>>It's close to C/C++ in syntax; it does not have all the object model options of C++, and doesn't have the inconsistencies of the VB instruction set and syntax. You don't need a lot of operators to create a strong language; everything is in libraries - I don't have to write the code to perform formatted output every time, I just call functions or methods. The same idea as anything else in the .Net architecture - you don't need to know what goes on underneath the cover to program in C#; it's got at least the same degree of power of expressiveness as VB, without the quirks of expression.
>
>What always made C++ hard to me is all the memory management, all the pointers and all that kind of stuff. In C#, one is detached from the tough technical details. One simply deals with objects and methods and properties. That's why C# is pretty straightforward...

I usually built that behavior once and implemented classes, but I agree, if you didn't grow up with linked lists, pointers, heaps and the like, C/C++ can be daunting. As noted, C# is detached from that much like Java.