>>That's the theory. That's in fact what most of the publicity says and speakers claim at the conferences. Yet, in the long run, I think each language will be better at different types of applications. They both target different set of developers and needs.
>
>Sorry. ADO.Net is not a theory and not just publicity.

The concept of using a component (like ADO.NET) in different languages is not new. You could have used ADO with C++, Java, or VB in the past. Was that exciting to you back then. It probably wasn't. Was it?

Although in theory it is true that with .NET you can go a little bit further and "inherit" from those classes regarding the programing language that you use. In practice it only goes a little tiny bit futher. For example, If you take the ADO.NET example, you will find pretty soon that some of those classes are not inheritable (I don't remember the .NET word for that) and therefore the new piece of the feature stops pretty soon.


>Tell me, what's in the .Net framework specific only for VB.Net
> and vice-versa? None.
>
I already pointed out message #652549.


> Do you have something in mind that you can't do
> in VB but you can in C# or vice-versa?
>
No, not really. My point is not about things that you can do in VB versus C#.

You can do anything in C# (just as you could have in C/C++) -- it is the fact that one language (named VB) will provide an easy way of doing things while other (e.g. C#) will have a more involved (and advanced) way of doing things.

This easy to use in VB.NET will not come without a price. I am sure there will be things that will be possible to do in C# that VB.NET won't be able to handle (just like there have always been things of that nature between C++ and VB.)


>The advantages of C# I could see over other .Net languages are:
>
>C# is ECMA standard while others are not.
>C# syntax is java like while you will be stucked with VB syntax.
>
I am glad you pointed out the Java similarity. I still don't understand why people is getting so excited about that when they are not using Java in the first place. Java has been around for a couple of years and a lot of people ignored it. Then, all of a suddent, having C# a Java-like syntax is great deal. Heck! C has have a standard syntax since the 70's and C++ since the late 80s (or early 90s) and that didn't make VFP developers chose C/C++ instead of VFP.

Anyway, my point is that most companies will be better using a high-level language like VB.NET to build typical business applications.

I am not trying to say that C# is not good. I am sure it is. Just like C/C++ have always been.

Good luck with C#.