Linux.com

Feature

Review: REALBasic 2005 for Linux

By Joe Barr on August 04, 2005 (8:00:00 AM)

Share    Print    Comments   

RealSoftware's REALBasic 2005 -- the popular cross-platform interactive development environment (IDE) for Mac OS X and Windows -- is scheduled to debut for the Linux platform later this month, perhaps as early as the LinuxWorld Conference & Expo in San Francisco. For the past couple of weeks, I've been falling asleep each night to the glow of beta versions of REALBasic 2005 running happily on SUSE Pro 9.3 on my monitor.
REALBasic 2005 is nothing like the Basic I used to know. If you haven't used Basic since most jobs required JCL to run, you might not recognize REALBasic as the same language. Sometime since then, for example, the dimension statement has morphed from its assigned role of defining array dimensions to become the defining force for all variables. You might say it has inherited the duties of the DECLARE statement. The language these days is thoroughly modern and object-oriented: it's all objects, properties, methods, and classes.

REALBasic is a powerful language with an equally powerful IDE. It is also a proprietary, closed software product, but you can develop free software with it. That means the source code and the executable of any apps you build with REALBasic can be freely distributed, without restriction. Or if you like, you can build freeware, shareware, or legacy proprietary apps with it. There are no restrictions, no royalties, and no runtime required.

At times REALBasic development can be blazingly, amazingly fast. At other times, however, it can be frustratingly slow and painful, as you struggle to learn the REALBasic way of doing things you might already know how to do a dozen ways in a dozen other languages. It's not that the learning curve for REALBAsic is so steep, but rather that at times it seems to go on forever.

You can download the public beta, but remember that it is a beta version; expect bugs and crashes, and expect to submit detailed reports about them.

You'll need a license key to run the beta, but RealSoftware doesn't ask for any personal information before it generates one for you. The company just wants to know how many people are trying the beta. It's one way to measure how large the market is for such a product among Linux users.

What can you do with it?

If problems in simultaneous application development for Linux and Windows, or Linux and Apple, have held you back in the past, REALBasic just might be the answer to your needs. Ditto if you're currently a REALBasic or Visual Basic developer for Windows and want to extend your grasp to the Linux platform. Cross-platform capabilities is what it's all about. You can configure the IDE to build executables for one, two, or all three environments with just a few mouse clicks.

REALBasic also does networking, with built-in support for TCP and UDP. This is the feature that really caught my eye, as my on-again off-again Internet bridge game project might actually become a reality if the networking chores were easily handled. In fact, that is exactly how I've been exercising REALBasic the past two weeks: by building networked server and client applications to play bridge. Throw in the lure of cross-platform capabilities and the lack of licensing restrictions, and I was ready to give it a whirl.

My personal needs aside, REALBasic is probably best for developing small GUI applications for data entry, database queries, or record keeping. But remember, lurking just behind that widget factory that lets you create pretty windows and all sorts of bells and whistles is a powerful language. Games, business, or personal; I don't see any real limits on what it can do.

A simple example

REALBasic widget editor
Click to enlarge
The image on the right shows REALBasic's object editor screen. You can create a simple standalone application with it in a minute or two. When you start REALBasic, the IDE opens to a Project tab that shows three objects: the application, a window, and a menu bar. To work on the window, double-click on it.

That opens an object editor like the one shown alongside. The window being created is displayed in the center of the screen, REALBasic's built-in controls for windows are displayed in the left margin, and the window's properties are shown on the right. To make the window in our example, you can set the properties for the window title and its background color by clicking on them and either entering text or using a color picker to select the color.

There are four controls visible in the window. I added each by simply double-clicking on it in the built-in controls listing. When a control is added to the window, it has the focus, so the properties displayed on the right side are those for the control instead of the window itself. I added the text for the question and the names of the pushbuttons by selecting the property and entering the text. I positioned the controls in the window by selecting each object and dragging it to where it should be.

To add the brains to the beauty, double-click on an object in the window -- the Yes button, for example -- and a code editor replaces the object editor. The left margin then shows the built-in controls available and the methods associated with them. For you old-timers out there, methods are a new way of writing a SUB back in the day.

The default method for our pushbutton is the Action method. The code you add here is executed when the button is clicked.

When both sides of your brain are satisfied -- the right side with the appearance of the widgets and the left side the logic and syntax of the code -- you can compile and test your application by clicking Run. Once you've cleaned up any errors, you're ready to build standalone executables.

Before doing a build, you need to decide on a name for your masterpiece. By default, it's MyApplication or a derivative thereof, for every possible platform. From the Project Tab, double-click on the app to bring up the application properties in the right margin. Among the properties you'll find the application name on the various platforms. Change them to your liking.

The standard version of REALBasic 2005 for Linux builds a standalone executable only for Linux. If you're running the Pro version, you can change that behavior. Click Project->Build Settings from the toolbar, then put a check mark next to the additional platforms you want: Windows, Mac OS/X and Classic, Mac Classic only, or Mac OS/X only. That's it. Run build, and you've just become a cross-platform developer.

Not so simple

Simple App Real life requirements are never that simple, whether for a personal task like my Internet bridge project, or something to sate your business needs. My project will require two separate apps: a client and a server. Based on the current design, the client will require three windows and at least two TCP sockets. The game server needs only two windows, but at least five sockets. As you can tell by the need for TCP sockets, networking is a big part of the project.

It's a big part of REALBasic, too. It comes with basic and advanced controls for both TCP and UDP sockets. One of the better known examples of REALBasic networking prowess on the Net is the creation of a complete Web server with less than a 100 lines of code.

One major distinction between the Standard and Pro versions is the SocketServer class. Its function is to manage all the socket connections that a server might need under the covers, all on a single port. In effect, REALBasic is "dumbing down" the socket code API so that mere mortals can write network servers.

In addition to the SocketServer class, there are two others designed to make networking easy to code: they are the EasyTCPSocket and EasyUDPSocket, both of which are available in both the Standard and Pro versions. Like the ServerSocket, the idea behind them is to make it easier to write network apps.

The scope is growing

The issue of scope looms larger as you move into the non-trivial programming chores. In REALBAsic, you can declare -- oops, make that dim -- variables in methods where they are needed. But they will only be visible within that method. That's fine for small projects, but not always so fine for larger.

You can get around the scope problem by creating a module -- just click on Add Module -- and then adding properties to it. These properties immediately become visible to all methods in the application. I'm thinking that a module is exactly the right place to put all the housekeeping chores that I need to perform when the application is launched, as well. Adding a method to do that is as simple as clicking Add Method.

As you add properties and methods to a module, you specify the scope for each of them. The default is global. You can require other parts of the application to refer to them explicitly as ModuleName.PropertyName, or you can limit their visibility to the Module itself.

The two things that I've scraped my knuckles on the most during my evaluation are the networking between client and server and displaying a hand of cards. Try as I might, I could never get any of the easier socket classes -- ServerSocket or EasyTCPSocket -- to work as I need. Ditto for UDP, which I thought would be ideal for signing on to the server. I've taken a step back and have gotten things working using the plain TCPSocket class instead.

The card display problem is most definitely not due to a shortcoming in REALBasic. It's because I didn't know how to do it in REALBasic, and I never found an example of exactly what I was trying to do that I could copy. Once I learned a suitable technique, it really was simple.

I defined a Canvas control tall enough for a single card image (46 pixels) and wide enough for 13 cards, plus a little extra, to display a hand in.

The plan was simple. The applications deal with a deck of cards represented by their rank in the deck, from 1 to 52. To deal a hand, for example, the server shuffles the deck and then sends each client a message with their 13 cards, separated from each other by a "|".

The client has the cardface image for each card. I carefully created an array of ImageWell objects, and used the editor to load the appropriate cardface image in each. But when I tried to paint the cards, I was told that the ImageWell was incompatible with the DrawPicture and DrawObject methods. That meant I had to do a lot of SELECT CASE routing to end up being able to paint the desired card. Hardly an elegant solution.

After a couple of days of banging my head on the keyboard, I finally asked for help on the mailing lists. In return, I not only got a lot of help with my specific problem, but learned more about REALBasic as I went. Instead of laboriously loading each image, one at a time, I was shown how to use GetFolderItem and load them into an array of type Picture -- not ImageWell -- in 7 lines of code.

Even better, at paint time I could simply reference the array by the rank of the card and paint from it directly. Very nice, even if there was a lot of pain involved in getting there.

I had hoped to have the bridge game finished in time to include it with the story, but I was a little too ambitious for my skills. I'm about 50 percent of the way through the client app, and about a third of the way through the server. The bridge game will have to make its debut at another time.

Conclusion

Bridge server There is much more to REALBAsic 2005 than I've touched on here, including database functionality. REALBasic supports MySQL, PostgreSQL, Oracle, ODBC, Database4D, OpenBase, REALDatabase, and REALSQLDatabase engines out of the box. Others are supported with plugins. It's also interesting to note that the Linux version of REALBasic 2005 was written with REALBasic. If that's not eating your own dog food, I don't know what is.

REALBasic is frustrating at times, but I've already accomplished far more with it in two weeks than I ever did with Borland's Kylix. It's also very powerful. If you need a cross-platform IDE that can handle just about any type of functionality you want to throw at it, this might be the right tool for you.

Consider the amount of documentation which accompanies the product, even in its beta stage. The Language Reference manual alone is nearly 1,000 pages. The Users Guide and the Tutorial combined add another 700 pages. And there is a Quick Start manual as well. All are provided in PDF format. The sheer volume of documentation is such that I've learned to love the Search function in Adobe Reader 7.0.

Available support options include a mailing list for the Linux beta. I recommend signing up for it, especially if you are new to REALBasic or a long time gone from Basic, as I was. Other mailing lists that might be useful include Getting Started, REALBAsic NUG, Tips, Games, and Plugins. There is also at least one unofficial IRC channel: #realbasic on FreeNode.

Will this be the first proprietary IDE to really catch on with Linux development? The REALBasic customer base began in the Apple community. But since a Windows version began shipping in 2003, Windows users have been a larger and larger share of that base. Currently, the ratio is roughly 55 percent Apple, 45 percent Windows. Previous releases have been able to build applications for Linux, but you couldn't develop them on Linux.

The Standard Version of REALBasic 2005 for Windows and Apple costs $100, but for Linux it is free. Surprisingly, that free-as-in-beer price tag will remain even after the beta is over. The Pro version, which offers additional built-in functionality, including the ability to compile for platforms other than the platform it is running on, currently sells for $400, and that's what the Linux version will cost as well.

REALBasic allows me to produce GPL-licensed applications, and to do it with a free-as-in-beer development tool that is far more capable than my meager skills can take advantage of. And if I want my friends who use Macs or Windows to be able to play bridge with me, REALBasic 2005 for Linux is likely to become the first application I've purchased for my Linux desktop in a long time.

Share    Print    Comments   

Comments

on Review: REALBasic 2005 for Linux

Note: Comments are owned by the poster. We are not responsible for their content.

if it ain't free as in speech

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on August 04, 2005 09:47 PM
I have no interest in it (you can keep the free beer for yourself): proprietary remains proprietary and I simply see no point in using it

#

Re:if it ain't free as in speech

Posted by: Joe Barr on August 04, 2005 10:08 PM
I salute your purity. Sinner though I may be, according to the Stallmanistas, I'll use a proprietary product to produce free software. I wonder, though, if the sins of the father follow the code.


Would you use GPL'd software created with a proprietary tool?

#

Re:if it ain't free as in speech

Posted by: Rocky on August 04, 2005 11:11 PM
There's nothing inheritely evil or wicked about proprietary code. Contrary to popular belief, some people have to buy groceries to put on the table - charging for the product that they develop is perfectly acceptable.

#

Re:if it ain't free as in speech

Posted by: Daniel Carrera on August 05, 2005 12:15 AM
What does charging money have to do with this?

The product in question is *free* as in beer, so charging money is obviously not the issue at hand. Furthermore, free software (as in freedom) does not prohibit you from making money (even by selling).

Cheers,
Daniel.

#

Re:if it ain't free as in speech

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on August 05, 2005 01:45 AM
My understanding is this product is slated to sell for $400. At least the useful version of it. So, in my view this is regular old commercial software for Linux. Money has everything to do with it. Is this really a new thing? (Oracle, etc, etc ?) No one is forcing you to buy it or use it (unlike some companies with 2 letter initials). I have a hard time with definitions of freedom that restrict my abilities to participate in open commerce if I choose to. This kind of definition of "freedom" in my view is why OSS advocates get branded as communists. We are all free to do exactly as the OSS gurus say I guess.
Freedom is also freedom not to write OSS.

#

Re:if it ain't free as in speech

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on August 05, 2005 02:45 AM
It only took 5 comments to get to the Communism accusation. Is that a new record?

#

Re:if it ain't free as in speech

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on August 05, 2005 04:52 AM
It was saying "this is why OSS is perceived as Communist". Implying that OSS is actually not Communist.

Be a little less knee-jerk.

#

Re:if it ain't free as in speech

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on August 05, 2005 03:36 AM
> My understanding is this product is slated to
> sell for $400. At least the useful version of it.

REALbasic Standard Edition for Linux is the one that is free as in beer and it has lots of useful features. Everything Joe mentioned in his article, except for compiling for Windows and Mac, is possible with Standard Edition. You could use to create a mail client, a custom web browser, a game, a single-user database app, a front-end to a CLI app and lots of other things. The free version creates stand-alone applications.

The Professional Edition adds some very high-end features like remotely debugging your applications on other computer, cross-compiling for other operating systems and using SSL for secure internet stuff. It's appropriate for enterprise applications, but the free edition is great for personal stuff.

#

Crowbar for old VB apps?

Posted by: Bob Halloran on August 04, 2005 11:31 PM
If you can use this to pry loose all those old VB fat apps out of a purely Windows environment, then to my mind it's worth the investment. This sort of legacy baggage is part of what holds back wider acceptance of Linux ("I have to be able to run XYZ app"). Yes, the *right* way to do this is rewrite into a more portable language, but this may provide a bridge to get there (rebuild under RB, *then* recode for performance reasons).

#

Porting from VB to Linux

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on August 05, 2005 12:26 AM
Yes, you can absolutely use REALbasic to move Visual Basic applications to Linux. Here's a technical document that explains some of the differences between the two products and offers advice on using REAL Software's VB Project Converter tool:

<a href="http://www.realsoftware.com/support/whitepapers/portingvisualbasic/" title="realsoftware.com">http://www.realsoftware.com/support/whitepapers/p<nobr>o<wbr></nobr> rtingvisualbasic/</a realsoftware.com>

#

Re:Crowbar for old VB apps?

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on August 09, 2005 01:00 AM
To port a VB application to Linux, REALBasic is not a viable alternative when compared with Gambas, which is open source.

#

Re:Crowbar for old VB apps?

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on August 28, 2005 05:21 AM
And the "open source" factor is significant HOW? I don't see why it matters when you're writing apps. Oh, sure, you can use the "maybe if real went bankrupt" thing, but that is hardly a reason to restrict yourself to Linux. There aren't many who can afford to constantly port from VB to Gambas.

#

Re:The review would be more useful...

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on August 05, 2005 01:13 AM
I also agree that a comparison with Visual Basic would not be very interesting as the authors of Visual Basic have not made a version for Linux.

What might have been interesting is a comparison with Gambas (<a href="http://gambas.sourceforge.net/" title="sourceforge.net">http://gambas.sourceforge.net/</a sourceforge.net>).

#

Re:The review would be more useful...

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on August 05, 2005 01:17 AM
Joe, I'm afraid I must disagree. In nearly any articles discussing OpenOffice.org, including those on NewsForge, there are always comparisons made between OO.o Writer and Microsoft Word. The reason is, of course, the major focus of OpenOffice.org--to provide a Free (as in Freedom), quality, cross-platform office productivity suite to all who wish to use it. To that end, OO.o looks and feels a lot like the Microsoft Office applications; this is how we get Windows/MSOffice users to consider converting to OO.o and, perhaps, other Free Software.

This time, the focus is on doing the same for developers (developers developers developers). I work in a "Microsoft shop." Our in-house developers write all their apps in VBA for use with Internet Exploder, and they do it because MS Visual Studio has always steered developers that way. It's like with current users of MS Office; for these developers, Visual Basic works and gets them paid, so they see it as "worth it" to stick with what they know and, thus, what will keep their mortgages paid next month.

To break this cycle, we need to wean them off of it, which means something comparable to what they now know. That means that a comparison of REALBasic to Visual Basic is appropriate. Yes, I know that there are several counterarguments, and those arguments could fill a thick book, but this is what these developers are thinking--"next month's mortgage...next month's rent...my kids need a roof...."

That said, when I do program, which is not as often as it once was (but slowly increasing once again, thankfully), I usually do it in shell script, Python, expect, or REXX, due to my current needs as a network engineer. These languages are Free and have Free implementations for multiple platforms.

#

Re:The review would be more useful...

Posted by: Joe Barr on August 05, 2005 04:25 AM
And of course, you have every right to your opinion, and you state it well.


People coming to REALBasic from VB are going to want those comparisons. This is not a review for them. This is a review for Linux users. It's not about how REALBasic compares with an MS product that they don't know or use. It's about an exciting cross-platform development tool _for Linux_ which is available for the first time.

#

Re:The review would be more useful...

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on August 05, 2005 03:16 AM
OK. Long time I did math in BASIC too.
Actually I never know to what BASIC functions with
the exception having an IBM-Operating_System wirh
IBM hardware_devices & machine dependent drivers.

#

What widget set does it use on linux?

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on August 05, 2005 04:12 AM
Is it Qt? GTK++? Motif? Plain Xt?

Also it it would be interesting to know what kind of performance the compiler achieves. I gather it's not a bytecode system of any sorts, but rather a full-blown native compiler? Does it compile quickly? Produce fast code?

#

Re:What widget set does it use on linux?

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on August 05, 2005 07:51 AM
It uses GTK.

Yes, it compiles machine code for x86. And it creates standalone binaries... no need to install external libraries, a runtime, a vm, etc.

The compiler is pretty fast... you should get the beta and try it yourself.

#

Re:What widget set does it use on linux?

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on August 05, 2005 12:06 PM
Why not try <a href="http://www.gambas.org/" title="gambas.org">http://www.gambas.org/</a gambas.org> (GAMBAS)?

#

Re:What widget set does it use on linux?

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on August 06, 2005 03:12 AM
I read a favorable review of Gambas in Linux Magazine, but unfortunately it was a similar shallow review. It didn't even say whether it compiles or not - afaik you need Gambas installed to run Gambas-developed programs.

#

Back Pain relief

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on May 28, 2006 03:32 PM
[URL=http://painrelief.fanspace.com/index.htm] Pain relief [/URL]
[URL=http://lowerbackpain.0pi.com/backpain.htm] Back Pain [/URL]
[URL=http://painreliefproduct.guildspace.com] Pain relief [/URL]
[URL=http://painreliefmedic.friendpages.com] Pain relief [/URL]
[URL=http://nervepainrelief.jeeran.com/painrelief<nobr>.<wbr></nobr> htm] Nerve pain relief [/URL]

#

Re:The review would be more useful...

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on August 11, 2005 06:47 PM
If you're interested in such an article, Real Software has a white paper on their site about doing conversions from VB to RealBasic. There's even a utility to do some of the conversion for you.

<a href="http://www.realsoftware.com/support/whitepapers/portingvisualbasic/" title="realsoftware.com">http://www.realsoftware.com/support/whitepapers/p<nobr>o<wbr></nobr> rtingvisualbasic/</a realsoftware.com>

As a programmer that did lots of VB and Access VBA programming, I found RealBasic to be a very natural transition. As far as components go, most of the major stuff is available, we've found a few things that we've needed 3rd party plugins for, but they ARE out there (monkeybreadsoftware.info, einhugur.com are the major ones we use) and they ARE cross platform for the most part. The SDK is available to anyone, so if you're also handy with C++, you can create your own. RB will also let you link to external<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.dll's if you want to. (and now supports softdeclares in 2005r2)

ActiveX is available to Windows users, but they've also allowed Mac users to automate the Office applications (Word, Excel and Powerpoint) as well as sending AppleEvents and Applescript which takes care of some of the other apps as well (You can also make your own apps AppleScript-able with a little work). There is also an IPC framework for allowing you to do IPC between RealBasic created apps.

Database support is pretty robust, natively supported DB include:
4D, CSV, DBF, dtfSQL, MySQL, ODBC (which we use extensively), OpenBase

we've also been successful in creating DSN-Less connections in a Windows environment and have found a 3rd Party SQLServer ODBC plugin for Mac which has come in VERY handy.

If you're truly curious, there is LOTS of materials available on Real's website.

From one programmer to another, RealBasic is worth at least taking a look at. It takes a little getting used to, but there are very few times when I say "I wish RB could do this the way VB could," and in the times I have, the features either show up in the next release, or I am able to get one of the plugin companies to include it with theirs.

#

The REAL cost of bringing RB to Windows &amp; Linu

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on October 06, 2005 07:05 PM
What the reviewer has forgotten to mention how much Mac users have suffered in order to bring this product to Windows and Linux users. This product was originally developed for Apple users and only sold to Apple users for years. Then RS introduced a Windows version and finally a Linux version. However there was a big problem with their Windows version. Prior to Realbasic 2005 (which is really Version 6) the interface used by Realbasic was completely different to the now current one large tabbed interface shown in the review. The previous interface was a multiple window interface. On the the Macintosh side there was no problem with this interface as Mac users were free to open components of their project into separate windows and then arrange those windows in any manner that they thought would benefit their work flow. This was an ideal interface on the Mac for using dual screens as it allowed you to look at multiple components of a project at once. However, this interface did not work well on the Windows platform because of the short comings of the multi document interface on Windows. And since Windows controls most of market place as opposed to Apple or Linux, RS resigned it interface to the current one large window. In the process Apple users have had to give up the ability to open items in separate windows and arrange them in any manner we want - this is a key component of the Apple operating system. Now we are forced to manipulate various tabs inside one large window in which everything is layered over everything else. We don't even have floating tool pallet windows any more - they are fixed inside the large "one size fits all" window. We can't construct project interface windows as separate windows to see how they would look in a running application, but are forced to construct our project window inside a scrollable tab. There are other features that have been removed such as the color pallet and the code splitter. As a Mac user I feel totally betrayed by RS as they refuse to address any of these issues and have generally shown a very condescending attitude toward Mac users regarding these issues because frankly they don't have to care any longer because once they are able to further refine their Windows product they can more than make up sales to Windows users regardless of how many Mac user they loose. I believe it is morally offensive for a company to remove features from one OS in order for that company's management to line their own pockets. Just image how you would feel after investing a lot of money and time a company redesigns its interface and removes all the components which make your OS unique from the product. Look at RS's laughable marketing campaign as to why the interface was changed - they say it was done to make the product more like VisualBasic to Windows users, but on the other give Mac users the lame excuse it was done to make it more like Safari; yes, thats right, because Safari (Apple's browser) allows for tabs RB should follow suit.

#

For RAD, Runtime Revolution

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on October 12, 2005 12:58 PM
I use Runtime Revolution (<a href="http://www.runrev.com/" title="runrev.com">http://www.runrev.com/</a runrev.com> that has much different language has been on Linux (started on Unix) for years, and support port to MacOSX, Windows, BSD, Solaris and Linux. RBstory sound good but it never work right. Just try compiel some samples Linux. Mac stuff in the nonMac IDE, even MAC icon of Office automation.

#

Unfortunately...

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on January 18, 2006 05:13 AM
The reviewer did not test the database connectivity because, contrary to the hyped-up marketing of this tool, only Postgres and MySql are supported on Linux, not even ODBC. I hit this wall in my testing efforts, and then came across these very enlightening threads:

<a href="http://forums.realbasic.com/viewtopic.php?t=823" title="realbasic.com">http://forums.realbasic.com/viewtopic.php?t=823</a realbasic.com>

<a href="http://forums.realsoftware.com/viewtopic.php?t=793" title="realsoftware.com">http://forums.realsoftware.com/viewtopic.php?t=79<nobr>3<wbr></nobr> </a realsoftware.com>

#

It is NOT free, it is a crippled 15 day demo.

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on May 26, 2006 07:09 AM
They lied to us beta testers, then one day the beta just bombs, and suddenly you can get a fifteen day trial or buy it. It was bull, this company lied and used us. In addition, they update about twice a year and want to sell you all the patches. They got their morals from Microsoft, avoid them like the clap.

#

Re:It is NOT free, it is a crippled 15 day demo.

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on June 21, 2006 10:47 AM
The Linux version is "free". The Windows and Mac versions have 15 day trials.

Actually, after each 15 day Windows / Mac trial expires you can renew the trial indefinitely. Just email them and they'll give you a link to the extended trial license.

The annual update plan actually itemizes to:
Standard Edition - about 14 cents / day
Professional Edition - about 55 cents / day

The price is not bad, if you're a professional commercial programmer, considering what it does and considering the fact that there is no distinction between upgrades and patches anymore. Patches contain all upgrades and upgrades contains all patches.

Bear in mind that the professional edition compiles to the Windows / Mac / and Linux platforms, plus supports these database technologies - Oracle, Microsoft SQL Server, FileMaker Server, MySQL, Sybase, Openbase, Frontbase, 4D Server or any ODBC data source.

#

relief joint

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on May 28, 2006 07:09 PM
<tt>[URL=http://painrelief.fanspace.com/index.htm] Pain relief [/URL]
[URL=http://lowerbackpain.0pi.com/backpain.htm] Back Pain [/URL]
[URL=http://painreliefproduct.guildspace.com] Pain relief [/URL]
[URL=http://painreliefmedic.friendpages.c<nobr>o<wbr></nobr> m] Pain relief [/URL]
[URL=http://nervepainrelief.jeeran.com/pa<nobr>i<wbr></nobr> nrelief.htm] Nerve pain relief [/URL]</tt>

#

Pain relief

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on May 30, 2006 01:15 AM
<tt>[URL=http://nervepainrelief.jeeran.com/painrelief<nobr>.<wbr></nobr> htm] Nerve pain relief [/URL]
[URL=http://www.back.painreliefnetwork.net/lowbac<nobr>k<wbr></nobr> pain.htm] Low back pain [/URL]
[URL=http://blog.gala.net/uploads/painreliefback/<nobr>b<wbr></nobr> ackpainrelief.htm] Back pain relief [/URL]
[URL=http://www.weblog.ro/usercontent/13155/profi<nobr>l<wbr></nobr> es/kneepainrelief.htm] Knee pain relief [/URL]
[URL=http://www.info.painreliefnetwork.net/Pain-R<nobr>e<wbr></nobr> lief.html] Pain relief [/URL]
[URL=http://www.sitefights.com/community/scifi/pa<nobr>i<wbr></nobr> nrelief/painreliefpreved.htm] Pain relief [/URL]
[URL=http://www.info.painreliefnetwork.net/Medica<nobr>t<wbr></nobr> ion-Pain-Relief.html] Medication pain relief [/URL]
[URL=http://www.info.painreliefnetwork.net/Natura<nobr>l<wbr></nobr> -Pain-Relief.html] Natural pain relief [/URL]

[URL=http://painrelief.fanspace.com/index.htm] Pain relief [/URL]
[URL=http://lowerbackpain.0pi.com/backpain.htm] Back Pain [/URL]
[URL=http://painreliefproduct.guildspace.com] Pain relief [/URL]
[URL=http://painreliefmedic.friendpages.c<nobr>o<wbr></nobr> m] Pain relief [/URL]
</tt>

#

Re:The review would be more useful...

Posted by: Joe Barr on August 04, 2005 09:45 PM
Ah, so you're not a Linux user. You won't find a lot of Windows-oriented reviews here on Linux.com, I'm afraid.


When the malignant monopoly starts to ship a version of VB for Linux, we might give it a go, but until then, sorry.


Joe Barr

#

The review would be more useful...

Posted by: Administrator on August 04, 2005 09:16 PM
...if the author had been able to compare RealBasic to MS Visual Basic. Most programmers writing Basic programs these days use VB on some version of Windows. Comparing the product to programming in C, C++, or Pascal (that's what Kylix uses) isn't very informative. Yeah, we know Basic is different from C. So what? If you're seriously looking at this product, chances are you're already programming in Basic, so the choice of language is already made.

Some issues that would be helpful to compare:
* The components available in the VB toolbox.
* Third party components on multiple platforms (and how cross-platform are they?)
* Is there any cross-platform support for things like automation (COM and DCOM). Yeah, it's a Windows thing, but it would be nice to know if they worked out some sort of equivalent for non-Windows platforms, using Interprocess Communication?
* Is there an equivalent to database connectivity components such as ADO, and what databases are supported.

Well, you get the idea.

#

ravindra mudumby-real basic 2005

Posted by: Administrator on August 17, 2005 11:18 AM
the popular cross-platform interactive development environment (IDE) for Mac OS X and Windows -- is scheduled to debut for the Linux platform later this month, perhaps as early as the LinuxWorld Conference & Expo in San Francisco. For the past couple of weeks, I've been falling asleep each night to the glow of beta versions of REALBasic 2005 running happily on SUSE Pro 9.3 on my monitor.

#

ravindra mudumby--real basic

Posted by: Administrator on October 29, 2005 03:49 AM
REAL Software is set to release REALbasic 2005 for Linux within the next week or so. The software promises to do for Linux what Visual Basic does for Windows, and provide a powerful, yet easy-to-use tool like Visual Basic, but for Linux instead.

REALbasic 2005 for Linux enables both desktop and server application development for Linux. In addition, REALbasic 2005 includes a Visual Basic Project Converter that helps migrate existing Visual Basic applications to REALbasic where they can be compiled for Linux. This is a benefit for companies that are looking to migrate to Linux but have legacy Windows-based software that was created with Visual Basic.
Interestingly, the software can also build applications for Windows and Macintosh from the same code base. The Linux Standard Edition will be offered for free on launch, whereas the Professional Edition runs on and creates software for Linux, Windows and Macintosh and includes other advanced features

#

Review: REALBasic 2005 for Linux

Posted by: Anonymous [ip: 218.82.78.111] on August 25, 2007 11:56 AM
It's free for linux standard version.

#

Review: REALBasic 2005 for Linux

Posted by: Anonymous [ip: 124.43.209.92] on November 13, 2007 03:35 PM
nice think.
can i put a referral link into my site?
hisubash . c*m.
thanks

#

This story has been archived. Comments can no longer be posted.



 
Tableless layout Validate XHTML 1.0 Strict Validate CSS Powered by Xaraya