VB6 is arguably the most popular and influential version of Basic it only makes sense to keep backwards compatibility with it. Why would anyone not want that from their Visual Basic clone?
because that's immensely backwards! what if vb3-6 had the same syntax as msbasic and same ascii text based UIs? it wouldn't have been as popular.
these tools could be the modern vb6, having modern UX paradigms such as responsive design etc... yet it is just producing something one would use only for nostalgia or explicitly support for a niche market still needing actual vb6... which i didn't know existed till now.
There's nothing stopping anyone from building responsive UI components in this or even in Visual Basic itself. I thought were were talking about VB6, the programming language, not the UI toolkit. They are closely related but not necessarily the same thing.
Given that there are already other, more modern, languages and frameworks that do you want you describe I don't think there is a market for that kind of modern Basic. That's why nobody has done it.
