> Is C# more object oriented than VB.net ???
No. They are precisely as object-oriented as one another. For the most part, they differ only in syntax, not in function.
> Why do we need C# in the first place ??
.NET gave Microsoft a chance to work with a "clean slate". They took the best bits of many existing technologies, plus many of their own technology ideas, and poured them all into .NET.
The same is true of C# ... its designers took the best bits of many existing languages, plus many of their own ideas, and created the new language. The fact that it borrows from other existing languages also means it is a natural choice for those developers who move to .NET.
> Someone asked me how come .net is object oriented
What else could it be?
I don't mean that sardonically. I mean, object-oriented technologies have been around for many many many years ... what other mature, yet advanced, technology type could Microsoft have chosen?