Help: Visual Basic Setup Problems
in [Visual Basic]
|
From: Michel Posseth [MCP] on 31 Jan 2010 14:21 Hello Mike , Did you ever considered a career as standup commedian ? As i had again a big laugh about your analogy , in my opinion you are in your way a true genius ! ;-) Michel Posseth [MCP] That guy that can code and is certified in VB and the imposter as you call it i believe :-) "Mike Williams" <Mike(a)WhiskyAndCoke.com> schreef in bericht news:OlRsBfkoKHA.1548(a)TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... > "Laurie" <laurie(a)I_hate_spam.com.au> wrote in message > news:eXq%23hvhoKHA.3664(a)TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... > >> Your [Mike D's] last paragraph should have been left off. >> My reading of the title this NG is that it is a VB NET >> newsgroup. > > The OP cross posted to two groups, one of which (the dotnet.languages.vb > one) is the correct group for the product he is using and the other of > which is not. The OP needs to know that he should not have posted to the > Classic VB group regardless of whether or not his post was also cross > posted to the correct group. > > To the OP: The comp.lang.basic.visual.misc group is the real Visual Basic > newsgroup and the last and final version of Visual Basic is VB6. The > product you are using, which is misleadingly called Visual Basic 2008 > Express, is NOT real Visual Basic. It is a variant of what is commonly > called VB.Net and your questions regarding it should NOT be either posted > or cross posted to the real Visual Basic group. > > Generally, apart from a few very simple exceptions, VB6 code does not work > in VB.Net and VB.Net code does not work in VB6, and neither of them will > compile or run in the IDE of the other. They are as different as chalk and > cheese. > > Unfortunately, in order to deliberately confuse the punters and to > dishonestly maximize profits, Micro$oft sprinkled their new and otherwise > completely different product with some Basic sounding constructs and gave > it a Basic sounding name and they pretended that it is the next version of > Visual Basic when in fact it is not. The name they have given to their new > product, the one you are using, is a deliberate lie. Micro$oft are lying > about it in much the same way that a food manufacturer would be lying if > he stuck "Cup a Soup" labels on packets of long grain rice, > nothwithstanding the fact that he might be the registered owner of the > name "Cup a Soup". A food manufacturer of course would be prosecuted in > the courts of law for such a deliberately dishonest act, but consumer law > in most countries is still decades behind the times and has not yet got > its act together in respect of software, although the EU is rapidly > working towards it (which is why Micro$oft hates us over here). > > Your erroneous posting is not your fault of course because you have been > misled by Micro$oft and in the circumstances it is not surprising that you > have been taken in by Micro$oft's subterfuge and have cross posted to the > wrong group. Micro$oft would never openly acknowledge their dishonesty of > course, but they have tacitly admitted to it by creating a new and > completely different newsgroup on their own public servers for their new > and completely different product. To summarise, one of the groups you have > posted to, as mentioned above, is for the real Visual Basic and you should > not post or cross post any of your VB.Net questions to that group. If you > have questions about the imposter then you should post them to the > imposter's own newsgroup at: > > microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.vb > > Mike > > >
From: kevinp on 31 Jan 2010 16:06 While we're on a rant that has nothing to do with the original question, let me complain about the 'NEW' Chevy Camaro... Even though it handles better than the 'Classic' Camaros of the '60s, '70s, '80s AND '90s.. ....gets much better gas mileage... ....stock V6 puts out more power than the stock V8 (of the standard version)... ....holds up much better in crashes and is ultimately safer to drive... ....and looks pretty good too... IT SHOULDN'T BE CALLED A CAMARO BECAUSE IT'S NOT WHAT I THINK A CAMARO IS!!! ....nothwithstanding the fact that GM might be the registered owner of the name "Camaro"... On Sun, 31 Jan 2010 07:33:57 -0000, "Mike Williams" <Mike(a)WhiskyAndCoke.com> wrote: >"Laurie" <laurie(a)I_hate_spam.com.au> wrote in message >news:eXq%23hvhoKHA.3664(a)TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... > >> Your [Mike D's] last paragraph should have been left off. >> My reading of the title this NG is that it is a VB NET >> newsgroup. > >The OP cross posted to two groups, one of which (the dotnet.languages.vb >one) is the correct group for the product he is using and the other of which >is not. The OP needs to know that he should not have posted to the Classic >VB group regardless of whether or not his post was also cross posted to the >correct group. > >To the OP: The comp.lang.basic.visual.misc group is the real Visual Basic >newsgroup and the last and final version of Visual Basic is VB6. The product >you are using, which is misleadingly called Visual Basic 2008 Express, is >NOT real Visual Basic. It is a variant of what is commonly called VB.Net and >your questions regarding it should NOT be either posted or cross posted to >the real Visual Basic group. > >Generally, apart from a few very simple exceptions, VB6 code does not work >in VB.Net and VB.Net code does not work in VB6, and neither of them will >compile or run in the IDE of the other. They are as different as chalk and >cheese. > >Unfortunately, in order to deliberately confuse the punters and to >dishonestly maximize profits, Micro$oft sprinkled their new and otherwise >completely different product with some Basic sounding constructs and gave it >a Basic sounding name and they pretended that it is the next version of >Visual Basic when in fact it is not. The name they have given to their new >product, the one you are using, is a deliberate lie. Micro$oft are lying >about it in much the same way that a food manufacturer would be lying if he >stuck "Cup a Soup" labels on packets of long grain rice, nothwithstanding >the fact that he might be the registered owner of the name "Cup a Soup". A >food manufacturer of course would be prosecuted in the courts of law for >such a deliberately dishonest act, but consumer law in most countries is >still decades behind the times and has not yet got its act together in >respect of software, although the EU is rapidly working towards it (which is >why Micro$oft hates us over here). > >Your erroneous posting is not your fault of course because you have been >misled by Micro$oft and in the circumstances it is not surprising that you >have been taken in by Micro$oft's subterfuge and have cross posted to the >wrong group. Micro$oft would never openly acknowledge their dishonesty of >course, but they have tacitly admitted to it by creating a new and >completely different newsgroup on their own public servers for their new and >completely different product. To summarise, one of the groups you have >posted to, as mentioned above, is for the real Visual Basic and you should >not post or cross post any of your VB.Net questions to that group. If you >have questions about the imposter then you should post them to the >imposter's own newsgroup at: > > microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.vb > >Mike > >
From: Mike Williams on 31 Jan 2010 17:34 "Michel Posseth [MCP]" <msdn(a)posseth.com> wrote in message news:4E849C16-77E4-4F66-BD1F-4A62CF34C157(a)microsoft.com... > Michel Posseth [MCP] > That guy that can code and is certified in VB > and the imposter as you call it i believe :-) That guy who can code? So you think you're the only one do you? Mike
From: Mike Williams on 31 Jan 2010 18:24 "kevinp" <kevinp(a)nospam.com> wrote in message news:1qrbm5lecm607ba0r9kd29k0dqs8aiin5k(a)4ax.com... > Let me complain about the 'NEW' Chevy Camaro.. > Even though it handles better than the 'Classic' Camaros > of the '60s,'70s, '80s AND '90s [lots of advertising stuff > snipped].. IT SHOULDN'T BE CALLED A CAMARO That's not the same thing at all. It is still a car and it can still drive on the same roads and carry the same passengers and it can carry out all the tasks that the old model could carry out in pretty much the same way. You can pick it up from the showroom and drive it immediately and the very first journey you do in it, no matter how long or complex it is, will take the same time as it did before, or even less. If you could drive the old one then you can immediately drive the new one, and you can drive it straight away at the same speed in terms of getting things done as you could previously. The new Camaro is basically the same product as the previous one, with some added bells and whistles, and you can immediately drive it and do the same things in it as you did before without the need to throw away your old driving licence and learn to drive all over again. Also, the people who make the new Camaro are not busy ripping up the roads or modifying them in such a way that the old Camaro will no longer work on them. The new Camaro is not a lie, unlike the supposedly new version of Visual Basic, which is. Personally I've got nothing against VB.Net, apart from that fact that it is based on a lie. It might be a good thing and it might be absolute rubbish and if Micro$oft had done the decent thing and had not dishonestly named it and marketed it in a deliberate attempt to pretend it was something it is not then I might have even given it a try myself, but I will certainly not do so after being lied to by Micro$oft. If I ever to decide to move from VB6 it will be to something other than VB.Net, and whatever it is it will certainly not be another Micro$oft product. Mike
From: Searcher7 on 31 Jan 2010 23:00
On Jan 31, 2:33 am, "Mike Williams" <M...(a)WhiskyAndCoke.com> wrote: > "Laurie" <laurie(a)I_hate_spam.com.au> wrote in message > > news:eXq%23hvhoKHA.3664(a)TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... > > > Your [Mike D's] last paragraph should have been left off. > > My reading of the title this NG is that it is a VB NET > > newsgroup. > > The OP cross posted to two groups, one of which (the dotnet.languages.vb > one) is the correct group for the product he is using and the other of which > is not. The OP needs to know that he should not have posted to the Classic > VB group regardless of whether or not his post was also cross posted to the > correct group. > > To the OP: The comp.lang.basic.visual.misc group is the real Visual Basic > newsgroup and the last and final version of Visual Basic is VB6. The product > you are using, which is misleadingly called Visual Basic 2008 Express, is > NOT real Visual Basic. It is a variant of what is commonly called VB.Net and > your questions regarding it should NOT be either posted or cross posted to > the real Visual Basic group. > > Generally, apart from a few very simple exceptions, VB6 code does not work > in VB.Net and VB.Net code does not work in VB6, and neither of them will > compile or run in the IDE of the other. They are as different as chalk and > cheese. > > Unfortunately, in order to deliberately confuse the punters and to > dishonestly maximize profits, Micro$oft sprinkled their new and otherwise > completely different product with some Basic sounding constructs and gave it > a Basic sounding name and they pretended that it is the next version of > Visual Basic when in fact it is not. The name they have given to their new > product, the one you are using, is a deliberate lie. Micro$oft are lying > about it in much the same way that a food manufacturer would be lying if he > stuck "Cup a Soup" labels on packets of long grain rice, nothwithstanding > the fact that he might be the registered owner of the name "Cup a Soup". A > food manufacturer of course would be prosecuted in the courts of law for > such a deliberately dishonest act, but consumer law in most countries is > still decades behind the times and has not yet got its act together in > respect of software, although the EU is rapidly working towards it (which is > why Micro$oft hates us over here). > > Your erroneous posting is not your fault of course because you have been > misled by Micro$oft and in the circumstances it is not surprising that you > have been taken in by Micro$oft's subterfuge and have cross posted to the > wrong group. Micro$oft would never openly acknowledge their dishonesty of > course, but they have tacitly admitted to it by creating a new and > completely different newsgroup on their own public servers for their new and > completely different product. To summarise, one of the groups you have > posted to, as mentioned above, is for the real Visual Basic and you should > not post or cross post any of your VB.Net questions to that group. If you > have questions about the imposter then you should post them to the > imposter's own newsgroup at: > > microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.vb > > Mike Ok. I didn't know any of this.(Not that there was any way to know going by just the newsgroup titles). I had run into a roadblock while studying assembly.(It was the book's fault, not mine). I decided to look for an easier language to learn, and one of the books I picked up and started reading is "Absolute Beginner's Guide to Programming" (Third edition). By QUE(Greg Perry). It is not specific about the "Visual Basic it discusses, so I assume it is for nothing later than VB6. So I'm now back to trying to figure out what to study first. Are there any good *free* VB languages(downloads) that I should start with? Thanks. Darren Harris Staten Island, New York. |