What went wrong with Visual Basic? Why didn't it become a bigger thing? Why didn't Microsoft build on it to make it better and more advanced?
basic != Visual Basic
>>106475228as anon pointed out, 6502 BASIC has nothing to do with Visual Basic>Why didn't it become a bigger thing? it became hugeVB6 was a very popular programming language and there are still VB6 codebases running in the world>Why didn't Microsoft build on it to make it better and more advanced?they didVB.NET runs on the CLR and is still available in Visual Studio in modern WindowsMicrosoft isn't adding new features, though, and while they've committed to security and bugfixes for the time being, they're probably going to sunset VB.NET at some pointthey recommend using C# for new projects instead of VB.NET
Bill himself wrote this code. In fact they had an emulator he and Paul wrote for some other system at Harvard where they could test and develop their BASIC without having to buy any development boards at all.MS-BASIC basically powered every home computer of the '80s.
>>106475228There's a special place in hell for retards like you
>>106475228Because Microsoft wanted to beat C++, but C++ developers would never switch to Visual Basic because the syntax is awful in comparison, so they came up with C# which had a much more familiar syntax and clearly it worked. In doing that it made Visual Basic redundant.
>>106475228I'm not sure what your inane questions have to do with your own thread's topic but VB6 was huge back then.Then this >>106476096 happened.
>>106475521Visual Basic is based on Basic though.
