PureBasic for Windows
- By Fantaisie Software
- Trial version
- User Rating
Used PureBasic for Windows?
Developer’s Description
PureBasic for Windows
- By Fantaisie Software
- Trial version
- User Rating
Used PureBasic for Windows?
Full Specifications
- GENERAL
- Release
- Latest update
- Version
- 5.11
- OPERATING SYSTEMS
- Platform
- Windows
- Operating System
- Windows 2000
- Windows ME
- Windows NT
- Windows Vista
- Windows 98
- Windows 10
- Windows 2003
- Windows 7
- Windows XP
- Additional Requirements
- None
- POPULARITY
- Total Downloads
- 21,563
- Downloads Last Week
- 2
Report Software
Program available in other languages
Last Updated
User Reviews
4.2/5
12 User Votes
I paid for PUREBASIC on PAYPAL but never got downloaded
sofengr1- Pros
- I don't know yet.
- Cons
- Is this a scam??
- Summary
The Simple and effective way!
BittShark- Pros
- Been using this for years, really nice system and most code is multi-platform without too much fuzz. One of the best investments I've done!
- Cons
- Still a little weak on the Linux side, but has lately caught up rather well.
- Summary
Top of the line!
LitlleRed- Pros
- Fast, easy and very productive language supported by both a very powerful included library system and easy and available user-libraries. One of the best language for small to medium projects.
- Cons
- Outdated visual designer (new seems to be coming thew).
- Summary
Makes speedy good small apps.
Joshua_Friend- Pros
- Create small and speedy apps. Not like Slow Dog MS.NET in which code can be decompiled and stolen. One of the last true basic compilers around. Even has 64bit compiles in which MS doesn't know the meaning of. Free upgrades no rip-offs here.....
- Cons
- Control creation and debugger should be more like VB6..
- Summary
- With Microsoft killing their Windows O/S every day, by making Windows not Windows compatible anymore at least you have the option to compile to Linux. This is Much, MUCH, better than very, very Slow .Net because .Net doesn't even compile code anymore and has no compatibility with .Net 1 & 2 libs when apps are compile.
Probably the best money I've ever spent on development
frigginjoe- Pros
- One license covers every supported platform. Forever. 32 and 64 bit PC, Mac, Linux....even older Amiga versions. GUI handling, cross-platform portability and complete self-contained, small executables. That price is far lower than "reasonable."
- Cons
- Bugs, as to be expected given the scope of OS support, worked out with smaller updates. GUI development isn't as polished as it could be.
- Summary
- I love it. I paid a very small price one time, and I never have to worry about which platform I'm currently using or when I decide to pick up using PureBasic again for fear of having to pay for a costly upgrade should I leave it behind for months or even years. It's simply a fantastic option to have personally and professionally. I've opted for Purebasic on my own license for several work projects when there were much "bigger" and well-known development options available to me for free.
One of the best languages around, both RAD and powerful
LitlleRed- Pros
- It is nice to have a language that do not need huge of support framework like .NET or Java, just compile to a a small and efficient program & your license will allow Win, MAX & Linux version if you want to switch. Just love it!
- Cons
- The included GUI-Design kit needs an update, but there is also a fee program called PureFORM to download to help with this.
- Summary
PureBasic - Not compatible to old school GW-Basic or QBasic.
JoshBlaize- Pros
- Cons
- PureBasic is not compatible to the old school GW-Basic or old school QBasic. Does not allow you to use the old school BASIC commands. A good descent Basic Compiler should be compatible with old school GW-Basic or old school QBasic. If PureBasic is not like GW-Basic or QBasic, then why bother calling it Basic in the first place? PureBasic needs to be a lot like BASIC of how John Kemeny & Thomas Kurtz wrote it. PureBasic could of had the John Kemeny & Thomas Kurtz style and its other features that PureBasic wanted to add, just to make it PureBasic. But other than that, if PureBasic does not have the John Kemeny & Thomas Kurtz style, then why bother calling it PureBasic?
- Summary
best compiler
downloader2001- Pros
- powerfull, compiles very small executables that don't need runtimes, cheap and very easy to learn. Best BASIC and maybe best PROGRAMMING LANGUAGE
- Cons
- Summary
An excellent product.
SGEEK- Pros
- This is a very good basic compiler. With the fasm backend, it manages to produce very small executable. There are numerous controls available (for the windows version). This program has all its future updates major or minor free. So you can enjoy all the future featues anytime. The program is constantly updated, and has an active ready-to-help forum users. <p> <p>The number of user libraries available also makes various things easier. You can create quite advanced applications with just basic knowledge of API, eg. what API is.
- Cons
- This program is capable of generating commercial quality applications, and even has been used for it. But when it comes to creation of application that needs more control than what the PB framework provides, it lacks in several ways. The free future updates might endanger the product's future. There is nothing else thats wrong with the application, as there are things that only need to be added, and nothing exceptionally wrong to remove.
- Summary
Excellent program, but I wouldn't buy it.
esh_corp- Pros
- The program is really excellent, compiles flawlessly.
- Cons
- Well, the program's good, but I don't think it is te kind of program I would buy.. personally, I didn't really like the interface that much, didn't feel it was user friendly, but that's just me.
- Summary