PureBasic or Q7Basic?

[karmacomposer]

I HATE these kinds of threads, but I have to ask since I am evaluating both.

Which one is better overall: PureBasic or Q7Basic?

PureBasic and Q7Basic both compile to either PC, Mac or Linux.

PureBasic has an Orge implementation so 3D games are possible.
Not sure if Q7 has any kind of 3D game implementation. Since it uses Qt, multimedia is certainly possible.

Q7Basic has a far superior form designer - better than even the professional form designers you can buy for PureBasic,
but it seems to be a bit of a pain to use. Q7 can easily be used to create Database apps. I THINK PureBasic can too.

Does anyone have experience with either? Which one is more complete? Which one is better supported and which
one won't flake out on me when it's crunch time and I have to get a project finished?

I looked at RealBasic and it's too closely related to LiveCode, which I invested heavily in and all it did in the end
was lose me clients due to improperly working deployment options (android still does not work, IOS is incomplete,
web is totally broken and I could not get Mac apps to run 100% on a Mac. Only PC apps worked perfectly for me).
Not sure but I think RealBasic is not a good choice for me - and it's the most expensive of all of my choices.

Delphi XE2 Pro is just too darn expensive for me right now, which is the main platform I was looking for, but PureBasic seems
to be a good choice to do MOST of what I could do in Delphi with similar speeds - is this accurate? My largest needs are
database apps, utilities and virtual instruments and effects (which are .dll files. I can do all of these in Delphi, but it's much
more difficult and expensive. I know a bit of pascal since I owned Delphi before, but I REALLY know basic and so using either
PureBasic or Q7Basic would allow me to get projects done faster. Also, PureBasic has a 64 bit implementation as well as
32 bit. Q7 Basic is 32 bit for PC, 64 bit for Mac and 32 bit for Linux. Delphi XE2 is the only one of the three choices that can
also deploy cross platform including IOS. Have not heard if either PureBasic or Q7Basic can deploy to mobile.

Also, how cross-platform is PureBasic? If I create a program on the PC, will it just work on the Mac? If I create a form on the PC
with PureBasic will that form also work on the Mac?

Thanks for helping me decide where to spend my money.

Mike

[karmacomposer]

Oh, yeah, and PureBasic has a forum that is currently active.

Q7Basic's forum may be active, but it's been WEEKS and they have not activated my forum registration. I cannot ask questions there yet.

Not good.

Mike

[Polo]

As you mention Qt, Purebasic uses native OS calls for windows and gadgets, which I think is a big plus (for us, not for the developers )

[DarkDragon]

As you mention Qt, Purebasic uses native OS calls for windows and gadgets, which I think is a big plus (for us, not for the developers )

Not really, PureBasic doesn't use native OS calls on linux. It uses GTK there instead of Xlib (which would be way more native). It could also use Qt instead.

[karmacomposer]

I'm beginning to see that Q7Basic is more like Visual Basic than Basic.

Also, it takes FOREVER to compile.

Although their visual for designer is superior in look and feel, it does not work properly it seems - every
form I have tried to make does not show up properly in the IDE unless I am doing something wrong.

Mike

[Polo]

Well you'll obviously find people here who like Purebasic, and it's safe to say it's fast to compile, produce fast and small executables

[karmacomposer]

Well you'll obviously find people here who like Purebasic, and it's safe to say it's fast to compile, produce fast and small executables

Yes. I am beginning to see that PureBasic is the best choice so far. ULTRA Fast compiling - that I like. The 3D engine shows that it can be SPEEDY!

Now I just need to make sure it can be used to create virtual instruments and my decision is made.

I do know an audio app was recently created and shown on KVRAudio's forum. It was not a plugin, though, but a windows program created in PureBasic.

It did show the potential synthesis capabilities of PureBasic and the programmer who created it. It's what prompted my attention to this platform in the
first place.

The only two platforms I knew you could even create plugins on were c++ and Delphi/pascal and no one seems to have had luck with Lazarus, therefore
Embarcadero Delphi would have to do - but expensive as heck! Also, I own PHP Rad XE2 by them and it's so buggy it CRASHES all the time, so I am not
willing to spend almost $1,000 on Delphi (even though I owned Borland Delphi ages ago).

Mike

[moogle]

Wrong place to ask if you're looking for an unbiased comparison

[karmacomposer]

Wrong place to ask if you're looking for an unbiased comparison

LOL. I TOTALLY get that. My mind is pretty much made up.

Mike

[IdeasVacuum]

PB's cross-plaform ability is a work in progress. If you look at the recent posts in the Active Topics thread, you will see that major improvements for the MAC are being introduced. However, not surprisingly, the Windows platform is by far the strongest - some of that strength comes from the underlying support of the Windows API, which of course is not cross-platform. I am not an expert but I imagine virtual instruments might need API calls on all platforms, a big job if it is necessary, but at least PB can do it.

The PureForm visual form designer (a replacement for the PB designer) is far more capable than most people think - including a lot of the devs that use it every day! It's important to go through PureForm's options and set it up the way you prefer to work. It's weakness is that it only runs on Windows and is only Windows aware, though you can produce platform neutral forms with it. One of the forum members is working on a new visual designer for the MAC, an indication that PB is very much alive and thriving. However, if there is anything GUI-wise that does not meet your requirements, you can design your own items using the Canvas Gadget - a magnificent implementation with a ton of possibilities.

The only way to judge whether PB is for you is to try it out. You won't find any perfect language out there , not even Delphi (now infamous for producing huge exe files). For me, PB plus this brilliant, friendly forum is Olympic Gold standard all the way.

[karmacomposer]

PB's cross-plaform ability is a work in progress. If you look at the recent posts in the Active Topics thread, you will see that major improvements for the MAC are being introduced. However, not surprisingly, the Windows platform is by far the strongest - some of that strength comes from the underlying support of the Windows API, which of course is not cross-platform. I am not an expert but I imagine virtual instruments might need API calls on all platforms, a big job if it is necessary, but at least PB can do it.

The PureForm visual form designer (a replacement for the PB designer) is far more capable than most people think - including a lot of the devs that use it every day! It's important to go through PureForm's options and set it up the way you prefer to work. It's weakness is that it only runs on Windows and is only Windows aware, though you can produce platform neutral forms with it. One of the forum members is working on a new visual designer for the MAC, an indication that PB is very much alive and thriving. However, if there is anything GUI-wise that does not meet your requirements, you can design your own items using the Canvas Gadget - a magnificent implementation with a ton of possibilities.

The only way to judge whether PB is for you is to try it out. You won't find any perfect language out there , not even Delphi (now infamous for producing huge exe files). For me, PB plus this brilliant, friendly forum is Olympic Gold standard all the way.

Thank you for a great response. So, it seems, PureBasic is VERY open ended.

Last question (again): can I use PureBasic to create MySQL database apps?

Mike

[Polo]

PB's cross-plaform ability is a work in progress. If you look at the recent posts in the Active Topics thread, you will see that major improvements for the MAC are being introduced. However, not surprisingly, the Windows platform is by far the strongest - some of that strength comes from the underlying support of the Windows API, which of course is not cross-platform. I am not an expert but I imagine virtual instruments might need API calls on all platforms, a big job if it is necessary, but at least PB can do it.

The PureForm visual form designer (a replacement for the PB designer) is far more capable than most people think - including a lot of the devs that use it every day! It's important to go through PureForm's options and set it up the way you prefer to work. It's weakness is that it only runs on Windows and is only Windows aware, though you can produce platform neutral forms with it. One of the forum members is working on a new visual designer for the MAC, an indication that PB is very much alive and thriving. However, if there is anything GUI-wise that does not meet your requirements, you can design your own items using the Canvas Gadget - a magnificent implementation with a ton of possibilities.

The only way to judge whether PB is for you is to try it out. You won't find any perfect language out there , not even Delphi (now infamous for producing huge exe files). For me, PB plus this brilliant, friendly forum is Olympic Gold standard all the way.

Thank you for a great response. So, it seems, PureBasic is VERY open ended.

Last question (again): can I use PureBasic to create MySQL database apps?

Mike

Only through ODBC. So you need to have it installed - whereas you can use SQlite or PostgreSQL with PB native driver.

[Fred]

As you mention Qt, Purebasic uses native OS calls for windows and gadgets, which I think is a big plus (for us, not for the developers )

Not really, PureBasic doesn't use native OS calls on linux. It uses GTK there instead of Xlib (which would be way more native). It could also use Qt instead.

That's wrong, Xlib is just another native toolkit on Linux, and nobody use it as it's way too limited. The only real alternative is GTK and QT, on par, depending on your desktop (Gnome or KDE).

[ts-soft]

@Fred

adding a QT Subsystem to all plattforms was a good idea

[DarkDragon]

As you mention Qt, Purebasic uses native OS calls for windows and gadgets, which I think is a big plus (for us, not for the developers )

Not really, PureBasic doesn't use native OS calls on linux. It uses GTK there instead of Xlib (which would be way more native). It could also use Qt instead.

That's wrong, Xlib is just another native toolkit on Linux, and nobody use it as it's way too limited. The only real alternative is GTK and QT, on par, depending on your desktop (Gnome or KDE).

GTK+ uses Xlib, Qt uses Xlib and I don't see the point why PureBasic doesn't directly use Xlib, too. Wikipedia clearly shows with an image, that GTK and Qt are higher level abstractions of Xlib, nothing more. So Xlib is not an alternative, but the lowest level which is window manager independent. Sure, you must draw the buttons yourself afaik, but you also get the system images to do so. And did you ever have a look at the event handling? I think its even more similar to the windows api event handling than the gtk events. But my statement isn't there to make you upset. It was just to show Polo, that his statement wasn't fully correct. It is correct for windows and mac, but not for Linux, as it could be even more native.

@ts-soft: Qt isn't really compatible to PureBasic. It would be a even more buggy than OGRE. The signals/slots are lost, the designer wouldn't work, ... .