VB 2005 Express..NOT OT...really!

So I made a comment a few days ago about it being time to try .Net, the
Express Edition.

Apparently not yet. Of course I didn't read the 'requirements' on the d/l
page, but VB2005EE REQUIRES SP2 to be installed on an XP computer.

So they want me to stop using VB6, but they don't want me to try VB2005EE,
because I haven't done SP2 yet (and probably never will unless it's a fresh
install on a clean box).

I may NEVER be able to go to .Net. Oh well.

There is no reason not to install SP2.

--

Randy Birch
MS MVP Visual Basic
http://vbnet.mvps.org/

Please reply to the newsgroups so all can participate.




"DanS" <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@a.d.e.l.p.h.i.a..n.e.t> wrote in message
news:Xns9759AB6DFD510idispcom@216.196.97.142...
: So I made a comment a few days ago about it being time to try .Net, the
: Express Edition.
:
: Apparently not yet. Of course I didn't read the 'requirements' on the d/l
: page, but VB2005EE REQUIRES SP2 to be installed on an XP computer.
:
: So they want me to stop using VB6, but they don't want me to try VB2005EE,
: because I haven't done SP2 yet (and probably never will unless it's a
fresh
: install on a clean box).
:
: I may NEVER be able to go to .Net. Oh well.

"Randy Birch" <rgb_removethis@mvps.org> wrote in news:#sGqlcIJGHA.500
@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl:

> There is no reason not to install SP2.
>

But there is no reason to install it either, for me anyway.

Will VB6 NOT work on XP SP2?

Lenny


"DanS" <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@a.d.e.l.p.h.i.a..n.e.t> wrote in message
news:Xns9759AB6DFD510idispcom@216.196.97.142...
> So I made a comment a few days ago about it being time to try .Net, the
> Express Edition.
>
> Apparently not yet. Of course I didn't read the 'requirements' on the d/l
> page, but VB2005EE REQUIRES SP2 to be installed on an XP computer.
>
> So they want me to stop using VB6, but they don't want me to try VB2005EE,
> because I haven't done SP2 yet (and probably never will unless it's a
fresh
> install on a clean box).
>
> I may NEVER be able to go to .Net. Oh well.

"Lenny Abbey" <labbey@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:ZG0Df.8224$vU2.4067@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> Will VB6 NOT work on XP SP2?
>
> Lenny
>
<snipped>

VB6 Works on XP SP1/2.

SP2 fixed a whole class of problems that malware terrorists can use.  That
additional security should be enough to get you to install it, unless, of
course, you like having known (and fixed) bugs in your system.

Mike Ober.

"DanS" <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@a.d.e.l.p.h.i.a..n.e.t> wrote in message
news:Xns975A51FEFAB5idispcom@216.196.97.142...
> "Randy Birch" <rgb_removethis@mvps.org> wrote in news:#sGqlcIJGHA.500
> @TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl:
> 
>
> But there is no reason to install it either, for me anyway.
>

More importantly, your application will only run on Windows XP SP2.
That's what the .NET 2005 runtime requires. Windows XP SP0 and SP1
won't work.

There are many shareware authors losing their business because they
moved to .NET without doing proper research beforehand.

"Michael D. Ober" <obermd.@.alum.mit.edu.nospam> wrote in
news:rq4Df.5593$1n4.5279@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net:

> SP2 fixed a whole class of problems that malware terrorists can use.
> That additional security should be enough to get you to install it,
> unless, of course, you like having known (and fixed) bugs in your
> system.
>
> Mike Ober.
>

See, that's what I don't understand. These 'bugs' are fixed, but there's
STILL a malware/spyware problem for the 'typical' user. Why ? Wasn't SP2
supposd to stop that ?

I'm not saying I've never done any updates, I've done one here and there,
but when I say I never did SP2, I should also say I never did SP1 either.

I've got a broadband connection, NAT router, incoming/outgoing firewall,
AV, and I don't use IE or Outlook/OE, and I'm the only user of this PC, and
I don't surf for porn. IMO, I'm pretty safe. Of course, I'm not one of
those 'typical' users either. Come on, I even wrote my own shell.

DanS

On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 10:59:48 -0600, DanS
<t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@a.d.e.l.p.h.i.a..n.e.t> wrote:
in <Xns975A7A177E0AFidispcom@216.196.97.142>

>"Michael D. Ober" <obermd.@.alum.mit.edu.nospam> wrote in
>news:rq4Df.5593$1n4.5279@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net:
> 
>
>See, that's what I don't understand. These 'bugs' are fixed, but there's
>STILL a malware/spyware problem for the 'typical' user. Why ? Wasn't SP2
>supposd to stop that ?
>
>I'm not saying I've never done any updates, I've done one here and there,
>but when I say I never did SP2, I should also say I never did SP1 either.
>
>I've got a broadband connection, NAT router, incoming/outgoing firewall,
>AV, and I don't use IE or Outlook/OE, and I'm the only user of this PC, and
>I don't surf for porn. IMO, I'm pretty safe. Of course, I'm not one of
>those 'typical' users either. Come on, I even wrote my own shell.
>
>DanS

With today's worms, you don't even need to surf to a malicious site - they'l
l
find your unpatched machine in a little less than your first three seconds
online.

---
Stefan Berglund

On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 10:21:45 GMT, "Lenny Abbey" <labbey@mindspring.com> wrot
e:
in <ZG0Df.8224$vU2.4067@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net>

>Will VB6 NOT work on XP SP2?
>
>Lenny

Eventually they'll get to that but for the time being it seems to work.

---
Stefan Berglund