In this article Paul Krill quotes the following statement:
The language’s placement was surprising because many software engineers have refused to migrate to VB.Net, the successor to the "well-beloved, classic Visual Basic 6.0 version," Tiobe said. It also was unexpected because Microsoft seems to have slowed down development of VB.Net. "For example, the latest Visual Studio version 2013 doesn’t contain any new VB.net language features," Tiobe said.
Yes, this is a quote. The Tiobe article that Paul quotes makes this stupid statement, but InfoWorld could have done the smallest amount of fact checking to find out why this statement is stupid.
Any journalist writing about Microsoft languages should have this much of the basics.
Microsoft has demonstrated in numerous ways that the speed of VB.NET development now parallels the speed of C# development. They’ve also stated many times that they are working on new compilers for both C# and VB.NET. I’ve talked here about my thoughts on the future of the languages, including implications of Mads Torgersen’s NDC talk.
And I’ll just skip my opinion on the Tiobe Index itself, and whether the change in VB.NET is real or just noise. Since this corresponded with a significant (by percent) drop in Visual Basic, which is tracked separately, well, the rabbit hole really goes nowhere…