I disagree. It only broke backward compatibility with VB6 when VB6 didn’t make any sense. Like byref arguments by default, or the useless “set” keyword, or coll

I disagree. It only broke backward compatibility with VB6 when VB6 didn’t make any sense. Like byref arguments by default, or the useless “set” keyword, or collections being inconsistently 0 or 1 based, stupid constraints on what types you can expose as a field or property in a class, or no way to distinguish empty strings and null. Having done the transition from VB6 to VB.net, yes there were a few things to learn but that was the only way to move on from legacy design choices.