Powerbasic Is A Dead-end
Julie Johnson
if so, would software written in QuickBASIC be transportable to this?
I have recently reached the limits of my current basic compiler.
.. Brian Mulroney: Biggest syntax error in politic.
--- Ezycom V1.48g0 01fd016b
* Origin: Fox's Lair BBS Bris Aus +61-7-38033908 V34+ Node 2 (3:640/238)
Har-D-Har-Har
lot of built in capability not seen in previous basics.
HK
Julie Johnson wrote in message <36062.3...@qwknews.concentric.net>...
Ketil Krumm
>if so, would software written in QuickBASIC be transportable to this?
>I have recently reached the limits of my current basic compiler.
Julie,
See my posting under the "Optimizing VB 4 programs" thread - I believe the
info there applies to you as well.
Ketil
Don Schullian
wrote:
>does the language of Powerbasic look much like any other basic?
>if so, would software written in QuickBASIC be transportable to this?
>I have recently reached the limits of my current basic compiler.
yes and mostly
____ _ ____ ____ _____
| _ \ / \ / ___) __ | ___)(_ _) Don Schullian
| |_) / _ \ \____\/ \| _) | | d...@ath.forthnet.gr
|____//_/ \_\(____/\__/|_| |_| www.DASoftVSS.com
___________________________________ www.basicguru.com
Vertical Software Solutions
Sean Dennis
20 Sep 98 18:08, Julie Johnson wrote to Cornel Huth:
JJ> What the heck do I do then? I have been finding MYself trapped in QB45
JJ> with no solution so far for compiling my larger programs. I'm am quite
JJ> pissed off now after taking one 2 or three years becoming fully
JJ> proficient at this language and then finding that the thing has
JJ> absolutely NO professional capacity. I've issued DYNAMIC metacommands,
JJ> I've used options within the Dos command-line, I've even re-configured
JJ> BUFFERS in my DOS for %#%%%$'s sake! I feel like MURDERING bill
JJ> gaytes...
If you're _THAT_ worried about it, move on to C++ or maybe Visual BASIC 5.0 or
something.
BASIC was never designed for professional applications. With a name like Basic
All-purpose Symbolic Instruction Code, I don't think that it was ment as a pro
language.
Later,
Sean
--- GoldED/2 3.00.Beta5 UNREG
* Origin: AfterHours/2 BBS Main Console (1:395/610)
Sid Lee
JJ> does the language of Powerbasic look much like any other basic?
JJ> if so, would software written in QuickBASIC be transportable to this?
JJ> I have recently reached the limits of my current basic compiler.
It looks very similar. I haven't worked much in QuickBASIC so
others will be able to supply more specific situations that may
be significant differences. Some differences I would suggest you
might encounter in the switch are that PB has quite a few new
"keywords" so you may find you need to rename some variables in
existing code. On the plus side it has quite a number of new and
useful functions.
-- Regards --
Sid Lee (FIDO - 1:134/122, Internet - sid...@agt.net)
--- Blue Wave/Max v2.12
* Origin: RASCAL BBS [Calgary, Alberta - (403)686-2550] (1:134/122)
Knud Berggreen
Wednesday September 23 1998, Julie Johnson writes to Knud Berggreen:
JJ> does the language of Powerbasic look much like any other basic?
JJ> if so, would software written in QuickBASIC be transportable to this?
JJ> I have recently reached the limits of my current basic compiler.
readabel text.
You can try in FirstBasic first. This is a shareware version from PowerBASIC
based on an older version of PB.
It is availabel at http://hjem.get2net.dk/berggreen/download/firstbas.zip
/Knud
--- GoldED/2 2.50+
* Origin: * PowerBASIC in Scandinavia: www.berggreen.dk * (2:236/203.64)
Don Schullian
>BASIC was never designed for professional applications. With a name like Basic
>All-purpose Symbolic Instruction Code, I don't think that it was ment as a pro
>language.
You've just earned youself the love and respect of just about every
participant of this NG!
Tell me.. what you can do in C that I can't do in PowerBASIC?
Barry Erick
been written in it, and a few years ago, PC Magazine did tests of it around
both Borlands 'c' and Microsoft's 'c' to see which optimized better and who
ran faster. Guess who won. It was the one with more than one lowercase
letter in its name.
--Barry
Sean Dennis wrote in message <36063.3...@qwknews.concentric.net>...
>Hello Julie.
>
>20 Sep 98 18:08, Julie Johnson wrote to Cornel Huth:
>
> JJ> What the heck do I do then? I have been finding MYself trapped in QB45
> JJ> with no solution so far for compiling my larger programs. I'm am quite
> JJ> pissed off now after taking one 2 or three years becoming fully
> JJ> proficient at this language and then finding that the thing has
> JJ> absolutely NO professional capacity. I've issued DYNAMIC metacommands,
> JJ> I've used options within the Dos command-line, I've even re-configured
> JJ> BUFFERS in my DOS for %#%%%$'s sake! I feel like MURDERING bill
> JJ> gaytes...
>
>If you're _THAT_ worried about it, move on to C++ or maybe Visual BASIC 5.0
or
>something.
>
>BASIC was never designed for professional applications. With a name like
Basic
>All-purpose Symbolic Instruction Code, I don't think that it was ment as a
pro
>language.
>
Julie Johnson
SL> others will be able to supply more specific situations that may
SL> be significant differences. Some differences I would suggest you
SL> might encounter in the switch are that PB has quite a few new
SL> "keywords" so you may find you need to rename some variables in
SL> existing code. On the plus side it has quite a number of new and
SL> useful functions.
thank you, dude, that's good news. You could actually help me out one tiny bit
more with an example;- if I tried to name a variable fileEND for example, would
PB tell me that I had tried to perform an illegal use of the instruction
END ?
as in, say:
110 LET k = k + 1 '* i don't use LET, by the way in case you're freaking
120 IF k > fileEND then LET k = fileEND
.. Backing up drive C: <beep>... <beep>... <beep>...
--- Ezycom V1.48g0 01fa011b
* Origin: Cyber_Fruit BBS Brisbane -= 61-7-33573382 =- (3:640/238.4)
Julie Johnson
JJ> if so, would software written in QuickBASIC be transportable to
JJ> I have recently reached the limits of my current basic compiler.
KB> QB-source as readabel text.
this is very good news.
KB> You can try in FirstBasic first. This is a shareware version from
KB> PowerBASIC based on an older version of PB.
KB> It is availabel at
KB> http://hjem.get2net.dk/berggreen/download/firstbas.zip
do you know of any Bulletin Boards that have this?
.. Operator, trace this call and tell me where I am.
Sid Lee
JJ> tiny bit more with an example;- if I tried to name a variable fileEND
JJ> for example, would PB tell me that I had tried to perform an illegal
JJ> use of the instruction END ?
JJ> as in, say:
JJ> 110 LET k = k + 1 '* i don't use LET, by the way in case you're
JJ> freaking 120 IF k > fileEND then LET k = fileEND
"fileEND" isn't a reserved word and it can be used as a variable
name (I just tried it here ;-)
Julie Johnson
SL> others will be able to supply more specific situations that may
SL> be significant differences. Some differences I would suggest you
SL> might encounter in the switch are that PB has quite a few new
SL> "keywords" so you may find you need to rename some variables in
SL> existing code. On the plus side it has quite a number of new and
SL> useful functions.
more with an example;- if I tried to name a variable fileEND for example, would
PB tell me that I had tried to perform an illegal use of the instruction
END ?
as in, say:
110 LET k = k + 1 '* i don't use LET, by the way in case you're freaking
120 IF k > fileEND then LET k = fileEND
Julie Johnson
Julie Johnson
KB> In the bassic, yes.
JJ> if so, would software written in QuickBASIC be transportable to
KB> this?
KB> QB-source as readabel text.
this is very good news.
KB> You can try in FirstBasic first. This is a shareware version from
KB> PowerBASIC based on an older version of PB.
KB> It is availabel at
KB> http://hjem.get2net.dk/berggreen/download/firstbas.zip
do you know of any Bulletin Boards that have this?
.. Operator, trace this call and tell me where I am.
Sid Lee
Bob Sewell
SD> If you're _THAT_ worried about it, move on to C++ or maybe Visual
SD> BASIC 5.0 or something.
SD> BASIC was never designed for professional applications. With a name
SD> like Basic All-purpose Symbolic Instruction Code, I don't think that
SD> it was ment as a pro language.
Originally, no, it wasn't. Maybe it was still true a dozen years
ago, but no longer. I see more ads for *professional* Visual Basic
programmers than C++ programmers. I subscribe to an e-mail support
list for VB. It currently has over 4,000 professional programmers who
also subscribe. Basic has been used by professionals for a long time,
thanks the PD7, PowerBasic and Visual Basic. And in the case of PB,
it'll out-run anything written in C++, and companies are finding that
they can dramatically cut their development time by using Basic rather
than C++.
.. Deja Moo - The feeling you've heard this BS somewhere before.
--- PPoint 2.06
* Origin: Auscultare! bobs...@mindspring.com (1:116/32.3)
Julie Johnson
SL> name (I just tried it here ;-)
thank you for doing that for me, I appreciate that for it has told me that I
won't have to rename variables in my programs when I transport them. (I often
create a lot of variable names that contain basic statement-names such as newx
or printY, and in the past, older versions of basic have not allowed this)
could you tell me something else? does PB allow:
DEF SEG = &HA000
or
POKE (10), 23
or
CALL ABSOLUTE(dummy%, programarrayoffset%) 'don't try this at home!
because I seem to recall that earlier versions of VB did not allow this
important type of instruction;- it was for reasons like this that I didn't
change languages back then when it came out.
.. I'm not a complete idiot... Several parts are missing!
Knud Berggreen
Sunday September 27 1998, Julie Johnson writes to Knud Berggreen:
KB>> You can try in FirstBasic first. This is a shareware version from
KB>> PowerBASIC based on an older version of PB.
KB>> It is availabel at
KB>> http://hjem.get2net.dk/berggreen/download/firstbas.zip
No, I'm sorry. But if you know any with an Internet email address, I can attach
the file.
/Knud
--- GoldED/2 2.50+
* Origin: * OS/2 24h * V32bis * (2:236/203.64)
Ernie Deel
<36069.4...@qwknews.concentric.net>...
> Originally, no, it wasn't. Maybe it was still true a dozen
years
> ago, but no longer. I see more ads for *professional* Visual
Basic
> programmers than C++ programmers. I subscribe to an e-mail
support
> list for VB. It currently has over 4,000 professional programmers
who
> also subscribe. Basic has been used by professionals for a long
time,
> thanks the PD7, PowerBasic and Visual Basic. And in the case of
PB,
> it'll out-run anything written in C++, and companies are finding
that
> they can dramatically cut their development time by using Basic
rather
> than C++.
VB programmer's buy more code than they sell. The market for VB
add-ons (mostly written in C++) is huge. The market for apps
written in VB is virtually nil.
I won't even bother downloading a piece of shareware or freeware if
I know it's written in VB. It's usually easy enough to spot one,
they're 10X the size they should be.
Anybody have a list of commerical or shareware apps written in PB?
--
Ernie Deel, EFD Systems
-----------------------------------------------
A computer can solve any problem ...
... except those that just don't add up.
Borje Hagsten
> VB programmer's buy more code than they sell. The market for VB
> add-ons (mostly written in C++) is huge. The market for apps
> written in VB is virtually nil.
>
> I won't even bother downloading a piece of shareware or freeware if
> I know it's written in VB. It's usually easy enough to spot one,
> they're 10X the size they should be.
>
> Anybody have a list of commerical or shareware apps written in PB?
Most (all?) professional developers buy more code than they sell.. facts
of life in todays programming. Whatever language you use, you don't
rewrite a huge spreadsheet or database object, etc. - you either use the
built-in ones or most of the times you buy better components, already
developed by others. A professional developer that insist on spending
weeks, or months on writing it all "by hand", is soon out of business,
believe me..
No list of software, but I can tell you that my own shareware is created
using VB 3.0 and PB/DLL v1.5. Using this "impossible" combination
(according to you) I can run a fulltime business, with tens of thousands
of pleased, registerered users and unfortunately, probably at least ten
times that amount un-registerered. I guess what kind of language it's
created in isn't exactly a concern to the users. The software's
functionalty is.
A new version of it is coming out in about a month - a true word
processor with many times faster translation engines (thanks to PB), etc
- written in the same combination of languages. Call that stupid if you
like - who cares, as long as my users are pleased and pay for the
software I produce - using VB and PB.. :-)
I'm a member of the ASP and I can tell you we have a lot of very
successful shareware developers among us, using VB as a base for their
businesses. Like I've said many times before: What language you use is
not important - never has been - never will be! It's how you use it..
;-)
Borje
------------------------------------------------------------
From: Borje Hagsten E-mail: hag...@algonet.se
Internet: http://www.algonet.se/~hagsten/engindex.htm
Developer of TOLKEN97 v3.2 for Windows, language-translator,
texteditor, dictionary and vocabulary-test, all in one..
Member of the Association of Shareware Professionals (ASP)
Member of the Educational Software Cooperative (ESC)
------------------------------------------------------------
radso...@mindspring.com
>of life in todays programming.
The above hyperbole might be useful for making a point, but factually that
is grossly untrue.
Sean Dennis
25 Sep 98 21:15, Bob Sewell wrote to Sean Dennis:
SD>> BASIC was never designed for professional applications. With a
SD>> think that it was ment as a pro language.
BS> Originally, no, it wasn't. Maybe it was still true a dozen years
BS> ago, but no longer. I see more ads for *professional* Visual Basic
BS> programmers than C++ programmers. I subscribe to an e-mail support
BS> list for VB. It currently has over 4,000 professional programmers
BS> who also subscribe. Basic has been used by professionals for a long
BS> time, thanks the PD7, PowerBasic and Visual Basic. And in the case of
BS> PB, it'll out-run anything written in C++, and companies are finding
BS> that they can dramatically cut their development time by using Basic
BS> rather than C++.
I can understand that... I took one look at a C++ program and tried to
understand it by reading the source that was included in it... I gave up-I
couldn't follow it!
I program in PDS and TurboPASCAL. I can follow both of those languages due to
their semi-logical formatting. ;)
Dave Navarro
e...@remove.this.mindspring.com says...
> Anybody have a list of commerical or shareware apps written in PB?
Go to the PowerBASIC web site and look at the third-party list. I only know
of about 12 commercial applications written in PowerBASIC, but a *LOT* of big
name companies use PowerBASIC for internal use. I can't think of a Fortune
500 company that hasn't bought a copy of PowerBASIC.
I should also mention that because of the fast/tight code produced by PB/DLL
and PB/CC, we're not starting to see a *lot* more mainstream programs written
in it as well.
I'll ask some of the companies if we can post their names, I don't want to do
it without their permission.
--Dave
Dave Navarro
says...
> I should also mention that because of the fast/tight code produced by PB/DLL
> and PB/CC, we're not starting to see a *lot* more mainstream programs written
> in it as well.
I must not be getting enough sleep. I meant, we're "now" starting to.....
<smile>
--Dave
Ernie Deel
>> Anybody have a list of commerical or shareware apps written in
PB?
>Go to the PowerBASIC web site and look at the third-party list.
PB add-ons are not really what I had in mind. I'd hate to think
that the biggest use for PB is producing PB add-ons.
>I only know of about 12 commercial applications written in
PowerBASIC, but a
>*LOT* of big name companies use PowerBASIC for internal use.
That's about what I expected. The same is true for VB. There are a
few commerical apps built with VB but not many. The basic trend
seems to be, if you want to sell it, use something other than BASIC.
>I should also mention that because of the fast/tight code produced
by PB/DLL
>and PB/CC, we're not starting to see a *lot* more mainstream
programs written
>in it as well.
>
Trot some of them out. A few examples of real world apps produced
using PB would make for good advertising don't you think?
Har-D-Har-Har
Dave Navarro wrote in message ...
PB/DLL
>> and PB/CC, we're not starting to see a *lot* more mainstream programs
written
>> in it as well.
>
>
In the industrial world, where you might sell only a few copies of what
you're writing, but can get big dollars for it, size, code efficiency, and
most of the things that make commercial software saleable, are just not
important. What is important is that the result is 100% what the customer
paid for in functionality. If I were to write some of these programs in C,
C++, or God forbid, Assembler, The customer would still be waiting, and
couldn't pay for the additional time it took to come up with an end result.
Basic provides a RAD solution, it provides a rapid development cycle, with
impressive end results, best bang for your development buck if you will. If
I were selling 10,000 copies, fast, compact, and pretty sell copies.
HK
Borje Hagsten
> few commerical apps built with VB but not many. The basic trend
> seems to be, if you want to sell it, use something other than BASIC.
In the customers world, the programming-language doesn't matter,
something my own sales is a good proof of. You can be a narrow-minded
developer, thinking that only Assembler or whatever counts, but if the
software is functional to the end-user, he/she don't care two bits what
language it's developed in (they mostly don't even know, or want to
know, what VB, Delphi or any other "language" is).
If you don't like Basic, don't use it. Simple, eh? I, for one, will
continue to use it as long as I can make a very good living out of it..
:-)
Borje
------------------------------------------------------------
From: Borje Hagsten, developer of Tolken97 v3.2
E-mail: hag...@algonet.se
Internet: http://www.algonet.se/~hagsten/engindex.htm
------------------------------------------------------------
Don Schullian
wrote:
> JJ> I have recently reached the limits of my current basic compiler.
>
> SL> It looks very similar. I haven't worked much in QuickBASIC so
> SL> others will be able to supply more specific situations that may
> SL> be significant differences. Some differences I would suggest you
> SL> might encounter in the switch are that PB has quite a few new
> SL> "keywords" so you may find you need to rename some variables in
> SL> existing code. On the plus side it has quite a number of new and
> SL> useful functions.
>
> thank you, dude, that's good news. You could actually help me out one tiny bit
>more with an example;- if I tried to name a variable fileEND for example, would
>PB tell me that I had tried to perform an illegal use of the instruction
> END ?
> as in, say:
> 110 LET k = k + 1 '* i don't use LET, by the way in case you're freaking
> 120 IF k > fileEND then LET k = fileEND
FileEND is NOT a reserved word hence it can be used as a variable name.
This is how it could be done in PB but what you have above will work too:
INCR K ' k = k + 1
K = MIN(K,FileEND) ' if k > FileEND then k = FileEND
Why don't you d/load TRYPB32.ZIP from the web page and have a look around?
C'ya,
Ernie Deel
>In the customers world, the programming-language doesn't matter,
>something my own sales is a good proof of. You can be a
narrow-minded
>developer, thinking that only Assembler or whatever counts, but if
the
>software is functional to the end-user, he/she don't care two bits
what
>language it's developed in (they mostly don't even know, or want to
>know, what VB, Delphi or any other "language" is).
The programming language doesn't matter; however, size, speed and
efficiency do --- not so much at runtime but for electronic
distribution.
To be competitive nowadays, you have to offer a demo for
downloading. If you don't offer one or you offer one that's 10X the
size of the competition, you're at a distinct disadvantage.
If you have no competition, none of this matters very much.
Borje Hagsten
Ernie Deel wrote:
> The programming language doesn't matter; however, size, speed and
> efficiency do --- not so much at runtime but for electronic
> distribution.
>
> To be competitive nowadays, you have to offer a demo for
> downloading. If you don't offer one or you offer one that's 10X the
> size of the competition, you're at a distinct disadvantage.
True. Which is why we now are eagerly awaiting a "Visual PB" -version.
No hurry guys - you can have the entire week to get it ready, if you
need to.. :-)
Microsoft has included the VB6 (and I think the VB5) runtimes in Win98,
so in the future, it probably will become a bit "easier" to use VB.
Unfortunately, they also are including a lot of MSIE-stuff in it now, so
I actaully feel I'm slowly moving away from the VB "arena". Maybe back
I'll soon even have to start using that buggy ol' "Delphi" -thingy
again.. ;-)
Borje (rapidly ducking and running away.. :-)
Ernie Deel
>True. Which is why we now are eagerly awaiting a "Visual
PB" -version.
Good things come to those who wait? Unfortunately, in a
competitive marketplace, he who hesitates is often lost.
>Microsoft has included the VB6 (and I think the VB5) runtimes in
Win98,
>so in the future, it probably will become a bit "easier" to use VB.
Wasn't VB6 released well *after* Win98?
My Win98 system has no trace of anything recognizable as a VB 6
runtime. I do have about 5 megs worth of VB3 and 4. Speaking of
which, these might be an easy to recover some disk space <g>.
Borje Hagsten
> >Microsoft has included the VB6 (and I think the VB5) runtimes in
> Win98,
> >so in the future, it probably will become a bit "easier" to use VB.
>
> Wasn't VB6 released well *after* Win98?
>
> My Win98 system has no trace of anything recognizable as a VB 6
> runtime. I do have about 5 megs worth of VB3 and 4. Speaking of
> which, these might be an easy to recover some disk space <g>.
Hm, I could be wrong here, sorry for the confusion. I looked and
everything seemed to be on the Win98-computer, but if it came with the
installation, well, I'm not sure, now that you mention it.
VB6 was released well before Win98 (here in Sweden :), but the
development must have been done side by side. With VB6 you get a lot of
MSIE-stuff, so I guess the development-teams "unfortunately" must have
been in connection with each other.. :-I
Borje
Ketil Krumm
>you're writing, but can get big dollars for it, size, code efficiency, and
>most of the things that make commercial software saleable, are just not
>important. What is important is that the result is 100% what the customer
>paid for in functionality.
While I agree with your conclusion, I strongly disagree with the above!!
Everything I write falls into the above mentioned category, but that
doesn't mean I care less about, in short, the speed of my app. This is one
of the reasons why I purchased PB/DLL - to get fast, "small" code for some
of the things VB just isn't optimized to do.
Besides, if more programmers would take the time to actually learn how VB
and other tools work internally, they just might get performances they now
claim impossible... A good example is the Jet Engine: I'm running several
databases with multiple tables of 100.000+ records, and even one with 2.15
*million* records in one table (static, I do admit). To steal an old
slogan from Blink, Inc - "blink and you'll miss it!". This is because
everything is coded for best possible performance (i.e. specific to the
task at hand), not accessed through some standard Access query. The cost
for the client was several thousand USD less than an SQL-based
implementation would have been. I'm not saying that Jet or VB is suitable
for absolutely anything, but they both posess a lot more power and
flexibility than the 'frowners' give them credit for.
Ketil
Dave Navarro
e...@remove.this.mindspring.com says...
> That's about what I expected. The same is true for VB. There are a
> seems to be, if you want to sell it, use something other than BASIC.
That's mostly due to a lack of education. Most people don't realize that
there is *nothing* you can do in C or Pascal that can't be done in PowerBASIC.
> Trot some of them out. A few examples of real world apps produced
> using PB would make for good advertising don't you think?
The commercial accounting application "One Write Plus" is written in PB/DOS.
The 16-bit Windows version is VB3 plus PB/DLL.
Dick Ruttan (sp), the guy who flew his plane non-stop around the world, wrote
his own custom CAD program in PB/DOS. He then used that program to design his
plane.
Probably 70% of all the utilities and applications running at NIST (National
Institute for Standards & Technologies) were done in PB/DOS. And they're in
the process of porting them to PB/CC.
Some of the big companies using PB/DOS, PB/DLL and PB/CC include:
Bell Atlantic
Bell Laboratories
Cal State Berkeley - Astronomy Department
Disney - Animatronics Division
Internal Revenue Service (U.S. Government)
KTLA Television
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories - Nuclear Division
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories - SDI Division
Lucent Technologies
Microsoft (they bought many copies of 32-bit PB/DLL)
NASA - Ames Research
NASA - Imaging Division
NASA - Marshall Space Flight Center
NASA - Goddard Space Flight Center
Product Identification, Inc. (inventor of Bar Codes)
University of California Los Angelos - Astronomy Department
--Dave
Borje Hagsten
> Some of the big companies using PB/DOS, PB/DLL and PB/CC include:
>
Snipped it down to this interesting one. Didn't you become a bit
suspicious when MS bought this programming-tool from you? I mean, they
will probably not use it for any of their own stuff and their reputation
for not "borrowing" code is a bit dubious, to say the least.. ;-)
For some "strange" reason, I have almost all of the large developers of
language-translation software in my list of registerered users now and
each time one of them shows up, I know the only reason they buy it, is
to check out the competition and maybe "borrow" some new ideas. I guess
you have the same kind of "problem" there.. :-)
Ernie Deel
>> Microsoft (they bought many copies of 32-bit PB/DLL)
>
>
>Snipped it down to this interesting one. Didn't you become a bit
>suspicious when MS bought this programming-tool from you?
ROTFL. That's too much, the best joke I've heard in a while.
Dave Navarro
says...
> Borje Hagsten wrote in message <361965C2...@algonet.se>...
> >> Microsoft (they bought many copies of 32-bit PB/DLL)
> >
> >
> >Snipped it down to this interesting one. Didn't you become a bit
> >suspicious when MS bought this programming-tool from you?
>
> ROTFL. That's too much, the best joke I've heard in a while.
It's no joke. Microsoft has purchased quite a few copies of PB/DLL. I have no
idea what they are doing with them, but Windows 98 does seem to run a little bit
faster.... <s>
--Dave
Borje Hagsten
> It's no joke. Microsoft has purchased quite a few copies of PB/DLL. I have no
> idea what they are doing with them, but Windows 98 does seem to run a little bit
> faster.... <s>
Well, that could be argued. A lot of people seems to have bought the
"new and faster" Win98, only to find that their one year old computer
suddenly turned into a sluggish 286.. sort of. Guess the MS-people
haven't figured out how to use the PB-stuff properly yet.. :-)
Ernie Deel
>It's no joke. Microsoft has purchased quite a few copies of
PB/DLL. I have no
>idea what they are doing with them, but Windows 98 does seem to run
a little bit >faster.... <s>
They purchase lots of software ... for OS testing.
The joke was the implication of malicious intent. As if there was
some sort of "secret" they were looking to steal.
Ernie Deel
>Well, that could be argued. A lot of people seems to have bought
the
>"new and faster" Win98, only to find that their one year old
computer
>suddenly turned into a sluggish 286.. sort of.
Use TweakUI to configure the user interface for a slower machine.
Turn off animations, adjust menu speed, etc.
>Guess the MS-people haven't figured out how to use the PB-stuff
properly yet.. :-)
Yes, once they discover the "secret technology" hidden within a bare
bones, non-visual, non-object oriented windows compiler, there will
be no stopping them. If history is any guide, they'll buy the
company ... in Bob Zale's dreams.
Dave Navarro
e...@remove.this.mindspring.com says...
> Yes, once they discover the "secret technology" hidden within a bare
> bones, non-visual, non-object oriented windows compiler, there will
> be no stopping them. If history is any guide, they'll buy the
> company ... in Bob Zale's dreams.
I knew there was a reason why I didn't like you.
--Dave
Ernie Deel
>
>I knew there was a reason why I didn't like you.
>
You don't like my jokes<g>?
I do sometimes point out that which others would prefer to ignore.
Is it necessary to subscribe to the common delusion in order to be
"liked"?
Dave Navarro
says...
> Dave Navarro wrote in message ...
> >In article <6viigu$i9j$1...@camel29.mindspring.com>,
> >
> >I knew there was a reason why I didn't like you.
> >
>
> You don't like my jokes<g>?
They don't come across as jokes. And you have posted disparaging remarks about
Bob and PowerBASIC for weeks now.
It's a free country and you're welcome to your opinion. However, most of what
you have posted simply is not true.
--Dave
PWRBASC
I'm getting a little tired of see Re:Powerbasic is a dead-end as well -
Personally, it works fine for me and what I need to do with it. I am thankful
that we have people here like Dave and Bob to help workout problems and
questions. Try getting Bill Gates to answer your email (yaaaaa!)
My 2 cents,
Gary Stout
Ernie Deel
>They don't come across as jokes. And you have posted disparaging
remarks about
>Bob and PowerBASIC for weeks now.
I have? Show me.
Aside from the latest exchange with you, I've posted 6 messages in
this thread. I just read back through all of them. I've made some
disparaging comments about VB and Microsoft but then again, so have
you.
So show me the "disparaging remarks about Bob and PowerBASIC" that
I've been posting for weeks now. I'm particularly interested in
anything that you consider to be untrue.
Dave Navarro
e...@remove.this.mindspring.com says...
> Dave Navarro wrote in message ...
> In article <6vls8m$b9g$1...@camel19.mindspring.com>
> >They don't come across as jokes. And you have posted disparaging
> >remarks about Bob and PowerBASIC for weeks now.
>
> I have? Show me.
"If history is any guide, they'll buy the company ... in Bob Zale's dreams."
This is a disparaging remark against Bob. To suggest that the only reason he
works his rear-end off making the best BASIC compilers on the planet is so
that he can sell the company to Microsoft. It simply isn't true.
And you have posted a number of messages where you offer your opinion that
we'll never have a Visual PowerBASIC product. My archives don't go back far
enough for me to find the exact messages, but if you'd like I can go through
DejaNews and find them for you.
If you don't like Bob, our products, our company or even me, that's fine. You
are welcome to your opinion. I just wanted to point out to everyone that your
observations concerning our future product line and our commitments to our
customers have been complete off-base (untrue).
--Dave
Ernie Deel
>"If history is any guide, they'll buy the company ... in Bob Zale's
dreams."
>
>This is a disparaging remark against Bob. To suggest that the only
reason he
>works his rear-end off making the best BASIC compilers on the
planet is so
>that he can sell the company to Microsoft. It simply isn't true.
Of course it's not true.
It was an intentionally outlandish remark made in sarcastic response
to an equally outlandish remark (in my view) which implied that
Microsoft bought copies of PB/DLL for some sinister purpose.
Microsoft buying the company and/or Microsoft "stealing" technology
from PowerBasic are both equally outlandish in my view.
To take any of this seriously, most folks would have to be dreaming.
>And you have posted a number of messages where you offer your
opinion that
>we'll never have a Visual PowerBASIC product.
Well stop whining and prove me wrong. I'd love to have a better VB
than VB.
Julie Johnson
KB>> It is availabel at
KB>> http://hjem.get2net.dk/berggreen/download/firstbas.zip
JJ> do you know of any Bulletin Boards that have this?
KB> No, I'm sorry. But if you know any with an Internet email address, I
KB> can attach the file.
may take me a while at the moment as I'm very busy... I'll get in touch
soon.
.. DOS 6.0: Yesterday's operating system, today!
--- Ezycom V1.48g0 01fa011b
* Origin: Cyber_Fruit BBS Brisbane -= 61-7-33573382 =- (3:640/238.4)
Doug Lurie
Cut it out!!! You are both too respected to resort to name calling!!!
Jokes are not always recognized as just that, so please be a little more
obvious with your humorous remarks.
Doug.
Dave Navarro
e...@remove.this.mindspring.com says...
> It was an intentionally outlandish remark made in sarcastic response
What kind of news reader do you use? Mind doesn't seem to distinguish sarcasm
without the presense of smilies or <grin> things in the text. I'd like to use
yours if it can read text and intuitively know what the intension of the
author was. (sarcasm alert)
> to an equally outlandish remark (in my view) which implied that
> Microsoft bought copies of PB/DLL for some sinister purpose.
> Microsoft buying the company and/or Microsoft "stealing" technology
> from PowerBasic are both equally outlandish in my view.
I certainly agree with that.
> >And you have posted a number of messages where you offer your
> >opinion that we'll never have a Visual PowerBASIC product.
>
> Well stop whining and prove me wrong. I'd love to have a better VB
> than VB.
Don't apply for a position in public relations, you'd be terrible at it.
My programming skills are such that I don't need to "b*tch and moan" because
someone else won't do my work for me. I've been writing better programs than
Visual Basic ever since PB/DLL 1.0 was released. All it takes is "a little
bit of effort" to learn about how to write a Windows program.
As for a "Visual" PowerBASIC. I can tell you from my experience using the
alphas, that it is indeed a great product. But I'm sure you'll hear much more
about it from the people who are using it after it ships.
--Dave
Ernie Deel
>
>Don't apply for a position in public relations, you'd be terrible
at it.
>
Who's making disparaging remarks now?
>My programming skills are such that I don't need to "b*tch and
moan" because
>someone else won't do my work for me. I've been writing better
programs than
>Visual Basic ever since PB/DLL 1.0 was released. All it takes is
"a little
>bit of effort" to learn about how to write a Windows program.
What a curious and contradictory position for a tool vendor to take.
BTW, what theory of customer service and public relations do you
subscribe to?
>>>SARCASM ON<<<
Note to Self: If customer notices lack of productivity and/or ease
of use, berate them for their lack of skills and laziness.
>>>SARCASM OFF<<<
>As for a "Visual" PowerBASIC. I can tell you from my experience
using the
>alphas, that it is indeed a great product.
Why bother with a "Visual" PowerBasic? By your own admission,
there's no need for it, "All it takes is "a little bit of effort" to
learn about how to write a Windows program".
>But I'm sure you'll hear much more about it from the people who are
using it after
>it ships.
Maybe I will ... but by then, I'm not sure that I'll still care
enough to listen.
Borje Hagsten
> As for a "Visual" PowerBASIC. I can tell you from my experience using the
> about it from the people who are using it after it ships.
Filtering text between my teeth here and wow! What do you know - there
is already an alpha-version ready of VPB? Any betas coming out soon?
All together now: "All we need is love".. rapabapaba.. :-)
Borje,
Dave Navarro
> Filtering text between my teeth here and wow! What do you know - there
> is already an alpha-version ready of VPB? Any betas coming out soon?
No comment. <smile>
To apply for beta testing, please send email to "sup...@powerbasic.com" and
request a beta tester application.
Please note that you must be an existing PowerBASIC customer in order to be a
beta tester.
--Dave
Borje Hagsten
> To apply for beta testing, please send email to "sup...@powerbasic.com" and
> request a beta tester application.
>
> Please note that you must be an existing PowerBASIC customer in order to be a
> beta tester.
Great - done that now. Just out of curiousity, how many non-existing
customers have you had over the years..? %-)
Borje, sometimes "non-existing", according to my wife.. :-)
Dave Navarro
> > Please note that you must be an existing PowerBASIC customer in order to be a
> > beta tester.
>
> Great - done that now. Just out of curiousity, how many non-existing
> customers have you had over the years..? %-)
We've had lots of non-customers apply for beta testing. Mostly people looking
for free software. But since beta testers don't get a free copy of the
software (all betas are time-locked to expire after 30 days), it usually
discourages people not serious about beta testing.
--Dave
James A. Smith
So what do you give the Beta testers then for all their time?
Borje Hagsten
> So what do you give the Beta testers then for all their time?
The reasons for wanting to become a beta-tester probably differs, from
all the ones expecting to get the stuff for free, to strange characters
like me, who simply loves the product and just want to have the
possibility to maybe contribute with something useful.
I mean, when PB releases VPB, I'll be one of the first in line to buy it
anyway. It will for sure, like the current versions of PB/DLL, be my
daily worktools. If I, as a beta-tester, can contribute with anything
useful, like bug-reports and tips, etc, this will be to my own benefit
in the future.
Like we say in the shareware-business: Expect nothing - enjoy anything
that comes in.. :-)
(I could use a new mug-holder though. The old 8x -one has been broken
for months and I'm getting real tired of having to wipe spilled coffe
off the keys on my keyboard all the time.. :-)
Borje "sticky fingers" Hagsten
Dave Navarro
> > We've had lots of non-customers apply for beta testing. Mostly people looking
> > for free software. But since beta testers don't get a free copy of the
> > software (all betas are time-locked to expire after 30 days), it usually
> > discourages people not serious about beta testing.
> >
The privilege of getting access to the product before it ships and helping us
to design it. Many features of PowerBASIC products today are the result of a
single beta testers asking for something during the beta process.
The fact is, most people who beta test products are not "good beta testers".
That is, they'll only test their own code and things related to their own
programming projects. Some people, however, will go beyond just their own
programming projects and test other features of the product thoroughly. We do
recognize the efforts of people who are exceptional beta testers. Those
people do recieve free products. But the mere fact that someone is a beta
tester does not get them a free product.
--Dave