Slashdot Mirror


Confirmed: Microsoft Says It Will Open Source VB 6

msmoriarty writes "Microsoft told a group of MVPs today at Tech-Ed that it plans to take Visual Basic 6 open source and will release the source code on CodePlex. A source at the event said that Microsoft is planning to release only the VB6 language on codeplex – not Visual Studio or related tools." Update: 05/20 02:24 GMT by T : Alas, too good to be true. msmoriarty writes with an apologetic retraction: "We got it wrong — Microsoft denied and went back to our source and they pulled confirmation. Our apologies."

205 comments

  1. good thinking on their part by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    ah here we are, this is great news from MS! finally

    1. Re:good thinking on their part by Z00L00K · · Score: 1

      What would be great by releasing that? So that even more people would be able to write bad code?

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    2. Re:good thinking on their part by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If MS had open-sourced VB, it would have bought the singularity closer by 20 years. Maybe one of your loved ones could have been saved - think about it.

      VB is the single most productive language ever made because the 'man in the street' can product great programs with it and 'programming gurus' are not needed!

    3. Re:good thinking on their part by DaVince21 · · Score: 1

      Except then MS denied they were going to do this. Sigh. And they had the chance to make themselves look a bit better with this (even if VB6 is... old).

      --
      I am not devoid of humor.
  2. WHAT? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    .........again..........WHAT???? Pllleeease let this be the dawn of a new garage programmer era!!

    1. Re:WHAT? by BmlA · · Score: 0

      So when MS open sources something you start crying? Which one is it now, should they open source or not?

  3. And we care why? by deinol · · Score: 2

    That's nice and all, but does anyone care?

    I mean, I guess there are some legacy projects out there that are still being maintained, but I'm sure those developers bought VS a long time ago.

    Or is there some secret in the VB6 code that the open source community can actually learn from?

    --
    Got Apathy?
    1. Re:And we care why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yes, I'd say people do care.

      If they actually do this, VB6 will still be a popular language when we're all dead. I'm completely serious -- it's the next COBOL.

      Whether that's a good thing or a bad thing, I don't know.

    2. Re:And we care why? by fragfoo · · Score: 5, Funny

      Or is there some secret in the VB6 code that the open source community can actually learn from?

      Probably yes, you can learn a lot from past mistakes.

      --
      Sig? Heil
    3. Re:And we care why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or is there some secret in the VB6 code that the open source community can actually learn from?

      Good IDE? Microsoft's IDE's seriously kick ass any open source IDE (and their lack of)

    4. Re:And we care why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, but the IDE isn't being open-sourced, just the language

    5. Re:And we care why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      really? REALLY?!?!? this is slashdot right? the world should be open source slashdot right? I realize we're not all RMS but to hear someone bashing the fact that something is going open source just seems rediculous.

      oh wait, Microsoft. My bad, MS hate trumps open source love. everything is normal, carry on...

    6. Re:And we care why? by Jimbookis · · Score: 1

      Companies like Citect (http://www.citect.com) and users thereof might. There's plenty of legacy stuff out there still being actively maintained that has VB6 in it. Maybe VB6 can now go 64 bit?

    7. Re:And we care why? by Sc4Freak · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Er, because at least one person will find this useful? Open-sourcing a previously closed product can only be a good thing for the community and FOSS, regardless of whether it's Microsoft or whether you personally believe it's useful. It's honestly something that Microsoft needs to be doing more often.

    8. Re:And we care why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Says you. Visual Studio is the only one that I've had to uninstall several times because of small mistakes that every other app I've ever used recovers from perfectly fine. I don't care how much supposedly nice little features they have, I've lost too much time fixing the goddamn thing to work again that it's not even close to being worth the ridiculous price tag on it.

    9. Re:And we care why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The hospital I work (and pretty much every hospital in the country) is dropping millions on a certain healthcare EMR system that is based on VB6.

    10. Re:And we care why? by icebraining · · Score: 1

      Hello Mr.Strawman. Can you please me point out where is GP bashing Microsoft?

    11. Re:And we care why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We want to migrate to Linux but still have some old VB apps in production, and don't even have the sources to some of them. Open sourcing the VM/interpreter/whatever would make it more likely to see a Linux version that would let us migrate without rewritting those old apps.

      We have to try wine and so on, but I have a feeling a native interpreter would work better.

    12. Re:And we care why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think this is more a move to try to poison open source by allowing polluting it with this probably awful codebase.

      Only half kidding...

    13. Re:And we care why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes- they should but what they released is worse than spitting in someones face.

    14. Re:And we care why? by Steauengeglase · · Score: 2

      Fixed: "IntelliSense seriously kicks any open source autocompletion's ass."

    15. Re:And we care why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uh, no. Sorry, but the world would be a better place if VB6 just quietly died. This is yet one more excuse to keep horrible grossly obsolete software on life support.

    16. Re:And we care why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cerner? (A company that likes to tell its employees, you don't need your family, you have Cerner now. You should have all your meetings before 8 a.m. or after 6 p.m. so that you can spend the rest of the time chained to your desks. You must wear business formal or 'Cerner casual' that you can buy from the company store (really... jeans and shirts with the Cerner logo that you can only buy from the company store.... or business formal)). That said, if you have any experience with it, you can make a ton of money because they are such assholes to work for not many people have that experience.

    17. Re:And we care why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In truth, this could be very useful. As a programming language and environment, VB6 was very good at creating quick and dirty applications to get the job done. Programmers tend to forget that the point of writing programs is to accomplish something. As a programming environment, VB6 was excellent.

      In practice it was crippled by deployment issues and platform support. Engineering out those problems would make it quite an effective tool for solving those small problems.

    18. Re:And we care why? by jcr · · Score: 1

      Software archaeology?

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    19. Re:And we care why? by syousef · · Score: 2

      Companies like Citect (http://www.citect.com) and users thereof might. There's plenty of legacy stuff out there still being actively maintained that has VB6 in it. Maybe VB6 can now go 64 bit?

      I don't know. Moving from 2-bit to 64-bit in one go is an awfully big leap!

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    20. Re:And we care why? by Hangin10 · · Score: 2

      VBDOS was amazing.

    21. Re:And we care why? by orangesquid · · Score: 1

      There's a scary amount of legacy code in VB. When I was interviewing for a job recently (PS: anybody hiring coders in the DelMarVA area?), the interviewer was asking about some porting work I had done. There were a whole pile of VB projects in use, only one or two of which the budgeters could justify examining---and that only meant re-working them in VB.net, so that they could be extended in the future without needing a legacy development environment.
      VB already *is* the next COBOL.

      --
      --TheOrangeSquid Is it any wonder things seem so awry? We swim in a sea of confusion and don't have to think to survive
    22. Re:And we care why? by Tolkien · · Score: 1

      Have you ever tried using Intellisense with C++ & the boost library? It becomes useless and molasses slow to update. I ended up disabling it so that I could actually get work done.

    23. Re:And we care why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, people care. There are legacy applications and APIs with deep dependencies on Visual Basic 6. Most cannot be re-written in .NET and therefore everyone who committed are trapped.

      Whether this is rumor or not, this MUST happen and I hope it happens soon.

    24. Re:And we care why? by PsychicX · · Score: 1

      As someone who is heavily involved in the Microsoft world -- does anyone care? Seriously, I did some great work with VB6 back in the day, but it was already struggling for any vague relevance by 2003. What possible appeal does the source code hold, apart from historical curiosity and amusement at what is probably a hilarious codebase? This doesn't help any Microsoft-houses, who have long since been forced to bail on VB6 -- and the stragglers are technical incompetents who can't get anything out of this.

      In 2003, I could see how this would've been supremely useful (if arguably dangerous in any number of ways). Now, it just doesn't make any sense at all.

    25. Re:And we care why? by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Have you tried this in VS2008 or VS2010?

      (the Intellisense engine has been completely rewritten between the two)

    26. Re:And we care why? by tibit · · Score: 2

      If you seriously consider VB6 IDE better than contemporary offerings like Eclipse or Qt Creator, then I'd like what you're having since obviously it gets one seriously out of touch with reality.

      --
      A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
    27. Re:And we care why? by tibit · · Score: 1

      Umm, VS2008 uses the old engine. VS2010 use the new engine, basically a true-to-form C++ front-end repurposed for online parsing.

      Alas, everything is in the execution. One anecdote: for my projects, Qt Creator 2's C++ parser has always done a better job than VS2008's intellisense. Creator uses a custom parser that only approximates C++ language spec, yet still does a better job than VS2008 did. I presume that this "makeshift" parser will be extended so that over time it will slowly approach a true, standards-compliant C++ parser.

      --
      A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
    28. Re:And we care why? by lonecrow · · Score: 1

      I am not sure how this would directly effect me since I have my copy of VB6 Studio that I can use to maintain and tweak the couple a dozen VB6 DLL's that I use on a variety of websites. So I should be able to continue that whether they open source it or not.

      The best part about this news is that it means I will finally be one of the cool kids using FOSS instead of a Micro$erf Dweeb.

    29. Re:And we care why? by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 3, Informative

      Umm, VS2008 uses the old engine. VS2010 use the new engine, basically a true-to-form C++ front-end repurposed for online parsing.

      That's what I meant.

      VS2008 one was really bad. When it came to Boost, it wouldn't take long for it to choke and die completely, esp. if you used something like Boost Lambda. VS2010 handled everything I've thrown at it (heck, it can process polymorphic Boost lambdas!). And it feels plenty fast to me, once it's done parsing headers.

    30. Re:And we care why? by oiron · · Score: 1

      Every day! Take a look at what comes from the horse's mouth...

      That happens about three times a minute, under VS2008. 2010 is better, but then, it's limited to native c++ (which is all fine, except that the PHB decided to do a crapload of work in C++/CLI over the years)...

      For really good autocomplete, take a look at Qt Creator and KDevelop 4.x.

    31. Re:And we care why? by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 2

      VS2008 C++ autocomplete is horrible. I won't even bother defending that.

      As for Qt Creator and KDevelop, in my experience they still don't hold a candle to VS2010 on any moderately complicated kind of template metaprogamming (i.e. 2/3 of Boost). Qt Creator especially seems to be fairly simple, though unlike VS2008 it doesn't stop working completely when it sees something it can't handle. KDevelop 4 was better, but not perfect.

      (VS2010 uses an actual C++ front-end to drive code completion, so it's as accurate as the compiler itself once it parsed all files - you can beat it at speed, but not at accuracy)

    32. Re:And we care why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe they use VB 6, but I was thinking of a cult^Wcompany a couple states to the north, where the average age is 20.

    33. Re:And we care why? by larry+bagina · · Score: 1

      Early versions used a bytecode interpreter but they added native compilation so most people used that.

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    34. Re:And we care why? by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      There is likely a lot of VB6 in 'Visual Basic for Applications' hence one department vetoed the other departments actions because it would likely impact macro lock in, a very popular 'it's just too hard to change office suites' tactic.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    35. Re:And we care why? by badran · · Score: 1

      VisualAssist is good plugin.

    36. Re:And we care why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I work for a company that maintains many Vb6 application and as long as people by this products they gonna stay in production line. The problem is that vb6 is no more maintained so every time a new operating system comes out of MS we have a lot of compatibility issues. I assure you there are many companies out there that dream to mod VB6 compiler to their needs.

    37. Re:And we care why? by Xest · · Score: 1

      Seeing as half the world's business are still built on VB6 then yes, it'd have been a good thing, because it'd mean there was finally hope in creating something that'd pull them away from that unstable, poorly scalable fuckup of a technology.

    38. Re:And we care why? by ProbablyJoe · · Score: 1

      For VB6? Hardly. VB6's IDE doesn't even support mouse scroll wheels (by default, there are plugins that do).

    39. Re:And we care why? by Canazza · · Score: 1

      yeah, I was quite shocked at the speed difference even for simple projects. Not only that but you can search for bits of a function/parameter name, rather than from the start (IE, to get a func called openNewFile() you could type NewFile and it would show up)

      Now if they could only speed up populating the .net and COM references dialogue box, and let me search/filter them I'd be happy.

      --
      It pays to be obvious, especially if you have a reputation for being subtle.
    40. Re:And we care why? by geminidomino · · Score: 1

      It's not archaeology, it's a race against^Wtoward evil!

    41. Re:And we care why? by 1s44c · · Score: 2

      Or is there some secret in the VB6 code that the open source community can actually learn from?

      Good IDE? Microsoft's IDE's seriously kick ass any open source IDE (and their lack of)

      Really? Are you really sure that fancy GUIs result in good programmers producing better code?

      From what I've seen anything fancier than vi or emacs may speed writing code but it won't improve its quality.

    42. Re:And we care why? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      VB isn't the next COBOL - people are still actively maintaining and extending COBOL.

      And a company moving from one single-vendor language to another single-vendor language? Did you not suggest to them that they should have learned their lesson the first time?

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    43. Re:And we care why? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      Really? Can you give an example of when IntelliSense beats clang's autocompletion, which works nicely even with complex template expressions?

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    44. Re:And we care why? by Larry+Lightbulb · · Score: 1

      Is it from the darkside?

    45. Re:And we care why? by Script+Cat · · Score: 1

      Mouse scroll in VB6 used to work in win98 but disappeared when switched to XP. Why, I don't know.

    46. Re:And we care why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I spent the last ten years working supporting a VB6 project. I wrote the C++ code that it ran on top of. The non-CS engineers who wrote the VB stuff fought tooth and nail to keep that software going. At the time I left the job, they were trying to get it to work on 64-bit Windows so they wouldn't have to upgrade it. The scariest part is, this was a real-time test system.

      If I were still there (and is this release had been true), I'm certain they'd be asking me to compile this source code into 64-bit.

    47. Re:And we care why? by DarkOx · · Score: 1

      Microsoft's IDEs are pigs, the great if you have powerful machine to run them on but suck donkey balls otherwise. Using Visual studio on an highend workstation is a joy, using it on just some PC is like going to the dentist.

      Codeblocks on the other hand runs great even on an anemic netbook and has all the really important features for the C/C++ programmer. I switched and I will never go back.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    48. Re:And we care why? by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Now if they could only speed up populating the .net and COM references dialogue box, and let me search/filter them I'd be happy.

      Does this help?

    49. Re:And we care why? by Tolkien · · Score: 1

      I've been using VS2008, yeah. I tried VS2010 but it crashes constantly. Even if it's the first program I open from a fresh boot and then I DON'T TOUCH IT overnight, it's guaranteed to have crashed by the next morning every single time. It crashes without my even using it? Wtf? Having it rely on DirectX was such a retarded idea. I know DirectX is the cause because 95% (the rest being OpenGL) of my games crash extremely often (read: literally every 5-20 minutes, an hour if I'm lucky) due to a (now known) underlying unfixed bug related to the motherboard. I tried fixing it years ago by buying a brand new graphics card in the hopes that the old one was the problem... No dice. I was too disheartened after having thrown $450 on that graphics card that I just put up with the problem for... 5(?) years now? Now that I can't even run the latest Visual Studio because of this dumb bug problem I have little choice left but to upgrade (mind you it'd be a relief at this point to get something that doesn't crash constantly when gaming... or developing, now).

    50. Re:And we care why? by Tolkien · · Score: 1

      Visual Studio 2010's Intellisense can handle boost's TMP? :O What about when you combine that with the Preprocessor library? I genuinely want to know. Intellisense is so bad with 2008 that the UI is only bearable without it.

    51. Re:And we care why? by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      VS2010 doesn't rely on DirectX directly. It relies on WPF, which in turn uses DirectX. There were bits using WPF even in VS2008 release (like the XML Schema editor), they just weren't as prominent.

      However, there's a lot of other stuff in Windows that uses DirectX, IE (before v9) being one. Given how many applications embed the IE engine, I think you'd be getting crashes left and right if the only issue was DX. If only just the games crash, then it's probably only when hardware acceleration is used.

      Now, in VS, if you go to Tools->Options, and there to Environment->General, there's a checkbox under "Visual Experience" that lets you disable hardware acceleration. Try using that and see if it helps any.

      Also, there are a bunch of registry switches that let you do the same to all WPF apps, system-wide (which you'd probably want to do if it helps you with VS).

    52. Re:And we care why? by Tolkien · · Score: 1

      I'm running XP at home (thus no IE9), and I'll definitely try as you suggest. Thanks for the heads-up!

    53. Re:And we care why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey... we're not that bad. And we're working on the VB6 thing. This stuff takes time!

    54. Re:And we care why? by cjb110 · · Score: 1

      it's weirder than that, MS scrolls tended to work, Logitech (and the rebranded) didn't.

      But FreeWheel (http://www.blackfiveservices.co.uk/freewheel.shtml) fixes all that, and in Access 97 VBA windows which behaved differently again...and yes unfortunately I still have to use both on a regular basis.

      --
      ----- I refuse to have an argument with an unarmed person
  4. One Word by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    *AWESOME*
    VB's IDE is easily my favorite. For prototyping and simple apps it is w/o peer IMO. Performance wise it's not the best, but was never intended to be. It's a good day to be a VB Programmer again. :) .NET blows.

    1. Re:One Word by tibit · · Score: 1

      The IDE won't be released, just the compiler and runtime. Sorry. No big loss, IMHO, VB6 and VC6 should die. Good riddance.

      --
      A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
  5. And no... by thedarb · · Score: 0

    Scripting in VB still doesn't make you a programmer. :P

    --
    This sig intentionally left blank.
    1. Re:And no... by LordLucless · · Score: 1

      Just like making "one true scotsman" arguments on slashdot doesn't make you a logician?

      --
      Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
    2. Re:And no... by Samantha+Wright · · Score: 1

      Sorry, mate. Microsoft's first commercial product was a BASIC compiler, and compiling VB was possible right up until the switch to .NET. That includes VB6.

      --
      Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
    3. Re:And no... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually VB compiled to "P-Code" which like CLR was an interpreted language run inside a Virtual machine, VB5 and VB6 had the option to compile to Native, but it still does a whole bunch of runtime stuff that means it was never that great...

    4. Re:And no... by damiangerous · · Score: 1

      BASIC interpreter.

    5. Re:And no... by Samantha+Wright · · Score: 1

      Damn—you got me. Nit successfully picked; for some reason I thought Altair BASIC was a compiler. However, VB6 does do native code generation, and BASICA was on the PC in the beginning in '81—that's pretty early.

      --
      Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
    6. Re:And no... by Tomun · · Score: 1

      However, VB6 does do native code generation

      No it doesn't. VB6 compiles to byte code which is interpreted by msvbvm60.dll

    7. Re:And no... by Dr_Barnowl · · Score: 3, Informative

      No, it doesn't.

      VB6 has an _option_ to compile to p-code interpreted executables, which is not switched on by default.

      Native binaries produced by VB6 _do_ have a lot of dependencies on the VB runtimes, because it uses them for a lot of it's internal implementation, like bounds checks on primitive types, it's String type, it's array type (which is not a raw array like C but an array class), but they are definitely native binaries. Many of these runtime checks contribute to the perception that VB6 is slow - you can turn a lot of them off in the compiler options. I think you might even be able to remove it's dependency on the runtimes, but that's really a bit pointless for what is designed to be a rapid prototyping / development system - it would be the equivalent of removing all the Python runtimes and wondering why your pace of development ground to a halt.

      The main thing that makes people think VB6 is slow is they build large strings by concatenating them - because the VB6 String is an immutable BSTR, this means that every time you append a character, it copies the whole string. Unlike Java, it lacked a StringBuilder class in the base runtimes, and you had to roll your own using memcopy() APIs.

      People think VB6 was terrible because it would let you get away with stupid crap. Couple that to it's relatively shallow learning curve and you got a lot of low-quality but otherwise functional programs written by people with less than stellar programming ability, which then go on to cause massive maintenance headaches for people who program professionally.

      One of the ancestor posters was right on the money though - it was and remains a way of knocking out something functional very quickly. If you wanted to write something a little more complex in it, you had to be a real hard-ass with yourself, because VB would give you a lot of rope to hang yourself with. But with discipline, and sometimes some advanced tricks to work around it's limitations, you could write high quality, functional software, very quickly compared to C++.

      My VB6 skills are kind of my pension plan... it really is the modern COBOL. I see so many job opportunities now that are thinly veiled "VB6 maintenance programmer" roles.

    8. Re:And no... by Tomun · · Score: 1

      VB6 has an _option_ to compile to p-code interpreted executables, which is not switched on by default.

      You're right, my bad.

    9. Re:And no... by Doctor+Faustus · · Score: 1

      Classic MS Basic (including VB6) strings were *almost* immutable. You could use Mid(myString, 4, 1) = "x", which I expect ruled out any optimizations you can usually do with immutable objects.

      VB.Net strings really are immutable, plus you have StringBuilder

  6. Honestly, this is the direction MS needs to go by atlasdropperofworlds · · Score: 1

    Everyone is using OSS, even MS. It's good to see they are at least trying to show some goodwill. Though VB may not be the best addition to the OSS community, it is at least showing that MS is willing to contribute something. It would also be nice to see more cool OSS things come out of MS Reserach...

    1. Re:Honestly, this is the direction MS needs to go by Lunix+Nutcase · · Score: 1

      Microsoft has been open sourcing things for years now.

    2. Re:Honestly, this is the direction MS needs to go by amliebsch · · Score: 1

      It's not about Microsoft supporting open source as much as it is Microsoft trying to do right by their customers.

      Bottom line, Microsoft doesn't want to support VB6 any more. At the same time, there are a lot of parties that still depend on it. So now Microsoft can give other people who want to support it the opportunity to do so, and their customers relying on VB6 won't be completely hung out to dry. The only real reason not to do this would be that it allows those customers to continue not buying into something newer, but they probably figured at this point that wan't going to happen anyways. Or maybe they're willing to take that loss for the customer goodwill.

      Either way, it's purely Microsoft looking out for Microsoft. Open source is a means to an end, they really don't care about the "community."

      --
      If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
    3. Re:Honestly, this is the direction MS needs to go by hot+soldering+iron · · Score: 1

      I really try to keep my MS bashing to a minimum. Really. But didn't their VP in charge of open source quit in disgust a while ago? I mean, I may be wrong. I hope I am. But it seems like whenever there may a stray bit of sunshine to shimmer on the Redmond Giant, it turns out to be gleaming on the blade sticking out of users backs.

      I've never programmed in VB (due to MS loathing and distrust), but it always looked like a nice way to build macros for office, and quickly build prototypes. It would be great if they open sourced VB6 without their normal strings attached, like it can only be used in projects for Windows platforms after MS has "thoroughly inspected" the project. If they really do use an OSI approved license, I might actually use it on Linux. Gambas has tried to be the Linux equivalent to VB, but it has to stay different enough not to be stomped into oblivion.

      --
      When you want something built, come see me. If you want correct grammar and spelling, get a F*ing liberal arts student.
    4. Re:Honestly, this is the direction MS needs to go by Steauengeglase · · Score: 1

      If I could I'd mod this insightful, I would. Even if it is MS looking for an easy out, at least it follows OSS's golden rule: Leave not your users, maintainers and customers completely and totally screwed.

    5. Re:Honestly, this is the direction MS needs to go by Gadget_Guy · · Score: 1

      But didn't their VP in charge of open source quit in disgust a while ago?

      I don't know. I guess we should find out for sure before judging. As for Microsoft's open source, there are plenty of projects that they have done. They have also supported external projects too.

      I've never programmed in VB (due to MS loathing and distrust), but it always looked like a nice way to build macros for office, and quickly build prototypes.

      The Office macros (Visual Basic for Applications) was one of Microsoft's big failures as it was responsible for a massive security hole on Windows. People who were smart enough not to open executables emailed to them would happily open a DOC file from any unknown source which was just as insecure.

      It would be great if they open sourced VB6 without their normal strings attached, like it can only be used in projects for Windows platforms after MS has "thoroughly inspected" the project. If they really do use an OSI approved license, I might actually use it on Linux.

      Well they do have MS-PL and MS-RL listed as OSI approved licences. I searched the text, but neither of them mention any Windows platform requirement.

    6. Re:Honestly, this is the direction MS needs to go by RobbieThe1st · · Score: 1

      Hm... No, I think MS has a far more insidious plan here: With the source exposed, any and every little bug and glitch in their interpretor/compiler will be easily found. Now, unlike a OSS app, the Good Guys won't be able to find them first and patch it... Because there's no good way to distribute the patched product to all MS customers!
      This will mean that until there's a stable, patched VB6 interpretor out there, all VB6 users will be horribly vulnerable, and may very well do what MS wasn't able to do themselves and kill the language!
      I wouldn't be surprised if MS are hoping that by the time someone creates a good VB6 interpretor, the language will be dead and "tainted" by the number of unpatched glitches it has.
      It probably won't happen that way -- People are too stubborn to give up a language simply because it's insecure -- but that could easily be what MS were thinking.

    7. Re:Honestly, this is the direction MS needs to go by The+Dawn+Of+Time · · Score: 1

      You know... their customers are their community, so looking out for their customers is showing care for their community.

    8. Re:Honestly, this is the direction MS needs to go by hot+soldering+iron · · Score: 1

      False Alarm. There are no plans for open sourcing VB6. Thanks for the good information, though.

      --
      When you want something built, come see me. If you want correct grammar and spelling, get a F*ing liberal arts student.
  7. Awesoem news but what's part are open source? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am wondering if that includes the vb runtime/compiler hope so very exciting!

  8. A Cunning Plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Once Visual Basic becomes an open source project the public's perception of Open Source software will plummet.

    1. Re:A Cunning Plan by cskrat · · Score: 2

      If that's the plan, we can expect to see Bob opened up soon as well.

      --
      My God! It's full of eval()'s.
    2. Re:A Cunning Plan by creat3d · · Score: 1

      Can you imagine... Bob using DirectX 11 shaders... annoying dog will tell you about how fun it is to schedule a meeting, now with a bump map!

      --
      Grammar nazis are to this community what excrements are to gold.
  9. A museum exhibit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A museum exhibit. First released in 1998. Support was ended in 2005.

    But good for Microsoft. you have to start somewhere. This will definitely help archivist preserving applications from that era.

    1. Re:A museum exhibit by jonsmirl · · Score: 1

      And we have to live with the patents associated with VB6 for another eight years or so.

      Could be a hint that the term for software patents (which shouldn't exist) is far too long.

  10. I know one developer... by suprcvic · · Score: 1

    that will be excited about this. All he knows is basic/vb6 and once wondered with pure astonishment why anybody would use such a ridiculous language as c/c++. When I informed him that Windows 7 would be the last OS to support VB6 runtimes he looked at me and asked "Well what the hell are we going to do?" I could go on about this fine fellow, but I have long repressed most of the memories of my time with that company and choose to retain my sanity.

    1. Re:I know one developer... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tell him about REALBasic.

  11. What license? by jonwil · · Score: 2

    Will it be one of their "shared source" licenses or will it be a true open source license like the BSD license or the IBM Common Public License?

    1. Re:What license? by EvanED · · Score: 2

      MS has a couple legit free licenses; both the MS-PL and MS-RL are copyleft (though of course GPL incompatible).

      Not everything up there is under one of those of course, but it's not like everything is under a shared source license or something like that.

    2. Re:What license? by Lunix+Nutcase · · Score: 2

      It's right there in the article:

      The source code was released under the Microsoft Reference License (Ms-RL).

      Though the Ms-RL is the Microsoft Reciprocal License so I don't know if one or the other is a typo since the Microsoft Reference License is the Ms-RSL.

    3. Re:What license? by Sc4Freak · · Score: 1

      The MS-RL is copyleft, but the MS-PL isn't. The MS-PL is more like the Apache license - you're given a copyright license and a patent grant and you can basically do anything you want with it.

    4. Re:What license? by marcosdumay · · Score: 1

      "MS has a couple legit free licenses"

      Yes, and a couple of non-legit free licenses with names that are not exactly equal, but similar enough that they can claim you misunderstood after they claim something was in a free license.

    5. Re:What license? by Steauengeglase · · Score: 1

      The article didn't specifically say that it would be released under that license, but that Microsoft.VisualBasic.dll and part of the 3.5 .NET libraries had. No real word on what this will be, though you are probably right.

  12. i love open source by virtuosonic · · Score: 1

    great, now i'll continue praying so they open source windows 3.1

    --
    http://agender.sourceforge.net/ get a free schedule tool
  13. IT'S A TRAP !! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    This will surely confound the uptakers for years on end. BEWARE MSGEEKS BEARING GIFTS !!

    If you thought Forth was gawd-awful for humans, wait til you get a load of that threaded p-code bowl of intestines-machinations !! It's like all that's bad with Forth and all that's bad with (anything-)basic, heaped onto a steaming pile of excrement.

  14. Vendor lock-in? by hweimer · · Score: 1

    So, Microsoft will essientially provide a way to port legacy apps to Linux and Mac OS X? They really want to reduce their precious vendor lock-in?

    --
    OS Reviews: Free and Open Source Software
    1. Re:Vendor lock-in? by SEE · · Score: 2

      Well, we still haven't seen the license. But, assuming a real open source license (say, MS Reciprocal), it would be a big step to those goals.

      And to improving VBA support in things like LibreOffice, too; VBA is a close relative of VB6.

    2. Re:Vendor lock-in? by larry+bagina · · Score: 1

      If anyone had any interest in running their VB6 exes on linux or windows, they would be using Real Basic.

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    3. Re:Vendor lock-in? by Expertus · · Score: 1

      And to improving VBA support in things like LibreOffice, too; VBA is a close relative of VB6.

      This. We have so many Macros and scripts in VBA (especially in Excel), that it's more cost effective to upgrade to a new version of Office every 3-5 years than it would ever be to port everything over to Open/LibreOffice. Open up VBA and the Excel folks will be happy to switch - they are the ones watching the money and licenses. Everyone else just uses Word to make passive-aggressive notes for the lunchroom.

    4. Re:Vendor lock-in? by marcosdumay · · Score: 1

      Yeah, that what they are saying they'll do. Either we have some aliens pretending to be people (and failing) at Redmond, or Microsoft is lying to us. I can't decide what is more likely...

    5. Re:Vendor lock-in? by Script+Cat · · Score: 1

      Upgradeing office breaks all the VBA scripts anyway.

  15. Then what? by owlstead · · Score: 1

    Will they create a community and some kind of entity to manage it all, or are they just releasing it in the hope somebody picks it up? The OS license (if it is FSF compliant) is just a first step to creating a community around it.

    1. Re:Then what? by acoster · · Score: 1

      I guess you mean if the license is OSI compliant, as only GPL/LGPL and some variants thereof are FSF compliant...

      --
      "Go forth, and be excellent to each other" --Bill & Ted
  16. The Product Management for VS says it's not true by mythz · · Score: 5, Informative

    http://twitter.com/#!/dseven/status/71352709785198592
    @dseven The rumors of VB6 going open source are simply not true. #msteched #vb6rumor #vb6

    http://twitter.com/#!/dseven/status/71359684904366081
    @dseven @beckynagel I'm the Director of Product Management for Visual Studio Tools & Languages. There's no more solid source than me. Its not true.

  17. Next in line to be open source by Megahard · · Score: 1

    Bob and Clippy.

    --
    I eat only the real part of complex carbohydrates.
    1. Re:Next in line to be open source by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bob... their last truly customisable desktop environment... and the most stable.

    2. Re:Next in line to be open source by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no, those are open sores

  18. Ip address by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now we can all make a GUI interface using visual basic to track the killers IP address

  19. What does it mean to open source a language? by Mr.+Underbridge · · Score: 1

    Honest question. Are they open-sourcing the language spec (and what does that even mean)? Are they open-sourcing the compiler? The libraries used to actually build the code?

    Article was pretty short on details there.

    1. Re:What does it mean to open source a language? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Article was pretty short on details there.

      That's because it's not accurate.

  20. Great!! by palmerj3 · · Score: 1

    Now I can write an OPEN-SOURCE program to track the killers IP!

    1. Re:Great!! by Gibgezr · · Score: 1

      I snorted coffee when I read this...thanks for making my day :)

  21. Does anyone care? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Anyone? Anybody? ...... I like tumbleweeds, they're strange and kinda pretty in an alien way......

  22. This had better be false by YojimboJango · · Score: 1

    I have invested so much time and effort convincing management to let me remove all references to VB6 from our internal systems. If this turns out to be true and some jackass ports legacy support for those awful spaghetti messes to linux I will need professional counseling, and a new job.

    I've been thanking MS for years for the decision to kill off VB6 and will hate them with the fury of a thousand suns if that corpse rises again as an oss zombie.

    1. Re:This had better be false by aztracker1 · · Score: 1

      Generally speaking VB6 was so intrinsically tied to COM it would be very hard to port.

      --
      Michael J. Ryan - tracker1.info
    2. Re:This had better be false by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is false! \o/
      We have an office application that depends on the exact visual basic in MS Office '97..., and although I hate to say it, Excell'97 runs very nice on decent CPU with some fast DDR3 memory.

  23. Re:The Product Management for VS says it's not tru by msmoriarty · · Score: 2

    The official statement we got from Microsoft was that the story was not confirmed -- it didn't deny it. Story has been updated with that. Invited Doug Seven to give official comment as well.

    Our source on this is solid. Additional details were confirmed. We do stand by the story.

  24. Re:The Product Management for VS says it's not tru by Unknown+Relic · · Score: 1

    And the person who broke the "news" wasn't even trying to pretend it was true.

    http://twitter.com/#!/RoyOsherove/status/71334987152101376
    @RoyOsherove here's a more official video of announcement of VB6 going open source from #msteched http://bit.ly/79qHlZ

  25. VB on Linux? by MasterOfGoingFaster · · Score: 1

    I see where Microsoft says it's not true. But what if MS did open source VB? What would happen? What good and what bad?

      - Lots of old Windows apps become available on Linux. (spread the love)
      - Lots of crap written by just-got-a-book-on-that "programmers" pollutes Linux. (spread the clap)

    When I read the headline, I figured it was an offensive move on MS's part. Sort of a pollute-the-waters strategy.

    --
    Place nail here >+
    1. Re:VB on Linux? by larry+bagina · · Score: 1

      You can already run windows crapps on Linux with WINE. But if MS did Open Source VB 6 (compiler and libraries), that wouldn't magically make all those VB6 crapps run natively on Linux. Best case, after the code generator and libraries were updated with something that runs under linux, you could dig up old VB 6 projects and re-compile them to run natively under Linux (and probably look like ass in GNOME or KDE).

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    2. Re:VB on Linux? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      VB6 is too deeply coupled to Windows, so I doubt you'll see anything useful for Linux.
      1. Visual Basic is laden with awful syntax, so nobody really wants to use it.
      2. Visual Basic is heavily dependent on Windows.
      3. Even if #2 is worked-around, most non-trivial VB6 programs make deliberate calls to various Win32 library functions.

      The ONLY reason VB6 had a bright moment is because developers could write COM and ActiveX components without having to learn the ugly COM plumbing.

  26. Re:The Product Management for VS says it's not tru by Charliemopps · · Score: 1

    Their public denial is on Twitter? Color me confused but I think someone, somewhere isn't being told the whole truth at M$FT.

  27. Oh please... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just let that atrocity die already.

  28. Rumor mill working overtime on this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is not true, it's a cascade of people with no ability to confirm this saying that it's confirmed.

  29. Senior Product Manager Says Rumor Not True by kai_hiwatari · · Score: 2

    Rob Osherove was joking when he tweeted that VB6 is being open sourced. If you look at his tweets, he followed that tweet with another with a link to "video of the official announcement" which is actually a link to Never Gonna Give Up. Looks like he was rickrolling. Anyway, Dough Seven, the Senior Product Manager of the Visual Team, had also tweeted that the rumors are not true. https://twitter.com/#!/dseven/status/71352709785198592 via http://digitizor.com/2011/05/20/microsoft-visual-basic-6-not-open-source/

    1. Re:Senior Product Manager Says Rumor Not True by Steauengeglase · · Score: 1

      Thanks. Too bad though.

    2. Re:Senior Product Manager Says Rumor Not True by tibit · · Score: 1

      I don't think that the limited manpower available in the OSS community should be drained by taking over maintenance of the monster VB6 is. If anything, it'd be a true-to-form Trojan Horse "gift" from MS to the OSS folk. Just think about it: instead of cool new things being done, people wasting tons of time tinkering with a dead code base, trying to bring it back, reimplementing whatever bits and pieces are necessary to keep it alive, etc. It'd get way more involvement than a software archaeology project deserves. I wouldn't mind if MS simply wiped all of their copies of VB6 codebase.

      --
      A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
  30. A Decade or so Too late... by MrSteveSD · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This would have been nice a decade or so ago when they dumped VB6, resulting in lots of panicked and expensive migrations over to .NET. Many companies had made huge investments in VB6 and felt totally betrayed (I worked for one of them). They were hoping for a new improved version of VB6 to be released (some new features here and there) and instead they got something massively different.

    If VB6 had been some kind of open standard back then, another company would have come along and basically said "Don't panic everyone, your huge investments in VB6 are safe. We are releasing OpenVB Studio and will continue to improve the language.". That would have been a disaster for Microsoft of course.

    1. Re:A Decade or so Too late... by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 1

      Yes indeed.

      As an intern, I wrote a HUGE VB6 application (well, several apps that worked together) that sucked Kronos time card data into an SQL Server DB and then crunched it into various metrics for management (it replaced a horrific Access DB app). This was in 1998 or 9.

      It is my information that they are still using it today, but I'll bet they plan of bringing in an intern to move it to .NET

      --
      If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    2. Re:A Decade or so Too late... by devent · · Score: 1

      Services you well to invest in a core business technology that is proprietary and is controlled by a single company. But Microsoft is so big, their technology is a save bet? No, Microsoft is free to change their technology however and whenever they wish, because they are so big they won't care about small firms.

      My ques is that your firm is now replacing the software with a .NET implementation.

      --
      http://www.mueller-public.de - My site http://www.anr-institute.com/ - Advanced Natural Research Institute
    3. Re:A Decade or so Too late... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My organization still has applications built with VB6 - they run just fine.

  31. DENIED (it is not true) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://twitter.com/#!/dseven/status/71359684904366081
    "I'm the Director of Product Management for Visual Studio Tools & Languages. There's no more solid source than me. Its not true."

  32. Go Away? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I thought MS was dedicating itself to ridding support for VB6 in Windows 8 (was supposedly not making Win7)? Open source is great, but how would you run it? This does not make any sense at all.

  33. OMG! by pz · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Seriously? News articles where tweets are being used as a primary source?

    That's it, I'm giving up on Slashdot. It's jumped the shark.

    --

    Put my fist through my alarm clock with its ding-dong death inside my ear. - The Blackjacks.
    1. Re:OMG! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It gets worse. This is is the tweets

      http://twitter.com/#!/RoyOsherove/status/71287262842859520 is the tweet that this 'redmond news' appears to be reporting from. Later on, from the same twitter:

      http://twitter.com/#!/RoyOsherove/status/71334987152101376 [caution; rickroll]

      Yeah. Blah.

    2. Re:OMG! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So long!

    3. Re:OMG! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This puts Slashdot on par with CNN

  34. In related news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've decided to open source my shit. Anyone who wants to can copy and use a log of my shit. It's just as valuable as VB.

  35. Re:The Product Management for VS says it's not tru by spongman · · Score: 2

    who'd have thought? from such reputable new sources, too!

    twitter -> reddev -> timothy -> slashdot

    damn, those nyt people must be shaking in their boots.

  36. Nobody uses VB. Try Gambas. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I mean if you like basic so much you can just use Gambas.

    Honestly, VB was a weak language in general. It's easy because it's visual and easy to work with for building quick user interfaces, but it's not very powerful. It's too high level to actually do anything.

    1. Re:Nobody uses VB. Try Gambas. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hate these kind of comments.
      As someone who actually works for a living in a small division of a large company I can tell you that VB6 is exactly the kind tool needed that I don't have a proper alternative to yet.

      In the real world of non-IT related business tiny little 'one off' GUI programs are needed all the time for various tasks, and small rather static 'one off' interfaces and file conversion utilities are also needed all the time. No money, time, or need for anything else.

      The thing about VB6 is that creating a GUI, interfacing to a database, and manipulating a few strings takes a few minutes, 'compiles' and then runs on every Windows machine XP, Win7, Server 2000, Server 2008, without doing anything other than running the EXE.

      If you just need a screen, some buttons, and reading/writing data it is the best tool around still. Do in minutes what takes hours in other tools.

      One real-wold example was when we needed a very small utility to record routine work on some equipment we have.
      The junior guy went to do it with .Net. He had about 100 lines of code and then we constantly had issues when the .net libraries got updates. Perhaps there was something he did 'wrong' but the issue was there.
      He was out one day, the manager was ranting, so I recreated it from scratch without ever looking at his code.
      15 lines of code and the app works on every crappy machine in the place.

      Another issue with the VB .Net to VB6 compare is how 'wordy' the .Net VB is compared. I have to type twice as many characters to get the same job done. The same job that was slick and easy 10 years ago is now a pain in the ass. That is not progress.
       

  37. Gambas by elucido · · Score: 1

    Linux already has Gambas. Why bother with VB?

  38. Re:The Product Management for VS says it's not tru by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    no, nyt is grabbing stories from twitter too. welcome to the twenty-teens. strap in, because it's gonna be a helluva ride!

  39. EEE by cadeon · · Score: 1

    Embrace, Extend, Extinguish doesn't work with Open Source.

    1. Re:EEE by Sarten-X · · Score: 1

      Sure it does. A malevolent company could release something older as OSS to promote something newer. Victims come for the free stuff, then get pressured towards the Latest Greatest Thing to get a few missing (vital) features. The license for Latest Greatest Thing forbids use of the open version across the entire organization, so everybody's now locked into using the new (and expensive) product. "Open Source" effectively becomes a marketing gimmick for a trial version of a product.

      --
      You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
  40. you should read the entire article by meta+coder · · Score: 1

    We contacted Microsoft for response to this story. A Microsoft spokesperson said the story was not confirmed by Microsoft, but the statement she gave did not deny the story. It reads, "The plan to open source [VB6 on] CodePlex is rumor, and has not been confirmed by Microsoft."

    also this tweet refuses such version

  41. And nothing of value was gained! by Xtifr · · Score: 1

    And nothing of value was gained! :)

    Seriously, though, I have to offer kudos to MS for this, but I still can't help thinking that it's a trap of some sort, given MS's long and sordid history of misdeeds and betrayal. But this is a move I can applaud, even as I eye it with caution (and a rather severe lack of personal interest).

    All assuming its true, which seems to be less than certain at this point.

  42. Confirmed: Some people are idiots. by sstamps · · Score: 1

    Seriously. Come on, a friggin' TWEET from some random twat is CONFIRMATION? O.o

    --
    -SS "Teach the ignorant, care for the dumb, and punish the stupid."
  43. Visual FoxPro by Quick+Reply · · Score: 1

    If only it was true, and Visual FoxPro (Not necessarily the IDE) should also be open sourced, since MS are eager to stop supporting it on newer platforms, and open-source developers can keep it running for them.

    1. Re:Visual FoxPro by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      I remember it was also rumored that FoxPro would be open-sourced roughly 5 years ago, only to be retracted or "clarified" to only be sub-tools. Same pattern it seems.

  44. Danger! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is an attempt by MS to kill all open source people at once. Don't look at it!

  45. Hip hip hooray by cybrpnk2 · · Score: 1

    VB6 is an American classic just like a 64 Mustang. Forget OOP and just git er done. Its back to the future and I couldn't be happier. Welcome back old friend!

    1. Re:Hip hip hooray by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More like a 77 Pinto...

    2. Re:Hip hip hooray by CodeBuster · · Score: 1

      Or the 1961 Corvair: "Unsafe at any speed..."

  46. Retracted: News story by kootsoop · · Score: 1

    Click on the link in the story. It's been retracted. Nothing to see here, please move along.

    --
    "Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get" - Jerry Avins
  47. AND It isn't true! by msmoriarty · · Score: 2

    We had another source who heard it completely Separately from this source. But after we went back to the source with that denial he pulled his confirmation. We have issued a correction and are working to get the story out there to everyone that the story is NOT true. We are extremly sorry for this.

  48. Re:good thinking on their part... oh no.. wait! by Zaiff+Urgulbunger · · Score: 1

    Update:

    CORRECTED: Microsoft Strongly Denies VB 6 Open Source Rumors, Sources Retract Statement

  49. Wow! VB6 by nicktindall · · Score: 1

    Whats next I wonder? Microsoft Bob - lookout Linux!

  50. Who will pick it up? by seeker_1us · · Score: 1

    I wonder if Miguel de Icza's new company will pick up development...

    1. Re:Who will pick it up? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wonder if Miguel de Icza's new company will pick up development...

      probably when hell freezes over.

      Miguel will have his hands full with getting Xamarin up and running, and replacing monotouch / monodroid for now.

  51. Re:The Product Management for VS says it's not tru by c0lo · · Score: 1

    And nothing of value was lost

    --
    Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
  52. Sounds Nice by bxwatso · · Score: 1

    Sounds nice, but I am waiting for the source to Ashton Tate's Full Impact.

  53. Just use mono or phoenix by youn · · Score: 1

    Phoenix basic looked interesting though not open source
    http://www.janus-software.com/phoenix_features.html

    of course, there is vb.net implementation by mono project... I hope they survive the new management though it is open source so theoretically it could be picked up at any point

    --
    Never antropomorphize computers, they do not like that :p
    1. Re:Just use mono or phoenix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      or check out Gambas

  54. VB6 by hackus · · Score: 1

    So confess.

    How many of you losers actually program in that gibberish? ;-)

    -Hack

    --
    Got Geometrodynamics? Awe, too hard to figure out? Too bad.
    1. Re:VB6 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm stuck maintaining several internal programs that were written in vb6. I doubt that I'm the only one. I'd rather use almost any other language, but I don't get to make those decisions.

    2. Re:VB6 by spectrokid · · Score: 1

      Moved from VB6 to VB.NET. Say what you want, but as a chemical engineer, it was an accessible way of getting things done. Most VB apps I wrote will just run on their WinNT 4.0 computers until the infrastructure they are part of dies. The one I needed to migrate was of course royally fucked. VB.NET is less likely to go the same way, as they would have to drop support for all .NET languages, which would even piss off a core of C++ devs. Because of the .NET framework, VB is now a full featured language, even has support for fancy multi-threading shit.

      --

      10 ?"Hello World" life was simple then

  55. Somebody should punish Microsoft by Dainsanefh · · Score: 0

    by selling short MSFT stock to oblivion tomorrow. That should teach them the lesson not to spread false hopes and rumors.

    --
    Twitter: @dainsanefh
  56. I read: Microsoft to by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    open source IE6. I was impressed.

  57. No thanks. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have never before found use for this meme, but KILL IT WITH FIRE.

  58. The story had bee debunked but... by Roachie · · Score: 1

    What a great way for Micro$oft to strike a blow to Linux/FOSS than to have a bunch of applications abend with: "Unhanded exception: 0x80000146 in mscorlib.ocx.so" As a matter of fact... dont give them any ideas!

    --
    This sig is not paradoxical or ironic.
  59. Re:Quick C Also by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I would like to see the original Quick C released as open source.
    It was a great compiler to learn with.

  60. What's next? by droidsURlooking4 · · Score: 1

    Powerbuilder and SQL Windows!

  61. crap by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

    Microsoft denied and went back to our source and they pulled confirmation.

    What language is that supposed to be in?

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    1. Re:crap by cpghost · · Score: 1

      What language is that supposed to be in?

      In gossip, compiled into low-level journalism perhaps?

      --
      cpghost at Cordula's Web.
  62. VB6 source code by geefau · · Score: 1

    I'd be interested to see the source code for sure

  63. MicroSoft "Opensourcing" old software by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I know of a little something they SHOULD release to OpenSource... GPL or give it full to Public Domain compelte with sourcecode....

    AmigaBASIC. You know, the one and only thing bundled with Amiga Workbench 1.x that didn't work properly. Everything else worked fine, but AmigaBASIC was far to buggy for any proper go at anything.

    Then again, I guess MS based QuickBASIC on the AmigaBASIC model, then QBASIC PDS came along, and then they made QBASIC for Windows 3 and stuffed a lot of visual stuff on top of it and called it (thus) VisualBASIC.

    So it's not too far fetched that some paranoid lying aliens at redmond thinks "if we give them AmigaBASIC they're gonna make a better VisualBASIC thaan VisualBASIC and so we're screwed" :/

  64. And not just that. by Ecuador · · Score: 1

    The "random twat" even rickrolled: http://twitter.com/RoyOsherove/status/71334987152101376
    That was his third tweet on the subject...

    --
    Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent. Polar Scope Align for iOS
  65. meh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    instead of open sourcing it, they should kill it like they tried with all microsoft releases that had a '6' in it.
    (ie6, Windows mobile 6, VB6) all equally disgusting

  66. Re:enhancing...enhancing...enhance...GOT HIM! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or is there some secret in the VB6 code that the open source community can actually learn from?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hkDD03yeLnU

  67. It's for you. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    2002 called, it wants the shark back.

  68. There is no such thing as vb6. by leuk_he · · Score: 1

    vb6 would be great, but if they ever open sourced it i bet some critical components would not be open sourced. Like the IDE, and some (very essetial) database connectors. In my team there is still a vb6 application that we need to support, and open sourceing it would mean the step to the next os (windows xx) would still be supported.

    Everybody thinks that vb6 is not supported, but some working business application still use it, and migrating those applications to .Net will cost money without a business justification.

    Too bad it was only a official rickroll. ( 4 year too late.. but MS is catching up on the memes..)

  69. that would have been great by SuperDre · · Score: 1

    If MS was going to opensource VB6, that would have been great to a lot of VB6 developers who are currently having problems with getting the IDE running under Windows 7, also for upgrading vb6 to new tech.. Ofcourse I'd rather have them opensource the internal VB7 which never was published and later replaced with VB.NET (vb7 is said to have had real OO and better WINAPI support (for stuff like window hooking etc))..

    Personally I still like VB6 way more than VB.NET because I still don't see the real advantage of .NET other than YET ANOTHER FRAMEWORK... And let's not forget, a lot of developers still haven't got a clue that with .NET it's sooo easy to just rip their original sources using a program like Reflector (there are ways around it, but that would nullify the use of .NET)..

  70. Knew it was false by Y2KDragon · · Score: 1

    It said Microsoft and Open Source in the same sentence without "WILL NEVER BE" between it.

  71. The real question: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When will they take Microsoft BOB open source?

  72. Rather see the source to MacBASIC by WillAdams · · Score: 1

    Which Microsoft wound up w/ and used as the ``inspiration'' for VisualBASIC:

    http://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?project=Macintosh&story=MacBasic.txt

    Rather a shame that AppleScript Studio in XCode went away w/ Snow Leopard.

    William

    --
    Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
  73. it's a Trap! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    it's a Trap!

    Dont know why, but knowing Microsoft it's safe to assume it.

  74. BASIC on Altair by JonnyRocks · · Score: 1

    Not overly excited about VB6. I would, however, love to see the code for their first project: BASIC on Altair. Not for practical use but historical coolness.

    1. Re:BASIC on Altair by multipartmixed · · Score: 1
      --

      Do daemons dream of electric sleep()?
  75. So much.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    .. for the Rapture. I'm going back to sleep. Wake me when there's news.

  76. Re:good thinking on their part... oh no.. wait! by Script+Cat · · Score: 1

    Oh, man the disappointment. VB6 was the best. Ridiculously, super fricken easy, to program with actually working auto complete. Compare it with VBA in excel these days. None of the functions work though they show up in auto complete. I want VB6 on linux.

  77. May Fools Day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Welcome to Slashdot, May Fools Edition

  78. Re:The Product Management for VS says it's not tru by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

    We do stand by the story.

    Right up to the point where we admit it was all bullshit.

  79. gosh, thanks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i know we've all been waiting expectantly for this one...

  80. "Too good to be true"? by uberjack · · Score: 1

    Visual Basic (and all its variants, including .net) is an abortion of a language - they can keep it.

  81. It's not just Slashdot's fault... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    FWIW - the news article was originally (from what I've seen) posted on Redmond Developer News by Kathleen Richards. It was based off of a "reliable source" that had contacted them through Twitter.

    Even though Slashdot did post this story, I don't believe the fault should be entirely put on them. I'd hope that in the future Slashdot keeps a list of authors that seem not to gather credible information or multiple sources, but Twitter recently has been the source of some relevant information (such as the Bin Laden operation in which a local resident tweeted information regarding helicopters and loud noises).

  82. Dang. Got my hopes up... by neminem · · Score: 1

    That would have been *extremely* helpful. As someone who had to reverse-engineer the way VB6 serialized a particular object, as part of a migrator from a previous version of an application that had a component that saved its information by dropping a raw, ugly binary blob straight from VB6 into its save file, and that we then needed to read back later without VB6... I think I did a pretty job of it, all things considered, but I would have been extremely happy to replace that whole VB6-deserialization class with one taken from the original source. Oh well.

  83. Heil Hitler by Dainsanefh · · Score: 0

    Sieg Heil!

    --
    Twitter: @dainsanefh
    1. Re:Heil Hitler by Dainsanefh · · Score: 1

      Sieg Heil Sieg Heil!

      --
      Twitter: @dainsanefh
    2. Re:Heil Hitler by Dainsanefh · · Score: 1

      Sieg Heil Sieg Heil! Sieg Heil Sieg Heil!

      --
      Twitter: @dainsanefh
    3. Re:Heil Hitler by Dainsanefh · · Score: 1

      asgoinsadoi gnasodi ngasoidngoasidn gosaidng osaidngsadh

      --
      Twitter: @dainsanefh
    4. Re:Heil Hitler by Dainsanefh · · Score: 1

      rg dsfgbdfvbcvb vxcbxcvbc bdfsgsdr erherhew

      --
      Twitter: @dainsanefh