IS BASIC programming still in vogue?
-
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@jaredbusch said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@scottalanmiller said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@thwr said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
I am currently learning VB6 from a 1998 textbook...
You could talk to a tree for the same effect
Not a good idea to start with VB when you want to learn programmingNot starting to learning programming, just need to also work with our legacy code
That's the problem with VB, it's all for ancient "we can't update it" code. VB was okay through around 1999, but never in the .NET era. So any legacy code made with it is pretty much guaranteed to have originated from a "developer" that was just mucking about and couldn't adapt to a more modern language and was carrying over bad VB habits from the 90s; and then a company that never updated code for close to twenty years now.
2 years left on the roadmap to have migrated all of our legacy code. It's a lot of work when you have a whole LoB application originally created in VB6.
The last one of these, I worked on went live in 2011. It was a horrid VB6 + Access database backend.
Thankfully it stopped using Access 7 years ago.
What is it using now?
-
@scottalanmiller said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@scottalanmiller said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@scottalanmiller said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@thwr said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
I am currently learning VB6 from a 1998 textbook...
You could talk to a tree for the same effect
Not a good idea to start with VB when you want to learn programmingNot starting to learning programming, just need to also work with our legacy code
That's the problem with VB, it's all for ancient "we can't update it" code. VB was okay through around 1999, but never in the .NET era. So any legacy code made with it is pretty much guaranteed to have originated from a "developer" that was just mucking about and couldn't adapt to a more modern language and was carrying over bad VB habits from the 90s; and then a company that never updated code for close to twenty years now.
2 years left on the roadmap to have migrated all of our legacy code. It's a lot of work when you have a whole LoB application originally created in VB6.
Wiat, you are REALLY doing VB6 with a book from 1998? I thought that you were kidding about that, lol. I figured you just were working on late VB.NET code and being silly with the VB6 thing. Damn.
No joke, our main executable is still VB6, and quite a few of our libraries. We have a couple libraries in VB.NET, but C# is what we use for anything new.
That's crazy. What a pain that must be to support. We were lucky, we did our big app in VB6 in the 90s, but were almost all to C# by 2002.
It is a pain, most of our problems come from the VB6 code. Also means that Devs sometimes need support since updated .Net libraries will sometimes break the integrations on their system.
-
@scottalanmiller said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@jaredbusch said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@scottalanmiller said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@thwr said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
I am currently learning VB6 from a 1998 textbook...
You could talk to a tree for the same effect
Not a good idea to start with VB when you want to learn programmingNot starting to learning programming, just need to also work with our legacy code
That's the problem with VB, it's all for ancient "we can't update it" code. VB was okay through around 1999, but never in the .NET era. So any legacy code made with it is pretty much guaranteed to have originated from a "developer" that was just mucking about and couldn't adapt to a more modern language and was carrying over bad VB habits from the 90s; and then a company that never updated code for close to twenty years now.
2 years left on the roadmap to have migrated all of our legacy code. It's a lot of work when you have a whole LoB application originally created in VB6.
The last one of these, I worked on went live in 2011. It was a horrid VB6 + Access database backend.
Thankfully it stopped using Access 7 years ago.
What is it using now?
MS SQL
I had assumed they didn't consider any other options, but I found some documentation the other day that showed they did consider other options.
It can be a nasty surprise for our smaller clients when they hit the 10GB limit for SQL express.
-
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@scottalanmiller said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@jaredbusch said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@scottalanmiller said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@thwr said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
I am currently learning VB6 from a 1998 textbook...
You could talk to a tree for the same effect
Not a good idea to start with VB when you want to learn programmingNot starting to learning programming, just need to also work with our legacy code
That's the problem with VB, it's all for ancient "we can't update it" code. VB was okay through around 1999, but never in the .NET era. So any legacy code made with it is pretty much guaranteed to have originated from a "developer" that was just mucking about and couldn't adapt to a more modern language and was carrying over bad VB habits from the 90s; and then a company that never updated code for close to twenty years now.
2 years left on the roadmap to have migrated all of our legacy code. It's a lot of work when you have a whole LoB application originally created in VB6.
The last one of these, I worked on went live in 2011. It was a horrid VB6 + Access database backend.
Thankfully it stopped using Access 7 years ago.
What is it using now?
MS SQL
I had assumed they didn't consider any other options, but I found some documentation the other day that showed they did consider other options.
It can be a nasty surprise for our smaller clients when they hit the 10GB limit for SQL express.
They considered them and STILL took that one? What did they consider and why did they choose it?
-
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@scottalanmiller said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@jaredbusch said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@scottalanmiller said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@thwr said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
I am currently learning VB6 from a 1998 textbook...
You could talk to a tree for the same effect
Not a good idea to start with VB when you want to learn programmingNot starting to learning programming, just need to also work with our legacy code
That's the problem with VB, it's all for ancient "we can't update it" code. VB was okay through around 1999, but never in the .NET era. So any legacy code made with it is pretty much guaranteed to have originated from a "developer" that was just mucking about and couldn't adapt to a more modern language and was carrying over bad VB habits from the 90s; and then a company that never updated code for close to twenty years now.
2 years left on the roadmap to have migrated all of our legacy code. It's a lot of work when you have a whole LoB application originally created in VB6.
The last one of these, I worked on went live in 2011. It was a horrid VB6 + Access database backend.
Thankfully it stopped using Access 7 years ago.
What is it using now?
MS SQL
I had assumed they didn't consider any other options, but I found some documentation the other day that showed they did consider other options.
It can be a nasty surprise for our smaller clients when they hit the 10GB limit for SQL express.
Wow, WTF is your product that you are hitting 10GB database sizes?
I mean it is easy to hit for some things. But anyone trying to stick that kind or stuff in a DB will not care about the cost of licensing SQL most of the time.
Not to say it was the best choice, just saying.
-
@scottalanmiller said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@matteo-nunziati said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@scottalanmiller said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@matteo-nunziati said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
VS Code is basically for web languages. if you want serious compiled languages development on MS you need Visual Studio.
Not at all. VS Code isn't for web at all. It's not focused on web tech, languages, or anything else. Most modern languages use web as a main output, but VS Code has nothing making it lean towards web any more than normal VS does.
What I mean is that even if MS "sells" VSC for any language it is quite a PITA to develop stuff in C++/C/C# in it wrt VS.
I prefer Atom or VSC when developing in python, but when I've to code c++ I move to other stuff.
On MS this stuff is VS.What's wrong with C# on VSC? I don't do much any more, but I prefer VSC for that over legacy VS still.
I like VSC more too, but debugging is way more powerful on VS (watch windows, remote debugger and similar) and when you go c++ the difference is more and more relevant.
Interpreted languages on VSC are probably even better tahn on visual studio.
Also consider that a bit more of complexity (dependency build, libs and so on) will let you do a lot of "handmade wiring" on VSC while VS has dependency build order built in.
I would surely use VSC for Python because most of the dependencies are a pip install away and I tend to build smaller projects with it. Surely VS is the place for bigger projects or lower level languages.
Also: try debug embedded devices with VSC... GOSH!
-
@scottalanmiller said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@scottalanmiller said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@jaredbusch said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@scottalanmiller said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@thwr said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
I am currently learning VB6 from a 1998 textbook...
You could talk to a tree for the same effect
Not a good idea to start with VB when you want to learn programmingNot starting to learning programming, just need to also work with our legacy code
That's the problem with VB, it's all for ancient "we can't update it" code. VB was okay through around 1999, but never in the .NET era. So any legacy code made with it is pretty much guaranteed to have originated from a "developer" that was just mucking about and couldn't adapt to a more modern language and was carrying over bad VB habits from the 90s; and then a company that never updated code for close to twenty years now.
2 years left on the roadmap to have migrated all of our legacy code. It's a lot of work when you have a whole LoB application originally created in VB6.
The last one of these, I worked on went live in 2011. It was a horrid VB6 + Access database backend.
Thankfully it stopped using Access 7 years ago.
What is it using now?
MS SQL
I had assumed they didn't consider any other options, but I found some documentation the other day that showed they did consider other options.
It can be a nasty surprise for our smaller clients when they hit the 10GB limit for SQL express.
They considered them and STILL took that one? What did they consider and why did they choose it?
I don't know what all options they were looking at, but I do know that some of our integration partners freaked out at the thought of us using something open source. I doubt that would happen now though.
-
@jaredbusch said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@scottalanmiller said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@jaredbusch said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@scottalanmiller said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@thwr said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
I am currently learning VB6 from a 1998 textbook...
You could talk to a tree for the same effect
Not a good idea to start with VB when you want to learn programmingNot starting to learning programming, just need to also work with our legacy code
That's the problem with VB, it's all for ancient "we can't update it" code. VB was okay through around 1999, but never in the .NET era. So any legacy code made with it is pretty much guaranteed to have originated from a "developer" that was just mucking about and couldn't adapt to a more modern language and was carrying over bad VB habits from the 90s; and then a company that never updated code for close to twenty years now.
2 years left on the roadmap to have migrated all of our legacy code. It's a lot of work when you have a whole LoB application originally created in VB6.
The last one of these, I worked on went live in 2011. It was a horrid VB6 + Access database backend.
Thankfully it stopped using Access 7 years ago.
What is it using now?
MS SQL
I had assumed they didn't consider any other options, but I found some documentation the other day that showed they did consider other options.
It can be a nasty surprise for our smaller clients when they hit the 10GB limit for SQL express.
Wow, WTF is your product that you are hitting 10GB database sizes?
I mean it is easy to hit for some things. But anyone trying to stick that kind or stuff in a DB will not care about the cost of licensing SQL most of the time.
Not to say it was the best choice, just saying.
It's a niche market LoB application that covers the bulk of what our clients need to do on a computer. So that means CRM features, email client, even a word processor.
-
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@scottalanmiller said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@scottalanmiller said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@jaredbusch said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@scottalanmiller said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@thwr said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
I am currently learning VB6 from a 1998 textbook...
You could talk to a tree for the same effect
Not a good idea to start with VB when you want to learn programmingNot starting to learning programming, just need to also work with our legacy code
That's the problem with VB, it's all for ancient "we can't update it" code. VB was okay through around 1999, but never in the .NET era. So any legacy code made with it is pretty much guaranteed to have originated from a "developer" that was just mucking about and couldn't adapt to a more modern language and was carrying over bad VB habits from the 90s; and then a company that never updated code for close to twenty years now.
2 years left on the roadmap to have migrated all of our legacy code. It's a lot of work when you have a whole LoB application originally created in VB6.
The last one of these, I worked on went live in 2011. It was a horrid VB6 + Access database backend.
Thankfully it stopped using Access 7 years ago.
What is it using now?
MS SQL
I had assumed they didn't consider any other options, but I found some documentation the other day that showed they did consider other options.
It can be a nasty surprise for our smaller clients when they hit the 10GB limit for SQL express.
They considered them and STILL took that one? What did they consider and why did they choose it?
I don't know what all options they were looking at, but I do know that some of our integration partners freaked out at the thought of us using something open source. I doubt that would happen now though.
That tells you when you drop a partner.... not so much a partner as an enemy. Nothing wrong with closed source, but avoiding open source just because it is open source is either bad because of incompetence or bad because they are trying to screw you.
-
@jaredbusch said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@scottalanmiller said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@jaredbusch said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@scottalanmiller said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@thwr said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
I am currently learning VB6 from a 1998 textbook...
You could talk to a tree for the same effect
Not a good idea to start with VB when you want to learn programmingNot starting to learning programming, just need to also work with our legacy code
That's the problem with VB, it's all for ancient "we can't update it" code. VB was okay through around 1999, but never in the .NET era. So any legacy code made with it is pretty much guaranteed to have originated from a "developer" that was just mucking about and couldn't adapt to a more modern language and was carrying over bad VB habits from the 90s; and then a company that never updated code for close to twenty years now.
2 years left on the roadmap to have migrated all of our legacy code. It's a lot of work when you have a whole LoB application originally created in VB6.
The last one of these, I worked on went live in 2011. It was a horrid VB6 + Access database backend.
Thankfully it stopped using Access 7 years ago.
What is it using now?
MS SQL
I had assumed they didn't consider any other options, but I found some documentation the other day that showed they did consider other options.
It can be a nasty surprise for our smaller clients when they hit the 10GB limit for SQL express.
Wow, WTF is your product that you are hitting 10GB database sizes?
I mean it is easy to hit for some things. But anyone trying to stick that kind or stuff in a DB will not care about the cost of licensing SQL most of the time.
Not to say it was the best choice, just saying.
I don't find that to often be the case. MS SQL Server is so expensive, I don't know any company that doesn't notice the cost. Even small installs are often $50K. You have to be insanely big to not care about losing $50K and having to pay for the overseeing of licenses.
-
@scottalanmiller said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@jaredbusch said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@scottalanmiller said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@jaredbusch said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@scottalanmiller said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@thwr said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
I am currently learning VB6 from a 1998 textbook...
You could talk to a tree for the same effect
Not a good idea to start with VB when you want to learn programmingNot starting to learning programming, just need to also work with our legacy code
That's the problem with VB, it's all for ancient "we can't update it" code. VB was okay through around 1999, but never in the .NET era. So any legacy code made with it is pretty much guaranteed to have originated from a "developer" that was just mucking about and couldn't adapt to a more modern language and was carrying over bad VB habits from the 90s; and then a company that never updated code for close to twenty years now.
2 years left on the roadmap to have migrated all of our legacy code. It's a lot of work when you have a whole LoB application originally created in VB6.
The last one of these, I worked on went live in 2011. It was a horrid VB6 + Access database backend.
Thankfully it stopped using Access 7 years ago.
What is it using now?
MS SQL
I had assumed they didn't consider any other options, but I found some documentation the other day that showed they did consider other options.
It can be a nasty surprise for our smaller clients when they hit the 10GB limit for SQL express.
Wow, WTF is your product that you are hitting 10GB database sizes?
I mean it is easy to hit for some things. But anyone trying to stick that kind or stuff in a DB will not care about the cost of licensing SQL most of the time.
Not to say it was the best choice, just saying.
I don't find that to often be the case. MS SQL Server is so expensive, I don't know any company that doesn't notice the cost. Even small installs are often $50K. You have to be insanely big to not care about losing $50K and having to pay for the overseeing of licenses.
You obviously have no real world frame of reference for your ranting.
I know many SMB with paid SQL server instances, and not a one spent ever $10k, let alone $50k.
-
@jaredbusch said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@scottalanmiller said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@jaredbusch said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@scottalanmiller said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@jaredbusch said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@scottalanmiller said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@thwr said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
I am currently learning VB6 from a 1998 textbook...
You could talk to a tree for the same effect
Not a good idea to start with VB when you want to learn programmingNot starting to learning programming, just need to also work with our legacy code
That's the problem with VB, it's all for ancient "we can't update it" code. VB was okay through around 1999, but never in the .NET era. So any legacy code made with it is pretty much guaranteed to have originated from a "developer" that was just mucking about and couldn't adapt to a more modern language and was carrying over bad VB habits from the 90s; and then a company that never updated code for close to twenty years now.
2 years left on the roadmap to have migrated all of our legacy code. It's a lot of work when you have a whole LoB application originally created in VB6.
The last one of these, I worked on went live in 2011. It was a horrid VB6 + Access database backend.
Thankfully it stopped using Access 7 years ago.
What is it using now?
MS SQL
I had assumed they didn't consider any other options, but I found some documentation the other day that showed they did consider other options.
It can be a nasty surprise for our smaller clients when they hit the 10GB limit for SQL express.
Wow, WTF is your product that you are hitting 10GB database sizes?
I mean it is easy to hit for some things. But anyone trying to stick that kind or stuff in a DB will not care about the cost of licensing SQL most of the time.
Not to say it was the best choice, just saying.
I don't find that to often be the case. MS SQL Server is so expensive, I don't know any company that doesn't notice the cost. Even small installs are often $50K. You have to be insanely big to not care about losing $50K and having to pay for the overseeing of licenses.
You obviously have no real world frame of reference for your ranting.
I know many SMB with paid SQL server instances, and not a one spent ever $10k, let alone $50k.
Depends on who is taking on the cost of administering the database. Technically, our clients are fully responsible for their own database administration, however we provide service for no charge, so we're actually absorbing that cost in order to make their costs lower. However, that also means no one is monitoring the database and there is no SLA in place for if there are are issues with their database.
-
@scottalanmiller said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@scottalanmiller said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@scottalanmiller said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@jaredbusch said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@scottalanmiller said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@thwr said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
I am currently learning VB6 from a 1998 textbook...
You could talk to a tree for the same effect
Not a good idea to start with VB when you want to learn programmingNot starting to learning programming, just need to also work with our legacy code
That's the problem with VB, it's all for ancient "we can't update it" code. VB was okay through around 1999, but never in the .NET era. So any legacy code made with it is pretty much guaranteed to have originated from a "developer" that was just mucking about and couldn't adapt to a more modern language and was carrying over bad VB habits from the 90s; and then a company that never updated code for close to twenty years now.
2 years left on the roadmap to have migrated all of our legacy code. It's a lot of work when you have a whole LoB application originally created in VB6.
The last one of these, I worked on went live in 2011. It was a horrid VB6 + Access database backend.
Thankfully it stopped using Access 7 years ago.
What is it using now?
MS SQL
I had assumed they didn't consider any other options, but I found some documentation the other day that showed they did consider other options.
It can be a nasty surprise for our smaller clients when they hit the 10GB limit for SQL express.
They considered them and STILL took that one? What did they consider and why did they choose it?
I don't know what all options they were looking at, but I do know that some of our integration partners freaked out at the thought of us using something open source. I doubt that would happen now though.
That tells you when you drop a partner.... not so much a partner as an enemy. Nothing wrong with closed source, but avoiding open source just because it is open source is either bad because of incompetence or bad because they are trying to screw you.
I'd say ignorance and incompetence. The problem is that we would probably lose more clients then they would if we dropped them.
-
@jaredbusch said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@scottalanmiller said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@jaredbusch said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@scottalanmiller said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@jaredbusch said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@scottalanmiller said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@thwr said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
I am currently learning VB6 from a 1998 textbook...
You could talk to a tree for the same effect
Not a good idea to start with VB when you want to learn programmingNot starting to learning programming, just need to also work with our legacy code
That's the problem with VB, it's all for ancient "we can't update it" code. VB was okay through around 1999, but never in the .NET era. So any legacy code made with it is pretty much guaranteed to have originated from a "developer" that was just mucking about and couldn't adapt to a more modern language and was carrying over bad VB habits from the 90s; and then a company that never updated code for close to twenty years now.
2 years left on the roadmap to have migrated all of our legacy code. It's a lot of work when you have a whole LoB application originally created in VB6.
The last one of these, I worked on went live in 2011. It was a horrid VB6 + Access database backend.
Thankfully it stopped using Access 7 years ago.
What is it using now?
MS SQL
I had assumed they didn't consider any other options, but I found some documentation the other day that showed they did consider other options.
It can be a nasty surprise for our smaller clients when they hit the 10GB limit for SQL express.
Wow, WTF is your product that you are hitting 10GB database sizes?
I mean it is easy to hit for some things. But anyone trying to stick that kind or stuff in a DB will not care about the cost of licensing SQL most of the time.
Not to say it was the best choice, just saying.
I don't find that to often be the case. MS SQL Server is so expensive, I don't know any company that doesn't notice the cost. Even small installs are often $50K. You have to be insanely big to not care about losing $50K and having to pay for the overseeing of licenses.
You obviously have no real world frame of reference for your ranting.
I know many SMB with paid SQL server instances, and not a one spent ever $10k, let alone $50k.
I'm dealing with a $50K right now. Very small, but they hit that really easily. Don't forget to include all of the ancillary costs like the required OS, CALs, external connection licenses, etc.
-
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@scottalanmiller said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@scottalanmiller said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@scottalanmiller said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@jaredbusch said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@scottalanmiller said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@thwr said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
I am currently learning VB6 from a 1998 textbook...
You could talk to a tree for the same effect
Not a good idea to start with VB when you want to learn programmingNot starting to learning programming, just need to also work with our legacy code
That's the problem with VB, it's all for ancient "we can't update it" code. VB was okay through around 1999, but never in the .NET era. So any legacy code made with it is pretty much guaranteed to have originated from a "developer" that was just mucking about and couldn't adapt to a more modern language and was carrying over bad VB habits from the 90s; and then a company that never updated code for close to twenty years now.
2 years left on the roadmap to have migrated all of our legacy code. It's a lot of work when you have a whole LoB application originally created in VB6.
The last one of these, I worked on went live in 2011. It was a horrid VB6 + Access database backend.
Thankfully it stopped using Access 7 years ago.
What is it using now?
MS SQL
I had assumed they didn't consider any other options, but I found some documentation the other day that showed they did consider other options.
It can be a nasty surprise for our smaller clients when they hit the 10GB limit for SQL express.
They considered them and STILL took that one? What did they consider and why did they choose it?
I don't know what all options they were looking at, but I do know that some of our integration partners freaked out at the thought of us using something open source. I doubt that would happen now though.
That tells you when you drop a partner.... not so much a partner as an enemy. Nothing wrong with closed source, but avoiding open source just because it is open source is either bad because of incompetence or bad because they are trying to screw you.
I'd say ignorance and incompetence. The problem is that we would probably lose more clients then they would if we dropped them.
Ever looked at recreating the software?
-
The problem with SQL Server costs is that they scale with you. If you are absolutely tiny, sure, they can be relatively small. But if you are that small, the cost is normally a big deal. As you get bigger, the cost scales with you. I've seen three person companies look at $25K of SQL Server licensing because it was the minimum install amount required but their LOB app. Around $8K per user for their SQL Server licensing alone in that case.
-
@scottalanmiller said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@scottalanmiller said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@scottalanmiller said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@scottalanmiller said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@jaredbusch said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@scottalanmiller said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@thwr said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
I am currently learning VB6 from a 1998 textbook...
You could talk to a tree for the same effect
Not a good idea to start with VB when you want to learn programmingNot starting to learning programming, just need to also work with our legacy code
That's the problem with VB, it's all for ancient "we can't update it" code. VB was okay through around 1999, but never in the .NET era. So any legacy code made with it is pretty much guaranteed to have originated from a "developer" that was just mucking about and couldn't adapt to a more modern language and was carrying over bad VB habits from the 90s; and then a company that never updated code for close to twenty years now.
2 years left on the roadmap to have migrated all of our legacy code. It's a lot of work when you have a whole LoB application originally created in VB6.
The last one of these, I worked on went live in 2011. It was a horrid VB6 + Access database backend.
Thankfully it stopped using Access 7 years ago.
What is it using now?
MS SQL
I had assumed they didn't consider any other options, but I found some documentation the other day that showed they did consider other options.
It can be a nasty surprise for our smaller clients when they hit the 10GB limit for SQL express.
They considered them and STILL took that one? What did they consider and why did they choose it?
I don't know what all options they were looking at, but I do know that some of our integration partners freaked out at the thought of us using something open source. I doubt that would happen now though.
That tells you when you drop a partner.... not so much a partner as an enemy. Nothing wrong with closed source, but avoiding open source just because it is open source is either bad because of incompetence or bad because they are trying to screw you.
I'd say ignorance and incompetence. The problem is that we would probably lose more clients then they would if we dropped them.
Ever looked at recreating the software?
Software isn't really the service they provide.
We integrate with the 'suppliers' our clients use
-
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@scottalanmiller said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@scottalanmiller said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@scottalanmiller said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@scottalanmiller said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@jaredbusch said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@scottalanmiller said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@thwr said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
@flaxking said in IS BASIC programming still in vogue?:
I am currently learning VB6 from a 1998 textbook...
You could talk to a tree for the same effect
Not a good idea to start with VB when you want to learn programmingNot starting to learning programming, just need to also work with our legacy code
That's the problem with VB, it's all for ancient "we can't update it" code. VB was okay through around 1999, but never in the .NET era. So any legacy code made with it is pretty much guaranteed to have originated from a "developer" that was just mucking about and couldn't adapt to a more modern language and was carrying over bad VB habits from the 90s; and then a company that never updated code for close to twenty years now.
2 years left on the roadmap to have migrated all of our legacy code. It's a lot of work when you have a whole LoB application originally created in VB6.
The last one of these, I worked on went live in 2011. It was a horrid VB6 + Access database backend.
Thankfully it stopped using Access 7 years ago.
What is it using now?
MS SQL
I had assumed they didn't consider any other options, but I found some documentation the other day that showed they did consider other options.
It can be a nasty surprise for our smaller clients when they hit the 10GB limit for SQL express.
They considered them and STILL took that one? What did they consider and why did they choose it?
I don't know what all options they were looking at, but I do know that some of our integration partners freaked out at the thought of us using something open source. I doubt that would happen now though.
That tells you when you drop a partner.... not so much a partner as an enemy. Nothing wrong with closed source, but avoiding open source just because it is open source is either bad because of incompetence or bad because they are trying to screw you.
I'd say ignorance and incompetence. The problem is that we would probably lose more clients then they would if we dropped them.
Ever looked at recreating the software?
Software isn't really the service they provide.
We integrate with the 'suppliers' our clients use
I see.
-
So by coincidence, I was talking to a dev shop today that is 100% C# on Windows, traditionally they have used VS Enterprise. We talked about VS Code and they immediately said that they were interested in switching and had investigated it and felt that the only things holding them back from switching immediately were related to build automation that is all set to be modernized anyway, and that all coding, dev, and debug processes were just fine with VSC.
-
All of our current desktop applications are VB.Net, but as we begin to update, all future code will be C#.
Granted, we have a lot of legacy code and simple updates will not always rate a rewrite to C# due to labor costs.
