Don’t Call VB.NET by That Name Call it FRED.NET

by Davina V
After reading Bernard’s “Visual Basic is not dead, its undead!”, I wanted to compare the results of Microsoft’s hard work to its original product. Unfortunately for me, I have never used Visual Basic (VB) or Visual Basic.Net (VB.NET) so I had no comparison so I had to go and try to get an expert opinion. In this article, experts compare VB and VB.NET and say that they are so different from each other that in their perspective “the new product might as well be called FRED.NET” (Otey, 2001). While VB.NET does provide new features such as true object-oriented inheritance, overloading, free threading, strict type checking, a new shared development environment, several changes are harder to get used to like the zero-based arrays. and Microsoft  messed up by recalling some of the VB.NET changes to make it more compatible with VB 6.0, it does little to help any transfer of code and hinders the development of VB.NET language’s cross-language compatibility, the main purpose of that framework.

VB.NET’s features are so different that they change the nature of VB. The syntax and basic languages changes will make it so that all of the existing VB applications to VB.NET will have to be rewritten, and the “migration tool” that Microsoft provides generates a to-do list of the code it was not able to migrate… which is most likely the most important parts of the program. And at the time VB.NET makes the language more complicated neglecting to imput two of VB’s strongest points: 1 ease of use and 2 low initial learning curve.

Visual sounds interesting enough to learn from and hopefully the one we are learning from has that low initial learning curve also.

Otey, M. (2001, June 20). Vb 6.0 vs. Retrieved from