Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. The Lounge
  3. VC++ 6 v's VC++.NET 2003 Deathmatch

VC++ 6 v's VC++.NET 2003 Deathmatch

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Lounge
csharpc++delphidatabasevisual-studio
18 Posts 14 Posters 0 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • G Giles

    Okay what do people think. I've been using Visual Studio .NET since it came out and complained like everyone else about no Classwizard etc, but grew to love it, and 2003 fixes so many little problems. I recently had to do a C++ project from scratch on Visual C++ 6, and had to put up with its complaining when saving all the files that a file was in use. That and a lack of optimisation for more modern processors beyond the Pentium Pro, and the fact that the complier is no where near as good as pointing out things like unsigned int cast to an int etc. Okay Visual Studio .NET 7 had a sloooow dependecy checker, but thats fixed in 2003. So what do people think who are using 2003 or VC6 - go on have a play. I have fond memories of it (I finally fled the Borland C++ nest for good having started with Visual C++ 5), but so do not want to have to work with it on a daily basis again. As an aside - anyone else here use OWL once apon a time? :-D


    "Je pense, donc je mange." - Rene Descartes 1689 - Just before his mother put his tea on the table. Shameless Plug - Distributed Database Transactions in .NET using COM+

    D Offline
    D Offline
    Daniel Turini
    wrote on last edited by
    #2

    Giles wrote: So what do people think who are using 2003 or VC6 - go on have a play. VC6? That's so 90's ; Giles wrote: As an aside - anyone else here use OWL once apon a time? I always preferred MFC (Microsoft Frustration Classes) over OWL (Outdated Windows Library) Kant wrote: Actually she replied back to me "You shouldn't fix the bug. You should kill it"

    G 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • G Giles

      Okay what do people think. I've been using Visual Studio .NET since it came out and complained like everyone else about no Classwizard etc, but grew to love it, and 2003 fixes so many little problems. I recently had to do a C++ project from scratch on Visual C++ 6, and had to put up with its complaining when saving all the files that a file was in use. That and a lack of optimisation for more modern processors beyond the Pentium Pro, and the fact that the complier is no where near as good as pointing out things like unsigned int cast to an int etc. Okay Visual Studio .NET 7 had a sloooow dependecy checker, but thats fixed in 2003. So what do people think who are using 2003 or VC6 - go on have a play. I have fond memories of it (I finally fled the Borland C++ nest for good having started with Visual C++ 5), but so do not want to have to work with it on a daily basis again. As an aside - anyone else here use OWL once apon a time? :-D


      "Je pense, donc je mange." - Rene Descartes 1689 - Just before his mother put his tea on the table. Shameless Plug - Distributed Database Transactions in .NET using COM+

      D Offline
      D Offline
      dacris
      wrote on last edited by
      #3

      Giles wrote: As an aside - anyone else here use OWL once apon a time? I used it from ever since I started Windows programming, up to late 2001, when I just had to switch to VC++. But I didn't move to MFC, oddly, I decided Win32 was better. Then, I immediately jumped into .NET and loved it ever since. Me and .NET are inseparable. ;P

      M 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • D Daniel Turini

        Giles wrote: So what do people think who are using 2003 or VC6 - go on have a play. VC6? That's so 90's ; Giles wrote: As an aside - anyone else here use OWL once apon a time? I always preferred MFC (Microsoft Frustration Classes) over OWL (Outdated Windows Library) Kant wrote: Actually she replied back to me "You shouldn't fix the bug. You should kill it"

        G Offline
        G Offline
        Giles
        wrote on last edited by
        #4

        As I always rememeber, OWL was usually ahead of MFC in terms of adding new features, but obviously not so mainstream.


        "Je pense, donc je mange." - Rene Descartes 1689 - Just before his mother put his tea on the table. Shameless Plug - Distributed Database Transactions in .NET using COM+

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • G Giles

          Okay what do people think. I've been using Visual Studio .NET since it came out and complained like everyone else about no Classwizard etc, but grew to love it, and 2003 fixes so many little problems. I recently had to do a C++ project from scratch on Visual C++ 6, and had to put up with its complaining when saving all the files that a file was in use. That and a lack of optimisation for more modern processors beyond the Pentium Pro, and the fact that the complier is no where near as good as pointing out things like unsigned int cast to an int etc. Okay Visual Studio .NET 7 had a sloooow dependecy checker, but thats fixed in 2003. So what do people think who are using 2003 or VC6 - go on have a play. I have fond memories of it (I finally fled the Borland C++ nest for good having started with Visual C++ 5), but so do not want to have to work with it on a daily basis again. As an aside - anyone else here use OWL once apon a time? :-D


          "Je pense, donc je mange." - Rene Descartes 1689 - Just before his mother put his tea on the table. Shameless Plug - Distributed Database Transactions in .NET using COM+

          N Offline
          N Offline
          Nitron
          wrote on last edited by
          #5

          VS2003 owns! I love it! I initially had the class-wizard phobia, but it soon subsided. I love the easy-access message handlers, the props window, and the new interface. It sux when I have to use VS6 for legacy code that no-one's gonna port to VC7.1 X| - Nitron


          "Those that say a task is impossible shouldn't interrupt the ones who are doing it." - Chinese Proverb

          G 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • N Nitron

            VS2003 owns! I love it! I initially had the class-wizard phobia, but it soon subsided. I love the easy-access message handlers, the props window, and the new interface. It sux when I have to use VS6 for legacy code that no-one's gonna port to VC7.1 X| - Nitron


            "Those that say a task is impossible shouldn't interrupt the ones who are doing it." - Chinese Proverb

            G Offline
            G Offline
            Giles
            wrote on last edited by
            #6

            Nitron wrote: I love the easy-access message handlers, the props window, and the new interface. Yep, me to. I think its a much better way of dealing with the message handlers. I've not had a good look at the Dialog editor yet in 2003, as I've been doing more class library stuff of late. Nitron wrote: It sux when I have to use VS6 for legacy code that no-one's gonna port to VC7.1 Yep, its a bit sad. I find it amazing the amount of places that are sticking wit Visual C++ 6 - the "We fear change!" bunch - they don't like the whole .NET thing because they don't have a clue what it is. Saying that I work for a big company and its about as nimble as a super tanker.


            "Je pense, donc je mange." - Rene Descartes 1689 - Just before his mother put his tea on the table. Shameless Plug - Distributed Database Transactions in .NET using COM+

            P 1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • G Giles

              Okay what do people think. I've been using Visual Studio .NET since it came out and complained like everyone else about no Classwizard etc, but grew to love it, and 2003 fixes so many little problems. I recently had to do a C++ project from scratch on Visual C++ 6, and had to put up with its complaining when saving all the files that a file was in use. That and a lack of optimisation for more modern processors beyond the Pentium Pro, and the fact that the complier is no where near as good as pointing out things like unsigned int cast to an int etc. Okay Visual Studio .NET 7 had a sloooow dependecy checker, but thats fixed in 2003. So what do people think who are using 2003 or VC6 - go on have a play. I have fond memories of it (I finally fled the Borland C++ nest for good having started with Visual C++ 5), but so do not want to have to work with it on a daily basis again. As an aside - anyone else here use OWL once apon a time? :-D


              "Je pense, donc je mange." - Rene Descartes 1689 - Just before his mother put his tea on the table. Shameless Plug - Distributed Database Transactions in .NET using COM+

              C Offline
              C Offline
              Chris Losinger
              wrote on last edited by
              #7

              I'll let you know as soon as I get my &*^(*^% VC2003 CD... :( -c To vote with no response is to follow the way of the coward.

              A 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • C Chris Losinger

                I'll let you know as soon as I get my &*^(*^% VC2003 CD... :( -c To vote with no response is to follow the way of the coward.

                A Offline
                A Offline
                Anders Molin
                wrote on last edited by
                #8

                Hmmm, I thought you guys in the states had already got yours. I ordered the $29 upgrade a loooong time ago, and is still waiting X| - Anders Money talks, but all mine ever says is "Goodbye!"

                J R A 3 Replies Last reply
                0
                • G Giles

                  Okay what do people think. I've been using Visual Studio .NET since it came out and complained like everyone else about no Classwizard etc, but grew to love it, and 2003 fixes so many little problems. I recently had to do a C++ project from scratch on Visual C++ 6, and had to put up with its complaining when saving all the files that a file was in use. That and a lack of optimisation for more modern processors beyond the Pentium Pro, and the fact that the complier is no where near as good as pointing out things like unsigned int cast to an int etc. Okay Visual Studio .NET 7 had a sloooow dependecy checker, but thats fixed in 2003. So what do people think who are using 2003 or VC6 - go on have a play. I have fond memories of it (I finally fled the Borland C++ nest for good having started with Visual C++ 5), but so do not want to have to work with it on a daily basis again. As an aside - anyone else here use OWL once apon a time? :-D


                  "Je pense, donc je mange." - Rene Descartes 1689 - Just before his mother put his tea on the table. Shameless Plug - Distributed Database Transactions in .NET using COM+

                  J Offline
                  J Offline
                  Joe Woodbury
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #9

                  I only get annoyed at the awkward ClassWizard replacement stuff when doing heavy UI work, but since I mostly work below that I've found VS.NET perfectly useable. I've only been using VS .NET 2003 for three days, but so far have no complaints. It does seem faster and in some cases, much faster. I still miss the ClassWizard, but am willing to exchange it for all the other neat things. I used OWL once many years ago on a fairly tricky (UI-wise)utility. The Borland IDE was a nightmare and I thought OWL used too many pointers. (Wouldn't be so bad if the stupid compiler put the "deletes" in the destructor for you.) A few months later, as an exercise, I ported the utility over to MFC. I instantly preferred MFC save for one really odd quirk--if I remember correctly, OWL did something similar to reflection, which MFC didn't have at the time. Whatever it was, it took me a while to get the same behavior (though being new to MFC was no-doubt a hinderance. When I last looked at the code, I couldn't remember what hung me up so badly.)

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • A Anders Molin

                    Hmmm, I thought you guys in the states had already got yours. I ordered the $29 upgrade a loooong time ago, and is still waiting X| - Anders Money talks, but all mine ever says is "Goodbye!"

                    J Offline
                    J Offline
                    James T Johnson
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #10

                    Anders Molin wrote: I thought you guys in the states had already got yours. I ordered mine the first day you could, and just got it on saturday. I can see why it cost $29 now, the package contained everything from the retail version except the fancy box. James "I despise the city and much prefer being where a traffic jam means a line-up at McDonald's" Me when telling a friend why I wouldn't want to live with him

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • A Anders Molin

                      Hmmm, I thought you guys in the states had already got yours. I ordered the $29 upgrade a loooong time ago, and is still waiting X| - Anders Money talks, but all mine ever says is "Goodbye!"

                      R Offline
                      R Offline
                      Robert Hinrichs
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #11

                      After waiting for quite some time for the upgrade, I called the toll-free number to check on the status and was routed to a Microsoft marketing person who wanted to ask me a "few questions" first. After I told her that it would not be OK for someone to call me at home, she routed my call to the order status person. This person said my order was in the warehouse ready to be shipped. I wonder if my call to check status initiated the shipment (after the interview)? Maybe just a coincidence.

                      S 1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • R Robert Hinrichs

                        After waiting for quite some time for the upgrade, I called the toll-free number to check on the status and was routed to a Microsoft marketing person who wanted to ask me a "few questions" first. After I told her that it would not be OK for someone to call me at home, she routed my call to the order status person. This person said my order was in the warehouse ready to be shipped. I wonder if my call to check status initiated the shipment (after the interview)? Maybe just a coincidence.

                        S Offline
                        S Offline
                        Stuart Dootson
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #12

                        Probably not - I phoned them up about my upgrade and they just said that there's a backlog of orders :-( Stuart Dootson 'Java, Basic, who cares - it's all a bunch of tree-hugging hippy cr*p'

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • G Giles

                          Okay what do people think. I've been using Visual Studio .NET since it came out and complained like everyone else about no Classwizard etc, but grew to love it, and 2003 fixes so many little problems. I recently had to do a C++ project from scratch on Visual C++ 6, and had to put up with its complaining when saving all the files that a file was in use. That and a lack of optimisation for more modern processors beyond the Pentium Pro, and the fact that the complier is no where near as good as pointing out things like unsigned int cast to an int etc. Okay Visual Studio .NET 7 had a sloooow dependecy checker, but thats fixed in 2003. So what do people think who are using 2003 or VC6 - go on have a play. I have fond memories of it (I finally fled the Borland C++ nest for good having started with Visual C++ 5), but so do not want to have to work with it on a daily basis again. As an aside - anyone else here use OWL once apon a time? :-D


                          "Je pense, donc je mange." - Rene Descartes 1689 - Just before his mother put his tea on the table. Shameless Plug - Distributed Database Transactions in .NET using COM+

                          M Offline
                          M Offline
                          Michael P Butler
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #13

                          OWL was the first Windows framework I used (Borland C++ 4.5 I think), after a couple of years of using Turbo Vision (DOS) with C++. This was used at home. I got a job in late '93 at a company who used MFC, even back then I considered it to be far superior to OWL and quickly kicked OWL into the trash. I've been an MS VC++ MFC man ever since. Michael 'War is at best barbarism...Its glory is all moonshine. It is only those who have neither fired a shot nor heard the shrieks and groans of the wounded who cry aloud for blood, more vengeance, more desolation. War is hell.' - General William Sherman, 1879

                          G 1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • A Anders Molin

                            Hmmm, I thought you guys in the states had already got yours. I ordered the $29 upgrade a loooong time ago, and is still waiting X| - Anders Money talks, but all mine ever says is "Goodbye!"

                            A Offline
                            A Offline
                            Anna Jayne Metcalfe
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #14

                            Me too. It's a pain waiting, as I have an add-in to test under 2003. :zzz: Anna :rose: Homepage | My life in tears "Be yourself - not what others think you should be" - Marcia Graesch "Anna's just a sexy-looking lesbian tart" - A friend, trying to wind me up. It didn't work. Trouble with resource IDs? Try the Resource ID Organiser Visual C++ Add-In

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • M Michael P Butler

                              OWL was the first Windows framework I used (Borland C++ 4.5 I think), after a couple of years of using Turbo Vision (DOS) with C++. This was used at home. I got a job in late '93 at a company who used MFC, even back then I considered it to be far superior to OWL and quickly kicked OWL into the trash. I've been an MS VC++ MFC man ever since. Michael 'War is at best barbarism...Its glory is all moonshine. It is only those who have neither fired a shot nor heard the shrieks and groans of the wounded who cry aloud for blood, more vengeance, more desolation. War is hell.' - General William Sherman, 1879

                              G Offline
                              G Offline
                              Giles
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #15

                              Michael P Butler wrote: (Borland C++ 4.5 I think), Yep, I think that was the point at which I moved away from Borland, around the time "Borland C++" became "C++ Builder".


                              "Je pense, donc je mange." - Rene Descartes 1689 - Just before his mother put his tea on the table. Shameless Plug - Distributed Database Transactions in .NET using COM+

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • D dacris

                                Giles wrote: As an aside - anyone else here use OWL once apon a time? I used it from ever since I started Windows programming, up to late 2001, when I just had to switch to VC++. But I didn't move to MFC, oddly, I decided Win32 was better. Then, I immediately jumped into .NET and loved it ever since. Me and .NET are inseparable. ;P

                                M Offline
                                M Offline
                                Matt Newman
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #16

                                dacris wrote: Me and .NET are inseparable. I didn't even know you could run .NET on Windows ME, but I guess that way MS runs things you wouldn't be able to seperate them if you wanted to :) Matt Newman

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • G Giles

                                  Nitron wrote: I love the easy-access message handlers, the props window, and the new interface. Yep, me to. I think its a much better way of dealing with the message handlers. I've not had a good look at the Dialog editor yet in 2003, as I've been doing more class library stuff of late. Nitron wrote: It sux when I have to use VS6 for legacy code that no-one's gonna port to VC7.1 Yep, its a bit sad. I find it amazing the amount of places that are sticking wit Visual C++ 6 - the "We fear change!" bunch - they don't like the whole .NET thing because they don't have a clue what it is. Saying that I work for a big company and its about as nimble as a super tanker.


                                  "Je pense, donc je mange." - Rene Descartes 1689 - Just before his mother put his tea on the table. Shameless Plug - Distributed Database Transactions in .NET using COM+

                                  P Offline
                                  P Offline
                                  Phil Martin
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #17

                                  Its not the fear factor (thankfully) where we work , but the enourmous cost. :(( Buying licenses for 15+ developers is a very expensive upgrade for us. Hopefully we'll be planning for the purchase in the next company budget.

                                  G 1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • P Phil Martin

                                    Its not the fear factor (thankfully) where we work , but the enourmous cost. :(( Buying licenses for 15+ developers is a very expensive upgrade for us. Hopefully we'll be planning for the purchase in the next company budget.

                                    G Offline
                                    G Offline
                                    Giles
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #18

                                    Well this IDE is free : http://www.icsharpcode.net/OpenSource/SD/Default.aspx[^] And you can download the MS C# compiler and .NET SDK for free as well. For Unit testing it has to be NUnit : Nunit.org[^] - even MS use it. May not be what people want, but its good enough for learning C# etc


                                    "Je pense, donc je mange." - Rene Descartes 1689 - Just before his mother put his tea on the table. Shameless Plug - Distributed Database Transactions in .NET using COM+

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    Reply
                                    • Reply as topic
                                    Log in to reply
                                    • Oldest to Newest
                                    • Newest to Oldest
                                    • Most Votes


                                    • Login

                                    • Don't have an account? Register

                                    • Login or register to search.
                                    • First post
                                      Last post
                                    0
                                    • Categories
                                    • Recent
                                    • Tags
                                    • Popular
                                    • World
                                    • Users
                                    • Groups