realbasic-nug
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Just curious.......

To: "REALbasic NUG" <realbasic-nug at lists dot realsoftware dot com>
Subject: Re: Just curious.......
From: Björn Eiríksson <bjorn at einhugur dot com>
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 13:45:51 -0000
Delivered-to: realbasic-nug at lists dot realsoftware dot com
References: <CCB92AF3-B719-4DFA-86FE-8148F294786F at markoneill dot co dot uk>
I think the answer to this is that many people just cant.

I my self had a hellish time porting some of my projects to REALbasic 2005/2006 and only recently succeeded in doing so.

The problems were not that things could not be done in REALbasic 200x, but more that something needed to be changed and the REALbasic compiler was crashing instead of giving some hint what the problem was. The problem could be as little as a constant name that REALbasic 200x did not like, but yet it is extremely difficult to track if it just crashes without giving a hint what the problem is.

Once actually managing to port most of my projects then 2 of the projects were experiencing serious slowdown which were a total turnoff until I tracked down the cause. (Which was DoEvents which seems to be much slower than in 5.5 at least in some sittuations)

I think given the above there are very valid reasons why people have not ported yet. (and note the above does not in any way take into account if people like the IDE, the added one megabyte to the compile size or other things that may annoy people).

What triggered me to try again to port my apps to 200x after having given up many times was a good experience when doing a new application from scratch in REALbasic 2006. (Which was my actualy first time where REALbasic 200x did not crash every 5 minutes)

Bottom line though is that any serious developer has to port and quickly, it is not going to be any easier to port by letting the problem wait while your application continues to grow in REALbasic 5.x.

Björn

----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark O'Neill" <me at markoneill dot co dot uk> To: "REALbasic Network Users Group NUG" <realbasic-nug at lists dot realsoftware dot com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2006 1:27 PM
Subject: Just curious.......


Curiosity killed the cat, but...

Why are people still using RB5.5.5 (and below)
instead of RB2006r2 and, more aptly, write here to
complain that certain features don't work in their
old version of RB?

Surely, if you're using RB to develop software, (as
opposed to sitting on your desktop looking pretty) you'll
be needing the most up-to-date version so that it
fixes all the bugs in earlier versions and consequently
makes your development job easier...

Just an observation, but it doesn't make sense to me
so I'd appreciate any responses as to why people
haven't upgraded - is there something I should know
about?! :)

All the best,

Mark.

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>

Search the archives of this list here:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>




_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>

Search the archives of this list here:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>