PureBasic Forums - English

I've been hanging out here on PB forums for a few weeks now to get the feel of the community, and I'm impressed with what I've seen. I'm impressed with PB, with Fred and his passion for the product, and with the technical abilities of the PB product. It reminds of the community and product you find at http://www.handheld-basic.com/ for the Palm environment. Both products produce tight executables without any messy runtimes, and both are priced for the true hackers that like to code but don't want to spend a fortune doing so. The commaraderie and friendship of this forum is immediately recognized.

I'm looking at building an application that must run on both Windows and MAC, and if I can get Linux, well, thats all the better. PB will certainly do this, but I've been looking at RealBasic, which appears to offer this ability, too, but at a MUCH higher price. I don't get the same "family" feeling when I visit the RealBasic forums, and I certainly don't like their pricing. With the RealBasic I don't get the ability to support someone like Fred, whom is slaving away on something he believes in. What I do get from RealBasic is a company, a faceless entity lacking the soul I find in PB. I wish to support someone like Fred; I enjoyed the interview of him, hope we get to hear from him more often like that.

However, early on I'm sensing that with the RealBasic product there is more of a "write-it-once" and have it compile on all three platforms than I get from PB. I see here in the forums lots of talk of the Windows API or even asm code, which I can fully appreciate if you were locked into one O/S.

After all of that rambling, my question to you folks ... is it possible to author a PB program that will compile in Windows, MAC, and Linux without a bunch of re-write? I'm not talking about a "hello world" app, I'm thinking of an application that will need to retrieve information from a server on the Internet, transfer files over the Internet, provide a rich GUI to the end user, and provide enough error checking hooks to be worthy of a commercial application? If I stay with all PB gadgets will I end up with a product that looks 2005 instead of 1995? I don't mean that to come across in a mean or offensive in tone, I hope you understand what I mean. The RealBasic demos look impressive across the various O/Ss, and the command set looks very feature rich, yet I keep coming back to PB hoping to find my solution here.

I'm not looking to offend anyone by posting about a competive product, just honest opinions.

Someone correct me if I am wrong, but, PureBasic 4.0 will address this issue. It will be easier to write cross-platform apps without re-writing specific code since the core command set will be more unified across each platform. Obviously, it goes without saying, that if you use OS specific commands (such as API calls, etc) they won't translate over but this is true for RealBasic, as well.

I tried RealBasic and I thought it had some nice features but I ended finding it "clunky" and some of the example apps didn't work on my computer. One benefit with PureBasic is you buy it once and you get lifetime updates. If you buy now you'll get PureBasic 4.0 when it comes out. RealBasic is expensive (IMO) and you'll still have to pay for major updates.

Have you tried the demos, dkirk? It will give you a feel for things.

I tried RealBasic and was not happy, in fact I prefer vb/vb.net to RealBasic, and I am not a vb or .net fan by a long shot.

I prefer PureBasic uber alles - but I am also not a cross-platformer, so perhaps this is a wasted post.

Dare2 wrote:Have you tried the demos, dkirk? It will give you a feel for things.

Yes. I liked RealBasic's ability to compile to any O/S you wanted. Running Windows you could compile a Mac app without running the Mac. This was cool, but like theNerd says, it does feel clunky. PB just feels so much more nimble. The RealBasic application GUI looked modern.

PB's ability to cross-compile is simply amazing, agile, and should be applauded as I'm sure it was no easy task. With PB I'm actually going to have to have a Mac sitting right here with me, something I didn't need with RealBasic.

Has anyone done any cross-development, client-server type work, and done it cross-platform using PB?

Excuse me, but.. even if you didnt need a mac on your side with other language. You got to be stupid for publishing a compiled program that you DIDNT EVEN TEST.

That goes for anything you develop, you must test it on as much systems as you can. here we have just 5 PCs to test at, so its not enough (its never enough). You sure know this (I hope), so even if you "could" just by saying "yes I click compile and I got it in 3 platforms" its worth nothing if it doesnt work correctly. Even if it does, you MUST test what you're going to publish.

Thats all..

PB will certainly do this, but I've been looking at RealBasic, which appears to offer this ability, too, but at a MUCH higher price.

I have RealBasic, so I am going to chime in here.

I bought and used RealBasic for some commercial work I was doing via contract for the local chapter of a Cystic Fibrosis organization. They needed some custom apps that would run on various platforms as their employees used their own laptops and naturally some had Windows and some had Macs, and some of the office computers ran Linux. At that time, RealBasic was the best and easiest solution for cross-platform development.

RealBasic is nice for cross compiling. I can write for all platforms via my PC which is the main reason I bought it. I found it to be stable, and it had a good feature-set.

The cons of RealBasic: The syntax leaves a lot to be desired and it takes a lot more code to do something than it does in PureBasic. RealBasic EXEs are HUGE! The sprite commands in RealBasic require QuickTime to be installed. The IDE for RealBasic has a clunky feel to it. The price isn't really an issue since it is a legitimate business expense and is tax-deductible.

Now, if I wanted to do cross-platform, I would use PureBasic.

RealBasic EXEs are HUGE!

Just like blitzbasic's? Perhaps same error or (lazyness?) at compiling everything at once? or having very big libraries (when they could be smaller)?

dagcrack wrote:You got to be stupid

I am NOT stupid.

dagcrack wrote:a compiled program that you DIDNT EVEN TEST.

I have an office filled with Mac G5s and G4s right here, of course I would test, and run an external beta test. I do not have a Mac on my desk and really didn't want another box here on my desk.

Just like blitzbasic's?

Worse, Blitz's EXEs are small in comparison

No you don't see my point...
The way you said it, just read it.
"Now with PB i'll need a mac on my side" THAT is stupid (not you), you will need systems to test with, on any language you work on thats what I mean. no matter how good the cross compiler is.

But what you said has no sense. Thats what I mean.
Why you think I'd call you stupid, if I don't even know you for having a reason.

Brice Manuel wrote:

Just like blitzbasic's?

Worse, Blitz's EXEs are small in comparison

Wow, got to see it for believing it! I remember the gui of the "editor" and thats what pushed me away from it mostly.. didnt got to test it in-deep as you have.

dkirk,

PureBasic is 59 euro for all platforms and all future updates, while Realbasic is $399 for all platforms followed by £199.95 for updates after the first 6 months.

This means that PureBasic + Mac Mini is still cheaper than RealBasic licenses alone.

You're going to have to test on a Mac befoe you put it out the door, so I don't see that having to compile on a Mac will be a real problem.

GedB wrote:dkirk,

PureBasic is 59 euro for all platforms and all future updates, while Realbasic is $399 for all platforms followed by £199.95 for updates after the first 6 months.

This means that PureBasic + Mac Mini is still cheaper than RealBasic licenses alone.

You're going to have to test on a Mac befoe you put it out the door, so I don't see that having to compile on a Mac will be a real problem.

That is my point!
Good one sir.

Hey guys ok.
I certanly think true cross platform is possibel. I am llosy when it comes to linux but with PB i got my Instant Messenger server ported to Linux in about half an hour which was because I had to remove als MessageRequesters to led pb not include gtk because it had to run on a Server without GUI a part from this i could take the Server code to Linux cut the Tray Icon code out and compile it. The only problem was to install ODBC on the Server just with commandline and absolutely no Linux knowledge took me 4 days. After a few days learning how MySQL works my Server ran. A little thing to know is that Linux is much more sensible when it comes to memory access while windows doesn't care if you write a string into memory forgetting the chr(0) Linux just kills your app but hey that was my error not PB's. Another Program I ported was my Chat system no porblem there didn't take any touch of the sourcode.
The only problem could be the gui it's a bit hard to do a real nice looking gui just with Purebasic commands some Editor Gadget support is really lacking (Hint at Fred) hope that gets better with 4.0.
byeNik

Conlusion: In vest the 59 € it is not wasted and try it out if it really doesn't fit your needs you still can invest in RealBasic

I also have REALbasic, I don't find the IDE at all clunky in fact I like it better than any other I've seen. I love the syntax and although the executables are much larger than you get with PB everything seems to run extremely fast.

I think REALbasic is a great product but dkirk is absolutley right about the forum and Real Softwares attitude to it's customers. PureBasic is in a league of it's own when it comes to these.

I paid quite a bit extra to upgrade to REALbasic pro because I wanted the database plug-ins only to find many of them don't work properly.

e.g. 1) The MySQL plug-in only supports the old password system so you have to use an old version of the server or use some command line options to tell the server to use the old password routines before you can connect.

e.g. 2) The 4D Server plug-in makes the REALbasic IDE crash under Windows.

REAL are about to bring out a SQL server based on SQLite so I don't see them fixing the other plug-ins any time soon either.