REAL Studio for Mac

REAL Studio for Mac

Average User Rating:
3.7
out of 141 votes

Quick Specs

  • Version:
    2010.3.0
  • Total Downloads:
    5,273
  • Date Added:
    Jul. 27, 2010
  • Price:
    Update; $99.00 to buy (Buy it now)
  • File Size:
    175.79MB
  • Downloads Last Week:
    60
  • Platform:
    Mac
  • Product ranking:

Publisher's Description

+
 
read more +
User Reviews
+
  • Current Version

    5.0

    out of 2 votes

    • 5 star 2
    • 4 star 0
    • 3 star 0
    • 2 star 0
    • 1 star 0
  • All Versions

    3.7

    out of 141 votes

    • 5 star 70
    • 4 star 23
    • 3 star 11
    • 2 star 5
    • 1 star 32
  • My rating

    0 stars

    Write review

Results 1–11 of 49

5 stars

"The Truth about REALbasic"

September 03, 2010  |  By MarkusWinter

 |  Version: REAL Studio 2010.3.0

Summary

This review was originally posted on VersionTracker.com.
is that it is a tool to develop software, and as any tool it has strengths and weaknesses. Most people complaining seem to miss the point, and would probably use a screw driver to hammer in a nail and complain afterwards.

So what is the truth?

(1) You want to learn to program?

Already you are faced with a plethora of choices: cross-platform or for Mac only? Standalone programs or ones which need a runtime? Just for fun or might it develop into something more serious?

For me the requirements were: easy to learn, good graphical user interface, cross-platform, and if possible cheap (preferable free)

That excluded X-Code (though I still have it on my Mac), Tcl, Python, and a few others and left me seriously looking at REALbasic, Java, SuperCard and Revolution. I tried all of them for a few weeks and REALbasic came out on top by a mile â?? I hadnâ??t previously appreciated the difference a fully object-oriented language would make.

X-Code is a good alternative if you (a) program for the Mac only and (b) you can stand the C language (not everyone can). But be aware that the latest version of X-Code requires Leopard and does not compile for older versions. To guarantee compatibility you'd need to install both X-Code 3 and X-Code 2.5. Or in other words: programs developed in X-code 2.5 under Tiger will run fine on Leopard but not necessarily the other way round

But as far as cross-platform programming goes, REALbasic is the best solution by far.

(2) Is REALbasic as fast as C?

Yes and No.

REALbasic is a fantastic Rapid Application Development Tool. It will usually take you far less time to write a program in REALbasic than in C, and for most programs it makes no difference if they have speed x or 2x (as the user is the slowest component in the chain and the computer waits most of the time for input from the user).

Even better if you have time critical parts then just write a plugin in C/C++ and REALbasic will happily accommodate it. You can also use declares to directly access APIs. And dealing directly with memoryblocks will also give you a speed boost should you need it.

That being said you can usually write a program that is faster in C than in REALbasic. Recently I was curious enough to try this, and my REALbasic program took about 650 milliseconds for the task, while the C program took 570 milliseconds. Was it worth the extra hassle to program it in C? No. But I can see situations where I might still go for a C plugin.

So people complaining about REALbasic being slower than C either donâ??t know what they are talking about or deliberately deceive the readers.

(3) Why are REALbasic programs so big?

REALbasic programs contain the whole framework â?? that means they are completely self contained and donâ??t rely on other bits being installed on your computer (like C# programs). Yes, that means a program doing nothing looks pretty big â?? and the situation is aggravated on the Mac where Universal programs need to contain both PPC and Intel code.

But the truth is that the size from then on doesnâ??t increase much as you add your code. And it has one advantage which beats the increased download size: I can run the program without an installer. Anyone who is on a â??managed systemâ?? where IT does not let you install anything knows what Iâ??m talking about (donâ??t you hate it when IT isnâ??t supporting your work anymore but became the masters of the house?). My REALbasic programs will run straight out of the box, no installation necessary, even from a USB stick if necessary.

(4) Is REALbasic buggy?

Sure it is. So is X-Code. VisualBasic. C#. MacOS X. And donâ??t get me started on Word and Windows.

Any complex program contains bugs. But the big question is are there bugs which make the program unfit for purpose? So called show stopper bugs? And there the answer is a resounding â??Noâ?? for REALbasic. That doesn't mean that there aren't some bugs that can make you swear and tear your hair out, but there are usually ways around it (even the RTF bug I've been bitterly complaining about could be dealt with with a free plugin. And the bug seems fixed in version 2008R4 anyway).

Furthermore most â??bugsâ?? Iâ??ve come across turned out to be errors in my code, so in the meanwhile Iâ??m more carefull about mouthing off and ask politely first.

P.S. Lately â??luckyaliveâ?? (a well known troll) has started posting lists of REALbasic bugs as proof that REALbasic is unusable â?? well, firstly most of the bugs he posted have a â??fixed/implementedâ?? behind them so his postings seems somewhat strange. Secondly letâ??s have a look at MacOS X 10.5 Leopard:

  • 10.5.1 fixed over 25 bugs (including a nasty one leading to data loss)
  • 10.5.2 fixed over 10 bugs (incl 7 which could lead to arbitrary code execution)
  • 10.5.3 fixed over 200 bugs (humongous update)
  • 10.5.4 fixed over 20 bugs (quick update to fix the serious Adobe CS3 bug)
  • 10.5.5 fixed over 70 bugs

Now the forthcoming MacOS 10.5.6 update has over 100 bug fixes â?? anyone thinks 10.5.5 is unusable? ;-)

Or anyone still wants to complain that 10.3 is no longer updated? Gee â?? get over it. At some point you always have to pay for new features and bug fixes ... I for one am looking forward to the new MacOS X 10.6 Snow Leopard (which will drop support for G4 and G5 Macs and only run on Intel Macs)

(5) Can I compile for OS9?

Amazingly we still have quite a few old Macs running OS9 around. And about 10% of my users are still on OS9 (other developers report a similar percentage). If you want to compile for OS9 then you need to use 2007R4 or earlier for the compilation.

I have several versions of REALbasic on my Mac, and the same code runs fine in all of them.

I should point out that dropping OS9 support in REALbasic isn't a complaint - RS supported OS9 much longer than Apple did.

(6) Can REALbasic be extended?

Yes. There are several high quality plugin developers, among which the Monkeybread Collection is especially noteworthy. You can buy the whole collection (at a sizeable discount) or just the modules you need (quite cheaply).

I would like to point out that I can't understand people who criticize the existence of third-party plugin developers and insist on them being included with REALbasic. That's like requiring Apple or Microsoft to include all those third-party templates, fonts, etc. and hey, why stop there? Why not include all programs ever written when you buy a computer?

That's just dumb and shows how insincere those posters are.

(7) Can I do everything with REALbasic?

No. No matter how hard you try you canâ??t make a decent cup of coffee with it.

Sorry, but the question is too general to be meaningful. You could ask â??Can I do everything with X-Codeâ?? and the answer would still be â??Noâ?? - for example you canâ??t compile for Windows or Linux.

But REALbasic can â?? and as such there are some compromises that must be made. Not everything is supported on all platforms â?? mainly because there is no equivalent on the other platforms. But the same applies to Java to a much greater extend, and strangely enough you donâ??t hear people complaining that Java canâ??t do everything.

Basically anything you want to do can be done, and REALbasic even supports a large amount of platform specific items (like AppleEvents or Spotlight on the Mac or RegistryItems and TrayItems on Windows) - but then using them defeats the purpose of a cross-platform development tool somewhat (though it is good practise to support some platform specific conventions â?? which can easily be done with conditional statements like .

#If TargetWin32

//Windows specific code here

#ElseIf TargetMacOS

//Macintosh code goes here.

#ElseIf TargetLinux

//Linux code goes right here.

#EndIf

(8) Whatâ??s the greatest strength of REALbasic?

Definitely the support both from the developers and the user community â?? where else do you have the CEO answering questions directly, the developers pinching in with advice on the forums and mailing lists, and an immense number of users eager to help you with your problems? The only other community where I experienced similar support (but not quite as good) is the RapidWeaver forums. Especially Joe Strout and Aaron Ballman deserve mentioning.

The one thing which constantly baffles me though is the politeness of the REALbasic developers â?? following some exchanges in the newsgroup by a certain individual I would have already been fuming at his personal attacks and unjustified comments, and ready to throw some four letter words in his face, but they still kept their cool. That is simply AMAZING.

(9) Whatâ??s the greatest weaknesses of REALbasic?

For me it is the lack of a better EditField control â?? the current one supports styled text (bold, italic, underlign, alignment, colour, fonts, size) but super/subscript are missing. And it is slow when using large texts. But then I rarely use more than 100,000 characters in a text ... actually, once a week I need to clean up a text with about 160,000 characters which then takes about 3 seconds. I can live with that.

Another sore point is that the documentation is lacking - with the Rapid Release model the documentation does not always reflect all changes. But anyone who ever had to write a documentation and keep it current knows what a task that is.

(10) What is this Rapid Release model?

Originally RS released a paid REALbasic version containing new features maybe once a year and then came up with a few free bug fix releases. However developers wanted new features quicker - so now a new release is made every 90 days. You pay once for a 12 month term and all releases in the following 12 months are paid for (sometimes 5 releases in 12 months if you time your purchase right). This has advantages and disadvantages. The introduction of new features can result in new bugs being introduced as well. Under the old model you usually ended up with a pretty bug-free version before RS moved on to the next release. Under the new model you get the same amount of bug fixes but features faster than you did before ... and new bugs. It's a trade-off most developers seem to be happy about, though I personally preferred the older model.

(11) Whatâ??s the matter with â??luckyaliveâ???

Well, he keeps posting defamatory comments, quoting people out of context etc, or as versiontracker themselves wrote when I pointed out some extreme postings: â??I'm leaving one post up that doesn't appear to violate submission guidelines, but am removing a bunch (if not all) of the rest. Not sure I've seen someone with this much of a vendetta before....â??

To give you a fairly harmless example (I donâ??t think the nonsense he spouts is worth repeating): I wrote that REALbasic programs are self-contained. He writes â??Really, Self contained - why the QuickTime requirement?â??

QuickTime is a technology developed by Apple and is available for MacOS & Windows. It is a fantastic piece of technology (basically it takes all the hassle out of playing music and video) and most media companies and media software use it. It is a free download and can be installed on a computer, but it does not have to be. iTunes is just one example of a program that uses QuickTime to play music and video.

Now REALbasic makes it very easy to use Quicktime in your own programs â?? they have a Quicktime player control. Of course if you use it then the user needs to install QuickTime to use the feature, and you can easily check that by doing something like this in the applicationâ??s open event

If Not System.QuickTime.Installed then

... // tell the user that QuickTime needs to be installed to use certain features

else

... // continue as normal

end if

Now complaining about REALbasic not being complete because you have to install QuickTime in order to use QuickTime features is the same as saying websites that use flash or java are incomplete because the user might not have flash or java installed. That is insincere at best and doesnâ??t speak well of his understanding of the most basic principles, but I think it is deliberately misleading as he clearly knows better.

He continues â??Quicktime is very limited so most developers are stuck with paying out more cash to third party plugin developers for additional picture manipulation; or by spending a huge amount of time trying to develop their own (which is more complicated in itself as the projects they wish to utilize inâ??

Now that is simply wrong on two counts: for one thing you do not need QuickTime to manipulate pictures in REALbasic (misleading) and to complain that there are third party plugins that extend the abilities of REALbasic is insincere - there are thousands of plugins for other programming languages too, e.g. Microsoftâ??s VisualBasic (thatâ??s actually one of its biggest strengths, though VisualBasic falls flat on his face in many other regards like its extremely poor support for object oriented design, and of course it canâ??t cross-compile to other platforms). The same is true for many other types of software: think of all the plugins you can get for Firefox, effect plugins for movie editors, plugins for Word (like EndNote) and Excel etc etc (and yes, you have to pay for many of them too â?? not everything is OpenSource or freeware)

One last example (and as I said Iâ??m using the PG rated ones): he writes: â??Some people never learn and continue to buy RB despite warnings of how the company will eventually screw you over one way or another.â?? and then quotes from Aaronâ??s blog about a change to REALbasicâ??s handling of DLLs. A change due to an issue that ONLY appears on WINDOWS and only under certain conditions: for one thing the programmer must use REALbasic plugins, and he must have a naming conflict. No plugins, no problem. If you use a Mac and develop for Macs only â?? no problem. If the plugins use a proper naming scheme â?? no problem. And the only thing that has changed ... is that on WINDOWS instead of a single executable you get a folder with the executable plus DLLs for your plugins (because Windows doesnâ??t use bundles like the Mac does â?? bundles are double-clickable folders which start the application residing inside). So in short REALbasic now uses the standard Windows way on Windows instead of implementing a Mac-like way. This change makes REALbasic Windows programs more stable if plugins are used. Which in my book is a good thing. So you get more stability, and you still donâ??t need to run an installer to use REALbasic programs (invaluable on managed systems). How he can deduce that this is RS â??screwing youâ?? is beyond me.

It is sad, and that he is hiding his comments behind a pseudonym tells a lot about him. Iâ??ve always been of the opinion that you have to stand up for what you believe in, and lets face it â?? heâ??s not facing jail for his comments like Chinese protesters would. Itâ??s a cowards way, snipping and shooting others in the back, and the only reason for him using a pseudonym is that he would be ashamed if he was found out and his name connected to his comments. Which in turn tells me a lot about the worth of his comments and how seriously to take them.

(12) Why do I keep posting and rating?

ithinkiseeascam aka iHitler aka luckyalive say about me â??rating the same product (4.2) over and over again is against the rulesâ??. I only started doing this after he posted about 20 very defamatory one star ratings (nearly all of which have been taken down now by versiontracker), so I think heâ??s a tad insincere here. I would say REALbasic deserves about four stars, but to balance luckyalive a bit I give it five. I also think people should get a fairly balanced view, not the drivel luckyalive is spouting.)

Furthermore I update and extend my previous reviews with new information as it becomes available.

(13) Any more information?

There are some very nice video tutorials geared towards the beginner at http://www.realbasic.tv/ which give a good idea of what using REALbasic is like

(14) What should I do now?

Simple. Download it, try it, and make up your own mind.

No matter what anyone says, whether they have an axe to grind, or have a self-interest in a product, in the end only your own opinion matters.

Reply to this review

Was this review helpful? (0)   (0)  

1 stars

"Bloated Bug Filled Software that Compiles the Same"

December 25, 2011  |  By RottenTomatoes

 |  Version: Real Studio 2011.4.0.0

Pros

None - 98% of my time was for fixing bugs and trying to create workaround for things that did not work due to faults in this product. Faults which I have documented by looking them up on google asopposed to any bad coding on my part.

Cons

In my opinion this product is nothing more than a ponzi scheme. They continually try to lure in new customers and upgraders by:

(a) constantly adding so called new features that often do not work and which add many new bugs of their own.

(b) bug fixes that often have nothing to do with what you are working on and any case fixes which you are forced to pay for by subscription.

(c) making promises about how this and that will be fixed in a future release, but it never is.

Fix the fundamentals and give cusomters what they already paid for!

Summary

Something is not quite right with a lot of the posters here:

1. The poster Monkeybread makes a well known plugin for this product and financially benefits from its sale.

http://www.monkeybreadsoftware.de/realbasic/plugins.shtml

2. The poster Markus Winter directly benefits from its sale also.

If you look at his site (screen shot - I have backups should it be removed):

http://img137.imageshack.us/img137/3194/winterau.jpg

You will see that it includes a Realbasic logo and text indicating that he is part of this company's affiliate program. He even begs you to buy it with the following text:

"If after trying REALbasic you decided to buy it then you can support this site and the software I develop by clicking the image left - it will take you to the REALsoftware store, and as a referrer I get a small percentage. "

And strangely if you've made a realbasic post in a forum that he does not like you will find your ip address listed on http://www.stopforumspam.com as a spam ip so when you try to access his site you will see a blocked ip message into which you have to enter a captcha to see it (unless of course you ar enot using a proxy).

http://img23.imageshack.us/img23/6326/blockbd.jpg

3. So thats at least two posters here who have financial ties to the company making posts here to financially benfit. Apparently some people have not heard of the concept of "conflict of interest".

4. Don't let the bug fix claims fool you into buying it.. In most cases I found the bug fixes have nothing to do with what I am working on, while the company does not bother to fix major issues.

Look at this post from 2001 which complains about a well known bug in the bug filled editfield class of this product:

"EditField inconsistent word wrap
Date: 26.09.01 07:30 (Tue, 25 Sep 2001 23:30:11 -0700)
From: Chris K
I have an EditField with border, multi-line, and scrollbar enabled that
isn't wrapping properly in OS X (it's fine in 9 and it was fine last I
checked on Windows). This problem is in 3.5.1 GM.

The words wrap properly in the IDE when the project is not running, but
if I run the project from the IDE or from a compiled app, the field
sometimes tries to fit an extra word on a line and then cuts of the last
half or so of the last character (I say 'sometimes' because the actual
combination of letters and words makes a difference on whether the wrap
happens properly or not). The problem is exasperated with border turned
off. Interestingly enough, I've seen the problem occur in the 'Edit
Values' dialog of the IDE itself.

After a bit of research I thought about using Doug's WASTEField, but I'm
doing a cross-platform app and I'd rather not add a bunch of platform
checking code to use the native EditField on Windows (and being the
native EditField works fine 9, I'd probably like to use it there as
well). Any thoughts?"

The company president acknowledges it in a followup post:

"Re: EditField inconsistent word wrap
Date: 26.09.01 15:00 (Wed, 26 Sep 2001 07:00:50 -0700)
From: Joseph J. Strout
At 11:30 PM -0700 9/25/01, Chris K wrote:

>I have an EditField with border, multi-line, and scrollbar enabled
>that isn't wrapping properly in OS X (it's fine in 9 and it was fine
>last I checked on Windows). This problem is in 3.5.1 GM.

Yes, we know about this. It's something we hope to fix soon -- I
suggest you join the DR list, keep your eye on those EditFields in
the upcoming alphas.

Cheers,
- Joe "

So now try entering text in a editfield in a version of RB 2007, 6 years later - same problem unfixed. This bug alone is amajor problem because any editfield will display text entirely wrong . For example; a multiline editfield might wrap this particular text like this:

"alter,alterum,ego,ethical self,gentleman,he,herself,himself,hombre,inner
man,inner self"

These lines should consist of two nearly full lines, with the remainder of letters on a 3rd line - the top line should not be cut off. So how would you feel if your current text editor decided to suddenly started wrapping text in unpredictable ways - you would stop using it, yet this company expects its users to build and sell software to customers with faulty interfaces THAT DO NOT BEHAVE like native software.

Just do a google search for realbasic editfield replacements and who will find an endless stream of posts about the defective editfield and how people turned to building their own classes plugins in an attempt to fix it.

5. Their company web site, along with other online resources, has included variations on this phrase:

"Real Software is privately held, privately financed and consistently profitable."

Consistent does not mean all the time, and that would seem to be backed up by posts on their own forum that for financial reasons their main programmer, Aaron Ballman, was let go previously. Yet if we to believe the company sales propaganda that always quotes a large number of users, such as 150,000, we are to believe they are doing great. How many of those 150,000 +/- people are people who upgrade regularly, people who stopped upgrading years ago, got free copies of the product, and so on. Something don't add up here - if you got 150,000 regular upgraders how do you not always make a profit. Lets see, taking the lowest product price of $99 X 150K users equals $14,850,000, although upgrades and subscriptions are actually more - something is fishy here.

Updated on Dec 25, 2011

Note: The cnet forum did not properly format the example text given for an editfield. When viewed in a editfield the following text would be placed on 3 lines. The firt one would would be cut off at the word "ethical", the second at "inner" - thus producing a overly short 1st line. Type in different text and the editfield chops the text improperly again - what you are NOT getting is proper text wrapping utilizing the full width of the editfield. So has this been fixed yet - wow, I still people selling editfield replacements.

"alter,alterum,ego,ethical
self,gentleman,he,herself,himself,hombre,inner
man,inner self"

I am still waiting for fixes for Classic Mac and operating systems 10.4 and before - of wait, the company dropped those Macintosh operating systems - yet they promised to fix this stuff. I'd get a better deal from a used car salesperson - at least I can sell the car for scrap when it does not work.

Updated on Dec 26, 2011

I frankly wonder at the total disconnect some of the posters who post overglowing positive feedback about this product here, yet post negative comments about the product on other web sites. Its as they don't realize people can look elsewhere. Take a look at the example below from the RB NUG hwereas Mr. Winter is critical of the product, which is strange since I thought it was outstanding. What is more strange is that if you Google you can find a lot more complaints. You can also find a lot of posts asking for informaiton that clearly show certain posters are the experts they claim to be.

REALbasic Network Users Group <realbasic-nug@lists.realsoftware.com>
Subject: Re: StaticText vs Label
From: Markus Winter
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2010 17:26:41 +0200

"> I was not very impressed when I noticed the change;

They could just have made LABEL a subclass of STATICTEXT

They could have better spend the time fixing a bug.

Unnecessary and customer-unfriendly."

Updated on Dec 26, 2011

And look at this post - certainly does not sound like the ratings he has given here. Something is wrong here!

REALbasic Network Users Group
Subject: Re: StaticText vs Label
From: Markus Winter
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2010 21:35:11 +0200

"No, StaticText does not work properly, neither in 2007R3 nor in 2010R4.

Nor does MoviePlayer, RTF, Drawer, etc

I might have gotten away with the bugs when my app was free (and mostly used
by Mac users) - now that I want to commercialize it (especially to Win
users) and want people to actually pay for it a higher level of quality is
expected and the bugs are really hampering what I can do.

I'm railing because instead of fixing the longstanding bugs RS wastes its
time on a pointless name change which just creates even more problems."

Reply to this review Read reply (1)

Was this review helpful? (1)   (2)  

4 stars

"Mac Win &#38; Linux desktop &#38; web app development made easy"

April 30, 2011  |  By Sh3ppard

 |  Version: Real Studio 2011.1.1.0

Pros

Rapid software development for Mac OS X, Windows, and Linux operating systems for both desktop applications and CGI web applications while only using one programming language!
Excellent support on free web forum & mailing list by staff & developers.

Cons

Too many bugs which slow down development.
No guarantee of bugs you need fixed will get fixed.
Poor documentation.
Can't file bug reports if your subscription has run out.
When subscription runs out, you may get stuck with buggy versions.

Summary

REAL Studio offers you a quick and easy way to develop software for Mac OS X, Windows and Linux desktop applications and CGI based web apps while only needing to learn one easy programming language -REALbasic. REALbasic the language is a well thought out object orientated modern version of the BASIC programming language. By design REALbasic shields you from having to deal with the complexity of each operating system's API toolboxes while still providing their functionality. It uses it's built in framework, dot notation and object orientation to simplify and expedite your software development, and it works!


Compatible with your needs:
REAL Software offers different versions of REAL Studio with different price points to fit your developmental needs and budget. REAL Studio also offers upgrades to your version's license in the event your development needs grow. While being subscription based REAL Software doesn't require you to be always be up to date with your subscription for you to build and distribute your projects as you desire. Once you have purchased REAL Studio you are allowed to develop and distribute as many applications as you want however you want -for sale, shareware, etc. without ever needing to renew your subscription if you don't want to. REAL Software does not collect any royalties on your sales and they do not control or own any rights to your projects. If you later decide to renew your license REAL Software allows you to do so at a discounted price less than a new purchase. You can let months and even years pass and still renew for less than a new purchase, excellent!


No software development product is perfect and unfortunately this includes REAL Studio:

I have few complaints about REAL Studio but I feel the bugs are the biggest problems. There are too many. I feel REAL Software should do more to fix them and that they need to do better testing before they release each version of REAL Studio. I also think that customers should be given extentions on their subscriptions when they have been sold very buggy versions. Nobody should get stuck with buggy versions as this severly reduces the usefulness of REAL Studio and often creates very time consuming and costly problems for the developer.


Being able to develop faster with REAL Studio (than other languages) for multiple operating systems is a real bonus and makes it worth the price.

If you're an experienced software developer or if you have an interest in learning software development REAL Studio has many advantages to offer you. The only true way to realize these benefits is for you to download and try the free 30 day demo offered by REAL Software, no credit card required!

Whatcha waiting for?

GIVE IT A TRY:
http://www.realsoftware.com/download/

Reply to this review

Was this review helpful? (0)   (0)  

5 stars

"Excellent Cross-Platform Software Solution"

April 30, 2011  |  By jason_adams

 |  Version: Real Studio 2011.1.1.0

Pros

- Easy to learn
- Powerful, simple language
- Single code source for Win / Mac / Linux builds
- Decent price for various levels of use
- Awesome user base forums with massive activity
- Effortless to pick up, learn, and improve

Cons

It does have bugs, like any compiler. But very rarely are they game-breaking, and RS is constantly releasing new versions (usually 4-5 times per year) to fix reported bugs.

Summary

In the end Real Studio is an excellent cross-platform solution for anyone from hobbyist to professional looking for a great way to develop software. Honestly, even if it's only for a single platform, it's such a great way to develop software that I would buy the Standard (single-platform) licence (which is definitely affordable) and use it for that platform. Compared to alternative software compilers, it's the easiest to pick up and go with, and can accomplish the vast majority of projects.

The language is a BASIC form, but don't let the name demean the product. It's truly a powerful language, fully object-oriented and event driven. There are excellent plugins out there to greatly expand the capability of the language, and if further platform-specific capabilities are needed the OS library can be accessed. This is generally for more advanced users, so beginners don't need to worry about it but experts have it if they want it.

So my recommendation? Download it and give it a shot. The 30 day trial is more than enough time to get acquainted with the IDE and language. Also, during this time, join the forums and ask questions-the user base is large, active, and helpful. See you there!

Reply to this review

Was this review helpful? (0)   (0)  

4 stars

"Easy to use &#38; Cross platfrom"

April 30, 2011  |  By alesvs

 |  Version: Real Studio 2011.1.1.0

Pros

- simple GUI
- cross platform compiler
- many features
- helpful community

Cons

- some annoying bugs
- some important features lacking
- still quite small community, but growing

Summary

Perfect for anyone looking for a RAD tool that compiles cross platform.

Reply to this review

Was this review helpful? (0)   (0)  

5 stars

"Best Development Tool For Producing Cross Platform Apps"

April 26, 2011  |  By KnightliteSoftware

 |  Version: Real Studio 2011.1.1.0

Pros

Ability to write powerful, professional, & aesthetically pleasing cross platform applications from a single source file, using a language that is easy to use & to understand. On-line forum of developers, who are always willing to help.

Cons

There has never been an application written that could not be improved, and that is why Real Software releases several updates throughout the year. They are constantly striving to improve their products.

Summary

I started in 1996 with VB 3.0., then switch later to VB 6.0. When 64 bit Windows came into use, I realized I had to make the jump to Visual Basic.Net. and would have to rewrite my apps from the ground up. Aside from the learning curve, in order to get any of my software to work, my customers would have to first download a 200 MB .Net framework file and 100 MB for the sql server. That was just ridicules. At the same time I was keeping my eye on the growth of Mac OSX, and many customers were asking for my software on that platform. I had to do something quick or go out of business.

Real Studio saved the day. I could write cross platform applications that would work on both 64 bit Windows machines and on the Mac, without having to write two sets of code. The code will also work on Linux. I could take my programing skills learned from Visual Basic and immediately apply them to Real Studio. In only two short months my customers were beta testing my new apps written with Real Studio.

The software is extremely intuitive. Everything is right in front of you. The Controls pane is on the left hand side of the screen. Properties are easily accessible from the Properties pane on the right hand side of the screen. The Window editing area sits right in the middle. If you need a button, drag it from the Controls pane on to the Window editing area. Double-click on the button and add your code. The Code windows and Window Editing areas are conveniently accessible from tabs on the Tabs bar. You can easily toggle back and forth from your window right to your code.

The projects compile to a nice neat folder. There are no dll horrors or installing controls to the Windows System folder. There were no .Net headaches or huge files for the customer to download. On the Mac there was no need to learn Objective C, or XCode. Everything was done with Real Software.

I cannot stress enough that providing a great developing tool is one thing, but offering a way for developers to quickly get help is extremely important to me. The Real Software user forums are terrific. You can post a question on the forum and you get an answer back in literally minutes, not hours, and not days. It is a friendly community of developers who are kind enough to share their expertise with those who are just starting out. The forum also provides a rich reference library that is fully searchable.

Now with the ability to write Web Applications using the same easy-to-learn source code, Real Software offers a whole new opportunity for developers who can take their source code written for Windows, the Mac, and Linux and effortlessly port this code to a web application. You can write web apps that will work on the iPhone, Android, iPad and other wireless devices.

If you want an easy-to-use development tool for quickly creating stable cross platform applications for Windows, Mac OSX, Linux, and the Web, Real Software is the application you need. I really enjoy using this product and look forward to more enhancements in the future.

Reply to this review

Was this review helpful? (0)   (0)  

3 stars

"Well working always improving cross OS development tool"

April 23, 2011  |  By Octopus_10x8

 |  Version: Real Studio 2011.1.1.0

Pros

Covering Mac, Linux and Windows and being a very mature RAD tool it creates really working applications in one single piece of executable. One could test its abilities before buying a version best matching own needs.

Cons

To finally cover several OSs there is a need to buy at least a mid-priced professional version. The few books on RB do not reflect all changes of the living RB language. Its abilities seem to grow faster than the eliminating of its few bugs proceeds.

Summary

Real Studio (REALbasic) supplies its users with the ability to create three OS covering applications from smaller up to higher complexity without the need to dive too deeply into the special features of the different operating systems. It avoids the need of bundling a lot of libraries beside of the final application, what other multi OS tools mostly do. The existing RB documentation already is helping a lot, but some more recent books on Real Studio (REALbasic) would help even more to detect all of its abilities and to make use of it.

Reply to this review

Was this review helpful? (0)   (0)  

5 stars

"Best RAD tool for MAC OSX that I have found"

April 23, 2011  |  By Dave_Sisemore

 |  Version: Real Studio 2011.1.1.0

Pros

Very powerful language tools, ability to create stable native applications, easy to learn, but not "basic", much much more than that. Great Object Oriented Programming (OOP) implementation (far easier than VB.NET, and just as powerful)

Cons

Documenation is complete, but with current version difficult to search due to their decision to switch from a searchable PDF to a wiki type format.

Summary

I have been using Realstudio since 2005, after switching from Windows to the Mac, and overall the experience has been quite positive. Their online forum is a fantastic source of help and information. And I would reccomend this product to anyone who is looking for a Rapid Application Development (RAD) too.

Reply to this review

Was this review helpful? (0)   (0)  

5 stars

"Build Web apps, Mac OS X apps, Windows apps with ease!"

April 19, 2011  |  By polarbear2011

 |  Version: Real Studio 2011.1.0.0

Pros

True cross platform application development, Rapid Application Development environment, minimum time to market including application templating, design, develop, and deploy Web Applications using Real Studio. Very easy to learn.

Cons

With the pricing being reasonable according to the deployment option(s) you need, and with the Australian Dollar being so strong I can't even complain about the cost! So, no Cons here, just value for money.

Summary

A mature and rich feature development environment combined with excellent technical support from Real Software and the amazing community at large of developers, means that Real Studio has come of age - and at just the right time. Saving time and money by designing, developing, and deploying to Mac OS X, Windows, Linux and Web Apps means smart business sense. Offering a 30-Day trial means you actually have time to evaluate the product. I can't wait to see what's around the corner for Real Studio?!

Reply to this review

Was this review helpful? (0)   (0)  

1 stars

"To many bugs!"

April 19, 2011  |  By NoAscii

 |  Version: Real Studio 2011.1.0.0

Pros

Easy to use.

Cons

To many bugs and limited controls like HTML Viewer, TextArea, Drawer Windows, Composite Windows .. ..

Summary

Coding for Mac .... Use Xcode

Reply to this review

Was this review helpful? (0)   (0)  

4 stars

"Great cross-platform OOP &#38; RAD environment."

April 19, 2011  |  By RicounetDlr

 |  Version: Real Studio 2011.1.0.0

Pros

Web applications and desktop app sharing almost the same code. Easy to use, fast learning curve and yet very powerful language. Proprietary bug report system called 'Feedback'. Real X-platform.

Cons

Even if the documentation is now in the form of a wiki, there still is a lot of room for improvements.

Summary

Try it !!! Web applications can share the same code as your desktop app if you dissociated your core functionality from the user interface. In this case you just need to write ( not rewrite ! ) the web interface and reuse your core framework as is.

Reply to this review

Was this review helpful? (0)   (1)  

Results 1–11 of 49

Add Your Review

Login or create an account to post a review.

You are logged in as . Please submit your review for REAL Studio
Add Your Review

The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited.
Click here to review our site terms of use.

Update Your Review

Since you've already submitted a review for this product, this submission will be added as an update to your original review.
Submit

The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited.
Click here to review our site terms of use.

 
see all reviews +

Full Specifications

+
What's new in version 2010.3.0
  • LLVM for RBScript: RBScripts now run up to 17 times faster than in previous releases. Using LLVM for RBScript is the first step towards the adoption of LLVM for building applications in REAL Studio.
  • Cocoa (Beta): The option to build for Cocoa is now available, but is at the beta stage. There are some new features for Cocoa builds, such as Pushbutton now has a ButtonStyle property that gives access to nine new styles of pushbuttons.
  • Documentation: The REAL Studio documentation is now locally stored and the user can choose between viewing the local version or the online documentation, http://docs.realsoftware.com.
  • Reporting Improvements: To make reporting easier, reports can now take a RecordSet directly to report upon.
  • Database Improvements: ODBC and REALSQLDatabase queries and updates no longer block the other threads while they are executing. This allows users to make their user interface more responsive.
  • Graphics Improvements: All of the graphics classes are now supported in Console applications. Also, pictures can now be copied to and from MemoryBlocks using a variety of picture file formats. Since memoryblocks can be transformed into strings, this allows the user to store pictures without having to write them to the disk first.
  • XML Classes: The XML classes have been updated to use libxml2, a modern, well-maintained XML library.
General
Publisher Real Software
Publisher web site http://www.realsoftware.com
Release Date July 27, 2010
Date Added July 27, 2010
Version 2010.3.0
Category
Category Developer Tools
Subcategory Coding Utilities
Operating Systems
Operating Systems Mac OS X 10.4 Intel/PPC, Mac OS X 10.5 Intel/PPC
Additional Requirements None
Download Information
File Size 175.79MB
File Name RealStudio2012r21.dmg
Popularity
Total Downloads 5,273
Downloads Last Week 60
Pricing
License Model Update
Limitations Not available
Price $99

Previous Versions:

Add to my list Report a problem
 
read more +

More Products to Consider

Close[x]

Submit a problem report for REAL Studio

Please describe the problem you have with this software. This information will be sent to our editors for review.

Problem:

The Download.com Installer isn't working as expected

The download link does not work

The software has a newer version

The product contains malicious software

Other

Description:

Please select a feedback type.

Please enter a description.

Submit Problem Report

Close[x]

Problem Report submitted

Thank you for submitting a problem report! The Download team is committed to providing you with accurate software information.

OK