General Category > Meta Forum

Suggestions for this forum

<< < (2/8) > >>

Edwin Knoppert:
>Thanks. PB needs to change the forum software and close the Café.
To think i was about the last person actually making the nn-th complaint not having a off-topic forum..
Right after that it was added.. boy what a mess it gave... sorry :)

Actually it seems the one and only forum people seem to come back for.
Maybe a misconception of mine but frankly, i think the PB future is rather dark.

A few 'cracks' are no longer visitting.
I suspect the freeware .NET IDE's have taken over everything.
Not a big deal per se, i have new programming tasks lately as well.
PowerBASIC is less than 5% of my work nowadays.
Geeh, i do so much c# nowadays i have difficulty thinking in BASIC: Boolean b = false; (hips!)

Maybe i am all seeing this in the wrong perspective, i would like to hear your thoughts on this.

:)

Eros Olmi:
I feel like you Edwin but I do not think the reasons are mainly related to other development environment but mostly to how Power Basic conducts their business.
I'm pretty sure they get enough for living in any case but the fact that for many, many months there is just silence is not good for any one.

I can be wrong but recent PB strategy is the following:

1. stay calm as much as possible, say nothing
2. in the meantime develop as much as possible new functionalities to justify a pay upgrade to a new version
3. release new pay version
4. for x = 1 to rnd(1, 3)
5.   fix some bugs
6.   release free *.x version
7. next
8. goto 1

Now, it can be a not bad strategy. So where is the problem? Problem is in line number 1.
If "stay calm" is too short, they cannot justify a pay version. If "stay calm" is too long, many users disappear.

Now we are in a "stay calm" too long era. I'm sure mr Zale will come out with a new pay version in next few months and it will be rich of new functionalities, but in the meantime install and usage base will be a little bit smaller.

I still think PB compilers are the best around in many aspects but I do not like the actual strategy at all.

That's my thoughts.
Ciao
Eros

Theo Gottwald:
From Standpoint of marketing, I like the Purebasic marketing much more.
Buy one get all further free.

And finally I think they even make more money then Powerbasic, as they sell a lot more copies.

Its just that the stability of Powerbasic is unbeaten, and most of my libraries are in Powerbasic.
If I had to switch to something else, it would cost me more time then the actual benefits.

But if that would not be the case ... if I would right now want to start programming,
I'd choose between Freebasic and Purebasic.

For the actual number of features, Powerbasic looks to me to high priced (compared to the alternatives).

Besides Freebasic also looks rather promissing as well as some other languages (like D++).
But in case of freebasic, stability seems to be a issue, and thats something I can't take in my projects.

if something in my programm doesn't work as expected, it shall be my fault, not fault of the compiler :-).
Everything else would be really surprising for me after using Powerbasic so long time now.

PS. Jose:
I am one of those who go to the PB-Forum to post in the Cafee. Its the easiest place to tell the "Amis" a bit of what they don't see in their news :-)). If it would not be that I know you really dislike it, a cafee could be in somewhere  :-)). But in fact I understand that you want to moderate technical questions and not political opinions. Which can be quite difficult. Therefore we "sell code" not "whine and coals".

Charles Pegge:
Theo, I am doing some fairly complicated things with Freebasic but have not encountered any stability problems from the compiler. Much of the work is done by 'GCC' and 'AS' back ends, so it has adopted a strong foundation of reliability.

There may be one or two weak eareas in error reporting, for instance PRINT#1, ss does not do anything, whereas PRINT #1,ss  with space between PRINT and '#' works as expected.
I cant think of any major problems at all.

Of course, the intrinsic function set is much smaller than PowerBasic's, so you may find yourself writing the missing functions, like USING$ and FORMAT$ which only works in QBasic legacy mode. The biggest hurdle for me was learning to live without GOSUB.

Theo Gottwald:
>the missing GOSUB


In Powerbasic you would not really need the GOSUB, as it internally seems just to compile to a CALL.

You can't do something like that in FB ?


PRINT #1,[:-)]ss
! CALL mysub
PRINT #1,[:-)]ss
END.

mysub:
PRINT #1,[:-)]ss
! RTS

At least in PB this will do the same as far as I can say.
The same with JMP and GOTO.


Here is an example how even function can be called from ASM:

ASSEMBLER-Tutorial #2

and this of course:

ASSEMBLER-Tutorial #2

Assembler-Tutorial #3

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version