[tragomaskhalos]

Behind the satire lurks a serious point though - a lot of C# programmers need to get over their snotty attitude to VB.NET, because once you get past the whole VB stigma thing they're basically isomorphic.

One point the guy didn't make was that VB.NET has XML literals, which are very nice if you like that sort of thing.

[danielbarla]

I find that most C# developers don't have strong feelings about VB.Net; if they comment on it negatively, they are probably trying to avoid the old stigma by association.

Although VB.Net's syntax is not really my cup of tea (it's a bit too wordy for me), I find that many of the keywords make a lot more sense than the equivalent C# ones. E.g. explaining the meaning of "shared" is a lot easier than explaining "static", because the concepts it brings to mind are closer to what's actually happening.