Where is vis2pure?

Shannara · Post by **Shannara** » Sun Apr 24, 2005 7:47 pm

Heh, perhaps you may want to read my posts more closely

Post by **Berikco** » Sun Apr 24, 2005 7:55 pm

Shannara wrote:Heh, perhaps you may want to read my posts more closely

No, Sorry, i already spend enough time trying to decode your scrambled english

Beach · Post by **Beach** » Sun Apr 24, 2005 8:28 pm

Shannara wrote: I have not checked the new version of VD since I do not have an updated version of coLinux (*hint*BEACH*hint*).

I'm not following you here... what does CoLinux have to do with this? Are you referring to Freak's new IDE?

Shannara · Post by **Shannara** » Sun Apr 24, 2005 8:33 pm

@Beach: My apologies

I was mixing the two up, my bad.

@Beriko: Its ok that English is not your primary language. There are quite a few good English and American courses over the net. All you need to do is Google for some. If you need any reference sites, I can post some URLs for you.

Post by **Berikco** » Sun Apr 24, 2005 8:49 pm

Shanara wrote:@Beriko: Its ok that English is not your primary language. There are quite a few good English and American courses over the net. All you need to do is Google for some. If you need any reference sites, I can post some URLs for you.

No thanks
Just post a normal bug report if something is not working.

Shanara wrote: I actually use Pure Designer over PV mainly due to the above reasons

You use Pure Designer over PureVision ??
You mix names so much, nobody can read your posts

Just type a little slower, and your written English will be fine

Shannara · Post by **Shannara** » Sun Apr 24, 2005 9:18 pm

You see ? It is not a bug but a design issue. It works as it was designed to do, but was inconsistant at the time.

PV is still making its way to become a nice designer

It's not there yet, but getting close.

I like English, but prefer American as it have more words for use

Paul · Post by **Paul** » Sun Apr 24, 2005 10:28 pm

Shannara wrote: PV is still making its way to become a nice designer It's not there yet, but getting close.

Your own personal opinion of course.

Myself along with hundreds of others find PureVision to be the perfect choice for commercial software design.

Enjoy!

GedB · Post by **GedB** » Mon Apr 25, 2005 9:48 am

Shannara,

Why don't you just use VB?

Shannara · Post by **Shannara** » Mon Apr 25, 2005 7:06 pm

@ Paul: Actaully, I cannot agree with you there. I believe numbers cannot count in this instance w/o testimony that all of these hundreds of developers use PV for all their projects?

@ GedB: Well, one, vis2pure is no longer maintain and there is currently not an up-to-date converter out. That's the reason. As mentioned in my previous post on this thread, I've undertaken the task of creating one.

As for using it exclusively, well ..

1.) Microsoft have stopped creating new versions of Visual Basic back in 96 or so. The last version of VB was VB6. (VB.net is not vb, CK).

2.) Runtime hell.

3.) It has no crossplatform support while PB has some.

4.) Huge RAM requirements for a simple program PB's RAM requirements are not that high.

5. ) Speed, PB wins on most speed tests against VB.

6.) VB only have two major things over PB. The Visual Studio dialog designer/code integration, aka an IDE. And a more full network support.

Paul · Post by **Paul** » Mon Apr 25, 2005 8:37 pm

Shannara wrote:@ Paul: Actaully, I cannot agree with you there. I believe numbers cannot count in this instance w/o testimony that all of these hundreds of developers use PV for all their projects?

I would not expect you to agree, simply based on your history here. For some reason you seem to project a very negative attitude and make a habit of posting your own assumptions and opinions as fact.

Anyway, considering we receive emails daily from PV users stating how they could not have quickly and easily completed projects without it.... yes, these numbers do count.

These people take the time and learn to use their tools to the fullest. These are the people who are able to accomplish the most. And once again, numbers don't lie.