|
Post by carlgundel on Jan 5, 2008 9:56:19 GMT -5
Please respond with your thoughts! ;D
-Carl
|
|
|
Post by borstensohn on Jan 5, 2008 10:57:36 GMT -5
Ah, thanks for the quick reply, but in the meantime I had already deleted my post, because I thought it was not so clear what I meant.
Anyway, I think either I need an application that runs on an end user's machine. For that purpose I would normally use a programming language like, say, a modern BASIC language - or I want a web application, then I would use PHP, Perl, Python or whatever.
Run BASIC seems to be a mixture from both. And forgive my bad imagination, but I cannot imagine which kind of applications could be built with Run BASIC. Per example, can I create peer-to-peer applications? As I remember, in Liberty Basic that wasn't easy.
And please, forgive my skepticness (and my weak English, too)!
|
|
|
Post by borstensohn on Jan 5, 2008 11:07:48 GMT -5
To explain in short my skepticism:
I guess most providers do not allow to install executable programs on their servers, so I don't see a reason for a programming language which you can create web applications with, which won't be able to run on the web.
|
|
|
Post by carlgundel on Jan 5, 2008 11:27:10 GMT -5
Ah, thanks for the quick reply, but in the meantime I had already deleted my post, because I thought it was not so clear what I meant. LOL. When you deleted your post, I deleted my reply to it. What makes these systems better than Run BASIC? They're popular? They would have to be more popular than Run BASIC since they've been around a lot longer. You are right that it is a mixture of both, and that is its special feature. You can write a web app without dealing with the complexities of web programming. Anyone can write a web app with Run BASIC without needing to learn and manage Apache, Perl, databases, etc. The same kinds of application you build with Perl, PHP, Python, Java server pages, etc. but much easier. Build blog apps, games, bug trackers, quotation systems, forums, or whatever your imagination can think of. If you can't think of one now, remember Run BASIC the next time you have an idea for a web app. Peer to peer? Sorry, no. Run BASIC is a web app system, and it doesn't have socket support, at least not yet. No problem. Thanks for posting! -Carl
|
|
|
Post by carlgundel on Jan 5, 2008 11:31:30 GMT -5
To explain in short my skepticism: I guess most providers do not allow to install executable programs on their servers, so I don't see a reason for a programming language which you can create web applications with, which won't be able to run on the web. Some providers do allow custom software, especially since you can easily provide virtualized PCs for people to run whatever they like (for example Amazon's EC2). Also, more and more people run web servers out of their homes (me and some friends were doing it ten years ago over a dialup connection), and pretty soon this will be commonplace. -Carl
|
|
|
Post by billw on Jan 5, 2008 13:05:50 GMT -5
I like how easy it is to get an application up and running. With database applications, it's as easy as setting up a database with some sample data, writing some simple queries, and RENDERing them. That sort of thing is much more difficult to do in PHP, and even then, there's very little code recycling. Continuing on with that theme, now it's much easier to set up one's own web server. Combine XAMPP (google it), Run BASIC, and a Dynamic DNS client, and you've got your very own web hosting. Registering your own domain and using it with that isn't that expensive. For hobbyists, Run BASIC spells the death of web hosting as a necessity. Did I mention Run BASIC is a heck of a lot more fun than PHP, ASP.NET, Perl, Python, or Rails coding?
|
|
|
Post by johnk1 on Jan 5, 2008 13:13:47 GMT -5
Tested several web servers last nite, all worked and were very easy as they autohosted whatever you wanted to put up, only one required an external domain name, DNS and recommended was same as here the Dyn" " one.
Like the idea of using basic to program (craft/style) a page myself, this suppose to be the date so I'm anxiously awaiting.
John
|
|