Welcome to PureBasic Chris!
I read a few of your articles on your website and I think your views on software generally make you a good fit for PB.
I hope you find PB fits your requirements enough to want to stay and start developing with and for PB.
Looking forward to seeing your contributions here on the forums and in PB software.
Computer Workshop is considering PureBasic support
Re: Computer Workshop is considering PureBasic support
IdeasVacuum wrote:Hello C Boss, welcome to the PureBasic forum
heartbone wrote:Welcome Boss.
Danilo wrote:Good luck and welcome to PureBasic!
You mean welcome againUSCode wrote:Welcome to PureBasic Chris!
http://www.purebasic.fr/english/viewtop ... 92#p233692
"Have you tried turning it off and on again ?"
A little PureBasic review
A little PureBasic review
Re: Computer Workshop is considering PureBasic support
I would like to make an offer to Fred.
Would you like some free advertising ?
Over the years I have written a number of articles for Code Project, Betanews.com and techrepublic.com. I also currently have a Blog which gets a bit of attention as well.
How would you like to do an interview for my Blog to start with ?
You could talk about Purebasic and what it is capable of.
Who visits my Blog ?
I track it and I get visitors from big companies like Microsoft, IBM, HP and Intel. I talk about subjects which interest them, like some failures of OOP, WIN32 vs WINRT, building software for tablets, etc.
To demonstrate my good will, I would be willing to do an email interview with Fred and write an article for my blog.
I won't post it now, but if you are curious about my Blog I will post a link to it at your request, to see what kind of articles I write before you decide.
My company is expanding its reach with the goal of promoting a number of Basic languages. For me rather than a "this Basic is better than that Basic" type of mentality, I would like to promote BASIC, the language, itself in all its flavors. BASIC has been done an injustice over the years by main stream programmers and it deserves recognition for not only what it has done in the past but what it is capable doing now.
In the past I catered only to PowerBasic users. Now I would like to branch out to Basic language developers in general. Now there is one thing I can offer the Basic language developers themselves. I have tracked a number of indie Basic languages over the years and the one weak area I find consistant is the difficult of building a quality Visual Designer environment. Some have done OK with their designers, but few if any had stood out. Compared to the more mainstream world (aka. Visual Studio) it is some times hard for professional programmers to take Basic seriously because of the limited visual design environments they have. You might even find it interesting that PowerBasic, despite its professional level compiler, also suffered from this problem. Bob Zale may have been an excellent compiler maker, but he was sadly behind the times when it came to drag and drop development. If it were not for the third party developers, PowerBasic likely would have stayed that way.
When I first started programming using Powerbasic, it had absolutely no GUI command set and especially no Visual Designer. Then my company came along and changed that. I believe that I was one of the first to build a visual designer for PowerBasic and a number of others followed. But I did something different. While the others built visual designers to simply generate API code, I build a GUI engine (DLL) and I did something unique. You see, the first generation of visual deisgners for PowerBasic, especially mine, were rudementary at best. I took years to learn how to solve problems in building a visual designer. Some on the forums tried to start some open source projects on the forum to see if they could find the solutions of how to build a visual designer. It never got far. Now a couple developers built their own commercial designers and sold them to PowerBasic users, among them the two best are FireFly and Phoenix. But I did something different. Because I was building a GUI framework, I decided to build everything I learned about drag and drop (WYSIWYG) into the GUI engine, so when I wrote my visual designers I didn't need to use one WIN32 API call. My GUI engine did all the work. My customers too have the ability to use those same features to build any WYSIWYG style applications and some use it.
So, I was thinking today. Why not work on making that engine more available to BASIC language developers so they can start building Visual Designer front ends worthy of the compilers they have created ? Maybe that is what I could offer to the PureBasic (and other Basic) communities and in particular the developers of those languages. While my GUI engine is currently only for PowerBasic, it is posisble it could be made to support more languages. Maybe it would be nice to allow Basic language developers to be able to build front ends at the level of Visual Basic and the like.
So what does my drag and drop engine do ?
Almost everything you need it to do. For example, is uses a subclassing engine which allows to take control of any windows controls (even custom controls) and to impliment low level drag and drop features in them. This is actually quite tricky and it requires preprocessing a number of window messages to make it work. Also, if a control has an child controls (which some do), the subclass engine literally has to trickle down and subclass every child to take control of its window message processing.
Next, there needs to be a drag and drop engine, so you can draw a drag rectagle when creating a new control (you draw it in a form). Then there needs to be a snap too grid when you create the control to force it to a grid if desired. My GUI engine even can display the snap to grid in different formats. But you need drag handles around the controls right ? My GUI engine has a custom drag handle control I created to do this, which is integrated into the drag and drop engine. You define a drag handle control for as many controls as you want. Now how about resizing and dragging controls ? The drag handle control handles this for you and it is easy to do. How about selecting and dragging multiple controls ? Easy ! The GUI engine can do the drag rectangles and you can drag hundreds of controls at one time with little or no flicker and quickly. This one task is not easy to impliment. The FireFly visual designer for PowerBasic, while a great designer, has difficultly doing this. It works great for a couple controls, but try 20, 50 or a couple hundred and it was a mess. It was slow and drag rectangles lagged. I spent a long time developing this engine and I have tested it with hundreds of controls.
But more is needed for a quality Visual Designer. Most high end designers have property lists. No such control exists in the WIN32, so I wrote my own and it works very well. This allows you to have real property lists and the control can have multiple property types, from fonts, text, file names, RGB colors and drop down lists.
So rather only code visual design features into a visual designer, I build an engine out of it so anyone can do the same and easily. My current Visual Designer for my GUI engine was written without a single call to the Windows API and not a single GUI command in the PowerBasic command set. Every aspect of it was done using only my GUI engine. There are features in the GUI engine that a Basic language developer could use to build extremely sophistated development envirnoments. Since most Basic developers likely are already using an open source or commercial code editor control for that part, the one thing missing is all the complex drag and drop stuff. True mine is for Windows only, but is uses the power of the WIN32 API to accomplish things most API programmers can't even image how to do. A lot tried on the PowerBasic forums, only to find it was just too difficult. I have spent years honing my engine down and building these features into it.
This is the one area most, if not all, indie Basic languages lack. Building the WYSIWYG front end is just too difficult. None have come close to the smoothness of say Visual Basic as far as the front end is concerned. Now there is an engine which was designed specifically for this task.
Now does that sound interesting at all ?
Would you like some free advertising ?
Over the years I have written a number of articles for Code Project, Betanews.com and techrepublic.com. I also currently have a Blog which gets a bit of attention as well.
How would you like to do an interview for my Blog to start with ?
You could talk about Purebasic and what it is capable of.
Who visits my Blog ?
I track it and I get visitors from big companies like Microsoft, IBM, HP and Intel. I talk about subjects which interest them, like some failures of OOP, WIN32 vs WINRT, building software for tablets, etc.
To demonstrate my good will, I would be willing to do an email interview with Fred and write an article for my blog.
I won't post it now, but if you are curious about my Blog I will post a link to it at your request, to see what kind of articles I write before you decide.
My company is expanding its reach with the goal of promoting a number of Basic languages. For me rather than a "this Basic is better than that Basic" type of mentality, I would like to promote BASIC, the language, itself in all its flavors. BASIC has been done an injustice over the years by main stream programmers and it deserves recognition for not only what it has done in the past but what it is capable doing now.
In the past I catered only to PowerBasic users. Now I would like to branch out to Basic language developers in general. Now there is one thing I can offer the Basic language developers themselves. I have tracked a number of indie Basic languages over the years and the one weak area I find consistant is the difficult of building a quality Visual Designer environment. Some have done OK with their designers, but few if any had stood out. Compared to the more mainstream world (aka. Visual Studio) it is some times hard for professional programmers to take Basic seriously because of the limited visual design environments they have. You might even find it interesting that PowerBasic, despite its professional level compiler, also suffered from this problem. Bob Zale may have been an excellent compiler maker, but he was sadly behind the times when it came to drag and drop development. If it were not for the third party developers, PowerBasic likely would have stayed that way.
When I first started programming using Powerbasic, it had absolutely no GUI command set and especially no Visual Designer. Then my company came along and changed that. I believe that I was one of the first to build a visual designer for PowerBasic and a number of others followed. But I did something different. While the others built visual designers to simply generate API code, I build a GUI engine (DLL) and I did something unique. You see, the first generation of visual deisgners for PowerBasic, especially mine, were rudementary at best. I took years to learn how to solve problems in building a visual designer. Some on the forums tried to start some open source projects on the forum to see if they could find the solutions of how to build a visual designer. It never got far. Now a couple developers built their own commercial designers and sold them to PowerBasic users, among them the two best are FireFly and Phoenix. But I did something different. Because I was building a GUI framework, I decided to build everything I learned about drag and drop (WYSIWYG) into the GUI engine, so when I wrote my visual designers I didn't need to use one WIN32 API call. My GUI engine did all the work. My customers too have the ability to use those same features to build any WYSIWYG style applications and some use it.
So, I was thinking today. Why not work on making that engine more available to BASIC language developers so they can start building Visual Designer front ends worthy of the compilers they have created ? Maybe that is what I could offer to the PureBasic (and other Basic) communities and in particular the developers of those languages. While my GUI engine is currently only for PowerBasic, it is posisble it could be made to support more languages. Maybe it would be nice to allow Basic language developers to be able to build front ends at the level of Visual Basic and the like.
So what does my drag and drop engine do ?
Almost everything you need it to do. For example, is uses a subclassing engine which allows to take control of any windows controls (even custom controls) and to impliment low level drag and drop features in them. This is actually quite tricky and it requires preprocessing a number of window messages to make it work. Also, if a control has an child controls (which some do), the subclass engine literally has to trickle down and subclass every child to take control of its window message processing.
Next, there needs to be a drag and drop engine, so you can draw a drag rectagle when creating a new control (you draw it in a form). Then there needs to be a snap too grid when you create the control to force it to a grid if desired. My GUI engine even can display the snap to grid in different formats. But you need drag handles around the controls right ? My GUI engine has a custom drag handle control I created to do this, which is integrated into the drag and drop engine. You define a drag handle control for as many controls as you want. Now how about resizing and dragging controls ? The drag handle control handles this for you and it is easy to do. How about selecting and dragging multiple controls ? Easy ! The GUI engine can do the drag rectangles and you can drag hundreds of controls at one time with little or no flicker and quickly. This one task is not easy to impliment. The FireFly visual designer for PowerBasic, while a great designer, has difficultly doing this. It works great for a couple controls, but try 20, 50 or a couple hundred and it was a mess. It was slow and drag rectangles lagged. I spent a long time developing this engine and I have tested it with hundreds of controls.
But more is needed for a quality Visual Designer. Most high end designers have property lists. No such control exists in the WIN32, so I wrote my own and it works very well. This allows you to have real property lists and the control can have multiple property types, from fonts, text, file names, RGB colors and drop down lists.
So rather only code visual design features into a visual designer, I build an engine out of it so anyone can do the same and easily. My current Visual Designer for my GUI engine was written without a single call to the Windows API and not a single GUI command in the PowerBasic command set. Every aspect of it was done using only my GUI engine. There are features in the GUI engine that a Basic language developer could use to build extremely sophistated development envirnoments. Since most Basic developers likely are already using an open source or commercial code editor control for that part, the one thing missing is all the complex drag and drop stuff. True mine is for Windows only, but is uses the power of the WIN32 API to accomplish things most API programmers can't even image how to do. A lot tried on the PowerBasic forums, only to find it was just too difficult. I have spent years honing my engine down and building these features into it.
This is the one area most, if not all, indie Basic languages lack. Building the WYSIWYG front end is just too difficult. None have come close to the smoothness of say Visual Basic as far as the front end is concerned. Now there is an engine which was designed specifically for this task.
Now does that sound interesting at all ?
Re: Computer Workshop is considering PureBasic support
Hi Chris,
I would say that unless your designer/engines are to offer cross-platform support then it is unlikely that they would find themselves a part of the official PB package. The form designer recently added to PB is indeed cross platform and Polo has done an excellent job with it.
I am not saying that your products would not find a place here, but I think it more likely to appeal to individual developers than anything else. I think a lot of the new users to PB come because of the cross platform capabilities as much as anything, though there do remain some old Windows die hards yet.
I would say that unless your designer/engines are to offer cross-platform support then it is unlikely that they would find themselves a part of the official PB package. The form designer recently added to PB is indeed cross platform and Polo has done an excellent job with it.
I am not saying that your products would not find a place here, but I think it more likely to appeal to individual developers than anything else. I think a lot of the new users to PB come because of the cross platform capabilities as much as anything, though there do remain some old Windows die hards yet.
I may look like a mule, but I'm not a complete ass.
Re: Computer Workshop is considering PureBasic support
I have to disagree with Srod, as I do think a Windows only VD could find a niche. However, for maximum reach, it would help to have a 64-bit compile of the VD so everybody running the 64-bit Windows version of PureBasic could run the VD.
Best wishes to the PB community. Thank you for the memories. 
Re: Computer Workshop is considering PureBasic support
Why not simply start with 32 bit Windows, the largest platform.
If it proves successful, then there is reason to work on porting to PureBasic for cross platform.
I should point out, that a complex drag and drop engine is not easy to develop and I have spent years improving mine taking advantage of the low level features of Windows. While it is possible other platforms have the same low level features, it is not necessarily guaranteed to. This is why I have tried to point out the importance of native coding which allows for taking advantage of everything an operating system has to offer.
While some may disagree with me, cross platform develop does have challenges and what may be available on one platform may not be available on another. This is why some companies may take the approach of building for the largest platform first and getting it right. Then if successful, trying to port to the next best platform and so on. True it would be nice if this could be done right from the start with a cross platform programming language, but again that at times means not having the low level features of a specific platform available.
A design environment also need not be 64 bit, to support a 64 bit compiler. The design environment can be 32 bit and then simply call a 64 bit compiler (or 32 bit) in the background to generate the apps. This means a 32 bit Windows version would support both 32 bit and 64 bit.
Once a 32 bit product is developed, then steps can be taken to eventually build a 64 bit later.
The "I won't do it unless it is cross platform from the start" mindset limits choices which could make a big difference in getting such ideas off the ground. For years Visual Basic was only 16 bit. Then it later became 32 bit. Initially it generated only a PCode app. Later it was able to compile to native code. Few may realize that when Visual Basic became capable of compiling to native machine code, rather than just Pcode, Microsoft's solution was quite interesting. They used a C compiler as the back end. Yes, Visual Basic eventually had a C compiler backend.
If it proves successful, then there is reason to work on porting to PureBasic for cross platform.
I should point out, that a complex drag and drop engine is not easy to develop and I have spent years improving mine taking advantage of the low level features of Windows. While it is possible other platforms have the same low level features, it is not necessarily guaranteed to. This is why I have tried to point out the importance of native coding which allows for taking advantage of everything an operating system has to offer.
While some may disagree with me, cross platform develop does have challenges and what may be available on one platform may not be available on another. This is why some companies may take the approach of building for the largest platform first and getting it right. Then if successful, trying to port to the next best platform and so on. True it would be nice if this could be done right from the start with a cross platform programming language, but again that at times means not having the low level features of a specific platform available.
A design environment also need not be 64 bit, to support a 64 bit compiler. The design environment can be 32 bit and then simply call a 64 bit compiler (or 32 bit) in the background to generate the apps. This means a 32 bit Windows version would support both 32 bit and 64 bit.
Once a 32 bit product is developed, then steps can be taken to eventually build a 64 bit later.
The "I won't do it unless it is cross platform from the start" mindset limits choices which could make a big difference in getting such ideas off the ground. For years Visual Basic was only 16 bit. Then it later became 32 bit. Initially it generated only a PCode app. Later it was able to compile to native code. Few may realize that when Visual Basic became capable of compiling to native machine code, rather than just Pcode, Microsoft's solution was quite interesting. They used a C compiler as the back end. Yes, Visual Basic eventually had a C compiler backend.
Re: Computer Workshop is considering PureBasic support
Over the last 10 years, there come one visuel designer after the next, only for windows.
(gDesign, Visuel Designer, PureFORM, PureVisionXP, ...) and i have wait for a crossplattform
solution. Actuell, PB have a integrated crossplattform Designer, not perfect, some missing features
but is crossplattform and Drag & Drop is one of the many crossplattform features of PB.
Greetings - Thomas
(gDesign, Visuel Designer, PureFORM, PureVisionXP, ...) and i have wait for a crossplattform
solution. Actuell, PB have a integrated crossplattform Designer, not perfect, some missing features
but is crossplattform
and Drag & Drop is one of the many crossplattform features of PB.Greetings - Thomas
PureBasic 5.73 | SpiderBasic 2.30 | Windows 10 Pro (x64) | Linux Mint 20.1 (x64)
Old bugs good, new bugs bad! Updates are evil: might fix old bugs and introduce no new ones.
Old bugs good, new bugs bad! Updates are evil: might fix old bugs and introduce no new ones.
Re: Computer Workshop is considering PureBasic support
Hi C Boss, much of what you pose cannot be answered in so many words and thus requires an investment on your part. You must build it and see who comes. Scan the replies to Visual Designer posts and you can gauge your audience. Keep in mind not all users require a VD to create their apps, myself included. If you are a "me too" product and not cross platform, then you start in a hole and offer no distinction other than long winded posts and promises of awesomeness. If you add a professional and well supported grid or chart control, that might whet some appetites. But, there are several of these available now(Windows only and Canvas based), so you must be better to gain acceptance and customers. Good luck on your decision.
The nice thing about standards is there are so many to choose from. ~ Andrew Tanenbaum
Re: Computer Workshop is considering PureBasic support
Maybe some videos may be helpful. They are not as extensive as I would like and I though a few together , but maybe they may give a slightly better and more visual picture of what my GUi engine can do.
Designer Walkabout: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QfHa-LJVfL8
This video demonstrates some basics of the designer and some nice examples of the visual bookmark feature, drawing controls, sizing them, changing properties, etc.
Designer Tutorial #1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QiB8BJG4Cnk
This video is narated and demonstrates some common tasks done in the designer.
For more info:
Entire collections of videos: http://www.youtube.com/user/ComputerWorkshopSoft/videos
Designer Walkabout: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QfHa-LJVfL8
This video demonstrates some basics of the designer and some nice examples of the visual bookmark feature, drawing controls, sizing them, changing properties, etc.
Designer Tutorial #1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QiB8BJG4Cnk
This video is narated and demonstrates some common tasks done in the designer.
For more info:
Entire collections of videos: http://www.youtube.com/user/ComputerWorkshopSoft/videos
Re: Computer Workshop is considering PureBasic support
It's not about where you start.C Boss wrote:Why not simply start with 32 bit Windows, the largest platform.
If you create an application with the idea of making it cross platform later on, it's simply not wise to depend on a library or runtime that is Win32 only no matter how good it is.
You need to know in advance if the library is available on all platforms you might want to support in the future. It even isn't enough to know that it might become available later on.
Windows (x64)
Raspberry Pi OS (Arm64)
Raspberry Pi OS (Arm64)
Re: Computer Workshop is considering PureBasic support
The product PureBasic itself is cross-platform, and the IDE is written with PureBasic itself... and cross-platform.
What you have to offer is nothing for the product PureBasic itself, in my opinion.
As a 3rd party developer, you are of course free to do what you want.
The market will decide, and good products sell. That's it.
If you are able to do better add-ons or a better VisualDesigner than what's already available,
than just do it and you will sell something. If you need money quickly, do it quickly.
If you like to read an interview with Fred, two of them are available at PureArea.net:
- Interview Fred 2012
Also try out:
- pureVision (already around for 12 years and actively supported)
- PureFORM
- Visual PureBasic IDE
- ProGUI
- Professional Grid Controls for Windows Applications
What you have to offer is nothing for the product PureBasic itself, in my opinion.
As a 3rd party developer, you are of course free to do what you want.
The market will decide, and good products sell. That's it.
If you are able to do better add-ons or a better VisualDesigner than what's already available,
than just do it and you will sell something. If you need money quickly, do it quickly.
If you like to read an interview with Fred, two of them are available at PureArea.net:
- Interview Fred 2012
Also try out:
- pureVision (already around for 12 years and actively supported)
- PureFORM
- Visual PureBasic IDE
- ProGUI
- Professional Grid Controls for Windows Applications
Last edited by Danilo on Mon Feb 03, 2014 10:10 am, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Computer Workshop is considering PureBasic support
I have been serving the PowerBasic community for nearly 14 years now, but for obvious reasons want to examine the possibility of supporting other Basic languages.
My company has a lot to offer, with many years of experience, but if there is no real interest here, I might as well just move on and consider other languages. PureBasic was highly recommended to me, but I won't waste my time developing for it if I do not see any real potential, simply put. I needed to touch base with the PureBasic community to see what it is accomplishing and what it could benefit from. Fred reached out to me in a way he hoped would encourage my company to take a serious look at PureBasic, as a third party developer, in hopes maybe my companies long experience in helping PowerBasic programmers could be also made available to the PureBasic community as well. It is not like my company hasn't done anything at all. It was just a matter of encouraging me to consider developing for Purebasic too. I won't do that if not made welcome.
My company currently is primarily a Windows development company, so the time and effort to port some things to make them more compatible with PureBasic could be extensive. I don't want to offer something which already exists either. Windows is the defacto standard for the business world, with more Windows PC running business software than any other platform. My experience with Windows is a valuable asset and just because I have yet to dabble with cross platform does not mean my company has nothing to offer, even now.
At this point I am more inclined to simply put Purebasic on my "to do" list of Basics to examine, rather than push it to the top of the list of priority languages to develop for. Thanks for your patience with my little discussion here. Fred has done a wonderful job in building such a strong community of developers and it is good to see Basic (in any form) being used. I won't though waste any more of your time.
My company has a lot to offer, with many years of experience, but if there is no real interest here, I might as well just move on and consider other languages. PureBasic was highly recommended to me, but I won't waste my time developing for it if I do not see any real potential, simply put. I needed to touch base with the PureBasic community to see what it is accomplishing and what it could benefit from. Fred reached out to me in a way he hoped would encourage my company to take a serious look at PureBasic, as a third party developer, in hopes maybe my companies long experience in helping PowerBasic programmers could be also made available to the PureBasic community as well. It is not like my company hasn't done anything at all. It was just a matter of encouraging me to consider developing for Purebasic too. I won't do that if not made welcome.
My company currently is primarily a Windows development company, so the time and effort to port some things to make them more compatible with PureBasic could be extensive. I don't want to offer something which already exists either. Windows is the defacto standard for the business world, with more Windows PC running business software than any other platform. My experience with Windows is a valuable asset and just because I have yet to dabble with cross platform does not mean my company has nothing to offer, even now.
At this point I am more inclined to simply put Purebasic on my "to do" list of Basics to examine, rather than push it to the top of the list of priority languages to develop for. Thanks for your patience with my little discussion here. Fred has done a wonderful job in building such a strong community of developers and it is good to see Basic (in any form) being used. I won't though waste any more of your time.
-
netmaestro
- PureBasic Bullfrog
- Posts: 8451
- Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 5:42 am
- Location: Fort Nelson, BC, Canada
Re: Computer Workshop is considering PureBasic support
Well look at you, interviewing a flock of potential disciples. Realistically very few people here would be willing to fork over $250 for a windows-only visual designer. Many of the experienced coders here don't use designers anyway as PB is concise and well-structured so code just flows. What you have to offer would most likely sell better in another market. Also, there are quite a few PB, c and asm programmers on these forums who are capable of producing the tools you seem to think nobody else can write, and a few who can spit out code in ten minutes that you'd have to spend months trying to make sense of. I'm starting to get a bit piqued here so I'm going to stop typing.It was just a matter of encouraging me to consider developing for Purebasic too. I won't do that if not made welcome
BERESHEIT
Re: Computer Workshop is considering PureBasic support
As far as I understand you started EZGUI because PowerBasic missed a lot of features at the time and that was 14 years ago.C Boss wrote:PureBasic was highly recommended to me, but I won't waste my time developing for it if I do not see any real potential, simply put. I needed to touch base with the PureBasic community to see what it is accomplishing and what it could benefit from.
If you would have been here 10 years ago with a similar product I think the response would have been totally different.
The thing is that the market you saw for PowerBasic, others probably already noticed for other languages. GUI design is such an important thing that most languages already have some solution for it (either directly or third party). It's not that your company hasn't anything to offer but reality is that you probably will encounter competing products for most languages you consider to target.
Windows (x64)
Raspberry Pi OS (Arm64)
Raspberry Pi OS (Arm64)
Re: Computer Workshop is considering PureBasic support
Fred, I apologize for intruding on your community here.
Please feel free to delete this thread.
My explanations I posted obviously have been misread by some. I was foolish to think I had anything to offer here.
Oh, to the person who commented about my product being a $250 Visual Designer, it is not, just so you know. It is a complete GUI framework which eliminates the need to use the Windows API, but it comes with its own Visual Designer/Code Generator to make it easier to work with the framework. A number of my customers use the framework by itself without the Designer. The product is the GUI framework, not the designer.
I appreciate Freds invite to consider PureBasic, as a third party developer. Sadly, it is obvious it is not a place in need of the skills my company offers. Also thank you to the Purebasic user who contacted Fred about my interest in considering developing tools for PureBasic. I guess I misread the invite. Sorry about that.
Please feel free to delete this thread.
My explanations I posted obviously have been misread by some. I was foolish to think I had anything to offer here.
Oh, to the person who commented about my product being a $250 Visual Designer, it is not, just so you know. It is a complete GUI framework which eliminates the need to use the Windows API, but it comes with its own Visual Designer/Code Generator to make it easier to work with the framework. A number of my customers use the framework by itself without the Designer. The product is the GUI framework, not the designer.
I appreciate Freds invite to consider PureBasic, as a third party developer. Sadly, it is obvious it is not a place in need of the skills my company offers. Also thank you to the Purebasic user who contacted Fred about my interest in considering developing tools for PureBasic. I guess I misread the invite. Sorry about that.