Article View: comp.lang.basic.visual.misc
Article #102Re: "SHOULD I DUMP VISUAL BASIC?"
From: Rune Moberg
Date: Sun, 11 Feb 1996 13:51
Date: Sun, 11 Feb 1996 13:51
49 lines
3004 bytes
3004 bytes
In article <4fef2l$4sck@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net>, stevez1@ibm.net (Steven R. Zuch) wrote: >>The sizemaniac aka VB 4.0 doesn't fit into that strategy. > >My point was that MS can, and IMHO will, incorporate more >OLE2 and OCXs into their next operating system, and therefore, >the need to distribute so much run time stuff with VB 4 will >not be required. VB may even become bundled with the >next OS, just like QBasic became bundled with DOS. You're talking 3-10 years from now... Win95 didn't come with any OCXs and the same is true for NT 3.51. I doubt we'll see any in NT 4.0 either... So, when you distribute your app two years from now, you'll most likely include those OCXs anyway, because the oldtimers who run NT 3.51 (because they never adapted to the Win95 UI) still haven't caught on... Installing a typical VB app (or any app with alot of DLLs and stuff) could soon become a nightmare. What does your installation program do when faced with a network? VB4 Enterprise simply ignores it, and stated that it had to be installed separatly on each workstation. So much for the ease of distributing OCXs? The only good solution I found (while being a network admin) was to install everything in one directory on the server. Nothing in SYSTEM or other places. Share the directory and away you go... This does indeed affect the users perception of the application's size! >My point was that if a third party has a nice software program, >MS may be able to incorporate the best of such into the >operating system. Development languages may fall into >this area. MS has been incorporating disk defragmenters, >backup software, compression, desktop file managers, >fax software, etc ... into Windows, regardless how the >developers felt. No. They licensed disk defragmenter from Symantec and the backup software from Central Point (or Arcada?). These are stripped down versions of the full package, so the customer is encouraged to buy the whole package... In any case, not one of the applications you mentioned was made with VB, nor did they use any OCXs. -- =\ *=- R.Moberg, CD-Player Pro info @ http://www.sn.no/~mobergru/ =/
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<KZPHx0JfFizd089yn@oslonett.no>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sn.no!not-for-mailReferences:
<4e9g08$3dp@maureen.teleport.com> <4e9oji$me5@news-2.csn.net> <4ebko9$8tn@hasle.sn.no> <4egdqm$app@shore.shore.net> <4eiogb$cas@hasle.sn.no> <310CFB3E.114B@mail.inett.no> <4etkm5$n3p@newshost.cyberramp.net> <4f63bc$97a@news.service.uci.edu> <4f92nd$1e3i@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net> <PpeGx0JfFqfF089yn@oslonett.no> <4fef2l$4sck@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sn.no!not-for-mail From: mobergru@oslonett.no (Rune Moberg) Newsgroups: comp.lang.basic.visual.misc,comp.lang.pascal.delphi.misc,comp.lang.c++ Subject: Re: "SHOULD I DUMP VISUAL BASIC?" Date: 11 Feb 1996 14:51:47 +0100 Organization: CD-Player Pro author! Message-ID: <KZPHx0JfFizd089yn@oslonett.no> References: <4e9g08$3dp@maureen.teleport.com> <4e9oji$me5@news-2.csn.net> <4ebko9$8tn@hasle.sn.no> <4egdqm$app@shore.shore.net> <4eiogb$cas@hasle.sn.no> <310CFB3E.114B@mail.inett.no> <4etkm5$n3p@newshost.cyberramp.net> <4f63bc$97a@news.service.uci.edu> <4f92nd$1e3i@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net> <PpeGx0JfFqfF089yn@oslonett.no> <4fef2l$4sck@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: hasle.sn.no Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit