I am curious and confused

Donald Montaine · March 18, 2015, 02:34:24 AM

I dropped out of the PB board last year because the fan boys were getting a bit nasty to anyone who suggested that PB should be more open with their customers about their future plans, if any.

I am not wanting to start any flame wars.

But I am confused by the lack of movement with the PB product. It seems logical to me that selling the company would have been the best way to preserve an income stream if there were no resources to continue. And, if selling the company was not an option that common courtesy would be to either tell customers that the company was dead, say that there would be no further development but customers were still able to buy the product, or release the source code to a friendly developer who would be able to provide patches for any issues. The current path just strikes me as assuring the least amount of income from the product. (I can't imagine that what is left at this point has even a fraction of the value of a year or year and a half ago).

And the curious part of me is just wanting to know why the current status continues as it seems to be the path that assures the least possible income from the product.

I bought pretty much every product that PB released over a 20 yr period and continue to find small uses for their products. I am just very perplexed, like an itch that can't be scratched - wondering why a small but successful software product with rather unique capabilities is being left to die an unnatural death?

So I guess this whole post comes down to "Why, why, why ..." - not that I really expect any answer <sigh>.

Eros Olmi · March 18, 2015, 09:21:02 PM

I suspect the only people able to continue development has passed away and no one has the courage or the possibility to say that.

To me PB10.X is still a great compiler that can stand in front of many other compilers for years.
Unless you do not have to write 64bit DLLs and do not have to write too much sophisticated modern UI, it is still on the table as possible choice for personal and professional projects.

Theo Gottwald · March 26, 2015, 09:03:24 PM

I do not believe that the americans have real interest in continuing PB.
They want us to go on with M$ Technology.

Steve Hutchesson · April 26, 2015, 03:36:24 AM

I agree with Eros that its a good tool but I have just about given up in disgust at the nonsense we have seen since Bob passed away. As a company they are in trouble which makes sense with Bob gone and they have had a number of misfortunes since then but the most irksome thing has been the destructive nonsense from some of the user base. The last versions did something different, they contain the mechanism to endlessly extend the capacity with libraries that made it a professional tool like VC and others but it was generally wasted by apathy, ignorance and the endless trolling of what was supposed to be "politically correct" BASIC (intentional UPPER CASE).

I will use it for as long as it is useful which will be for the life of 32 bit Windows bit but trying to keep a viable community going is like urinating into the wind and wondering why you get wet. The real talent moved on long ago and while a few brave ones tried to get Gary's attempt to resurrect API coding up and running, it flopped due to the endless trolling, arguments and general stupidity. I am lucky in that I primarily work in MASM and enjoy the advantages of its power, precision and development time using a wide range of libraries and MASM macros.

Raising the dead seems to be a case of too little, too late and too long ago to succeed.

Donald Montaine · May 04, 2015, 02:20:18 AM

After doing a small amount of research and asking around, it seems the company is not really operational at this point. I don't believe either Jim Bailey or Tom Hanlin are involved any more.

Patrice Terrier · May 11, 2015, 11:01:42 AM

I am amazed to see how long it takes for most users to understand that PowerBASIC is dead with the passing of Bob Zale.

Not that you couldn't use anymore the 32-bit version (frozen in time), but that there will never be a 64-bit version.

...

Peter Weis · May 11, 2015, 05:40:56 PM

Also think the PowerBASIC death Patrice but hope dies last

Donald Montaine · May 24, 2015, 07:04:03 AM

As of Saturday, May 23, 2015. There is finally an indication on the PB board that there may be a future for PB. In a post by John Eccles in the PB2014 group, he discloses that he has been trying to buy PB, Inc for the past year and provides info from Vivian that PBWin 11 PBCC 7 in 32 and 64 bit versions were completed by Bob before his death and that she plans to release them.

Patrice Terrier · May 24, 2015, 09:28:43 AM

The PowerBASIC 64-bit version has never been into beta testing.

Thus i couldn't imagine how, from the first release, it would popup bug free.

Ask yourself, who will be able to perform the unavoidable code maintenance?

For SDK programmers the transition to another language is not that hard, and the sooner the better

You should have learned from this lesson, to never put all your eggs into the same basket.

...

Theo Gottwald · May 24, 2015, 03:03:36 PM

I assume that her financial situation is not that perfect, so i wonder that - if available - these compilers have not been sold before. Besides that I would be interested in a PB 11 (32 bit of course).

Bob Houle · May 24, 2015, 03:57:36 PM

hopium...

Mix of Hope and Opium... (Irrational or unwarranted optimism.)

Donald Montaine · May 24, 2015, 06:25:21 PM

For me, Power Basic has always been a useful tool for small projects. It has never been my primary development tool. For years I was a Pick Basic programmer but always had a second skill set in network administration and management I have also used Clarion and WinDev for projects over the years.

There have always been small projects that I needed to do for which Power Basic was the easiest tool to use. But I never have depended on any product that was made by a small company. Even in their twilight, the Pick-like databases all bring in many millions of dollars a year and have significant support staffs. I dropped Clarion and moved to WinDev precisely because of Topspeed --> Soft Velocity was becoming too small and unreliable.

So for me, Power Basic is just like a favorite screw driver that I miss when lost. It isn't that I am lacking in other screw drivers, or use screw drivers when hammers are appropriate. And, my reliance on Power Basic is not significant enough for their problems to cause me anger. I will be just fine without them! But, damn it, I will miss having that favorite screw driver available in appropriate circumstances.

But since I started out as a management analyst years ago and moved into IT analysis and programming as most management problems ended up involving IT, I am (as the title of the thread indicates) "Curious and Confused" by a process that has seemed to make so little business sense. (But, after reading the latest on the status of Power Basic Inc., my question has been answered -- the problems were personal, not business, and seem to be centered around a widow wanting to continue her husband's legacy while facing health problems).

I understand a lot of the anger as many people did depend on Power Basic for their income. And, from a business point of view, the situation has been indefensible. But, on a personal level, everything is totally understandable and perhaps requires compassion rather than anger.

Jean-Pierre Leroy · May 25, 2015, 11:10:39 AM

Interesting info on this site ...

http://masm32.com/board/index.php?topic=4202.0

Frederick J. Harris · May 28, 2015, 09:28:38 PM

Well, so much for that it seems (the recent initiative).

I have to confess I was confused about the part where these so called products already existed, such as a 64 bit PB compiler, and the masm thread where John was looking for conversion code to convert 250,000 lines of x86 asm to x64 asm. In my book he gets an A for effort though!

Steve Hutchesson · June 11, 2015, 10:34:34 AM

Hi Fred,

I confess I did not have any great confidence that the company would be bought out and it is probably for the better as a direction change would have killed the place anyway. I would imagine Bob had done some work on a 64 bit version but I have no idea what shape it was in at the time of his passing. Unless its someone who was close to Bob and his team, the next person who looks at the PB compiler source code will be in for a shock at the sheer size and complexity of a task like that.

I know that Bob shifted to a 32 bit assembler to build PB a couple of versions ago so it would be modern code but some of the discussion I have heard lately would be close to pipe dreams of those still rusted on to archaic basic notation. I think Bob created a very good dialect of basic that has some real grunt but the old basic brigade simply don't have the tools or the know how to build a project of this type.

I know Bob's family have had a hard time over the last few years since Bob passed away but I don't see any other way for PB to continue apart from it coming from the remains of the existing organisation and on that I would not hold my breath. Fortunately in the 32 bit realm not much needs to be done as the 2 compilers are fully extendable as of versions 10 and 6 and can keep being extended through libraries until 32 bit Windows fades away.

News:

I am curious and confused