Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

PB/DLL 6.0 CAN make EXE's

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Chris Boss
    replied
    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.


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

    Leave a comment:


  • Rich Brockway
    replied
    Cecil,

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


    Rich

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

    Leave a comment:


  • Lance Edmonds
    replied
    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>

    Leave a comment:


  • Michael Mattias
    replied
    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

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    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

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

    Leave a comment:


  • Rich Brockway
    replied
    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


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

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    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

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

    Leave a comment:


  • Lance Edmonds
    replied
    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>

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    I think just rename it PowerBasic for Windows, v7.00


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

    Leave a comment:


  • Peter Manders
    replied
    > future PB/DLL 7.0

    That would be PB/WINS 7.0

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


    Peter.


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

    Leave a comment:


  • Semen Matusovski
    replied
    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.

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

    Leave a comment:


  • Mike Joseph
    started a topic PB/DLL 6.0 CAN make EXE's

    PB/DLL 6.0 CAN make EXE's

    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
Working...
X