CORRECTED: Microsoft Strongly Denies VB 6 Going Open Source, Sources Retract Statement

Redmond Developer News has retracted its earlier report that Microsoft had told MVPs at the Tech-Ed Conference that it planned to open source the Visual Basic 6 programming language.

Microsoft's Doug Seven, director of product management for Visual Studio tools and languages, strongly denied a story reported here earlier that Microsoft planned to open source VB 6.

"There's no more solid source than me. It's not true," he said.

The statement was in response to a story published earlier on this site that said that the rumor of VB6 being opened source, first heard at Tech-Ed and then spread on Twitter, was confirmed by an independent source.

After a Microsoft spokeswoman provided a statement from Doug Seven, RDN contacted the independent source again to re-confirm the reported information. The independent source then retracted his statements.

The original poster on Twitter has also retracted his statement.

RDN regrets for the error.

About the Author

Kathleen Richards is the editor of and executive editor of Visual Studio Magazine.

comments powered by Disqus

Reader Comments:

Sat, Dec 15, 2012 Mark Germany

There are still Millions of VS6 developers, who never ever will change ? Why ??? .. perfect product :)

Wed, May 25, 2011 Abraham Petit Venezuela


Sat, May 21, 2011 WallesCai ShangHai

Good,but hope MS hold the open source project on VBos project, which should NOT relative to .NET

Thu, May 19, 2011 wjs

Anne Ominous, Your timeline for VB for DOS and VB for Win are backwards... VB for Windows 1.0 came out in 1991 which was actually over a year before VB for DOS was introduced. (My first project at MS was VBDOS.)

Thu, May 19, 2011 Doug Seven Redmond

Kathleen - Unfortunately you are the victim of someone's practical joke. Today a member of the developer community started a rumor that VB6 was going to be released as open source software via CodPlex. There is no truth to this rumor. There are no plans to open source VB6. Doug Seven Director of Product Management Visual Studio Tools & Languages Microsoft

Thu, May 19, 2011

You're seriously taking an unattributed tweet from a guy that then posts a rickroll!? Come on.!/RoyOsherove/status/71334987152101376

I suggest you post a retraction *now* to reclaim what credability you have. And don't use the word 'confirmed' in a headline ever again.

(Hint: A *single* person posting something on twitter confirms that someone or something somwhere, knows how to type things into twitter. Nothing more.)

Thu, May 19, 2011

Wow - yet another reason to not read the Redmond Developer News.

Thu, May 19, 2011

This has been confirmed my MS as not true.!/dseven/status/71352709785198592 []
@dseven The rumors of VB6 going open source are simply not true. #msteched #vb6rumor #vb6!/dseven/status/71359684904366081 []
@dseven @beckynagel I'm the Director of Product Management for Visual Studio Tools & Languages. There's no more solid source than me. Its not true.

Thu, May 19, 2011 mikef

Except it's not true:

Thu, May 19, 2011 mikef

Except it's not true:

Thu, May 19, 2011 Anne Ominous

This is a very interesting article, and interesting concept as well. However, the timeline given for Visual Basic's evolution seems a bit confused. All of the elements of Visual Basic for DOS were available as add-on code libraries that could be included when compiling code for their BASIC Professional Development System 7.0, which came out around 1991 or so. Not long after that came Visual Basic for DOS, which was essentially the same product but which used those same libraries in its standard compile. I am pretty sure VB for Windows came out *after* VB DOS, but I could be wrong. Then you mention that .NET came out in 2002 *before* mentioning that VB 6 was '98. That's not wrong, but it is in backwards order. I think that would be terribly confusing to many readers.

Add Your Comment:

Your Name:(optional)
Your Email:(optional)
Your Location:(optional)
Please type the letters/numbers you see above