PureBasic Longevity Quotes

MachineCode · **Joined:** Tue Feb 22, 2011 1:16 pm **Posts:** 1459

Being a long-term PureBasic user, it really bothers me when people start either spouting rubbish about how PureBasic is doomed if it doesn't add OOP support or charge for updates, or do this, or do that; or that they're newbies and start asking if PureBasic has a future. Both types of people are questioning PureBasic's longevity, without considering its stable history.

So I've started collecting some of these quotes to post here as proof that PureBasic has endured and continued to be updated for more than a year after the last such post. Some quotes have been paraphrased and/or edited for clarity, but otherwise they are all real actual quotes from these forums that can be found with a search. I hope you enjoy them.

BTW: Did you know that Microsoft Visual Basic only lasted 7 years before being ditched by Microsoft (1991-1998)? PureBasic has outlived it by 5 years so far (it was first released in 2000), which proves the team's dedication to its future.

Some people wrote:

"i am bit worried about the future of PureBasic" - February 6, 2012.
"one thing very concerned me and it's tardy PB updates" - October 17, 2011.
"will the developement of PB will go on?" - September 21, 2011.
"I was really fearing that I'd have to switch to another language." - August 7, 2011.
"Is Fantaisie Software still alive? Is PureBasic dead?" - July 24, 2011.
"is Purebasic still developed?" - July 4, 2011.
"I hope development has not stopped." - July 4, 2011.
"[Without OOP] PB will die and go away in a few years." - March 16, 2011.
"I am concerned that I am coming to the party after last call." - October 26, 2010.
"Is the community going to be dead soon?" - September 24, 2010.
"I need PB to stay actual and supported for years." - July 14, 2008.
"PureBasic needs a redesign and rethink in its marketing across the board." - July 26, 2008.
"PB isn't made for profesionality and future. That's the truth." - February 8, 2007.
"Shareware software companies with one product and no upgrade fee's have no future" - July 12, 2006.
"i can see approaching a day in which Fantaisie soft will sell PB to another bigger company." - July 12, 2006.
"I would like to see updates charged for, simply to better secure PB's future" - May 15, 2006.
"How can [...] Pure Basic [...] ensure its long term success?" - May 12, 2006.
"PB's days are numbered if some MAJOR changes aren't made in a very short time!" - February 28, 2004.
"is it likely that fantasy software goes bust and suddenly stops releasing new versions of PB?" - April 16, 2003.

c4s · **Posted:** Fri Mar 18, 2011 11:33 am

Funny idea - I like it!

I've found another thread with some potential comments (and it's 9 years old

):
viewtopic.php?f=7&t=3447

PureLeo · **Posted:** Fri Mar 18, 2011 3:16 pm

Funny thing is... BlitzMax was born, and is already almost dead (my opinion, no flames). And PB is always growing stronger.

I'm starting a project with a team of friends to produce some comercial games, and while everyone wants to use C++ for that, I'm convincing them of using Purebasic (protuctivity purposes, besides all its awesomeness) and I had to show them this topic

Fluid Byte · **Posted:** Sat Apr 02, 2011 10:45 pm

This is hilarious, keep 'em coming :mrgreen:

Unfortunately, even after a decade, it won't stop people who are barely able to program a "Hello World" snippet from bitching about missing OOP support.
Maybe the realize in another ten years :wink:

Nituvious · **Posted:** Mon Apr 04, 2011 4:02 am

When did this thread turn into an OOP discussion that happen to cause controversy a few days ago just by mentioning it?

MachineCode · **Joined:** Tue Feb 22, 2011 1:16 pm **Posts:** 1459

This topic was started to show how doomsayers are wrong. It's not meant to be OOP specific.

Rook Zimbabwe · **Posted:** Mon Apr 04, 2011 8:17 pm

I wrote my Restaurant Point of Sale (and the new Retail POS version) in PB. The only issues I encountered were lack of being able to color a button without a 3rd party lib (which was solved by Gnozal with PUREcolor [EXCELLENT PRODUCT!]) and my own stupidity...

The stupidity part was exceptionally handled by the old coderats on board... :mrgreen:

I sell the software for $99.00 US and I have sold over 700 copies to date!

PB and LIFE are GOOD!

And the product I have in mind with OGRE might make me a few more pennies as I am studying the MINECRAFT DISTRIBUTION and PUBLICITY management to hopefully insure some measure of success!

I refuse to comment on OOP... I use an OOP layout in detailing my basic program but nothing else... anyone that reads my code can see that! You want OOP go play with VB/VC etc.

Of course OGRE is OOP... I mena have you looked at that code?

Primoz128 · **Posted:** Mon Sep 12, 2011 9:38 pm

C/C++ is never updated, while Pure Basic is so how the hell is PB bad o.O ( man i forgot to who i am replying )
One of last doomsday quotes is the one i am replying.

Tenaja · **Joined:** Tue Nov 09, 2010 10:15 pm **Posts:** 793

Primoz128 wrote:

C/C++ is never updated, while Pure Basic is so how the hell is PB bad o.O ( man i forgot to who i am replying )
One of last doomsday quotes is the one i am replying.

Actually, this is not really true. While the ansi definition of C (and c++) is relatively fixed, the language is updated probably more than any other. How, you ask?

1. It is almost always the first to support new processors and platforms.
2. There are more libraries written for C than any other language. The list of libraries has never stopped growing. If you didn't like the growth rate of any specific library, then you just went to a different web site.

The "language" of PB itself has had very few updates, from what I've seen--perhaps none since 3.xx days, from what I can tell, considering most 3.xx code runs in 4.6--and the code that doesn't run is usually a command difference, not a language difference. What is updated in PB is its command list, and these are merely built-in libraries.

My personal opinion is that I'd rather see better optimizations (strings take a minimum of 4 bytes per character, for crying out loud!), bug fixes and IDE improvements, with an emphasis on external library use rather than built-in commands. I know that opinion is likely to be contrary to the general population here, but I use a small percentage of the command list as it is.

X · **Joined:** Tue Apr 04, 2006 6:27 am **Posts:** 308

Primoz128 wrote:

C/C++ is never updated, while Pure Basic is so how the hell is PB bad o.O ( man i forgot to who i am replying )
One of last doomsday quotes is the one i am replying.

Small correction on C++, updates?:

1998
2003
2007
2011

ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C%2B%2B

I have to keep tabs on C++ updates due to day job

Kuron · **Joined:** Sat Oct 17, 2009 10:51 pm **Posts:** 919

PureLeo wrote:

Funny thing is... BlitzMax was born, and is already almost dead (my opinion, no flames). And PB is always growing stronger.

I referred to this in another thread. Instead of improving a product, fixing bugs and keeping it competitive, Mark simply abandons the product and creates a new one. He has made a career out of this and Blitzers fall for it hook, line and sinker every single time.

citystate · **Joined:** Sun Feb 12, 2006 10:06 pm **Posts:** 515

it's probably wise to leave any further comments alone... that's a good way to get a thread locked/deleted :wink:

J. Baker · **Posted:** Tue Sep 13, 2011 5:16 am

I don't see any doomsday for PB. Well, at least not any time soon. But I wouldn't mind small update fees if it would keep Fred and Freak from working daytime jobs. Updates were definitely more frequent then. As for OOP, go else where.

Kuron · **Joined:** Sat Oct 17, 2009 10:51 pm **Posts:** 919

J. Baker wrote:

As for OOP, go else where.

I agree.

Blood · **Posted:** Wed Sep 14, 2011 9:02 pm

I agree PB has a future but lets get real, its lack of OOP support means it will never be more than a small hobby language that never gets used for big projects.

PureBasic Forum

PureBasic Longevity Quotes

Who is online