PB/DLL 6.0 CAN make EXE's

[Mike Joseph]

Just wanted to make a quick observation. From the website it is totally unclear that PB/DLL can also make EXE's. Obviously all of you long time PB users know that you can, but i'm willing to bet that the majority of novices will think that PB/CC is for EXE's and PB/DLL is for DLL's only.

I will admit that this is what I believed at first and I was more then a little turned off about the prospect of shelling out $189.00 for PB/DLL and $159.00 for PB/CC just so that I could make both EXE's and DLL's.

Anyway, I think it would be a good idea to make it crystal clear on the product descriptions page for PB/DLL that it can also make EXE's.

Regards,
Mike

[Semen Matusovski]

PB/GUI sounds better.
Bob, time to pronounce competition for the best title with a prize one free copy of future PB/DLL 7.0.

------------------

[Peter Manders]

> future PB/DLL 7.0

That would be PB/WINS 7.0

Haven't figured out what the letters WINS stand for yet


Peter.


------------------

[K Peel]

I think just rename it PowerBasic for Windows, v7.00


------------------
Kev G Peel
KGP Software
Bridgwater, UK.
mailto:[email protected][email protected]</A>

[Lance Edmonds]

Actually, EXE compilation capability is made fairly clear on the "Which Compiler Should I Buy" page at http://www.powerbasic.com/shop/compiler.asp and we direct all presales enquiries to this page (along with the Products pages).

However, I'll pass your comments on to the webmaster and see if everything can be tidied up and linked a little better. Thanks for the heads-up!



------------------
Lance
PowerBASIC Support
mailto:[email protected][email protected]</A>

[John Rayfield]

I think I'll comment on this one.

I agree that changing PB/DLL's name might not be such a bad idea. Obviously the name implies that PB/DLL has something to do with DLL's, but nothing more. I even wonder how much business PowerBASIC is losing because people who might otherwise take a look at PB/DLL, don't look at it because they 'assume' that it only generates DLL's and they aren't interested in that. The name PB/DLL was perfect for the product when it first came out, since generating DLL's with it, was the purpose for which it was primarily promoted, at that time. But, since it would almost appear that most users are just as much interested (if not more interested) in using it to generate EXE's, a name change (at least for the next version) might seem to be in order (and might help to increase PowerBASIC's orders for it ).

Just my opinion...

John Rayfield, Jr.
Rayfield Communications, Inc.
Springfield, Missouri

------------------

[Rich Brockway]

I agree. It does need a name change. The current name does not properly reflect the capabilities of the product. Kev's suggested name "PowerBasic for Windows, v7.00" sounds like a good candidate.

Just my two cents...

Rich


------------------

[Cecil Williams]

How about "VPB++ 7.0", that's assuming the next generation PB product will contain a visual designer. "PowerBasic for Windows, v7.00" is just too long a monaker guys. Let's hope PB keeps it short and simple.

Cheers,
Cecil

------------------

[Michael Mattias]

Actually, EXE compilation capability is made fairly clear on the "Which Compiler Should I Buy" page at ...

But that page is NOT available directly (.e., no "link") from the "products" page, which is the page where I look for product info whenever I visit any prospective vendor's web site.

Therefore, *from a marketing perspective*, the EXE compilation capability is NOT "fairly clear" to prospective customers.

MCM

[Lance Edmonds]

It's linked from the home page, but that is exactly why I've asked the webmaster to tidy it all up - it cauld all fit together a little better. Thanks for pointing that our Michael!



------------------
Lance
PowerBASIC Support
mailto:[email protected][email protected]</A>

[Rich Brockway]

Cecil,

I would prefer "++VPB 7.0" to "VPB++ 7.0." I would rather see it incremented (improved) first, then released.


Rich

------------------

[Chris Boss]

IMO up till PB 6.0, PB was mostly promoted as an "addon" to Visual Basic. Most of the early advertsing done by PowerBasic (PB DLL 1.0 on) was in VB magazines and the DLL aspect was the critical selling point.

With the advent of DDT, PB is now looking more like a complete compiler for standalone apps (EXEs) rather than just a VB addon.

I think now is the time for a name change so the programming world will know that PB is not just a VB addon anymore. The name is very important, because it signifies the purpose of the product.

I think it is time for PB to come out of the shadows of VB and to stand on its own.

The next generation of tools for PB plus the significant changes likely to be found in PB 7.0, will make it very enticing to Basic programmers (primarily VB programmers) who want something better.

The new name should stand out.

Some possible names could be:

PB 2000

PB NCC (Native Code Compiler)

PB Builder 7.0

PB 7.0 (no DLL in the name)

Well, I think I'll leave this up to the guys at Powerbasic, since mine suggestions may be a bit corny.


------------------

[jcfuller]

With the advent of PBCC the natural name change in my opinion
would be PBWC PowerBASIC Windows Compiler.

On a related note:
I noticed in latest Programmers Paradise catalog a product called
PowerGEN; an addon for Power Builder. It appears there is a trademark controversy
brewing???

James


------------------

[Shawn Tartaglia]

I don't know if anyone cares...

Possible name change away from BASIC. This would leave all the negative concepts behind.

(Ok! Ok! don't jump all over me. It was just a suggestion.)

------------------

[David Lees]

I just came across PowerBasic in a Visual Basic Usenet group. It is only
through this forum that I found PB can make EXEs. I looked on the home page
for PB and did NOT see this information. When I used the link provided by PB support
I did see the page about choosing compilers.

This looks like an intriguing product, but it definitely needs a name change and a
home page update. I wonder how many casual browsers like me just passed it by?

David Lees


------------------

[Mike Joseph]

Yep. Thats exactly what happened to me. I couldnt find the confirmation that EXE's were possible on the website (even though it is there in the "Choosing a Compiler" section). However, I had a feeling I was missing something because I couldn't figure out why everyone using PB/DLL would need a Visual Editor and there was so much discussion going on about that! After a bit more digging through the messages in the forumn it became clear that EXE's and DLL's were both possible.

-Mike

------------------

[Siamack Yousofi]

Since I seem to have an opinion on everything, here we go…

IMHO the ‘BASIC’ in Powerbasic does the product more disservice than anything else. We all use and love BASIC and know that no other language can beat PB. But corporate decision makers will not adopt a tool for serious stuff if it has BASIC in its name.

Before you all jump on me let me say that the case for Visual Basic is different. The decision-makers are really deciding on ‘Microsoft’ not ‘BASIC’ and even then for serious and mission critical projects they lean towards Visual C++ or other tools.

Powerbasic is a good name when we target the BASIC programming community and there are millions of us. So if the name needs changing at all (and I am not suggesting that it does) then it may be better to leave the word ‘BASIC’ out.

Borland did not name their tool Visual Pascal or Pascal++ or Object Pascal or PowerPascal. They simply called it Delphi. When talking to Pascophiles, Borland sales executives emphasise the Pascal ancestry and if confronted with ‘its only Pascal’ they jump on you with ‘no it is not!”

If I write a real kick-butt compiler that gives you the ease of VB and the power of Assembler while using a dialect of say COBOL or FORTRAN, how would naming it PowerCobol or PowerFortran help?

Siamack


------------------




[This message has been edited by Siamack Yousofi (edited March 28, 2000).]

[Colin Schmidt]

Hello. Just my humble opinion here, nothing else.

I must say that Siamack has a very good point. I can not count the number of times my professors in school have made either a joke about basic, or have simply slammed it altogether.

Many people here have expressed the amount of negativity they receive the moment they mention basic.

In my VC++ class the professor actually started out with a lecture on the tools available and why we where using VC++. Sadly enough he knew nothing about PB. What he did say though was that basic “is just such a stupid language.” It took me six weeks to get him to look and some DDT source code: Once he did, he actually loved it and stated that it was a clean and beautiful interface. He also said (not realizing that he was part of the problem) that he could not figure out why something like this had not taken off.

Thus my own 2 cents is the same as Siamack’s. Find a unique name that no one will associate with anything else. From there you can then create your own image of the product from scratch. If possible though also have the name mean something relevant if ever looked up for a real meaning.

For example with my own company: Praxis is actually an old English word that is still in the dictionary that means a “standard or common practice”.

Colin Schmidt

------------------
Colin Schmidt & James Duffy, Praxis Enterprises, Canada

[Mike Joseph]

I guess i would tend to disagree with you Siamack. The reason PB isn't being adopted by corporate decision makers in the RAD tool market is that PB isnt quite a RAD tool... yet.

At this stage, PB is probably more compareable to C then it is to Delphi or VB. If this is the case, then corporate decision makers in the market for a non object oriented, non RAD tool may very well (as you say) chose C over a "BASIC" language. That being the case, even a name change wouldnt be enough to get corporate decision makers to buy into it. Besides, what do have left if you change the name? People will wonder if its a C type language, a C++ type language or what... As a VB programmer, I'd probably never have noticed PowerBasic if it didnt have Basic in the name... it'd be just another quasi language in my eyes.. something like Python, Perl or Lisp.

Im guessing that PowerBASIC's target customers are developers working for small companies who are looking to suppliment their VB code with PB written DLL's. (Hence the name PB/DLL) Next in line are probably independant VB developers and former QBasic developers. Its probably the BASIC in PowerBASIC which attracts this target group and if you remove that from the name, you risk alienating those other basic programmers who would be interested in faster and more powerful(with some caveats) basic compiler.

You did hit on one thing though... MS sure has/does market the hell out of VB. I'm sure that once/if PB ever gets an improved IDE with an integrated Visual designer that is somewhat compareable to VB's, that the PB folks will then be able to seriously market PB as a RAD tool to compete head on with VB and Delphi. Once that happens, the 3rd party tools market will begin to open up, more independant developers will use it, scores of VB users will start to convert, and the snowball effect will ensue. Hopefully

-Mike


------------------

[Lance Edmonds]

Thanks for the feedback folks, we love to hear this type of information.

JFYI, since the release of PB/DOS so many years ago, our customers have included a large number of Fortune-500 companies, the US government, and an (almost!) uncountable number of corporates. Many of these customers have purchased at least some of our Windows series of compilers too.

Also, there are a large number of people that "hang out here" (and/or just lurk) that work for these type of companies and organizations just do not make the fact known. The number of active posters on this BBS is hugely outweighed by the number of regular lurkers that just visit to soak up the code, for research, etc.

PowerBASIC as a brand name is quite well known. Obviously we are always on the look-out for ways to make it known even more however!

Thanks again for the feedback and keep on programming!

------------------
Lance
PowerBASIC Support
mailto:[email protected][email protected]</A>