This sounds great but I’m genuinely unable to figure out how to get to part one.
Not the thumbnail. Not the pink text “A History of Visusl Basic”. Not the number one on the list of chapters. Not the chapter ousted at the very bottom.
The next button is for a different article.
How am I supposed to navigate to the thing the article is advertising to me? It’s a very strange decision not to make it really easy with a strong call to action or obvious link.
My very first purchase on eBay was to buy a used copy of Visual Basic 6 Enterprise Edition sometime while I was in school.
Then for a period of time I lost the physical CD it came with, and couldn’t install it anymore on a new system. Some time later I remember finding the CD at the bottom of some box of random stuff and being so happy - it was scratched up and didn’t reliably install, but I think I managed to burn a copy of it onto a new disk complete with inkjet printed sticky disk label that resembled the original disk.
Any time VB comes up I repeat my same wishlist item. I would love for Microsoft to open source it, in any way, shape or form. I would love for the community to take a crack at adding things to VB6 like bugfixes, any missing features (my understanding is they don't own everything about VB6) and just overall general improvements, imagine VB6 with threading. I know its ancient, but it can still produce a native GUI application effortlessly.
I’d want this if only because I’m stuck maintaining old industrial software written in VB6 (it is omnipresent in manufacturing) and I’d like to have a development experience that is actually somewhat usable.
(No, TwinBasic isn’t adequate. No, a VB.NET migration isn’t feasible.)
You might want to mention the comedy series Microsoft used to run on MSDN. I think it was called “The .NET Show” or “VBTV”. It featured characters like the “VB Rapper” and “Head in a Box” (Ari and Chris). It was genuinely funny and they made at least a few episodes. I loved Microsoft back in those days. Unfortunately, I haven’t been able to find any trace of it online now. This was really long ago - around 2002, I believe.
Why on earth would you use an AI-generated image [1] (let me be clear: POOR AI IMAGE) for the banner of this project?
If you're going to use genai, you need to make sure it actually looks acceptable. Do at least one careful pass over it before publishing. Just look at the details:
- The text on the book spines doesn’t even spell “Microsoft” correctly.
- Dartmouth is spelled "Darmouth". SIGH.
- The screenshot on the CRT monitor doesn't remotely resemble any version of Visual Basic I’ve ever used and I’ve been using it since Visual Basic for DOS.
Using an image like this sets the tone and impression for the entire book going forward. Right now, that first impression isn’t good.
Haha wow you weren’t kidding. That image is so bad that it looks like it was generated using 3 year old models.
The computer screen I can forgive, but if they author genuinely doesn’t have access to modern image generation tools then they could have at least loaded that image up in GIMP, Paint.NET or even just MS Paint, and added the text themselves.
It won't be long before people realize that having poor AI images looks worse than having no images, in the same way that having a reaction GIF every other paragraph of a blog post fell out of style or deeply generic and unillustrative clip art or stock photos of puzzle pieces or featureless-white-3D-figure-with-hard-hat-holding-question-mark.
I sympathize with the motivations behind it, but it does look cruddy and cheapens the end result.
That computer (and chonky-boy floppy disk) look so unlike any real computer from back in the day that it honestly makes me question if the author knows anything about what that era was like.
My first impression was that the text style is dismayingly like either an AI wrote most of it or (to be charitable) the author’s writing has been heavily influenced by the current generation of LLM output. So the image style goes perfectly with it.
These AI images are an absolute plague these days. I’m glad more people think they’re genuinely awful. To me they’re absolutely disgusting. I think I’d honestly prefer Macromedia Flash ads over this.
Get used to it. This is the future we've created for ourselves. It's only going to get worse as people everywhere try to use AI to distinguish themselves. Expect everyone to be an artist, everyone to be an author, everyone to be a programmer. Slop. It's what's for dinner.
The problem isn’t the use of AI. It’s the lack of editorial effort to use AI well.
Modern image generation models can handle text fine. Or the author could have left those artefacts blank and added the text themselves in “post production”
The problem is the use of AI. It’s a reliable indicator that the author doesn’t actually care about the quality of the work, so I shouldn’t bother to read the text.
This is just lazy AI use as a replacement for lazy stock image use. The details of exactly how it sucks at its job while providing something that fills a checkbox for someone who has no concern for quality are somewhat different, but the basic failure is the same.
Same. My first paid programming job while I was in college was for writing VB 5 software for local businesses. The GUI builder was the obvious star, but you could also write sophisticated programs.
I remember the form designer was a standout feature. Microsoft added a complete UI framework into VB for DOS based on the standard ASCII character set.
VB for DOS really needed a version 2.0, but it never got it.
Much appreciated. VB6 was my first attempt at learning Win32 programming. I’ve written so many tools and games with it; it even helped me land my first job. A true golden age.
Or just plain FoxPro. I was writing dBase programs to put myself through undergrad in the late 1980s/early 1990s and I really liked the early DOS versions of FoxPro with their extensive mouse-driven TUI -- even more elaborate than the ones Borland had for their "Turbo" languages.
VB was practical and useful at the time, especially as a learning tool in school. I enjoyed testing the competitors that arose to emulate its abilities, including RapidQ Basic, Envelope Basic (a.k.a Phoenix Object Basic), some of which are documented here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BASIC
I think it would be cool to see a Documentary on programming languages, e.g. their history, rivalries, successes and downfalls, of the 80s, 90s and 2000s. If it is made correctly, with humor, it could be entertaining, perhaps even profitable.
There is definitely a story to be told in GUI based development environments, from VisualWorks / Digitalk smalltalk to VB to Delphi. Along with the also rans (PowerBuilder, the death of Clipper and dBase systems).
GUI interfaces were going to be a massive productivity goldmine compared to green screens and TUI interfaces. Now here we are back to those again in various forms and web browsers won in the end anyway.
Was a wild ride in the 1990s when it was happening in earnest.
Unironically, yes, this, Ifsuѧl Bacti1on|, and weird computer shape (extra-thick 3.5"-looking floppy and... what that slot is even supposed to be?) makes it look worse than it should. I get that the value is in other content, and this is just a basic illustration for the sake of having some picture (for aesthetics, I guess?). So it was made with minimum effort possible just to have something, that's cool, effort matters elsewhere.
But it doesn't only look sloppy or hastily made, it also looks inaccurate - and that really makes a bad impression. "Inaccurate" or "careless" are not the words any author should want their reader to think about.
A screenshot from an emulator, showing the same message but formatted as a BASIC program (just a bunch of PRINTs or REMs) - or something similarly simple to make, lacking glaring inauthenticity - would make a drastically better impression.
Related, very interesting and entertaining interview of Alan Cooper, including the story of him demo-ing ruby to Bill Gates
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FqtwGuGRjJM
This sounds great but I’m genuinely unable to figure out how to get to part one.
Not the thumbnail. Not the pink text “A History of Visusl Basic”. Not the number one on the list of chapters. Not the chapter ousted at the very bottom.
The next button is for a different article.
How am I supposed to navigate to the thing the article is advertising to me? It’s a very strange decision not to make it really easy with a strong call to action or obvious link.
I found it on the site's books section: https://evilgeniuslabs.ca/books/visual-basic-history
My very first purchase on eBay was to buy a used copy of Visual Basic 6 Enterprise Edition sometime while I was in school.
Then for a period of time I lost the physical CD it came with, and couldn’t install it anymore on a new system. Some time later I remember finding the CD at the bottom of some box of random stuff and being so happy - it was scratched up and didn’t reliably install, but I think I managed to burn a copy of it onto a new disk complete with inkjet printed sticky disk label that resembled the original disk.
Must had been mid/late 90s I think.
Had so much fun making stuff in VB back then.
Any time VB comes up I repeat my same wishlist item. I would love for Microsoft to open source it, in any way, shape or form. I would love for the community to take a crack at adding things to VB6 like bugfixes, any missing features (my understanding is they don't own everything about VB6) and just overall general improvements, imagine VB6 with threading. I know its ancient, but it can still produce a native GUI application effortlessly.
I’d want this if only because I’m stuck maintaining old industrial software written in VB6 (it is omnipresent in manufacturing) and I’d like to have a development experience that is actually somewhat usable.
(No, TwinBasic isn’t adequate. No, a VB.NET migration isn’t feasible.)
How hard could it be to just clone it, at this point?
The point is that is was included in Windows.
Already enterprise approved on the MS stack.
I know HN is all startups with macbooks on local admin, but in bigger companies even devs cannot just install whatever they want.
Gambas ;)
https://gambaswiki.org/website/en/main.html
I used to run it on a very crappy PC when it came out. The binary is probably pretty tiny and can likely be decompiled quite nicely with modern tools.
You might want to mention the comedy series Microsoft used to run on MSDN. I think it was called “The .NET Show” or “VBTV”. It featured characters like the “VB Rapper” and “Head in a Box” (Ari and Chris). It was genuinely funny and they made at least a few episodes. I loved Microsoft back in those days. Unfortunately, I haven’t been able to find any trace of it online now. This was really long ago - around 2002, I believe.
Why on earth would you use an AI-generated image [1] (let me be clear: POOR AI IMAGE) for the banner of this project?
If you're going to use genai, you need to make sure it actually looks acceptable. Do at least one careful pass over it before publishing. Just look at the details:
- The text on the book spines doesn’t even spell “Microsoft” correctly.
- Dartmouth is spelled "Darmouth". SIGH.
- The screenshot on the CRT monitor doesn't remotely resemble any version of Visual Basic I’ve ever used and I’ve been using it since Visual Basic for DOS.
Using an image like this sets the tone and impression for the entire book going forward. Right now, that first impression isn’t good.
[1] - https://evilgeniuslabs.ca/uploads/content/2026/05/6fd5a7b327...
Haha wow you weren’t kidding. That image is so bad that it looks like it was generated using 3 year old models.
The computer screen I can forgive, but if they author genuinely doesn’t have access to modern image generation tools then they could have at least loaded that image up in GIMP, Paint.NET or even just MS Paint, and added the text themselves.
It won't be long before people realize that having poor AI images looks worse than having no images, in the same way that having a reaction GIF every other paragraph of a blog post fell out of style or deeply generic and unillustrative clip art or stock photos of puzzle pieces or featureless-white-3D-figure-with-hard-hat-holding-question-mark.
I sympathize with the motivations behind it, but it does look cruddy and cheapens the end result.
Guy_pointing_up_saying_this.gif
MICROSOFT MARL was definitely my all-time favorite product from Microsoft.
I enjoyed programming |fsuAI Bact1lon|, but I only got started with version 5.
hahaha. IIRC Microsoft MARL is good friends with Microsoft BLOB.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Bob
The little-known predecessor to the Xbox and Surface, except for landscape architecture.
That computer (and chonky-boy floppy disk) look so unlike any real computer from back in the day that it honestly makes me question if the author knows anything about what that era was like.
My first impression was that the text style is dismayingly like either an AI wrote most of it or (to be charitable) the author’s writing has been heavily influenced by the current generation of LLM output. So the image style goes perfectly with it.
Thicc floppy disk.
The "Oomerd" button is probably the debugger by the sound of it?
I'm scared of the floppy disk used to load Visual Baction
These AI images are an absolute plague these days. I’m glad more people think they’re genuinely awful. To me they’re absolutely disgusting. I think I’d honestly prefer Macromedia Flash ads over this.
Get used to it. This is the future we've created for ourselves. It's only going to get worse as people everywhere try to use AI to distinguish themselves. Expect everyone to be an artist, everyone to be an author, everyone to be a programmer. Slop. It's what's for dinner.
The problem isn’t the use of AI. It’s the lack of editorial effort to use AI well.
Modern image generation models can handle text fine. Or the author could have left those artefacts blank and added the text themselves in “post production”
The problem is the use of AI. It’s a reliable indicator that the author doesn’t actually care about the quality of the work, so I shouldn’t bother to read the text.
This is just lazy AI use as a replacement for lazy stock image use. The details of exactly how it sucks at its job while providing something that fills a checkbox for someone who has no concern for quality are somewhat different, but the basic failure is the same.
I have a lot of fond memories of Visual Basic for MS-DOS 1.0.
I remember saving up for it at high school with my student discount. From memory it was about $120.
Same. My first paid programming job while I was in college was for writing VB 5 software for local businesses. The GUI builder was the obvious star, but you could also write sophisticated programs.
IIRC VB for DOS came out after the Windows version...
I remember the form designer was a standout feature. Microsoft added a complete UI framework into VB for DOS based on the standard ASCII character set.
VB for DOS really needed a version 2.0, but it never got it.
Much appreciated. VB6 was my first attempt at learning Win32 programming. I’ve written so many tools and games with it; it even helped me land my first job. A true golden age.
One thing which I'd be interested in being contextualized is the story of MacBasic:
https://www.folklore.org/MacBasic.html
and how other competing products such as RealBasic (somewhere I have a book on it) factored in.
I hope somebody writes a history of Visual FoxPro as well.
Or just plain FoxPro. I was writing dBase programs to put myself through undergrad in the late 1980s/early 1990s and I really liked the early DOS versions of FoxPro with their extensive mouse-driven TUI -- even more elaborate than the ones Borland had for their "Turbo" languages.
Excited to read the rest of this! Keep it up
Excellent Idea :)
VB was practical and useful at the time, especially as a learning tool in school. I enjoyed testing the competitors that arose to emulate its abilities, including RapidQ Basic, Envelope Basic (a.k.a Phoenix Object Basic), some of which are documented here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BASIC
I think it would be cool to see a Documentary on programming languages, e.g. their history, rivalries, successes and downfalls, of the 80s, 90s and 2000s. If it is made correctly, with humor, it could be entertaining, perhaps even profitable.
There is definitely a story to be told in GUI based development environments, from VisualWorks / Digitalk smalltalk to VB to Delphi. Along with the also rans (PowerBuilder, the death of Clipper and dBase systems).
GUI interfaces were going to be a massive productivity goldmine compared to green screens and TUI interfaces. Now here we are back to those again in various forms and web browsers won in the end anyway.
Was a wild ride in the 1990s when it was happening in earnest.
Ah yes, Mcosoft ΓΛAX and Microsoft Marl. Groundbreaking products that paved the way for Visual Basic, Visual Studio, and beyond.
Unironically, yes, this, Ifsuѧl Bacti1on|, and weird computer shape (extra-thick 3.5"-looking floppy and... what that slot is even supposed to be?) makes it look worse than it should. I get that the value is in other content, and this is just a basic illustration for the sake of having some picture (for aesthetics, I guess?). So it was made with minimum effort possible just to have something, that's cool, effort matters elsewhere.
But it doesn't only look sloppy or hastily made, it also looks inaccurate - and that really makes a bad impression. "Inaccurate" or "careless" are not the words any author should want their reader to think about.
A screenshot from an emulator, showing the same message but formatted as a BASIC program (just a bunch of PRINTs or REMs) - or something similarly simple to make, lacking glaring inauthenticity - would make a drastically better impression.
AI slop.