Wouldn't it be interesting for every purebasic update to be paid?

[skinkairewalker]

Hello everybody !
Wouldn't it be a good idea, with each update of purebasic, we pay a small fee / or maybe the full value of a new license in order to always keep FantaisieSoftware with financial support to always innovate this fabulous and powerful tool called PureBasic ??

just sharing my view...

[BarryG]

Been discussed literally a million times before, and the answer every time is: Fred's not going to charge someone again, so it's up to the users if they want to pay again (there's no limit to how many licenses you can buy).

[mk-soft]

You can also login at www.purebasic.com and donate instead of buying a version.
This is what I do with the new version.

[Lord]

As long as donations are only possible via PayPal, I don't see any
possibility of donating anything.
Sorry.

[BarryG]

PureBasic's "Ordering" page has offline options -> https://www.purebasic.com/ordering.php

[Lord]

PureBasic's "Ordering" page has offline options -> https://www.purebasic.com/ordering.php

Thanks for this hint. I didn't notice this possibility.

[Seymour Clufley]

It's incredibly frustrating (for me, as a supporter of PB who wants it to keep going) that Fred doesn't make it easy for people to donate.

[Rinzwind]

If it is paid, people will have more expectations and it will start a version mess on the forum examples (you need version x for this). If I may be blunt, language syntax improvements/evolution aka programmers quality of life tweaks are just not happening and I am very disappointed at that. There are many ways to improve the language and make it less cumbersome with less bloated code. There are simply no modern code paradigms available and all feature requests involving the PB language itself are just ignored. So no, it would be a bad idea. It is a niche language. Good at low level utilities. Not so good at large business applications and code bases.

[Fred]

It's incredibly frustrating (for me, as a supporter of PB who wants it to keep going) that Fred doesn't make it easy for people to donate.

What would be easier options ?

[Oso]

... If I may be blunt, language syntax improvements/evolution aka programmers quality of life tweaks are just not happening and I am very disappointed at that. There are many ways to improve the language and make it less cumbersome with less bloated code. There are simply no modern code paradigms available and all feature requests involving the PB language itself are just ignored. So no, it would be a bad idea. It is a niche language. Good at low level utilities. Not so good at large business applications and code bases.

I've been very happy with PureBasic and have developed the first stages of a core business application, which, performance wise, is similar to a competitor's product written in C. When I'm confident that the software is ready, I will roll it out to two customer sites I'm responsible for, replacing a long-standing commercial product. I was surprised at just how much I could achieve with it, in a short space of time.

I think it's important to look at the broader picture. I also develop in C# but it takes a long time to get something working for a client to try out, adding to the costs. Microsoft's tools always appear to be fraught with problems over future direction and the passing trends of whatever companies and products they care to acquire, or lose — a good example being Xamarin, which now being dropped (it was always very buggy), causes software investment to become obsolete. I think PB is worth supporting and hanging onto. I'm not keen on the alternatives.

[Fangbeast]

I've been very happy with PureBasic and have developed the first stages of a core business application

I've never done 'core business applications but a few small business tools that have been in use since 2008 and if a dummy like me can do it, anyone can. Had a lot of valuable help over the years but have so much to work on that simply just 'works' while using pb that I don't need to ask much any more.

The way the forum is going, we are slowly filling with spam bots, whiners and people who want everyone to write all their code for them that many of us just read the forum and say nothing. After 21 years with PB, everything "I" need to do still just works so thank you Fred.

Oh and RASHAD, hope you are doing okay?

[Marc56us]

+1 with Fangbeast
I have also created many small utilities that have been working every day for over 10 years. (and even some 2003 so 20 years!)
They are quite easy to build and can be maintained and modified very easily. This last point is essential for programs used in companies.
So try to modify a C++ or python program that you haven't touched for 10 years... already a good part of the libs are no longer available or incompatible. With PB, I modify 2 ou 3 lines only.
Of course they don't have nice modern interfaces with the latest graphical gadgets, but they are ergonomic and intuitive to use (the professional user doesn't want something nice, but something reliable, easy, fast, light (stop bloatwares))
Add functions: yes.
Modify the base (to "simplify"): No
I consider PB as a generalist: it can do everything that is essential. For the rest, we call on specialists if necessary.
I admire Fred's work in keeping this perfect tool consistent.

[Oso]

The way the forum is going, we are slowly filling with spam bots, whiners and people who want everyone to write all their code for them that many of us just read the forum and say nothing. After 21 years with PB, everything "I" need to do still just works so thank you Fred.

I am conscious of having asked for a lot of help on this forum Fangbeast, hopefully not without always searching first though. I hope to be able to repay it back to the forum when I'm able to, but after about five months, I still feel everyone else is more advanced than I am. Sometimes of course it's just great to be able to chat about a technical subject, or debate it, without necessarily looking for an outcome. I miss the office chat.

I should add though, my application is far from finished, but it has reached the point where I know I can achieve it with PB.

I often find earlier posts on the forum and I think like many forums, it goes through waves of once-active groups of members, some of whom have disappeared. At present it's very helpful. The spam problem is unfortunate but at least they are being deleted. Some forums don't delete the spam and it then looks as if the product is no longer maintained.

[Oso]

... This last point is essential for programs used in companies. So try to modify a C++ or python program that you haven't touched for 10 years... already a good part of the libs are no longer available or incompatible. With PB, I modify 2 ou 3 lines only.

I agree with these points entirely Marc56us. In the commercial world, maintainability is often more important than nice features. Programmers come and go, sometimes companies have to employ a contractor temporarily to adapt an application that's been written by others.

Of course they don't have nice modern interfaces with the latest graphical gadgets, but they are ergonomic and intuitive to use (the professional user doesn't want something nice, but something reliable, easy, fast, light (stop bloatwares))

For writing business admin applications and the speed of being able to develop something bespoke, the user interface is perfectly good. I don't think it's any different from the C# desktop environment.

I admire Fred's work in keeping this perfect tool consistent.

Agreed, I think there's some great ideas in the language. Considering what's been achieved with it, with only a small team, is much more impressive than many competitors' products. I can imagine if Microsoft had PureBasic, the install download would be 4GB for the base version.

[plouf]

Another posibility to "support fantasie software" is to register with Spiderbasic.
This has a low <37euro per year renrwal cost AND at the same time you have another product/platforms (web/android/ios) ..

This is what i do...