3 ms·

I think the comparison is a little non-sequitur. Classic visual basic hasn't had a feature released since 1998 and supported ended in 2005 (with extended in 200

I think the comparison is a little non-sequitur. Classic visual basic hasn't had a feature released since 1998 and supported ended in 2005 (with extended in 2008). It's not a part of Windows itself per se, but a runtime environment. Couldn't you just as well have written an app in Java, which has also kept good backwards compatibility and could still be run on both Windows and MacOS with minimal changes?

JohnTHaller 6y ago
Windows maintains backwards compatibility to an amazing level compared to Macs. If there were a version of Visual Basic for Mac released alongside the Windows version back in 1998, it would have been a classic Mac app which Apple dropped support for after Mac OS 10.4 and never had on Intel-based Macs. If Microsoft had updated this theoretical Visual Basic for Intel-based Macs running Mac OS X back in 2008, Apple would have dropped support for it with Catalina, which ditched 32-bit app support. What you're hoping for just wouldn't have worked except for a runtime that was still being supported by the publisher to make the jump from Mac Classic to OS X and then again from 32-bit to 64-bit as Apple broke backwards compatibility. If Microsoft had somehow brought Mac VB out of retirement twice and done both of the above, Apple would be dropping support for it again a few years from now when they drop Rosetta and only support M1-based apps on Mac OS.
- pjmlp 6y ago
  Here is a more modern example, after acknowledging that WinRT hasn't been the success they wanted, and starting the Reunion project to merge Win32 and UWP worlds, they are still running them in parallel and it will take several years to fix 8 years of doubling down on WinRT in detriment of Win32, but they will eventually get there even if the ride isn't as smooth as it should be (like killing C++/CX). However until then, UWP apps will keep running.
II2II 6y ago
VB6 is a good demonstration of the point being made. Even though development stopped two decades ago and support ended a decade ago, they can continue to use it. They probably didn't anticipate development of VB being dropped so soon, but Microsoft had (and continues to have) a history of maintaining backward compatibility. While dropping support for VB would have had negative consequences and using Java may have been better, we only know that in hindsight. Java was about half the age of VB at that point in time, it's most vocal advocates seemed to be more interested in cutting Microsoft down to size, while it had a mixed reception among both developers and end users. None of those qualities bode well in the long term, especially from the perspective of those invested in Microsoft technologies.

JohnTHaller 6y ago

Windows maintains backwards compatibility to an amazing level compared to Macs. If there were a version of Visual Basic for Mac released alongside the Windows version back in 1998, it would have been a classic Mac app which Apple dropped support for after Mac OS 10.4 and never had on Intel-based Macs. If Microsoft had updated this theoretical Visual Basic for Intel-based Macs running Mac OS X back in 2008, Apple would have dropped support for it with Catalina, which ditched 32-bit app support. What you're hoping for just wouldn't have worked except for a runtime that was still being supported by the publisher to make the jump from Mac Classic to OS X and then again from 32-bit to 64-bit as Apple broke backwards compatibility. If Microsoft had somehow brought Mac VB out of retirement twice and done both of the above, Apple would be dropping support for it again a few years from now when they drop Rosetta and only support M1-based apps on Mac OS.

pjmlp 6y ago
Here is a more modern example, after acknowledging that WinRT hasn't been the success they wanted, and starting the Reunion project to merge Win32 and UWP worlds, they are still running them in parallel and it will take several years to fix 8 years of doubling down on WinRT in detriment of Win32, but they will eventually get there even if the ride isn't as smooth as it should be (like killing C++/CX). However until then, UWP apps will keep running.

II2II 6y ago

VB6 is a good demonstration of the point being made. Even though development stopped two decades ago and support ended a decade ago, they can continue to use it. They probably didn't anticipate development of VB being dropped so soon, but Microsoft had (and continues to have) a history of maintaining backward compatibility. While dropping support for VB would have had negative consequences and using Java may have been better, we only know that in hindsight. Java was about half the age of VB at that point in time, it's most vocal advocates seemed to be more interested in cutting Microsoft down to size, while it had a mixed reception among both developers and end users. None of those qualities bode well in the long term, especially from the perspective of those invested in Microsoft technologies.