonewest.com> wrote: you could go to Access 200? and sql server pretty easily and improve> Hi Folks > > I've been developing in MSA97 since it first hit the streets and its been > fantastic for what we needed. We have a number of Apps out there all in > runtime and all doing sterling work! > > Time to move on though and we have been pulled from pillar to post (old > English expression) looking at Java, .NET and a host of RAD's that build in > those languages (Java, VB, C# etc). And just when I though we'd settled on a > RAD with Java the licensing and deployment rules and costs are making the > whole thing seem untenable! > > I'm back to square 1 and though this is a .NET group I'd value input from > others who have been through this research before. > > It's Db development and I'd really like my code to be database agnostic - > that is if one Client needs it to run on an Oracle Db and another on MSSQL > then it needs to do that with minimal code changes. > > It needs to be secure and handle users and groups effectively with logging. > > It needs to be easy to deploy and update as there will be regular updates > developed. > > Obviously fast development is desired - after MSAccess everything else seems > slow in the development cycle! > > Feedback, advice and comments / recommendations will all be gratefully > accepted. > > -- > Kahuna > ------------ efficiency. i still do Access, VB, VB.NET, C#, etc. if you're gonna redo the whole thing then get yourself up-to-date. 
Other interesting topics
Multithreading dilemma
How do you use GetProperty.SetValue with the index parameter? EventHandler for late-bound COM object How to check a string to see that it is a valid file name name parser Weird bug How to change the name of multiple textboxes CD Burning with VB.NET Opening Folder Browse Dialog On Client Side Silly syntactic question |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
