Computer Workshop is considering PureBasic support

[srod]

Must admit I don't really see why you shouldn't proceed. At the end of the day, if you are looking for a stable platform (one with a future) to port your tools to in order to give these tools more security than perhaps you might have with your previous compilers of choice, then I can't see as you can do much better than Purebasic. With your skills you should be able to port your tools in little time inmo. Without much additional work you will have versions for Winx86 and Winx64.

From here, you can continue to sell your engines to developers from all walks of life, not just Purebasic users. Heck, what if your biggest customer base are not Purebasic users? So what. What you will have is a set of tools that you can maintain easily and safe in the knowledge that your chosen development platform will still be here when I am pushing up daisies (and if I don't cut out the barrels of coffee I consume, then that will not be very far away!) Your designers can surely be made to spit out code in a variety of languages/flavours. It may well be that Powerbasic users will continue to be your most profitable customer base, and there is nothing wrong with that. Purebasic DLLs work fine with Powerbasic (just a few tweaks needed to handle strings! )

Seems to me that you are not really open to suggestions as to how EzGUI might be able to evolve beyond what it has been throughout it's life, and I understand that. You have clearly invested a hell of a lot of work and time in a product which you are rightly proud of and probably feel that in it's current form still has a lot to offer. I cannot comment upon that because I do not know the product very well.

If you are to stick with EzGUI in it's current form then, well, I think you know better than anyone what your options are. All I can say is that from a Windows point of view, there is nothing EzGUI offers which you cannot do in PureB (and so a port will not be difficult). Once done, you can still support all your existing customers as well as open up new avenues. With each new major release of PureB, the cross-platform capabilities of the language just gets better and better and so, with one eye on the future, you would be in a pretty good position to eventually think about a cross platform version of EzGUI. It's win win as far as I can see.

Having said all this, let me answer the question which I think you perhaps should have asked much earlier : would I buy EzGUI as it is, or if you ported it to PureB? The honest answer is no, but that is only because with the work I do, I am not in need of such a tool. I have been a Windows die hard through and through, but even I am now moving towards cross-platform, for the challenge as much as anything.

Just my 5 cents worth.

[Danilo]

Please feel free to delete this thread.

This is not the PowerBasic forum, where they even deleted your "good bye" thread now.

If you want to find a new home, I would recommend to you to stop that "I am the Boss" attitude.
Some people here might think you are crazy.

If you develop a product for PureBasic users, I am sure you could find some customers here.
As a third party developer, you currently don't have a product for PureBasic users.
Or did I misread something?

You have many years of experience in WinAPI programming. We have the same.
Do you really think you are the best developer in the world and we are all kids?
Your postings sound like you really believe this.

Your problem is that you know only one programming language and you made yourself
depend on PowerBasic only, which is dead now. You seem to have a hard time learning
any other programming language. If you are unable to learn PureBasic, how do you think
you could learn C?
You seem to have big problems right now, you are in big trouble. I am sorry for you and can
understand the situation is very stressful for you. It's about your future and the future of your company.

But please don't project your problems onto us. You are the only person who is responsible for your current situation.

Your troubles have nothing - absolutely nothing - to do with us.

Develop a product for PureBasic if you want. If not, I am fine as well. I already suggested
to you to do something. Just do it! All you answered is how great you are and what your company
has to offer...

You, as a third party developer, should start to actually listen to what people here suggest to you.
They already told you what they want, made suggestions. Read and listen what your potential
customers want, make notes about what they are telling you, instead telling them what they want is wrong,
because you currently can't deliver what people here want.

If you were my friend, I would suggest to you to take a break for a few days. Give yourself
some time to think about your situation and re-think what you want to do in the future.

Wish you all the best!

[luis]

Sigmund would love this kind of thread.
Seems to me you were expecting to be welcomed and seen as a breath of fresh air so much needed.
You could have simply invested some time in browsing the forum.
Nothing better than that can help you to understand what people here like about PB, what they dislike, and what they would like to see and what they could be potentially interested in buying from a third party developer.
You are trying to get a condensed snapshot of what the community here thinks by talking to a bunch of people. What are they ? A 1% of the community here ? Less ? Are they your potential customers ?
Also reading the forum you could see how many here can build what you offer by themselves and how many don't.
Surely you can't realistically get an upfront number of how many people will buy your product, you have to evaluate what you see here, and take a bet. Start small and then build upon that.
Don't ask, look and base your decision on what you see, not on what you are told.
Also I don't see how can you consider the idea of writing a commercial third party lib for PB without trying the compiler for at least some time.
Ultimately if you build something useful and in the meantime you can demonstrate you are a good programmer, you are dependable, your software works, you will get more and more consideration and almost certainly more customers.
An by doing that you would probably get feedback from people here asking you "could you build something like... I would buy that, and I certainly would buy that from you!"
Now it's a little premature, don't you think ?

Until then, marketing research like this is not representative at all of what you could get from this.

Maybe you'll be back with a third account in the future.
You seem to be a valid programmer from what you did, and I concur with many of your ideas and point of view you have expressed on your youtube channel. I would like to see you on the forum and talk about programming stuff if you can manage to do it leaving sometimes this managerial crap out of it.

[Fangbeast]

I'd like a visual designer that has PureVision's simple interface, the way that it exports the code is good for me personally and it must have support for Splittergadgets and KeyBoardShortCutGadgets because I use them a hell of a lot.

I feel the super, you beaut, everything featured designers are too expensive, too many features shoehorned in, too much new stuff to learn and I am young in programming, only 30 years experience so can't handle it.

Click here, press that, move that, do this, resize that, fins this property box, hit that spinner, all the new designers are over the top!. PureVision has kept it simple and never shocked me personally. Each upgrade require bugger all learning curve and thankfully, hasn't increased the price!!

If someone made a simple designer that supported ALL pb gadgets at a cheap price with affordable upgrade path, more would pay for it. And made it extensible.

Just my 5 cents worth.

[USCode]

... 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.

Nah, ignore the negativity here Chris, they don't represent the silent majority who at this time remain ... Silent.
I've always been surprised at the number of folks who use PureBasic to develop for Windows only, given its cross-platform nature. I think many of them would find your tools very useful. The way I see it "the more the merrier" and that you should go for it!

[ostapas]

Maybe you'll be back with a third account in the future.

Killed my lungs

[C Boss]

It is easy for some to just think, "why not just switch languages and simply move to this one and get over it". It is not that easy. I have nearly 60,000 lines of code which would have to be ported over to Purebasic and that is the GUI engine alone. It also only targets Windows and there is a big difference between cross platform and targeting a single OS. All of my code is based on the WIN32 and beyond jthat I just use the core logic command set of the Powerbasic compiler (ie. FOR NEXT, IF THEN, etc.) it does not use a single GUI command in the PowerBasic language. It would be easier to port it directly to C, than to Purebasic, but I am not a C programmer.

Now to better appreciate the effect of native coding, even on something like a Visual Designer, consider this. The current PureBasic visual designer only displays "representations" of controls on a form, not the real thing (I checked and it is a Canvas which is drawn on, not real controls). This means the user does not actually see what their UI will look like until they compile and run it. I take a different approach. Designers I build use the actual controls themseleves as objects on a form. You actually see the user interface as it will really look and you don't have to compile any code to do that. There is even a test mode in the designer. This makes a big difference.

For example a combobox on the PureBasic designer does not properly represent what it will look like in the app when compiled and run. In Windows the combobox height is fixed by the font size used, but a designer must have the ability to size the invisible part (the drop down list area which will be used). When I wrote my GUI engine, the drag handle control takes this into consideration. The combobox looks like it will in the compiled app (the height fixed), but when you select a combobox for resizing, the drag handle control knows how big the invisible area is (to be used for the drop down list) and the drag handle locations are based on this.

I also do not see any way to control ZOrder in the PureBasic designer. In Windows ZOrder and tab order are the same, but ZOrder effects the depth of controls to each other while tab order effects user selection when tabbing via the tab key. ZOrder is an important concept in native Windows software, but I do not even see this supported in the Purebasic designer (unless the demo version is different than the licensed version).

Maybe using the draw on a Canvas approach for PureBasics designer is best for cross platform development, but it seriously limits a developer from seeing what the UI looks like during development, no matter the platform used. Surely on Windows it is only a barely acceptable representation of what the controls look like. I don't mean to demean the Purebasic designer by saying this, because I know how hard it is to build a designer and any indie developer even capable of building a decent one should be applauded.

If what some of you say, that some PureBasic users only develop for Windows, then they are not getting the best possible results for their target platform, during the development cycle. The generated apps may work well, but designing them must take a lot more work to get it right.

I should also point out, that I am coming from two unique different backgrounds actually. On the one hand, I am a Basic programmer. But I am also a native WIN32 programmer and what I write is far more akin to writing a windows app using C than what most Basic programmers today experience. Basic programmers are shielded from the Windows API because of the GUI command set of the Basic language they use. WIN32 programmers in the other hand don't need a GUI command set, but do everything via the WIN32 API. Porting this kind code to any version of Basic is a challenge, since all the features most of the users of the language speak most highly about are not important to a WIN32 programmer. It is the core parts of the language which matter instead.

For a WIN32 programmer to attempt to port to cross platform would almost be useless. WIN32 means , one is targeting the Windows platform directly and at that level there is no cross platform approach.

Some of you may have used PowerBasic in the past, so you may appreciate this next point. There were two camps in the PowerBasic community:

DDT (PowerBasics own GUI command set)

SDK (meaning low level WIN32)

These two camps were as divurgent as night and day. The SDK developers were the ones who created most if not all the third party tools, since they were the ones with the expertese to do the really difficult stuff which the native command set of the compiler did not support. They were the ones building custom controls, custom graphic libraries, custom visual designers and the like.

The DDT developers were BASIC programmers primarily, dependent upon what the compiler supported in its command set. Often they were challenged when DDT did not support directly some task they needed to accomplish and they had to dabble with the Windows API directly. Some became pretty good with this, but many just found it difficult so only did what easiest for them.

Over the years, because PowerBasic added more and more UI commands (ie. graphics), SDK developers became less and less in the community. Some who wanted the power of the Windows API, but not the work would use third party Visual Designers like FireFly which shielded you from the API in most of the UI stuff, the designer being a code generator. But this group often would be limited by what the designer could do and would only go so far into the API. So even though some uses SDK front ends for development, they too though held back from the deeper things of the Windows API.

The small minority of PowerBasic developers who embraced the power of the low level Windows API, were the ones building the really good stuff. Patrice Terriers WinLift and GDImage are good examples. Few programmers have come close to the kind of stuff he has developed. He finally gave up on Powerbasic (because of no 64 bit version) and simply ported all his stuff to C++ (but had to break a lot of rules of normal C++ development to get the results he was looking for, which was performance and small size).

The point is that with Powerbasic, it was the experienced low level WIN32 programmers who were building all the really good stuff. A number of great custom controls were developed by some of these programmers, like EGrid, RMChart, SIGrid and MLG. A couple of these developers built some really powerful Visual Designers which come close to the level of say Visual Basic. Paul Squires FireFly was the most popular and stable. His was very good. Dominic Mitchells Phoenix, while a little buggy at times and less popular, still put most to shame. I have to give him credit, he is one good programmer and I was very impressed with what he has done. His Visual Designer would put all of the indie Basic language IDE's and Designers to shame. His looked more like something coming from one of the big companies, like Microsoft or Intel. Patrice Terriers graphic engine is making big inroads into the WINDEV community (which is a very expensive, high level RAD development system) and he is doing things which likely amaze them. His knowledge of the many different graphic engines in Windows is extensive (GDI, GDIplus, DirectX,OpenGL, Windows Desktop Manager). Then their is Jose Roca and his programming forums. Some of the best of the best PowerBasic programmers discuss all sorts of advanced stuff there. Jose Roca's versions of the Windows API headers is one of the most extensive and well done among PowerBasic users.

It is no secret that PowerBasic is having some very serious problems and all of these advanced WIN32 programmers of their community know this and are looking at alternatives. I am just one of that group. PureBasic is one of the more obvious choices for them and a flood of advanced developers of tools for Windows could come to Purebasic if it embraced it. But if the cross platform priority is more important than benefiting from a flood of experienced low level API programmers or if the Purebasic community simply proudly snubs this available resource, then they will go elsewhere. There is already a move among many of them to simply port to C so they can have more confidence in the long term stability of the companies who make the tools then use (aka. Microsoft). But these guys love basic over C. They really do. C is only a choice of last resort for them, not the best choice. Now Purebasic has come up in discussion in this group. There are few (actually less experienced programmers) who use Purebasic who have encourage the more advanced group to embrace it. Sadly, many of them fear the problems of using any indie language, especially if it was built by a one or two man team. When Bob Zale died it was obvious to them of the danger of using such languages. Big companies always have someone to take someones place, but the little companies like PowerBasic or PureBasic, it is not so reassuring.

I may not have approached reaching out to this community in the best way and for that I apologize. But I am just one of a very talented group of programmers which came out of the PowerBasic environment. These are the low level SDK style programmers who are pushing Windows development to the limit. Trust me when I say, this is a talented group of programmers who have a lot to offer. Treat them like newbies and make them unwelcome and PureBasic could be pushing away some of the most talented WIN32 programmers around. Don't think this talent is easily replaceable either. In the Microsoft world there few programmers of this caliber who write for the low level WIN32 API. In that world it is all about dot.net (or java or HTML5). Even in the Microsoft world, low level C and C++ programmers are not the mainstream. Experienced WIN32 programmers are likely more rare. But the Powerbasic forums has bred over the years an amazing talent pool of experienced low level WIN32 programmers. Don't let that talent pool pass by. You have no idea of the talent you are pushing away. Sure, they may not be the cross platform kind of people that some of you want, but how many of you are Windows only developers ? This talent pool could bring in some amazing new third party tools which can help push PureBasic even further. Treat them badly and they will not give PureBasic a second look. Show respect for the talent pool they have and welcome them and you might be surprised at what they can teach you and bring to PureBasic, even it it is only for Windows.

[luis]

Your post is again too long for my lifespan, so I must concentrate on the most appalling part.

"why are you pushing talented people away, they could give so much to you, you don't know what you are losing"

What are you smoking ?
Talented people is certainly appreciated, this is a programmers' forum, know-how and expertise are the currency here (even if sometime packaged with less then stellar personality).

No one is pushing away no-one. You super-talented programmer want to come here ? Come !

Other talented or less-talented PowerBasic programmers want to come here ? Bring them on!

I welcome the less talented or less experts too, they can grow and anyway that's beside the point, anyone is welcome here, as long (now I'm talking for myself) does not expect to be treated as a GOD programmer just because he says so and show some genuine desire to learn and better himself without boasting an embarrassing ego and respecting the value of other people time (because nothing is more valuable than time).

If you are good people here will take notice and appreciate you, if you are funny and easygoing people will note that too and will make jokes with you, it that's your kind of thing. What do you want more ? It's a forum, not your kingdom, try to enter it without making so much noise and let your actions, contributions and behavior do the talking.

You may end up selling something too.

And let the other PowerBasic users out of it, I'm sure in a pool of people so talented there will be some able to decide by himself what to do. To be welcome here they just need to register in the forum and log in without much fanfare.

[PB]

> if the Purebasic community simply proudly snubs this available
> resource, then they will go elsewhere

Um, so what? Again with the chest-beating that was mentioned.
Stop alluding that we're all stranded here waiting to be rescued!

> I am just one of a very talented group of programmers

Chest!

> this is a talented group of programmers who have a lot to offer

FFS. Get over yourselves. This is a direct insult to the talented
programmers in THIS forum. Can't you see that? You're going on
with alluding that we need help and that PowerBasic coders are
somehow more superior. Shit, man. Now I'm getting pissed off.

> Don't think this talent is easily replaceable either

So, now the threats start.

> You have no idea of the talent you are pushing away

Chest!

> Treat them badly and they will not give PureBasic a second look

PureBasic's been doing fine without you all, and will continue to do so.
Anyway, I've had enough of your ego today. You can let yourself out.

[IdeasVacuum]

It would be easier to port it directly to C, than to Purebasic, but I am not a C programmer.

Well, you are not a programmer of either so you do yourself a disservice there. Given your years of experience, it would be very easy for you to get along with both C and PB.

I take a different approach. Designers I build use the actual controls themselves as objects on a form. You actually see the user interface as it will really look and you don't have to compile any code to do that. There is even a test mode in the designer. This makes a big difference.

PureForm does as you describe, possibly PureVision does too, I have not used that one. The built-in Visual Designer is more than good enough, and supports all three PB platforms.

It is no secret that PowerBasic is having some very serious problems and all of these advanced WIN32 programmers of their community know this and are looking at alternatives. I am just one of that group. PureBasic is one of the more obvious choices for them and a flood of advanced developers of tools for Windows could come to Purebasic if it embraced it. But if the cross platform priority is more important than benefiting from a flood of experienced low level API programmers or if the Purebasic community simply proudly snubs this available resource, then they will go elsewhere.

If you want to sell to a Basic market, them PB is now your only real choice! In this day and age, cross-platform is important to many developers because their customers are cross-platform. Depends on how large a slice of the PB market you are interested in, but there is probably a large enough 'Windows only' sector to be worth trying.

some of the most talented WIN32 programmers

Some of the most talented are using PB every day and have done so for years. If others wish to join, they are free to do so and their contributions will be warmly welcomed ~ they should of course show respect to the developers that have helped to make PB as popular as it is today, not 'barge in' and expect to be worshipped for what they have done elsewhere.

[C Boss]

Forget it !

Fred, sorry to bother you all here and please delete my account. Purebasic appears to have all it needs for future development here, at least in the words of the more vocal posters.

The Powerbasic Third Party developers obviously are not needed here. At least not my company.

The Computer Workshop has no interest in spending the time and resources in developing for PureBasic. I am sorry I waste your time.

[Demivec]

And let the other PowerBasic users out of it, I'm sure in a pool of people so talented there will be some able to decide by himself what to do. To be welcome here they just need to register in the forum and log in without much fanfare.

I second these two statements. It would seem that CBoss has made himself king of the other talented programmers there (in the PowerBasic forum) and they move and breathe at his beck and call. It would seem that he seeks to add this forum to his conquests as well. If he has something to offer then why not produce it (as he says he is capable of) and as Danilo said, "The market will decide, and good products sell.".

To join the PureBasic forum doesn't require an invite, any interested party can obtain access here. This includes programmers, vendors and the general public.

[wilbert]

The Powerbasic Third Party developers obviously are not needed here. At least not my company.

It might be good to separate two different things; your company/knowledge and your EzGUI product.
Being able to help others with low level OS knowledge is something that is usually very much appreciated here.
But your main question seems to be if people would buy EzGUI as it is (Windows 32 bit only).
Some might and others give you feedback that a cross platform solution would be more interesting to them.
Between the lines it sounds to me that that a version other than 32 bit Windows is not going to happen because it would be too much work.
That's understandable but also explains some of the feedback.
Another thing is the fear you expressed that a small company can suddenly cease to exist is a legitimate one but would also be the case with a third party product like EzGUI.
There's always a chance that you become totally dependent on it for a project and suddenly it's no longer actively supported or it won't work for some reason with a future version of PureBasic.
That's a chance not everyone is willing to take.

[PB]

I think he's made up his mind.

[IdeasVacuum]

Well, a hero has the prerogative to choose who to rescue........