REALbasic

[LogicalVue]

I'm curious how many people on this forum have looked at REALbasic as an alternative to VB6 or VB.NET.

Your thoughts?

---
Paul Lefebvre
REALbasic Community Evangelist

[Paul M]

Nope, if it were more like lets say PowerBASIC then i would use it alot more often. PB compiles native code and it much faster than a lot of other BASIC variants including Visual Basic.

[LogicalVue]

Nope, if it were more like lets say PowerBASIC then i would use it alot more often. PB compiles native code and it much faster than a lot of other BASIC variants including Visual Basic.

I'm not familiar with PowerBASIC, but REALbasic does generate native code for each platform that it builds for (Windows, OS X and Linux). Its native code is not known for being tremendously fast, though it depends on what you need to do.

Paul Lefebvre
REALbasic Community Evangelist

[Atheist]

Looking from a VB .Net developers perspective, what would the advantages to "moving" to REALbasic be?

[LogicalVue]

Looking from a VB .Net developers perspective, what would the advantages to "moving" to REALbasic be?

Well it depends on what you're doing, of course. If you're using VB.NET to create ASP.NET applications, then REALbasic is not an option. If you're creating services or anything COM related then REALbasic is not an option.

But if you're creating desktop applications then REALbasic has these advantages, in my opinion:

• It's less complex than VB and the .NET framework
• It's cross-platform, I don't think Mono is there yet, at least for desktop apps
• Easier deployment of your apps: It doesn't require a run-time to be installed

The last two are the big ones for me.

But, unless you're fed up with Microsoft or want to go cross-platform there is probably little reason to switch from VB.NET if you're happy with it.

Paul Lefebvre
REALbasic Community Evangelist

[esposito]

I develop desktop applications only. After the demise of VB6 I looked into alternative languages for Win32.

REALbasic drew my attention at first but, when I realized how difficult it was to get documentation, tutorials, code samples etc. about this language, I decided to give it up.

I have now switched to Delphi and I think I'll stay with it for a very long time.

P.S. One of the main reasons why I have preferred Delphi to RB is that, while Delphi offers you a free version for the development of commercial software with very few or no limitations, the professional version of RB (the only one with which you can create something decent from the commercial point of view) costs an arm and a leg.

[LogicalVue]

I hear Delphi is pretty good. I've been meaning to try out one of the Turbo Explorer editions, but I haven't gotten around to it (it seemed like it had a bunch of prereqs I needed to install first -- I should go back and check it out).

Delphi is not cross-platform yet, though (although the Lazarus project is coming along).

Paul Lefebvre
REALbasic Community Evangelist

[esposito]

I hear Delphi is pretty good. I've been meaning to try out one of the Turbo Explorer editions, but I haven't gotten around to it (it seemed like it had a bunch of prereqs I needed to install first -- I should go back and check it out).

Delphi is not cross-platform yet, though (although the Lazarus project is coming along).

Paul Lefebvre
REALbasic Community Evangelist

The only prerequisite you need to install Delphi is the .NET Framework SDK Package v.1.1. Please note that, although the Delphi IDE needs the .NET Framework, the resulting executables are compiled in native code and do not need it.

Delphi is not coss-platform yet but Lazarus is now mature for the production of cross-platform software in Delphi code.

[Redneck]

I'm not familiar with PowerBASIC, but REALbasic does generate native code for each platform that it builds for (Windows, OS X and Linux). Its native code is not known for being tremendously fast, though it depends on what you need to do.

No, it does not. REALbasic uses a runtime system which is extremely slow.

I use to use REALbasic for frontends of my software and it is a POS. It is unstable, slow, and very limited.

I have created lots of programs with REALbasic including vintage game system emulators. The emulators were ported from emulators I wrote in C and when run side by side the speed difference was almost unbelievable. 1-3fps on REALbasic compared to 150fps in C without a speed limiter.

REALbasic is basically an interpreter that sticks your code into an already built runtime system which calls the code and interprets it on the fly. Not a compiler one bit.

Also, REALbasic has tons of documentation and TONS of examples. A LOT more than VB.NET does.

[LogicalVue]

No, it does not. REALbasic uses a runtime system which is extremely slow.

I use to use REALbasic for frontends of my software and it is a POS. It is unstable, slow, and very limited.

I have created lots of programs with REALbasic including vintage game system emulators. The emulators were ported from emulators I wrote in C and when run side by side the speed difference was almost unbelievable. 1-3fps on REALbasic compared to 150fps in C without a speed limiter.

REALbasic is basically an interpreter that sticks your code into an already built runtime system which calls the code and interprets it on the fly. Not a compiler one bit.

Also, REALbasic has tons of documentation and TONS of examples. A LOT more than VB.NET does.

Your frustration with REALbasic is evident, but that is no reason to be so cranky

Anyway, contrary to your belief, REALbasic does not use an interpreter. It does actually compile to native code for each platform. It has a large framework that is also included with the app, but the framework is also native code and separate for each platform.

REALbasic will never be as fast as C. After all, it has type and safety mechanisms that any high-level language has, which C does not have to deal with. But if there's a piece of code that you can't get to run fast enough in REALbasic, then you also have the option of using your C code and incorporating it as a plug-in to REALbasic.

I can't speak much about graphics or game-type software as I don't do that. But I know there are several games written with REALbasic that seem to have very good performance, including an open-source 3D first-person shooter, Renegades.

Paul Lefebvre
REALbasic Community Evangelist

[MartinLiss]

I am currently doing a review of REALbasic 2008 Release 1. My first impressions are very good particularly since it's an easy transition from VB6.

[esposito]

I am currently doing a review of REALbasic 2008 Release 1. My first impressions are very good particularly since it's an easy transition from VB6.

There's no doubt RB is much closer to VB6 than VB.NET is. Nevertheless, my concern is that in the near future (when the successor to Vista is released) MS might break compatibility with non-.NET software, so RB apps may stop working just like VB6 ones may.

Personally, I have switched to Delphi that allows you to produce professional software also using the cheap Turbo version or even the free one.

I am aware that Delphi executables may stop working as well. So, I'm keeping my fingers crossed while waiting for the next version of Windows. RB may give me better survival chances in the future, as it also targets Mac and Linux. Nevertheless, I am firmly convinced that, for the time being, if you want to sell desktop software, Windows is the only OS that counts.