Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!

Confirmed: Microsoft Says It Will Open Source VB 6

timothy posted more than 3 years ago | from the don't-knock-it-yet dept.

Microsoft 205

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."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

good thinking on their part (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36186292)

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

Re:good thinking on their part... oh no.. wait! (1)

Zaiff Urgulbunger (591514) | more than 3 years ago | (#36187560)

Update:

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

WHAT? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36186314)

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

Re:WHAT? (1)

BmlA (2179336) | more than 3 years ago | (#36186360)

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

And we care why? (2)

deinol (210478) | more than 3 years ago | (#36186342)

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?

Re:And we care why? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36186372)

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.

Re:And we care why? (1)

orangesquid (79734) | more than 3 years ago | (#36187498)

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.

Re:And we care why? (5, Funny)

fragfoo (2018548) | more than 3 years ago | (#36186374)

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.

Re:And we care why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36186946)

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...

Re:And we care why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36186378)

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)

Re:And we care why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36186412)

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

Re:And we care why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36186592)

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.

Re:And we care why? (2)

Steauengeglase (512315) | more than 3 years ago | (#36187200)

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

Re:And we care why? (1)

Tolkien (664315) | more than 3 years ago | (#36187508)

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.

Re:And we care why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36186444)

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...

Re:And we care why? (1)

icebraining (1313345) | more than 3 years ago | (#36186742)

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

Re:And we care why? (1)

Jimbookis (517778) | more than 3 years ago | (#36186530)

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?

Re:And we care why? (2)

syousef (465911) | more than 3 years ago | (#36187404)

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!

Re:And we care why? (4, Insightful)

Sc4Freak (1479423) | more than 3 years ago | (#36186538)

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.

Re:And we care why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36187164)

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

Re:And we care why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36187258)

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.

Re:And we care why? (1)

PsychicX (866028) | more than 3 years ago | (#36187588)

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.

Re:And we care why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36186620)

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.

Re:And we care why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36187314)

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.

Re:And we care why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36186928)

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.

Nobody uses VB. Try Gambas. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36186968)

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.

Re:And we care why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36187332)

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.

Re:And we care why? (1)

jcr (53032) | more than 3 years ago | (#36187392)

Software archaeology?

-jcr

Re:And we care why? (2)

Hangin10 (704729) | more than 3 years ago | (#36187460)

VBDOS was amazing.

Re:And we care why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36187524)

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.

One Word (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36186348)

*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.

Re:One Word (1)

tibit (1762298) | more than 3 years ago | (#36186366)

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

And no... (0)

thedarb (181754) | more than 3 years ago | (#36186354)

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

Re:And no... (1)

LordLucless (582312) | more than 3 years ago | (#36186410)

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

Re:And no... (1)

Samantha Wright (1324923) | more than 3 years ago | (#36187234)

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.

Re:And no... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36187536)

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...

Honestly, this is the direction MS needs to go (1)

atlasdropperofworlds (888683) | more than 3 years ago | (#36186364)

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...

Re:Honestly, this is the direction MS needs to go (1)

Lunix Nutcase (1092239) | more than 3 years ago | (#36186484)

Microsoft has been open sourcing things for years now.

Re:Honestly, this is the direction MS needs to go (1)

hot soldering iron (800102) | more than 3 years ago | (#36187062)

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.

Re:Honestly, this is the direction MS needs to go (1)

Gadget_Guy (627405) | more than 3 years ago | (#36187358)

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 [microsoft.com] 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 [opensource.org] and MS-RL [opensource.org] listed as OSI approved licences. I searched the text, but neither of them mention any Windows platform requirement.

Re:Honestly, this is the direction MS needs to go (1)

amliebsch (724858) | more than 3 years ago | (#36187052)

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."

Re:Honestly, this is the direction MS needs to go (1)

Steauengeglase (512315) | more than 3 years ago | (#36187320)

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.

Re:Honestly, this is the direction MS needs to go (1)

RobbieThe1st (1977364) | more than 3 years ago | (#36187376)

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.

Awesoem news but what's part are open source? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36186368)

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

A Cunning Plan (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36186370)

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

A museum exhibit (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36186382)

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.

Re:A museum exhibit (1)

jonsmirl (114798) | more than 3 years ago | (#36186428)

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.

I know one developer... (1)

suprcvic (684521) | more than 3 years ago | (#36186390)

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.

Re:I know one developer... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36187412)

Tell him about REALBasic.

What license? (2)

jonwil (467024) | more than 3 years ago | (#36186392)

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?

Re:What license? (2)

EvanED (569694) | more than 3 years ago | (#36186434)

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.

Re:What license? (1)

Sc4Freak (1479423) | more than 3 years ago | (#36186584)

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.

Re:What license? (1)

marcosdumay (620877) | more than 3 years ago | (#36187048)

"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.

Re:What license? (2)

Lunix Nutcase (1092239) | more than 3 years ago | (#36186520)

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.

Re:What license? (1)

Steauengeglase (512315) | more than 3 years ago | (#36187354)

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.

i love open source (2)

virtuosonic (1880050) | more than 3 years ago | (#36186404)

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

IT'S A TRAP !! (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36186436)

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.

Vendor lock-in? (1)

hweimer (709734) | more than 3 years ago | (#36186448)

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?

Re:Vendor lock-in? (2)

SEE (7681) | more than 3 years ago | (#36186612)

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.

Re:Vendor lock-in? (1)

Expertus (1001346) | more than 3 years ago | (#36186970)

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.

Re:Vendor lock-in? (1)

larry bagina (561269) | more than 3 years ago | (#36186764)

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

Re:Vendor lock-in? (1)

marcosdumay (620877) | more than 3 years ago | (#36187070)

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...

Then what? (1)

owlstead (636356) | more than 3 years ago | (#36186458)

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.

The Product Management for VS says it's not true (5, Informative)

mythz (857024) | more than 3 years ago | (#36186474)

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

http://twitter.com/#!/dseven/status/71359684904366081 [twitter.com]
@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.

Re:The Product Management for VS says it's not tru (2)

msmoriarty (195788) | more than 3 years ago | (#36186596)

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.

Re:The Product Management for VS says it's not tru (1)

Unknown Relic (544714) | more than 3 years ago | (#36186614)

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

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

AND It isn't true! (2)

msmoriarty (195788) | more than 3 years ago | (#36187542)

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.

Re:The Product Management for VS says it's not tru (1)

Charliemopps (1157495) | more than 3 years ago | (#36186660)

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

Re:The Product Management for VS says it's not tru (2)

spongman (182339) | more than 3 years ago | (#36186952)

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

twitter -> reddev -> timothy -> slashdot

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

Re:The Product Management for VS says it's not tru (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36186998)

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

Next in line to be open source (1)

Megahard (1053072) | more than 3 years ago | (#36186488)

Bob and Clippy.

Re:Next in line to be open source (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36186624)

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

Ip address (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36186490)

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

What does it mean to open source a language? (1)

Mr. Underbridge (666784) | more than 3 years ago | (#36186516)

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.

Great!! (1)

palmerj3 (900866) | more than 3 years ago | (#36186548)

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

Does anyone care? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36186550)

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

This had better be false (1)

YojimboJango (978350) | more than 3 years ago | (#36186590)

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.

VB on Linux? (1)

MasterOfGoingFaster (922862) | more than 3 years ago | (#36186616)

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.

Re:VB on Linux? (1)

larry bagina (561269) | more than 3 years ago | (#36186810)

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).

Gambas (1)

elucido (870205) | more than 3 years ago | (#36186988)

Linux already has Gambas. Why bother with VB?

Re:VB on Linux? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36187562)

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.

Oh please... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36186664)

Just let that atrocity die already.

Rumor mill working overtime on this (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36186698)

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

Senior Product Manager Says Rumor Not True (2)

kai_hiwatari (1642285) | more than 3 years ago | (#36186716)

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 [twitter.com] via http://digitizor.com/2011/05/20/microsoft-visual-basic-6-not-open-source/ [digitizor.com]

Re:Senior Product Manager Says Rumor Not True (1)

Steauengeglase (512315) | more than 3 years ago | (#36187390)

Thanks. Too bad though.

A Decade or so Too late... (3, Insightful)

MrSteveSD (801820) | more than 3 years ago | (#36186800)

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.

DENIED (it is not true) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36186840)

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."

Go Away? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36186898)

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.

OMG! (3, Insightful)

pz (113803) | more than 3 years ago | (#36186914)

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.

Re:OMG! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36186972)

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.

In related news... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36186948)

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.

EEE (1)

cadeon (977561) | more than 3 years ago | (#36187020)

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

Re:EEE (1)

Sarten-X (1102295) | more than 3 years ago | (#36187342)

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 should read the entire article (1)

meta coder (752563) | more than 3 years ago | (#36187038)

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 [twitter.com] refuses such version

And nothing of value was gained! (1)

Xtifr (1323) | more than 3 years ago | (#36187246)

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 [slashdot.org] at this point.

Confirmed: Some people are idiots. (1)

sstamps (39313) | more than 3 years ago | (#36187260)

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

Visual FoxPro (1)

Quick Reply (688867) | more than 3 years ago | (#36187382)

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.

Danger! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36187396)

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

Hip hip hooray (1)

cybrpnk2 (579066) | more than 3 years ago | (#36187522)

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!

Retracted: News story (1)

kootsoop (809311) | more than 3 years ago | (#36187528)

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

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?