PureBasic Forums - English

Exactly !
It is a MODERN BASIC

Do not be angry with me, but I think Fig has a lot of truth.

"Basic" is loaded with archaic connotations. I had to explain myself why to use PB when it's Basic. Basic = default language, for beginners, for teaching... nothing professional.

If I use Python, no one will say: Ah, that's the Basic language for beginners. Blahblah. I do not have to explain anything.

Unfortunately, everyone judges the book by the cover. And PB is no exception. Once people hear "Basic", it raises retro-thoughts in them. No modern idea.

That's like saying - I have "Pure-vacuum tubes"! The most modern electronic component in the world! And everybody says - well, nice But they are still vacuum tubes! We already use semiconductors. I know, the answer is completely out, but that's the way it is. Language defines opinion.

That's a bit of a problem. I understand, PB is 20 years old in the world. It is great! Perfect product! But the young generation, affected by the mainstream, is hard to explain. Basic => I'm ashamed ... I will not program in Basic!
But Python? wow, super, great, coolll - I'll take my T-shirt "Python" (or PyLadies) and I'm God!

EDIT:
Do not get me wrong. I am also proud of using PB and I understand all the benefits.
But ask the young generation 15-25 years of age to have the same feelings as we do? Try to convince someone about these benefits at a job interview. Etc.
It is not about us, ie people who actively use PB. It's about the rest of the world and how the rest of the world probably sees Basic.

zxretrosoft wrote:Basic => I'm ashamed ... I will not program in Basic!

It doesn't matter what PureBasic is called. Once the user reads the manual and/or sees the syntax, they'll know it's Basic, so what's the point of renaming it? It's Basic. No way around it, or hiding it, or wanting to hide it. Again, if anyone is embarrassed by Basic, then they've wandered into the wrong place... just like the Blue Oyster Bar.

Think the other way around: how did you find PureBasic at first ? Most of you because it was listed as new Basic alternative for VB6 for example. There is nothing wrong with the name and it won't change the fact it's a BASIC like language anyway.

Dude wrote:

zxretrosoft wrote:Basic => I'm ashamed ... I will not program in Basic!

It doesn't matter what PureBasic is called. Once the user reads the manual and/or sees the syntax, they'll know it's Basic, so what's the point of renaming it? It's Basic. No way around it, or hiding it, or wanting to hide it. Again, if anyone is embarrassed by Basic, then they've wandered into the wrong place... just like the Blue Oyster Bar.

Am I ashamed? - No way! Quite the opposite - I'm proud to tell anyone who is interested that I program in PureBasic. It simply shows that I've made a thoughtful, well researched choice to produce software that I care about.

For the record - I think that PureBasic is great name!

Pure = essential, unadulterated, clear, elegantly simple
Basic = fundamental, primary, minimal, solid foundation and also a language paradigm suited to all levels

In short form as PB it coincidentally matches my own Plant Base product - nice!

That's all I have to say on the subject

Now where did I put my leather jacket?

New users (so potential buyers!) prefer to have new features rather than 100% bug-free systems (just look at commercial product of many softwares).
I think that in order to have new customers it is better to first follow the wish lists before the bug lists

Second thing: we should point out that PB is not a basic compiler, but an assembler code generator! and that's why it's fast, small EXE, no need VM and truly cross-platform.

Finally, last thing, when I am told BASIC, I say, do not look at the first letter (Beginner), but look at the second letter "All purpose" and think also VBA VBS etc. are basic and are used every day by professionals.

There is a stigma associated with using Purebasic in the business world, purely because of the word basic.

I have written a handful of different tools for clients in both Purebasic and Xojo as I have a license for both. It's not until they have seen the difference in the file size produced and the speed differences in how they run that they have changed their minds about Purebasic.

It's something that will always exist. Xojo rebranding itself from RealBasic hasn't changed the syntax of the language neither has it changed the fact that it compiles in a whole framework into the exe.

Both are great programming languages and the decision should always be which one is best suited to the job in hand.

EDIT: I think it changed from RealBasic to Real Studio and then Xojo.

Purebasic could have two names... Why not ?
It will still drag old programmers looking for basic (and these programmers don't get any younger, I am one of them, I know...) and can be more attractive to the new generation.

I learnt Realbasic became Xojo, I wonder what effect it had on the community...

The programming language matters to managers who must consider future support of delivered code.
If you deliver a working app that meets spec, the language should not matter.
A bloated Python or .NET delivery that meets spec, will be a bear to guarantee install dependencies across OS's.
What version of Python installed? What flavor of .NET? Etc.
That said, I do not care what the language is called.
I care more about the growth of the language.
18 years of Windows releases = mucho growth.

Ajm wrote:There is a stigma associated with using Purebasic in the business world, purely because of the word basic

Which is weird, because PowerBasic never had that stigma. It had plenty of respect in the business sector, before its author died. Maybe it's just a marketing issue, as PowerBasic pushed very strongly on biz/pro use; whereas PureBasic is more all-purpose, with 3D game support, etc.

Well, If i hear PowerRanger i don't think of a ranger either

Fig wrote:I learnt Realbasic became Xojo...

I find saying 'Xojo' a damn site more embarrassing than saying 'Basic'.

Xojo

This reminds me of an episode of Futurama:

Fry: Oh, man, this is great! Hey, as long as you don't make me smell Uranus.
Leela: I don't get it.
Farnsworth: I'm sorry, Fry, but astronomers renamed Uranus in 2620 to end that stupid joke once and for all..
Fry: Oh. What's it called now?
Farnsworth: Urectum.

Even if you were to change the name to PureComplex. It doesn't make it any more complexed. That is measured by the intelligence of the user.

PureBasic Rules!

Unless your on DOS. Then... PowerBasic Rules!

I think it would be best if the language was just named - PURE

Rather than thinking of the word basic in relation to the antiquated BASIC programming language, let's view it as a term describing the ease and simplicity of PureBasic's programming syntax, structures, and methodologies. It might have started with BASIC-like syntax, but it has evolved into quite a sophisticated language today.

Furthermore, rules of branding would forbid such a name-change to a product that has flourished for two glorious decades.