Comparing WT Library - 2011 vs. 2012

by MeanMrMustard 31 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • MeanMrMustard

    Hola Bobcat,

    The Visual C++ with MFC pre-dates VB 6. I think even VB 5. During that time it was Borland C++ competing with Microsoft. I don't even think Borland is around anymore. But during the time, I thought it was better than MFC. Not much in the way of Windows development is outside of .NET these days. But it looks like WT Library is hanging on!

    I used to do all sorts of VB.NET development, but now my work is C# and web based. I agree, it is terribly hard to keep up with all the stuff that is out there...


  • Bobcat

    Do you think it would be worth the effort now to learn VB.Net? Or are people moving away from that? Or is it even relevant any more? I always viewed VB6 as quite interesting (after you learn how to hack away at its surface shortcomings). But in the end it is still 32 bit and orphaned by MS. (There is actually an effort going on to divorce VB6 from the MS runtime - here - but it will be a while.) Thanks for your thoughts.

    I don't know whatever happened to Borland's C, but their Delphi product was sold to these guys. It looks interesting but the retail for the IDE is way out of my league. I used to have Delphi Version 1. But when I saw VB's ease of use I went in that direction. (Looking at the Delphi link some more, I think this is where Borland's C went to also.)

    That is interesting about WT Library and VC++ w/ MFC. The latest version of the WT Library says it will only work on Win 7 or higher. So I take it they are doing stuff with the API that previous Windows can't handle.

    My programming experience started with VB-Dos. I learned on it to try to improve a friends TMS program written in QuickBasic 7.

    (Incidentally, the link to "VB dot Net above I did not put into place. And the JWN editor would not allow me to remove it -?!?!)

Share this