I occasionally use Turbo Pascal version 3.
I have a couple of VCR's that have only 36 Cable channels that work fine.
I have a 13" Sony TV that was purchased to use before IBM introduced a Color 
Monitor.
I keep a Win 98 machine active for some favored legacy apps.

Just because it is old doesn't mean that it cannot still be useful!

OTH, XPPro & Delphi 7 see the most use...

John Ferrell    W8CCW
"My Competition is not my enemy"
http://DixieNC.US

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Tony Smith" <ajsmith@rivernet.com.au>
To: "'Microcontroller discussion list - Public.'" <piclist@mit.edu>
Sent: Monday, August 21, 2006 3:49 AM
Subject: RE: [EE] Re: Which Visual Basic


>> Robert A LaBudde wrote:
>> > I stopped using Microsoft development tools, because they introduce
>> > incompatibilities by intent and stop supporting their tools after a
>> > decade of use. I used there Basic compiler for 15 years before they
>> > discontinued that and went to Visual Basic. I used that for
>> 10 years
>> > before they discontinued that and went to a different framework,
>> > VB.NET.
>>
>> Visual Studio 6 with VB6 works fine under Windows XP.
>> Keep on using it for the next quarter of century.
>> What's the point of your message?
>
>
> Yeah, I'd like to complain about not being able to buy "B" or "F" 
> batteries
> for my radio anymore, Amtel continually obsoleting parts and Microchip
> changing the programming algorithm all the time.  And where'd all the 
> 30-pin
> memory SIPPs go?
>
> 10 years out of a software package is not bad.  That's longer than you own 
> a
> vehicle or most electrical items.  Why MS doesn't support DOS products in
> 2006 is beyond me.
>
> Progress.  Bah.
>
> That said, "incompatibilities by intent" is a bit of an overstatement. 
> Most
> old Basic code will run in VB; lines, gosubs and all.  VB.Net is a 
> different
> matter, even then there is a converter that works unless you're doing
> something weird.  No pleasing some people.  The OP would be happier with
> Delphi.
>
>
>> > designing a GUI in VB6 was much easier and more flexible.
>> > Classes were also nice for modularity. However, PB8 makes
>> subroutine
>> > DLLs and is much more flexible with hardware.
>>
>> VB6 works fine even on boxes which cost virtually nothing now.
>> What hardware are you talking about?
>>
>> Regards.
>> MS
>
>
> Bit puzzled at that one, XP abstracts the hardware, so you need to load
> custom drivers to access some of it.  But that XP's fault, not VB.  So
> Powerbasic is probably in the same boat.  Maybe PB still has the OUT
> statement, that should be fun under Windows.  Imagine the complaints when
> Vista comes out.
>
> Tony
>
> -- 
> http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
> View/change your membership options at
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
> 


-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist