Slashdot Mirror

It sounds like RealBasic might be a fit for what you're looking for. Have you tried them? http://www.realbasic.com/

This is why I first ran Linux on my desktop. Now I can't imagine using anything else, but there are a few things keeping me from wiping Vista off my T60. First is the fact that the company website only runs under IE. Ok, so I install ie4lin, but it looks like crap and crashes a lot. Not for me. Secondly, I think it's a lot easier to develop on Windows than on Linux, especially if you don't know C++ - and what good is developing an application on linux if most people are using some version of Windows. There is however a cross-platform program that could be the Microsoft killer and it's called none-the-less REALbasic. However, it's not free either. http://www.realbasic.com/products/realbasic/tour/index.php?ch=7&os=lin Wouldn't surprise me if Microsoft bought out this company.

I'm using Realbasic http://www.realbasic.com/
Works great on Windows & Linux (but looks better in Gnome since RB uses GTK for Linux)
We had to choose - VB / C# .NET, and still be locked in, or get something that can work on more than one OS.
For half the price of our MSDN subscription, I can easily build multiplatform software.
It's also made me a better developer, since RB has better OO than VB6.

IIRC, Office 97 and VS6 used their own controls rather than the OS controls. Having developed for both, I can agree it's a pain in the ass. But I think that predates the monopoly issues. Also, the current version of VS, and all versions of VS.Net use their own custom controls. This is not a requirement! In fact, REALbasic claims to use the standard controls of 3 OSes! I can't imagine it would be harder for MS to use the standard controls they already make...unless they're too crappy to commonly use. In which case, I have to wonder why they haven't improved their quality. It makes me wonder if this is yet another example of them giving lower-quality products to the masses while keeping better tools for those who buy their products. A good argument against that is that VS.Net and Office use different controls from each other, too! And that has me just shaking my head.

If there were a VB6 compiler for Linux, that would be much more interesting to me.

With REALbasic you can write the code once and compile native binaries for Windows, Linux, and Mac OS X. It's supposed to be very similar to VB.

I use wxPython for development, which I'd recommend for anything cross platform. There's also wxPerl, wxRuby, wxBasic, etc. It's a c++ framework and has binding for nearly every language in use, even works with .NET. Very fast, and it's LGPL'd.

What Mono does not support is the migration of Windows applications written using Visual Basic 6 or earlier. The solution for that problem is REALbasic, a cross-platform RAD tool that is similar to VB6 and runs on Linux, Windows and Mac OS X. REALbasic compiles native executables for each platform from a single code base.

Here's what the Mono guys say about it:
"REALbasic is a great tool for Linux," stated Miguel de Icaza, vice president of developer platforms for Novell. "Where Mono focuses on bringing .NET applications to Linux, REALbasic migrates Basic applications to Linux."
http://opensource.sys-con.com/read/244039.htm

REALbasic Standard Edition for Linux is free as in beer.
Get it here: http://www.realbasic.com/download/

RealBASIC is cross platform and *very* compatible with existing VB code.

RealBasic may have just lost some customers...

With a little research, nothing could beat MS-Access with its VB. We quickly had working GUIs integrated with business logic. Things were beautiful. PHP was available but the its abilities at the time were very limited.

Sadly, there is still no real answer to MS-Access' programming paradigm in the Linux world. Gambas http://gambas.sourceforge.net/ comes close. So does RealBasic http://www.realbasic.com/. Other wannabe environments are simply wasting time at present, and do not appear to be serious.

I am meant to understand that Kross http://conference2006.kde.org/conference/talks/2.p hp is progressing well, but was not impressed when I tried it.

Having powerful programming environments that are friendly to newbies is OK, but making them actively hostile to power users on the other hand is insane. Those two items aren't mutually exclusive, but Linux programmers tend to think so - sadly.

Why use Qt with its horrible licensing issues for commercial software creation when you can use a better solution like REALbasic?

I want to be able to develop applications in both Windows and Linux. VS.Net and Mono allow me to use the same code with very little tweaking between platforms and keep using my Visual BASIC skills I learned over a decade ago.

So would RealBASIC, with the added advantages of producing actual native binaries, having a reasonable UI on OS X, and not being open to Microsoft patent claims.

Visual Basic was designed for developing desktop software. If that's what you are building, it's suitable. For the most part, the language you choose is a personal preference and it sounds like your boss wants to use VB because that's what he is familiar with. That said, IF your boss is suggesting VB6, you have to consider the fact that it is no longer supported by Microsoft. If he is comfortable with VB.NET, that's another option. However, any .NET application requires the .NET runtime to be installed on the user's machine. If the software product you are creating is something that will go outside your company (perhaps it's a product you sell for example), then you have to consider the extra overhead of having to deal with making sure the user has the proper .NET runtime installed. Another alternative is REALbasic which is very similar to Visual Basic but is completely object-oriented and is cross-platform (Windows, Macintosh and Linux). It also builds self-contained exes so you don't have to worry about DDL hell or having to make sure a particular framework, runtime or virtual machine is installed. You can find out more about REALbasic here: http://www.realbasic.com/

I'd actually recommend RealBasic instead of VB for a few different reasons:

1) RB is cross-platform. (It can compile for Windows, OS X and Linux all from a single project.)

2) RB applications are all bundled together with their libraries. That means you don't need a runtime like VB's, you can just copy the .exe file and you're installed.

3) I find RB a little bit easier to use.

http://www.realbasic.com/

http://www.realbasic.com/

Extra credit is that it can compile binaries for Windows, MacOS X, and Linux. I believe there's a demo version to try before you buy.

If you're looking for completely free, unfortunately you may well be sol. KDevelop may be your only option as posted above, but I wasn't aware that KDevelop can give you win32 apps....?

http://realbasic.com/

IMO if you need to crank out a cross platform app very, very quickly it's a nice way to go. Of course there are the pitfalls of the use of proprietary tools but the folks at RB have made a point of playing well with others.

BTW, I have no connection to RB other than a satisfied user since their beta days.

Well, not FOSS, but there's already such a thing: RealBASIC.

realbasic

You could try them out on RealBasic: http://www.realbasic.com/

It's a lot like Visual Basic, except:
1) Portable to MacOS and Linux
2) Easier to just jump in and write apps with
3) Produces apps with no DLL dependencies.

Give it a try, you might find it meets your needs.

How about Visual Studio?... I can whip up a usable, very functional Windows app in seconds. Try doing that on any other platform.

Yet you're very careful not to name any.

I won't either, but, in the true /. spirit, I can provide a link: http://realbasic.com/community/designawards/2005/.

"Made with REALbasic" != "Absolute crap, guaranteed"

Um... Standard Edition is free as in beer... free beer. Not $100. At least on Linux, which is the point... right?

And the Pro features do not include an "auto-installer" (whatever that is) because REALbasic apps don't need an installer at all. Here's a full list of the Pro features:
http://www.realbasic.com/products/pro/

If, as another poster has mentioned below, it's so easy to offer a cross platform toolkit on par with QT at such a great price and still remain a viable company, why don't you do it? Why doesn't someone else do it? (Remember, Microsoft is not cross platform).

What you mean like RealBasic ?

I mean come on .. $99 for standard RB license versus $1790 for QT one. I know QT is heaps better, but that sort of price difference is ridiculous.

1) Who is going to code their applications? Schools will have to hire hoards of developers to write custom code. Nearly all IT shops are against this, in favor of COTS.

Do they have that much money to waste? Fact is, Rapid Application Development in Linux is no big monster. You can always develop in RealBasic and compile the executable to run on Linux, that if learning curve is a problem.
Otherwise they can develop in Java: Look at Skype, Limewire, Azareus, Digichat.
Java is cross-platform you know?
Simpler languages like Tk/TCL are also cross-platform and easy to program in.
Fact is VB programmers are used to recycling ActiveX components which are very unstable, bulky and guess what support is now obsolete. Windows 2000 very soon will also lose support

2) Who are they going to call for tech support? How much does that cost?
Forums, Google, Articles, Books. People are badly accustomed with bad support that charges enormous rate; when it is known that people that work for them don't have a clue but follow from an answer manual. I know this girl that is clueless about computer and works for an IT Support Centre answering the phone.
Plus Linux hardly need as much support as Windows. It doesn't decay and corrupt so easily, it doesn't get so readily infected by nasties.

3) Who sets the standards for interoperabily?
I hope you don't think it should be Microsoft.
Interoperability is not a challenge for Linux, many internet cafes with solely Window clients run Linux on the background. Many corporates have their mail server sitting on Linux.
Can't comment on Mac though, never used it.
But can assure you - that with many more OSS education-related arising, Linux is by miles a cheaper better and saner idea.

The good thing about Microsoft is that you can always blame them if something goes wrong - so that can be handy for school admins.

I've used Runtime Revolutions' DreamCard for the PC and it's Mac OS X version seems just as competent. It's a holdover from the HyperCard days apparently, but the IDE is OK. The scripting language seems Basic like but the syntax can be a little odd. Might be worth looking at though.

If Basic is not to much the turn off, then perhaps RealBasic might be worth a look. The IDE and language remind me of a combination of the VS6 and PowerBasic products combined for OS X.

Again, most /.'ers will probably sneer at these tools since they aren't C and possibly aren't enterprise level solutions. But for a quick tactical level program, they might make for a good solution.

Probably worth less then $0.02, but I thought I'd add some RAD into the conversation.

RealBasic 5.5+ does a large portion of the work involved for you. Simple applications port right over to Windows, Mac, and Linux (thus FreeBSD).

Makes UI development easy, and I do all of the 'hard working' code in perl.

Seems like a good time to pick up a license for REALbasic, since they are giving it away until the end of the March:

Get a free license here:
http://www.realbasic.com/vb6/

Good thing there is REALbasic.

It is almost completely syntax compatible with VB and it has the benefit of compiling for Windows, Mac and Linux. And it even comes with a VB Project Converter to help you along.

There is a strong community of developers and some excellent plugins. Including a database plugin for Valentina which is much more powerful than the built-in database (and than Access).

You might care to look at:

RealBasic -- a VB-near clone with cross-platform development options that actually work, and which produces standalone .exes which don't require a magic set of DLLs to be installed correctly.

Extreme Basic -- an open source VB-like development tool which looks very promising, being developed by the original developer of RealBasic.

You mean a migration path like RealBasic provides?

Seriously, that solution is already out there, and it does MacOS X as well as Windows and Linux. RealBasic just has a really crappy marketting effort behind it so nobody knows about it...

You don't have to re-write. Use REALbasic. You can use it to convert VBA to code that runs Windows, Linux, or Mac.

REALbasic almost beat you to it, with an IDE for Mac and Windows, and building for Mac, Windows and Linux.

Pity it's not free.

REALbasic is a great environment/language for beginners (and experienced programmers for that matter. It's visual and has a modern, object-oriented version of BASIC.

http://www.realbasic.com/

Lets face it, times have changed.

When we started with computers, GUI didn't even exist, and it was rather simple to peck in a hello world or guess my number program in a couple of lines of Basic.

Now GUI is the norm, and only the "Geeks" have a use for text based interfaces.

So I say abandon any attempt at teaching anyone new to programming anything that is going to yield a command line program (at the onset at least). The results will be anti-climactic and discouraging at best.

I would start off with something like REALbasic which can very easily create those same hello world or guess my number type games only with a new GUI face. And the amount of code that you have to type still remains about the same. REALbasic has the added bonus that it is an object oriented language that can be used to teach techniques that will transfer to other languages in the future.

You don't want to throw a kid who has never seen a command line in his life into a situation where the product of his efforts is only usable in this foreign environment. Get him up and running in an environment that is familiar, and show him how easy it is to create useful tools for that environment.

I have just started working with REALbasic. It is a fantastic product, and making applications with it is a breeze, especially across platforms. User community is very supportive, and the folks who started REALbasic often weigh in for help. Might be a little too small at this point for you to convince the higher ups though. REAL software website

Depending on the need for rock-solid reliability, have you considered using a high-level RAD tool?

I've had positive experiences with REALbasic, a high-level BASIC-based language that is similar to Visual Basic but compiles for Windows, Mac OS X, Mac Classic, and Linux (GTK). It even makes console apps.

Just tell the decisionmakers it's a .NET clone that works cross-platform. If you don't need the power of Java or C#, REALbasic could be a good choice--and you'd never need to port code from platform to platform.

Oh, I and I guess I should link to the actual website of the product, sorry. :)

http://realbasic.com/ RealBasic's Homepage. You can download a free trial, I recommend giving it a try.

Why REALbasic?

* It includes a VB-to-RB porting tool.

* Compiles native executables for Linux.

* Has been shipping for 6 years and is very mature.

* Supports Sybase via a plug-in developed by Sybase.

You can learn more about porting VB to Linux here: http://www.realbasic.com/vb/

It's not your father's BASIC. It's a great RAD environment, with a language much more heavily influenced by Python than BASIC. You can write plugins in C/C++ to make the things that need to run super fast run super fast.

My company uses this product to build products that generate several hundred thousand in revenue per year. Our tools budget is under thousand dollars per year, mostly spent on REALbasic.

Just to play Devil's Advocate here for a moment...

You say "programmer" is one area where Linux has it covered. So where can I find a tool like RealBasic for Linux? A cross-platform visual RAD? (And please don't say Runtime Revolution; I've tried it, it's a piece of crap.)

I'm sure you'll all say that "only wimps use RAD tools, real men use C++ and wxWindows" (or whatever) but bear with me, here. This is a type of programming tool that exists both in Windows and MacOS and you can't really say that Linux has all the bases covered until it's there.

No, you couldn't squash it, except maybe if your PC came with a FireWire Bulldozer. First, RTFA. Do you see those benchmarks? Second, not only do you get your choice of OS on a G5 (OS X, Linux, etc.) you can also run Office natively, write programs natively that compile to X86, but you can also run X11 applications side by side with Mac OS apps, all on a system running with a BSD Core. The fact that you said, "my choice of OS" cracks me up. Do you even realize that OS X is based on BSD and is open source at the core? Need your precious Windows? Ever heard of Virtual PC? (Which will be compiled for the G5 soon according to Microsoft and Apple.)

I don't know about you, but I'm a goth. Part of that, to me, means I think for myself. In this case, it means no Intel, and no AMD. IMHO, PowerPC and *NIX are the future.

I think the folks at REAL Software will provide an educational discount to anyone who provides proof of academic status... academic prices start at $69.95 US. They even offer a complete "Intro to Programming" curriculum with lesson plans and examples available for a free download from their web site.

Enjoy.

I think the folks at REAL Software will provide an educational discount to anyone who provides proof of academic status... academic prices start at $69.95 US. They even offer a complete "Intro to Programming" curriculum with lesson plans and examples available for a free download from their web site.

Enjoy.

My first choice is Delphi. I don't think I'd ever say Delphi is better at creating quick`n`dirty apps than VB, but I would most certainly say that it is completely on par in that area, with the added benefit of being much more powerful. (My opinions here are based on VB6 and Delphi5, which are the last two I used heavily before being liberated from Windows GUI work.)

The other alternative I can think of is RealBASIC. Their development environment used to only run on Mac OS, even though it could compile apps for either Mac OS or Windows. Nowadays, the environment itself as well as the apps it creates all run on both Mac OS 9/X and Windows, although I've never used the Windows development environment. I've only had limited exposure to RealBASIC, but based just on those few hours, I would highly recommend any fan of VB at least give it a shot--I know if I ever have to go back to Windows GUI work, I certainly will. (It seems it would especially shine for quick`n`dirty apps because it seems to focus more on simplicity and cross-platform rather than feature bloat.)

It emulates 68k code though, not PPC, so you are stuck with MacOS 8.1 max, but on a fast PC you can run 68k code faster than any Motorola 68k processor ever did! You will need the ROM from a Quadra 650 (68040) for best results.

I was using it to run REALbasic REALbasic 3.5.2 -- the last 68k version. REALbasic can create Windows apps, but you have to run the IDE on the Mac-- that is, until version 5 which just came out but which you have to pay for all over again so I probably won't get it.

One cool thing is to access a Mac network from the PC-- the good old chooser running on Windows!

but it really did help me get started in programming oh so many years ago.

If you really do use BASIC, I recommend RealBASIC for Mac OS X. I could never stand it for serious development, but it's a lot better than VB with features like syntax formatting to make lame code easier to read.

I used it to throw together a custom client for my Fortune page for all the lame OSes in a few minutes. BASIC is still easy to look down upon and all implementations are seriously lacking in vital(at least to me) areas. RB doesn't have UDP support, and VB doesn't have syntax formatting.

Back to the serious topic and away from replying to a joke: Java's SWING toolkit is my favorite multiplatform toolkit. A single binary works for most platforms, and "advanced" features that we don't consider necessary in disagreement with our respective (former :) bosses.

For quickly drafting small projects, PHP and other server-side scripting languages are a great option. I would love to be able "throw togethor" something like this as well as package it into self contained binaries for winshit and OS X.

but there is a VB for Macs and somewhere in the world another engineer sheds a tear....

There's a program called REALBasic out for Mac (and maybe PC as well) that can develop multimediaish programs for Windows, MacOS 9.1 and less, and MacOS X+ with the same code. I've never used it, but as far as I know, it's quite good, graphical, pretty easy to learn/use, etc. Not sure if this solves what you are trying to solve, but good luck!