Talk:PowerBASIC: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 15:49, 25 April 2008

Latest revision as of 17:43, 6 December 2024

(99 intermediate revisions by 23 users not shown)

Line 1:

{{WikiProject banner shell|class=C|1=

==Advertisment==

{{WikiProject Computing |importance=Low}}

this page looks more like an advertisment than a real article. especially the characteristics section. alomsot like assembler? i would like to see some serious data before i believe this. --[[User:80.140.173.115|80.140.173.115]] 00:24, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

}}

: What can you see as advertising in this material? All characteristics are almost correct! It is a compiled language (not interpreted), its programs don't need external RTL (actually, a very small RTL is packed in any PowerBASIC program, its size depends on used WIN32 API functions and so on, it is not an all-pupose RTL). It produces programs that are REALLY compact and rather fast. It is NOT an assembler of couse, but one can use inline asm to improve programs speed. And PowerBASIC is really able to give free access to the third party DLL; a good example you can see provided with distribution of RMChart DLL. (Sorry for my bad English). <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:195.19.226.194|195.19.226.194]] ([[User talk:195.19.226.194|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/195.19.226.194|contribs]]) 07:33, 19 December 2006 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned2 -->

{{Archive box| [[Talk:PowerBASIC/Archive 1|Archive 1]] <small>(August 2006—April 2008)</small> }}

__TOC__

== UnambiguousProgramming expressions?Language ==

I created the Programming Language section in hopes that it can be filled out by the community and on a latter date be moved to create a "PowerBASIC the programming language" Wikipedia page. --[[User:Cory Marshall|Cory Marshall]] ([[User talk:Cory Marshall|talk]]) 07:20, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

:Cory, what structure do you have in mind for this section? Presumably the structure would be consistent with your proposed new page. That would help people to know where/in what form to contribute. --[[User:ChrisHolbrook|ChrisHolbrook]] ([[User talk:ChrisHolbrook|talk]]) 08:20, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

::This turned out to be allot harder question to answer then i thought. After checking-out a [[smalltalk]], [[objective-c]], [[c++]], and [[Java (programming language)]] I got even more confused, however i did notice some similarities. They have a History section with some type of principles/philosophy, syntax, standard library, and a criticism section. Given the advancements in the language additional sections covering the DDT, GRAPHIC, etc. could also be included. --[[User:Cory Marshall|Cory Marshall]] ([[User talk:Cory Marshall|talk]]) 07:43, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

:What about a WIkibook project? [[User:Poetcsw|Poetcsw]] ([[User talk:Poetcsw|talk]]) 02:54, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

== Propose removing the unsourced sections ==

>>"The compilers' parsing of mathematical expressions is very unambiguous, while in other languages it can involve some guess-work to determine how formulas will be interpreted by the compiler."

At present the article reads like an advertisement, and there is not much reflection on the quality of PowerBASIC by outsiders, except for the two book references that were added recently. The tone of the article would be improved, in my opinion, if the unsourced sections were removed:

*Notable language features

That's just nonsense. If you have to guess, then it's because you don't know the language. Properly formed expressions aren't ambiguous. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Molar999|Molar999]] ([[User talk:Molar999|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Molar999|contribs]]) 04:37, 28 November 2006 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned2 -->

*Syntax

*PowerBASIC history

In the Reference section, I suggest removing Gerald Krug's book, which is available from Lulu, a self-publishing company. Per [[WP:SPS]] self-published material shouldn't be used as a reference for any matters of fact. I suggest removing Rick Knoblaugh's review in PC Magazine. Since no publication date is provided, the review can't be looked up for purposes of verification. Please let me have your comments on these changes. [[User:EdJohnston|EdJohnston]] ([[User talk:EdJohnston|talk]]) 02:13, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

== ... ==

:I go with that. I ''think'' I have the PC Magazine ref tracked: this Russian site [http://www.microprocessor.sscc.ru/comphist/compref.txt] says Volume 12 Number 16 is Sep 28 1993, which is the issue cited [http://www.powerbasic.com/products/pbdos/ here] as the Editor's Choice review. But that connection is really WP:SYNTH and an explicit citation is needed. [[User:Gordonofcartoon|Gordonofcartoon]] ([[User talk:Gordonofcartoon|talk]]) 02:45, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

someone please fix the article with NPOV relevent info? since when did wikipedia become a soapbox for advertising <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:74.134.248.200|74.134.248.200]] ([[User talk:74.134.248.200|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/74.134.248.200|contribs]]) 07:06, 11 January 2007 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned2 -->

::Approve what Ed said. I think its fair to remove them. Ive been bold and removed stuff as above. [[User:Five Years|Five]] [[User talk:Five Years|Years]] 03:10, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

: The concerns raised previously have been addressed and checked for a NPOV. Comments are welcomed. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:67.17.204.214|67.17.204.214]] ([[User talk:67.17.204.214|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/67.17.204.214|contribs]]) 13:00, 22 May 2007 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned2 -->

::Given that ''Five Years'' is the personal mentor of ''Real World Experience'', I guess this sort of behavior should be expected.[[User:PowerCoder|PowerCoder]] ([[User talk:PowerCoder|talk]]) 09:32, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

::In that case, the same standards should be applied to the Microsoft Visual Basic article - and a few others - Correct? [[User:PowerCoder|PowerCoder]] ([[User talk:PowerCoder|talk]]) 09:50, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

:::[[WP:AGF]] - since others think the same, there's no reason to assume any inappropriate motive. (I agree, though, that programming language articles are often poorly sourced - but we can't fix everything at once). [[User:Gordonofcartoon|Gordonofcartoon]] ([[User talk:Gordonofcartoon|talk]]) 12:27, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

== Suggestion for improved description of the capacity of the PowerBASIC dialect of basic. ==

== I find it valuable ==

I have just finished reading this extended "Talk" page and notice that a reasonable amount of polemic has been posted over time about the language and its capacity by persons who appear to be hostile to PowerBASIC and its product range.

First I am not an employee of PowerBASIC Inc. and I have no financial or commercial connection to the company apart from being a paying customer who has bought and used their products for over 10 years. I regularly use the language for non-critical code ad this often includes low level code within the published Microsoft Windows API functions and direct Intel mnemonic code (assembler).

I find the article valuable. I'm not a PowerBasic customer but I rely on WikiPedia to provide straight information on a variety of technologies such as Microsoft's Windows, Microsoft's Visual Basic, PowerBasic, RealBasic, Java and so on. The value of Wikipedia would be diminished greatly if you rejected an informative article like this one. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/67.103.41.146|67.103.41.146]] ([[User talk:67.103.41.146|talk]]) 17:40, 1 February 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

The suggestion is to produce a list of proven verifiable characteristics of the language so that the Wikipedia reader can be more properly informed about the PowerBASIC dialects of basic. Note that my suggestion is current only to the last version of the PowerBASIC compilers, versions 8.04 and the matching console compiler. The following list is a bare outline of capacities that are directly verifiable.

==COI==

* 1. The language is backward compatible to the line number form of basic, even though it is not a recommended style of coding.

Note that [[User:67.17.204.214]], a major contributor to the article, is an IP address that traces back to PowerBasic -[[User:Halo|Halo]] ([[User talk:Halo|talk]]) 18:18, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

* 2. The language properly impliments the command and function runtime components of legacy basic.

: I agree that some of the recent edits Halo reverted were fluffy; so, thanks. [[User:PeterStJohn|Pete St.John]] ([[User talk:PeterStJohn|talk]]) 17:23, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

* 3. The language has a substantial number of extensions to legacy basic in a wide range of different capacities.

:: man Halo you have your work cut out for you. [[User:PeterStJohn|Pete St.John]] ([[User talk:PeterStJohn|talk]]) 17:18, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

* 4. The language is routinely capable of using the full range of Windows API functions.

* 5. The language has an industry standard Intel notation inline assembler.

* 6. Late versions of the language support at least a number of COM and OOP capacities.

The later capacity of COM and OOP should be properly addressed by people who have more experience in that area as I don't use that capacity in my own code.

* Meanwhile I've been putting notes on the (new) talk pages of IPs contributing. If they are ''aware'' that there is a discussion they may participate, and together we may post good information in a neutral way. [[User:PeterStJohn|Pete St.John]] ([[User talk:PeterStJohn|talk]]) 19:22, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

My primary programming language is 32 bit Microsoft Assembler and on that basis I am willing to argue that the PowerBASIC dialects of basic have easily verifiable capacity in writing low level code. I will not edit the page as any suggestions of this type should be addressed by people who have proven experience using the language and here I suggest either the Vendor or some of his staff members.

:: Note that [[Special:Contributions/67.17.204.214|67.17.204.214]] identified himself ([http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:RealWorldExperience&diff=prev&oldid=198007072 diff]) as "Tim Robbins PowerBASIC Inc." — [[User:Athaenara|Athaenara]] [[User talk:Athaenara| ✉ ]] 00:39, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Steve Hutchesson

===Factual Information===

hutch at movsd dot com

[[User:Hutch48|Hutch48]] ([[User talk:Hutch48|talk]]) 04:57, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

1- Are you saying it's "fluffy" to mention a "peer-to-peer" user forum? If so, why is this standard only applied to PowerBASIC? Virtually every vendor of programming languages has a link to their user forums on their Wikipedia page. Why is it that you only destroy PowerBASIC links, and not the others? Why is it done over and over? <small>[posted by [[Special:Contributions/71.100.238.224|71.100.238.224]] 18:48, 9 March 2008 (UTC)]</small>

: I'm here, and not everywhere, because of the self-promotion notification. What we hope is that the hostilities subsume as the promoters of a subject/product, who are often honest fans, come to respect the wiki's standards for NPOV and no-self-promotion and no-advertising. I'm not against PowerBasic; Borland provided historic alternatives. The issue is saying too much, too broadly; keeping to dry facts with a neutral tone. We want the article to be neutral and balanced and not read like an advertisement for a commercial product; much of that is merely stylistic. If you keep to single ammendations of dry fact supported by references we'll all be happy; but if you copy in too much of the product's website, or equivalent, people will react as I did. It's simply easier to revert a paragraph if the tone is promotional, than to re-edit it for you, picking out the acceptable parts. You will be more effective improving this article if you do one definite supportable point at a time. [[User:PeterStJohn|Pete St.John]] ([[User talk:PeterStJohn|talk]]) 20:19, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

== Improving the Article ==

2- Are you saying it's inappropriate to provide compatibility information? At one point, PowerBASIC had a succinct and accurate list of the operating systems supported. That information has been repeatedly destroyed, and replaced with obvious misinformation. Why do you demean the person who corrects the error? The correct terms "Win95, Win98, WinME..." were replaced with a wholly incorrect single term "95 onward". At a minimum, it should have said "Windows 95" or "Win95". However, even more egregious is the suggestion that PowerBASIC does not support WinNT (which it does). WinNT preceded Win95 by years, so the erroneous line is blatantly wrong. WinME is a common problem to many vendors, because of the well-known stability issues. Even further, why was WinVista and Win2008 removed? Many software products are still, to this day, incompatible with these latest OS's, but one may not realize it because their data sheets were constructed before the coming of this latest event. How is a reader to understand compatibility if it is not listed? <small>[posted by [[Special:Contributions/71.100.238.224|71.100.238.224]] 18:48, 9 March 2008 (UTC)]</small>

:It's just bloat to replace "Win95 onward" with "Win 95, Win 98, Win NT 1, Win NT 2, ..." If people want compatibility specifics they can go to the product's website (which is why linking in wiki can be beneficial to an enterprise, without overstepping advertising). The article is not a spec-sheet. I agree that "95" should be "Win95". You might consider "Win 95 onwards, excepting Win ME, and MS Vista is in beta" or something like that. We want a sentence, not a spec sheet. PowerBASIC isn't that big. [[User:PeterStJohn|Pete St.John]] ([[User talk:PeterStJohn|talk]]) 20:19, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree, this article is an advertisement and needs to provide more complete information. I believe it is essential to add information about the [http://groups.google.com/group/alt.lang.powerbasic/browse_thread/thread/e1a056169a01cb21# controversy] surrounding the treatment of customers of powerbasic. Many have been banned, including myself, and ''possibly defamatory statement redacted per WP:BLP by Gordonofcartoon''. There are also many issues with the language that are not mentioned and need to be covered.

3- Why is it necessary to use the word "commercial" repeatedly. Isn't a single use, in the first sentence, more than enough? I understand you may be a proponent of open-source software, and that's perfectly acceptable. But such repetition helps nobody. It just pounds the reader. over and over, with what some people feel is a negative term. <small>[posted by [[Special:Contributions/71.100.238.224|71.100.238.224]] 18:48, 9 March 2008 (UTC)]</small>

: I'd agree. My revert may have been too wholesale; but you can beat that, by making one change at a time, and rebut any disagreement one topic at a time. [[User:PeterStJohn|Pete St.John]] ([[User talk:PeterStJohn|talk]]) 20:19, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

I would like to add a section in the article to this effect. Feedback is welcome.

4- Why is it necessary to characterize PowerBASIC FORMS negatively because it's an add-on product? There are 2 possible reasons it's an add-on:

[[User:MikeTrader|MikeTrader]] ([[User talk:MikeTrader|talk]]) 19:16, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

4A- It's an attempt by the publisher to maximize revenue by overcharging the customer.

:''I believe it is essential to add information about the controversy surrounding the treatment of customers of powerbasic.''

:Is it mentioned in any source that's reliable per [[WP:V]]? Stuff collected from a forum isn't usable -and please will you stop posting possibly defamatory statements. See [[WP:GREATWRONGS]]; Wikipedia isn't a venue for telling the world about some company's misdeeds. [[User:Gordonofcartoon|Gordonofcartoon]] ([[User talk:Gordonofcartoon|talk]]) 12:46, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you again for your feedback. There are many examples on Wikipedia of such information. I will research and find some to quote. Again, this is the DICUSSION area. In my opinion, and that of at least one other, this article is an advertisment. I would like to discuss this further. I understand the information in the forums cannot be used a source for the article, but it is relevant as a base for discussion for inclusion.

4B- It's an attempt by the publisher to only charge the customer for the features they choose to purchase.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enterprise_JavaBean Here is an example]. "Some developers felt that the APIs of the EJB standard were far more complex than those developers were used to. An abundance of checked exceptions, required interfaces, and the implementation of the bean class as an abstract class were all unusual and counter-intuitive for many programmers."

The answer can only be determined by an in-depth study of the value provided for the purchase price. However, since PowerBASIC gives free advertising space to competitors of PowerBASIC FORMS, I lean very strongly towards 4B. Yes, that's correct, they give absolutely FREE advertising space to visual designer competitors on their web site. <small>[posted by [[Special:Contributions/71.100.238.224|71.100.238.224]] 18:48, 9 March 2008 (UTC)]</small>

While this is disputed (and appropriately marked as such), it is very valid background and in the main article. As someone researching this, I now have more information.

: Every product has deals and features. We just don't want to advertise. The article on Wendy's doesn't mention the current sale item. But again, it's mostly a matter of tone. [[User:PeterStJohn|Pete St.John]] ([[User talk:PeterStJohn|talk]]) 20:19, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

This article would benefit from content like this especially when the owner of powerbasic is frequently making statements like [http://groups.google.com/group/alt.lang.powerbasic/browse_thread/thread/819543e242f71b6c# these] and there are numerous userbase [http://newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Archive/Comp/comp.lang.basic.powerbasic/2008-02/msg00008.html issues]. Your continued whitewash of this article and even valid contributions to this discussion leave serious doubt about your neutrality. Perhaps you should step aside and allow another senior member to manage this article.

I could ask many more tough questions about the treatment PowerBASIC has received here, but I'll try very hard to keep it at a businesslike level. I'll just look forward to hearing your response to the above questions?

[[User:MikeTrader|MikeTrader]] ([[User talk:MikeTrader|talk]]) 20:00, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

By the way, I notice you consider yourself an "Expert C Programmer". You should certainly be very proud of that accomplishment -- but do you suppose it's had an affect on your attitude towards a lowly BASIC compiler which outperforms most C products? <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/71.100.238.224|71.100.238.224]] ([[User talk:I|talk]]) 18:48, 9 March 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:I agree here, Bob Zale was a brilliant programmer, under each level as a businessman, and an asshole as a person! --[[Special:Contributions/193.83.133.228|193.83.133.228]] ([[User talk:193.83.133.228|talk]]) 11:22, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

: Most of my work currently is in MSVB-- a fine product for slapping together UIs quickly on the MS platform. I despise MS for it's monopolism, however. I'm told by some beowulf programmers that various versions of FORTRAN are competitively efficient, but it's not a very expressive medium for me. Java is very expressive and I'm told that the overhead of the VM is much reduced. LISP has fixed some efficiency issues (mainly on account of past reliance on special hardware) and is definitely more expressive than C for many important things. No version of BASIC is where I would think to look for max efficiency, but it's certainly good that new versions are more efficient for the people who are using it (usually for other reasons, e.g. installed code-base). People who use ''emacs'' instead of ''vi'' are, in fact, putrid scum, but I'm definitely not religious about languages :-) Incidentally, please consider creating an account, it facilitates dialog and as a practical matter you'l tend to be taken more seriously. [[User:PeterStJohn|Pete St.John]] ([[User talk:PeterStJohn|talk]]) 20:19, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

== External Links ==

===Edit Verification===

Not list on page

* [http://www.movsd.com/pbdll.htm Hutch’s PowerBASIC Tools]

* [http://www.ifxgroup.net/pb-code.htm IFX Group PowerBASIC Source Code]

* [http://www.davar.net/PC/PBASIC/PBASIC.HTM Davar PowerBASIC routines]

* [http://www.angelfire.com/wy/samri/programming/basic Sam’s PowerBASIC programs]

* [http://www.garybeene.com/sw/gbsnippets.htm Gary Beene’s gbSnippets]

* [http://www.xs4all.nl/~rokremer/english.htm René Kremer’s PowerBASIC code]

* [http://www.wizardanswers.com/software/pbsource.html John E. Carter’s PowerBASIC code]

* [http://www.personal.uni-jena.de/~p6sepa/pbmix.htm Robert Seidel’s DOS code]

* [http://www.xlsior.org/index.html?code/pb.Marc van den Dikkenberg’s PowerBASIC code]

* [http://www.bmeworld.com/shannon/tools/index.html Shannon’s Tools]

External Link but No Third Party Discription

To meet the requirements of the Wikipedia verification policy, I am quoting the sources for the edits made to the Powebasic page.

* [http://www.reonis.com/POFFS/ Börje Hagsten’s Files]

* [http://www.greatwebdivide.com/code.htm Don Dickinson’s PowerBASIC code]

On the wiki page with External Links and Third Part Description

[http://www.powerbasic.com/support/pbforums/showthread.php?t=35407 returning DWORD in FPU]

* [http://www.powerbasic.com PowerBASIC company website]

* [http://www.powerbasic.com/support/pbforums/index.php PowerBasic Support Forums]

* [http://www.jose.it-berater.org/index.html José Roca Software]

[http://www.powerbasic.com/support/pbforums/showthread.php?t=35375 Official reply]

Note: Adding more than one link to the Wikipedia article may result in Wikipedia's XLinkBot deleting all the added links. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:MarkHunterPB|MarkHunterPB]] ([[User talk:MarkHunterPB|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/MarkHunterPB|contribs]]) 23:08, 1 January 2011 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

[http://www.powerbasic.com/support/forums/Archives/Archive-000003/HTML/20000801-4-000465.html Deleted Thread]

I've now spent some time tracking down the source of the inconsistency

between PB's DWORDs and the unsigned long integers stipulated in much C

code. It centers on PB's DWORDs and their behavior when their value

exceeds DWORD maximum (0FFFFFFFFh). Their value does not necessarily

wrap beyond zero; instead, it's often truncated at zero. Although I

suspected that something like this was occurring, actually spotting

this behavior took some time because simply incrementing a DWORD to

maximum, and then beyond maximum, causes its value to wrap as expected

(to zero, then one, then two, and so on). However, the following code

shows the truncation occurring:

:I'v created a Third Party section to make it easier to list the external sites and to eventual move the external links to there own legitimate Wikipedia pages. --[[User:Cory Marshall|Cory Marshall]] ([[User talk:Cory Marshall|talk]]) 12:41, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

x??? = &hE1DDA73Cx2??? = (x??? * x???)

This operation leaves x2??? = 0.

== [[Turbo Basic]] merge into [[PowerBASIC]] proposal ==

Such behavior becomes a problem when an algorithm relies on values

wrapping, and that's exactly what's expected in many cryptographic and

hashing algorithms. This is how I stumbled across the behavior. It's

also why most programmers probably never have a problem with PB's

DWORDs: They want to avoid overloading a variable and thus rely on the

DWORD's big capacity. I also must stress that I've never noted

anything odd about PB's DWORDs when used for other purposes.

PowerBASIC itself maintains that the result of any operation will be

correct within the limits of the data types stipulated by the

programmer, and I've never even heard of anyone with an experience that

might cast doubt on the credibility of this claim.

Article itself states that [[Turbo Basic]] was renamed [[PowerBASIC]] when it was bought back by its author; in other words, the former is simply an early version of the same product. IMHO, it would thus make more sense to deal with them in the same article, and I would suggest that PowerBASIC remain the main title, as it was known by that name for far longer. [[User:Ubcule|Ubcule]] ([[User talk:Ubcule|talk]]) 14:41, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

The central point is this. An inconsistency exists between the

output of at least some C compilers and PowerBASIC compilers. I can

offer my own experience as evidence that in certain circumstances, the

inconsistency can have practical consequences. I've also found a

simple way to resolve this issue. Use PB's long integers in

cryptographic and hashing algorithms where DWORDs are expected. The

algorithms then return the expected results, bit for bit--which of

course is the only correct way to judge the accuracy of the output.

:An excellent suggestion which I support fully! --[[Special:Contributions/62.47.245.4|62.47.245.4]] ([[User talk:62.47.245.4|talk]]) 12:22, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

[http://www.powerbasic.com/support/pbforums/showthread.php?t=35407 more DWORD issue]

: +1 --[[User:Dadu|Dadu]] ([[User talk:Dadu|talk]]) 09:54, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

{{merged-from|Turbo Basic|10 September 2016}}

== The end of PowerBASIC ==

[http://www.powerbasic.com/support/forums/Forum4/HTML/003534.html English Alphabet strings]

It's a shame that the PowerBASIC website is offline! It is still a living language. [[Special:Contributions/2003:DC:7F33:3EE7:5DB2:F630:93A6:E04C|2003:DC:7F33:3EE7:5DB2:F630:93A6:E04C]] ([[User talk:2003:DC:7F33:3EE7:5DB2:F630:93A6:E04C|talk]]) 20:06, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

[http://www.powerbasic.com/support/forums/Forum4/HTML/008174.html Incorrect string handling]

[http://www.powerbasic.com/support/pbforums/showthread.php?t=14373&highlight=VAL In this] thread, contributors wrote a function to convert a string to a number. A simple version using pointers yeilded 370 clock cycles compared to 5200 for the built in PB version. Using ASM that was reduced further to 90 Clks.

[http://www.powerbasic.com/support/forums/Forum4/HTML/012827.html no support]

[http://www.powerbasic.com/support/forums/Archives/Archive-000003/HTML/20020806-5-000273.html A deleted thread]

powerbasic Staff member, Dave Navvaro states:

"we will have a compiler for Linux some time this year"

[http://web.archive.org/web/20030522082708/http://www.powerbasic.com/support/forums/Archives/Archive-000003/HTML/20020806-5-000273.html The original thread]

It should be noted that despite the alleged "No Vaporware" Policy, a Linux compiler has never materialized.

Offending user's may also find their personal information disseminated as PowerBASIC has no Privacy policy.

[http://www.freebasic.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=10567&start=0 Personal information disseminated]

My assertion: "PowerBASIC COM integration is limited" is discussed fully [http://www.jose.it-berater.org/smfforum/index.php?topic=1377.15 here]

"PB returns DISP_E_EXCEPTION. This highlights a very serious shortcoming with PB-automation, and is

why PB-automation can be a nightmare to work it."

I state: "Little, if any, official support is provided". This can be easily verified by looking at any category of the user forum for posts by powerbasic staff going back at least 5 years. Mr Zale also [http://www.powerbasic.com/support/forums/Forum4/HTML/012827.html states]:

"It's not possible to include a free lifetime consulting service.... This is simply not something we can do free of charge based upon upgrade prices under $100. We'd like you to get the assistance as inexpensively as possible, and I really hope you can make a connection here. However, if all else fails, we have always offered paid technical assistance for "in-depth" problems of this nature. Feel free to contact us at your convenience if that is of interest to you."

"PowerBASIC strictly enforces a policy requiring forum users to use their full real name when posting"

As stated directly on the User Forum signup:

"Forum Rules

To post, you must register with your full, real name (both first and last names). No handles or abbreviations are allowed.

... Profanity, rude, or disparaging comments (about PowerBASIC or others) is strictly prohibited... The owners of PowerBASIC Peer Support Forums reserve the right to remove, edit, move or close any thread for any reason."

I assert PowerBASIC staff are '''very''' sensitive to criticism and users are frequently banned.

From Mr Zale [http://www.powerbasic.com/support/forums/Forum4/HTML/010606.html himself]:

'posted June 11, 2004 04:21 AM

Actually, suspension was for a very short period of time... enough to "cool off"... certainly not permanent. Long ago, he was offered reinstatement upon agreement to follow forum rules.

Regards,

Bob Zale

PowerBASIC Inc.

[http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.basic.powerbasic/browse_thread/thread/448bfaa8fcb30d00 Banned]

Another [http://groups.google.ca/group/comp.lang.basic.powerbasic/browse_thread/thread/448bfaa8fcb30d00/95f616f42c32df73?lnk=st&q=powerbasic+linux#95f616f42c32df73 example]

This [http://www.powerbasic.com/support/forums/Archives/Archive-000003/HTML/20000801-4-000465.html thread] was also deleted,

because it pointed out the unsigned integer inconsitency in the compiler.

"I've had more than one experience while converting C to PB in

which PB's DWORDs have created results that don't match the results of

the same operations employing unsigned integers when coded in C. "

The thread is still available

[http://web.archive.org/web/20021223174650/http://www.powerbasic.com/support/forums/Archives/Archive-000003/HTML/20000801-4-000465.html here]

Any casual developer can verify this in seconds, but if you do not know it's there you are likely to waste hours looking for a non-existent bug.

As I suggested a month ago in my post on the COI page these facts are being deliberatly withheld by powerbasic staff who would see this infomation as counter to their marketing aims. I would appreciate help with these edits to provide the most wikipedia compatible wording.

[[User:RealWorldExperience|RealWorldExperience]] ([[User talk:RealWorldExperience|talk]]) 03:02, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

I noticed you deleted the most recent edits. Perhaps we should discuss the facts presented here and try and agree on some neutral wording? [[User:RealWorldExperience|RealWorldExperience]] ([[User talk:RealWorldExperience|talk]]) 23:29, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

===Rebuttal===

"Real World Experience" is a single purpose account, created to attack PowerBASIC, Inc. It appears he has no "edits" other than those which are antagonistic towards PowerBASIC.

On Jan 30, 2008, a PowerBASIC Forum Administrator realized that this user was posting under a false identity, which was not allowed under forum policies in place for 12 years. The Admin asked this user to restrict posts to his real name in the future, just as done by thousands of other members.

In retaliation, the user began a vendetta against PowerBASIC, Inc. On Feb 3, 2008, be began a campaign of misinformation on the Free Basic BBS. When that received little support, he took the same misinformation to the VB Wire BBS. Now, he's brought the same tired arguments here, to Wikipedia.

1- "Real World Experience" said, "Little, if any, official support is provided". This is not truthful. For many years, PowerBASIC has offered absolutely free, one-on-one, technical support by email. Paid support is only required when it involves custom programming, debugging of user programming errors, or custom research outside the bounds of the PowerBASIC compiler. This policy is virtually unmatched in the industry.

2- "Real World Experience" said, "There are currently no full time staff offering support." That is a false, reckless, and slanderous statement with no validation of any kind. PowerBASIC has highly qualified, full time technicians who provide excellent technical support.

3- "Real World Experience" said, "Little, if any, official support is provided in these forums." That is false. A quick review of the active forums show that PowerBASIC employees have actually posted 18,771 messages in support of PowerBASIC customers. If archived forums were included, the total would be much higher. Of course, for serious support issues, PowerBASIC recommends that customers use free, one-on-one support instead.

4- "Real World Experience" said, "This situation is especially relevant for new users who may suddenly find themselves without access to any real support." This is wild speculation intended to inflame and agitate the casual reader. It has no basis in fact, and is without merit. It is nothing more than the writer's imagination about what might occur in the worst possible scenario at some future date. One might just as easily say "The moon may explode today". They have about an equal chance of occurring. The truth: "No licensed PowerBASIC customer has ever been refused support in the entire history of the company." The worst that might be said is that the very occasional abusive customer is delayed just a bit, at least until he regains composure.

5- "Real World Experience" said, "PowerBASIC currently has no clearly stated Privacy policy." That, too, is absolutely false. PowerBASIC has published a very definitive [http://www.powerbasic.com/privacy.asp privacy policy] for over eleven years. We're proud to note that we've improved it from time to time, in favor of our valued customers. Please feel free to view it.

6- "Real World Experience" said, "[sic] user's may also find their personal information disseminated". That, too, is wild speculation and very reckless. Never, in the history of the company, has PowerBASIC ever released a customer's contact information. No mailing address. No email. No residence address. No telephone number. Not once. Of course, when you register for the PowerBASIC Forums, you authorize the use of your full real name, since it's a published item. And, in the case of "Real World Experience", he voluntarily and personally published his city of residence in every forum message.

7- "Real World Experience" said, "String functions MCase$ UCase$ LCase$ UCode$ ACode$ only handle the English alphabet". That is absolutely false. Many years ago, it was true, as was very common in the era of DOS programming. However, the last five (5) versions of PowerBASIC for Windows and PowerBASIC Console Compiler have offered excellent support for international character sets.

8- "Real World Experience" said, "MCASE$ UCASE$...are slow compared to ASM routines commonly applied to these tasks". We dispute this claim in its entirety, and respectfully note that he has provided absolutely no substantiation for his allegation. Frankly, we chuckled at the notion that an experienced programmer would believe assembler routines are commonly applied to these tasks. Visual Basic, his latest compiler of choice, does not even offer an assembler.

9- "Real World Experience" said, "I assert PowerBASIC staff are very sensitive to criticism". This is a distasteful personal attack on the employees of PowerBASIC, Inc. It clearly has no place on Wikipedia.

10- "Real World Experience" said, "This thread was also deleted, because it pointed out the unsigned integer [sic]inconsitency...". This is nothing more than wild speculation, using charged words in order to inflame an issue which does not exist. If this thread was actually deleted by a PowerBASIC Admin, the writer could not possibly have any knowledge of the reason. Obviously, that's why he failed to provide any substantiation. There was no reason to follow this up, but the archive tag in the URL leads me to suspect it's simply age.

11- "Real World Experience" said, "users are frequently banned." This is false, reckless, and slanderous. Did he provide a count of banned users? Did he provide a list of banned users? What is his definition of the word "frequently"? Once again, he's using charged words in a distasteful attempt to denigrate a company with high ethical standards. Yes, we occasionally find it necessary to suspend a forum member. Yes, sometimes we find it necessary to delete a thread. Sometimes for piracy. Sometimes for abusive behavior. Sometimes for flooding posts. Sometimes for other valid reasons. With close to 300,000 messages posted, there will always be a few bad apples. But, that does not equate to "users are frequently banned". He's entitled to his personal opinion, but it has no place on Wikipedia.

We should note that this user is still welcome as an active member of the PowerBASIC Forums. He is not barred from entry, as long as he uses his real full name as stated in the PowerBASIC Forum Rules and Policies.

There's much more, but I think I'll stop here. In my opinion, "Real World Experience" has made a mockery of the Wikipedia concept. That's really a shame. If anyone has a question about PowerBASIC or the truth presented here, I'll be happy to offer any assistance needed.

Tim Robbins

PowerBASIC, Inc. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/67.17.204.214|67.17.204.214]] ([[User talk:67.17.204.214|talk]]) 15:33, 17 April 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Third opinion ==

User forums and newsgroups are most certainly not reliable sources. Criticisms and other information must be verifiable in reputable references. Concerns about improper conflicts of interest can be addressed at [[WP:COI/N]]. Concerns about reliable sourcing can be raised at [[WP:RS/N]]. Concerns about disruptive and uncooperative behavior can be raised at [[WP:AN/I]]. [[User:Vassyana|Vassyana]] ([[User talk:Vassyana|talk]]) 03:34, 18 April 2008 (UTC) {{:User:Vassyana/3O}}

Thank you for those links. Please see my post about [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Sources_for_technical_facts_in_computing relaible sources] as it pertains to this entry [[User:RealWorldExperience|RealWorldExperience]] ([[User talk:RealWorldExperience|talk]]) 08:19, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

== Response ==

Hello Tim, Thank you for responding. It would be helpfull if you registered as suggest last month by an administrator, so that we could be clear who you are.

I think you raise some valid points and I welcome the opportunity to work with you to create some more accurate and fair wording for this entry. I think I should make it perfectly clear that my intention is to present ALL the facts about powerbasic not just the ones that are convenient to your marketing aims. I also recognize that this is not a forum for personal experiences or opinion so we should just stick to the verifiable facts.

Like most developers I use up to twenty different software products designed for development every day. Powerbasic was simply one of those elements. I intend to edit many entries at Wikipedia that I have detailed information about, this just happens to be the first one. I recognize that Mr Zale describes Powerbasic as his [http://www.powerbasic.com/support/pbforums/showthread.php?t=37014 life's work], but I suggest that this is providing a conflict of interest for any of your submissions and you should probably let the wikipedia process of multiple editors prevail rather than reverting any edits that you don't like.

My personal opinion, not that it is relevant here, is that powerbasic is a perfectly fine product, for what it is, but like all software, has limitiations and differences that are relevant to any comprehensive description. I feel that the full truth of the product, however inconvenient to the marketing aims of the company, should be presented here. This should not be a hinderence to Powerbasic as I think it is pretty much understood that no software product is perfect. Even Powerbasic has to occasionally acknowledge a mistake was made, even if it means that [http://www.powerbasic.com/support/pbforums/showthread.php?t=35253 all existing code be changed]. My hope is that we can find some wording to agree on.

Starting with your rebuttal for my Support contribution, I agree that the language could be improved. I post on many many internet forums devoted to a wide range of products and subjects. Most are general purpose and probably do not warrent comment. Becuase you link your forum to the Wikipedia entry and declare it the "official" forum, and because it is the offical repository of fact relative to the powerbasic product, you introduce it as valid element for inclusion in a well rounded wikipedia entry. I don't disagree with that. For no,w I shall confine myself to this and leave out supporting evidence from third party forums.

The Powerbasic forum has five categories of product support. A quick count oreveals that Since Oct 1st 2008 (six months ago) there were 8505 posts in these forums as reported by the search engine.

PowerBasic Console Compiler - 6 pages - 1134 posts

PowerBasic for DOS - 1 page - 253 posts

PowerBasic for Windows - 22 pages - 4602 posts

Programming - 8 pages - 1958 posts

Programming the Internet - 3 pages - 561 posts

In those six months the count of posts from Powerbasic personel was:

Tom Hanlin, PowerBASIC Staff - 0 posts

Borje Hagsten, PowerBASIC Staff - 0 posts

Neil Bertz, PowerBASIC Staff - 0 posts

Tim Robbins, Administrator - 0 posts

Bob Gee, Administrator - 0 posts

Lance Edmonds, Administrator - 0 posts

(This aministrator suddenly dissapeared in July 2004 with no explanation)

Steve Rossell, Administrator - 32 posts (12 in the last few weeks, 2 contained no support, leaving 18 actual support posts of which most are [http://www.powerbasic.com/support/pbforums/showthread.php?t=35373 a line or two] like: "The REG statement and function can be used to communicate via a register array in both directions with a TSR. This is outlined in chapter 14 of the PowerBASIC For DOS Reference Guide.")

Bob Zale, Administrator - 48 posts (6 contained no support or a sugestion to email [e-mail]

22 are within the last few weeks (since lack of support was first cited) so cannot be taken at face value. I suspect these are the product of an effort to jumpstart perception like [http://www.powerbasic.com/support/pbforums/showthread.php?t=36818&page=2&highlight=Bob+Zale this]

A very different tone from just a few months ago in posts like [http://www.powerbasic.com/support/pbforums/showthread.php?t=36232&highlight=Bob+Zale this] "It's called a negative number. You've heard of those???"

and "Someone please tell me that in the 21st century it's possible to phrase this question without reminding me of an [http://www.powerbasic.com/support/pbforums/showthread.php?t=14049&highlight=Bob+Zale&page=5 attack dog?"]

and "Well, I'm not sure now we can communicate with you. We've actually spent hours trying to explain it privately, but without [http://www.powerbasic.com/support/pbforums/showthread.php?t=35375 success."]

and outright sales posts like [http://www.powerbasic.com/support/pbforums/showthread.php?t=36446&highlight=Bob+Zale this] and [http://www.powerbasic.com/support/pbforums/showthread.php?t=36263&highlight=Bob+Zale this]

and leaving out 7 which are trivial one or two line responses, hardly worthy of the title "support" we are left with 12 actual posts from Mr Zale and 18 from Mr Rossell for a grand total of 30 support posts of any real value in SIX MONTHS.

When you consider that there were 8508 posts asking for help in that time, a contribution of 30 official replies accounts for less than 0.5% of support offered by the Powebasic company.

By Comparison, just three members of the support team for another popular compiler, PureBasic, (Fred, Freak and Beriko) managed to contribute to 780 threads, and an average of six posts per thread. That's over 4600 posts of official support in the same time frame. There are many more members of their support team also contributing.

In light of this I suggest that the phrase "Little, if any, official support is provided in these forums" is accurate, but I conceed a more accurate wording could be found in the phrase: "little (less than 0.5 percent) official help is provided in the forums"

Your claim that: "PowerBASIC has offered absolutely free, one-on-one, technical support by email" to be accepted, you should have to meet the same standard of proof required on Wikipedia that everyone else does. On face, this statement is not verifiable. Further, it is quite clear from [http://www.powerbasic.com/support/forums/Forum4/HTML/012827.html this post] that support is an additional cost promoted via the forums. "It's not possible to include a free lifetime consulting service.... This is simply not something we can do free of charge based upon upgrade prices under $100. We'd like you to get the assistance as inexpensively as possible, and I really hope you can make a connection here. However, if all else fails, we have always offered paid technical assistance for "in-depth" problems of this nature. Feel free to contact us at your convenience if that is of interest to you."

In fact your current [http://www.powerbasic.com/support/support.asp website] makes it clear that "free" support includes little more that pointers to the manual that comes with the product adding "Should your request goes beyond the intent of the technical support and resources we offer for free you will be advised there will be a $49 per incident charge if you would like us to proceed with your request." In a balanced entry, this distinction should be covered.

Leaving aside the recent changes to the Powerbasic privacy policy in light of this dispute, and concrete evidence of flagrant abuse of personal information that do not belong here, I will move next to the subject of banning or "suspending" customers that conduct "abusive behaviour". Given the context of the wikipedia verification policy it would be impossible to represent this here even with a stack of sworn afadvits. I also recognize that a group of individuals experience does not rise to the level of relevance untill it is covered in print. Until then this will remain out of my contribution here at Wikipedia.

Since, as you point out, I cannot know why a thread is mysteriously deleted, perhaps you can offer an explanation for the sudden disapearance of [http://www.powerbasic.com/support/forums/Archives/Archive-000003/HTML/20000801-4-000465.html this] thread (available [http://web.archive.org/web/20021223174650re_/www.powerbasic.com/support/forums/Archives/Archive-000003/HTML/20000801-4-000465.html here]) relating to the unsigned integer incompatabilities recently? If, as you hilariously suggest, this threads "age" is responsible for its deletion then it would seem logical that all the other threads of the [http://www.powerbasic.com/support/pbforums/showthread.php?t=18&highlight=C%3A%5CPBDLL50%5C same] or [http://www.powerbasic.com/support/pbforums/showthread.php?t=17379&highlight=exported+sub%2Ffunction earlier] "age" would have been deleted also, yet they have not.

The deletion of this specific thread, written after many hours of detective work, by a very well respected developer, proves not only that threads are targeted and deleted by Powerbasic staff, but that there is a direct attempt to suppress the fact that unsigned Integers are incompatible with mainstream languages like C. This is proof of "sensitivity".

As the author concluded "The central point is this. An inconsistency exists between the output of at least some C compilers and PowerBASIC compilers... in certain circumstances, the inconsistency can have practical consequences". I think we could probably go a little further and qualify what thos circumstances are specifically, but this is fact is indisputable as covered extensively in my last post here.

Since you challenge the statement "String functions MCase$ UCase$ LCase$ UCode$ ACode$ only handle the English alphabet" I will prepare and cover this in a later post.

Finally, you acknowledge that users are required to use their full real name when registering and posting on the powerbasic forums, why not simply edit my submission instead of deleting it? Surely there can be no dispute about this fact, it is clearly stated in the signup procedure of the forum.

In this post, at a minimum, I have proved the following statements and will post them to the entry. I would respectfully ask you not to delete them.

"little (less than 0.5 percent) official help is provided in the forums"

"Help beyond the intent of the technical support and resources we offer for free will be charged $49 per incident"

"threads are targeted and deleted by Powerbasic staff"

"staff are sensitive to criticism"

"An inconsistency exists between the output of at least some C compilers and PowerBASIC compilers"

"users are required to use their full real name when registering and posting on the powerbasic forums"

I hope that we can work together to create a fair and balanced entry for Powerbasic.

[[User:RealWorldExperience|RealWorldExperience]] ([[User talk:RealWorldExperience|talk]]) 08:20, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

===Rebuttal===

The actions of "Real World Experience" are plain and simple vandalism. His most recent paragraph of inappropriate antagonism was added to the PowerBASIC page twice.

1- "Real World Experience" said, "[sic] Becuase you link your forum to the Wikipedia entry and declare it the "official" forum, and because it is the offical repository of fact relative to the powerbasic product..."

This is a fabrication. The notation of an "official" forum was added by 63.157.90.231 on May 1, 2006. It has since been removed. The PowerBASIC Forums are Peer Support Forums, frequented by thousands of folks with widely varying needs and agendas. The vast majority of them are wonderful friends and customers, but your suggestion that PowerBASIC has deemed them to have created the "official repository of fact relative to the PowerBASIC product" is not correct. Even further,

at this time, there isn't even a link to the PowerBASIC Forums on Wikipedia.

2- "Real World Experience" said, "Lance Edmonds, Administrator - 0 posts (This [sic] aministrator suddenly [sic] dissapeared in July 2004 with no explanation).

This is another false statement. On Aug 18, 2004, the following message was posted on the PowerBASIC forums by Lance:

"Hi folks!"

"Thanks all for the kind words! It was a real pleasure working for PowerBASIC and I do miss it, however life will continue in a different (and hopefully equally fulfilling) direction for me now! Anyway, I'm going to embark on some of my own software projects for the short term, and we'll see what develops from there. In any case, I'm still an avid PowerBASIC programmer and supporter, so I will still be dropping by from time to time to put my 2-cents in."

3- "Real World Experience" said, "Leaving aside the recent changes to the Powerbasic privacy policy in light of this dispute..."

This is another fabrication. The PowerBASIC Privacy Statement today has the same text as the Privacy Statement of August 23, 2000. Eight years ago. This fact can be verified [http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.powerbasic.com/privacy.asp here].

4- "Real World Experience" said, "When you consider that there were 8508 posts asking for help..."

This is yet another fabrication. By his own words, earlier in the message, there were 8508 total posts, not 8508 requests for help. The number of requests for help would obviously be much lower than the total. It's clear this was re-phrased in order to twist his mathematical calculation to fit a result which matched his agenda. The result of that calculation was then posted to the PowerBASIC page without regard for the misinformation.

5- "Real World Experience" said, "it is quite clear from this post that support is an additional cost promoted via the forums"

This is yet another false statement. "Real World Experience" knows it is false, because he is the one who asked the original question on the PowerBASIC Forums. Our employees are experts on the PowerBASIC compiler. Our employees provide absolutely free technical support for questions about how to use the PowerBASIC compiler. But he asked a question about Microsoft Visual Basic, not PowerBASIC. He had a program written in Visual Basic, and he wanted to recreate its functionality in a PowerBASIC program. He did not understand some of the statements and functions used in Visual Basic, and he wanted us to provide that information, or perhaps even write the PowerBASIC program for him. If our representative knew the quick answer to his Visual Basic problem, he would have certainly shared it. We do that every day. But, we are not Visual Basic experts. In order to answer his questions about Visual Basic, or to write his program for him, we would have to do some fairly lengthy research on that product and his specific problem. That is very clear. It's also very clear that such research and custom programming is well beyond the scope of technical support from any company. Mr. Zale wrote him a very polite, businesslike message to explain it fully.

PowerBASIC is a programming tool. It is used by programmers to create an application program. We sell the tool to create a program. We will help you by answering questions about the tool, but we can't create your programs for you, and we can't answer technical questions about other programming tools. That would be a lifetime consulting service. If one were to follow the somewhat twisted logic of "Real World Experience", you could:

A- Visit your Sears store and buy a hammer.

B- Expect them to teach you to build a house or build it for you.

C- Expect them to teach you to use an air-hammer you bought elsewhere.

Of course, then Wikipedia Editors would have to go to the Sears page and:

A- Add an entry that Sears won't build your house if you buy a hammer.

B- Add an entry that Sears won't teach you to use tools bought elsewhere.

C- Then move on to appliances, televisions, etc.

6- "Real World Experience" said, "little (less than 0.5 percent) official help is provided in the forums".

This is yet another fabricated claim. As explained earlier, the numbers used in the mathematical calculations were manipulated by "Real World Experience" in order to provide a result that he desires. However, even if his mathematics were truthful, the entire statement is immaterial. The PowerBASIC Forums Registration Agreement advises each customer that: "This forum has been created for "Peer-to-Peer" questions and discussions. While PowerBASIC employees may contribute, this forum is not a source of official support.". At PowerBASIC, we believe that free, one-on-one, technical support provides a much better result for most programming issues. Of course, it's still nice to know that PowerBASIC employees have contributed 18,771 forum posts in support of

our valued customers.

7- "Real World Experience" said, "staff are sensitive to criticism"

The truth is, we welcome criticism, as it's a key element in the evolution of our products. Of course, false statements about us and our products must be addressed with facts.

8- "Real World Experience" said, "threads are targeted and deleted by Powerbasic staff".

This is a false statement. It is not verifiable, but is obviously just the personal opinion of the author. Original content is not allowed on Wikipedia pages.

9- "Real World Experience" said, "PowerBASIC differs from mainstream languages like C in a few respects, most notably in its use of the FPU for DWORD unsigned integer calculations. Since overloading an integer is fundamental to Encryption algorithm's in most languages, this presents a unique problem in PowerBASIC."

PowerBASIC is not a C compiler, and it does not attempt to emulate any one particular C Compiler the writer has in mind. PowerBASIC is a PowerBASIC Compiler, a proprietary compiler built only to the PowerBASIC specification. It is not built to a C specification, any more than a Chevrolet is built to a Nissan specification. The conclusion "...this presents a unique problem in PowerBASIC." is not verifiable, but just the personal opinion of the author. Original content is not allowed on Wikipedia.

10- Admins and Editors of Wikipedia with far more experience than either myself or "Real World Experience" have previously determined that all reference to the PowerBASIC Forums should be removed. These editors ("Halo", "62.172.143.205", "PeterStJohn", "Flowanda") are unanimous in

their opinion that even a forum link should not appear on the page. Given their level of experience, I feel compelled to accede to their judgement. I am removing all references to the PowerBASIC Forums.

11- An Editor of Wikipedia (Flowanda) with far more experience than either myself or "Real World Experience" has previously determined that all references to PowerBASIC Support should be removed. Given the level of experience, I feel compelled to accede to that judgement. I am removing all references to PowerBASIC Support.

If anyone has a question about PowerBASIC or the facts presented here, I'll be happy to offer any assistance needed.

Tim Robbins

PowerBASIC, Inc. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/67.17.204.214|67.17.204.214]] ([[User talk:67.17.204.214|talk]]) 15:37, 18 April 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Verifiability ==

I noticed you deleted all of my contribution yet again. It would be more helpful, not to mention a show of good faith, if you would participate in the process and edit my contributions instead of completely deleting them!

Now that you have removed the link to the powerbasic forums, and elected to not sanction the description of "official" Powerbasic forum, perhaps some other relevant links would be appropriate. I agree with you that they are in fact "user to user" forums and will reword my contribution accordingly. I also agree with your wording "this forum is not a source of official support." Additionally, Your own website states: "Should your request goes beyond the intent of the technical support and resources we offer for free you will be advised there will be a $49 per incident charge if you would like us to proceed with your request." So I am not sure why you deleted that too?

As I indicated, the last remnants of company support suddenly left the powerbasic forums with Lance in July 2004 as confirmed in the thread you [http://www.powerbasic.com/support/pbforums/showthread.php?t=30928 quoted.] As another member put it "you may indeed be correct. lance's last post was july 5, 2004 and the last post that indicated he was powerbasic support was june 25... also, between march 6 and march 7 of this year lance changed his title from "administrator" to "member". if he is indeed gone i wish him a lot of luck!" It seems pretty clear that no one at the time had any idea what happened. But this is irrelevant and I only mention it because Lance provided technical support via the forums (as can be seen by any casual search of his posts). The current levels of participation in the forum by powerbasic staff cannot under any stretch of the imagination be considered support.

Because 30 support posts of any real value in SIX MONTHS cannot be considered support, and there is no eveidence of alleged "email support", my statement that "little if any real support is offered" is valid. Support is a key issue to novice developers and should be clearly represented in the wikipedia entry.

Thank you for helping with the wording of "there were 8508 total posts, not 8508 requests for help". This is perhaps a more accurate statement and as I have said all along I welcome your input. Since we agree on this number, perhaps you can justify your statement of "18,771 messages in support of PowerBASIC customers"?

The numbers I quoted are easily verifyable from your [http://www.powerbasic.com/support/pbforums/search.php search engine.] simply type in any of the historical support staff names like "Steve Rossell" or "Bob Zale" under "User Name:", highlight the five forums in which users confine thier posts for help:

PowerBasic Console Compiler

PowerBasic for DOS

PowerBasic for Windows

Programming

Programming the Internet

then hit search. If you look at page two you will see that posts in the last six months immediatly dry up.

A grand total of 32 posts from Mr Rossel and 48 posts from Mr Zale.

A quick review of these posts shows that in fact Mr Rossel contributed 18 posts of any significant help and Mr Zale only 12 (leaving aside Mr Zale's recent spurt of enthusaism).

This is a verifyable FACT. Anyone can verify these numbers. This is not my opinion. Even if we include every post made in that timeframe as real "support" we are still only talking about 80 out of 8500, thats still less than one percent! This is a relevant verifyable fact.

Your point 5 contains no references or even vague offers of proof. You mention Microsoft Visual Basic, seem to assert that Visual Basic users should be entitled to support from powerbasic staff etc etc. I am unclear how any of this is relevant?

It is interesting to note that you use an internet archive to support your arguments about historical posts when is suits you, yet have so far to acknowledge that the post relating to the incompatability of unsigned integers was targeted and deleted. If you statement "The truth is, we welcome criticism, as it's a key element in the evolution of our products" is true, then cite an example from your forums of criticism that has been embraced.

In fact powerbasic would like to dodge all accountability as clearly demonstrated when this [thread was deleted.]

The user claims: "This entire issue started when Bob challenged me to prove that PowerBASIC/Linux had ever been announced as "coming real soon" and accused me of lying.

I provided the proof. ([http://web.archive.org/web/20030602170609/http://powerbasic.com/aboutpb.asp Linux is coming soon, and other platforms will follow.])

He deleted my post, banned me from the forum and has now apparently [http://www.powerbasic.com/support/forums/Archives/Archive-000003/HTML/20020806-5-000273.html deleted] the actual [http://web.archive.org/web/20030522082708/http://www.powerbasic.com/support/forums/Archives/Archive-000003/HTML/20020806-5-000273.html evidence] that I cited as well.

While I agree that these comments do not meet the standard of verifiabilty for inclusion in a Wikipedia entry, clearly a thread has been deleted, and clearly it was critical of Powerbasic's false announcement of a linux compiler. This IS verifiable evidence of sensitivity to criticism and thread deletion. At a minimum this should be included in a wikipedia entry.

Your unwillingness here to acknowledge that Powerbasic is incompatible with mainstream compilers in that it uses the FPU for unsigned integer calculations and returns 64bit signed quad integer values st(0) of the FPU (unlike C that returns quads using the EDX:EAX registers) or even allow any mention of it in this entry, clearly indicates that you are seeking to suppress this information. You assert that a thread dealiung with this subject in clear and precise language (quoted earlier) has expired due to its "age".

These two things are simply incompatible with your assertion that "we welcome criticism". Obviously you do not.

Once again, I have proved threads are deleted and powerbasic is sensitive to criticism.

The facts that 64bit signed quad integer values are [http://www.jose.it-berater.org/smfforum/index.php?topic=1473.msg4619#msg4619 returned in the st(0) register of the FPU] also [http://www.powerbasic.com/support/forums/Forum6/HTML/005431.html here] and [http://www.powerbasic.com/support/forums/Forum4/HTML/001862.html here], and that the FPU is used for signed 32 bit Integer calculations is not only relevant, but important. I agree that the distinction between a C compiler and Basic compiler is also relevant. The implications of this inconsitency are directly provable as pointed out earlier: "The value does not necessarily wrap beyond zero; instead, it's often truncated at zero."

x??? = &hE1DDA73Cx2??? = (x??? * x???) This operation leaves x2??? = 0.

This is verifiable by any owner of the Powerbasic compiler in seconds and very relevant to the product in particular, and development in general. Since this pertains to the bahaviour of the compiler, as do all the features listed by the powerbasic company, it must meet the same burdon of proof, meaning the expression above is verifiable in exactly the same way as any of the claims made in the "Notable language features of 32-bit compilers"

How do you verify, for example, that "PowerBASIC programs are self-contained and do not require runtime files to execute."?

I submit that all these facts are verified in the same way, and that it is simply company vanity to include some but not others.

==Statement of Fact==

"Real World Experience" is a single purpose account, created to attack PowerBASIC, Inc. It appears he has no "edits" other than those which are antagonistic towards PowerBASIC. The actions of "Real World Experience" are plain and simple vandalism.

On Jan 30, 2008, a PowerBASIC Forum Administrator realized that this user was posting under a false identity, which was not allowed under forum policies in place for 12 years. The Admin asked this user to restrict posts to his real name in the future, just as done by thousands of other members.

In retaliation, the user began a vendetta against PowerBASIC, Inc. On Feb 3, 2008, be began a campaign of misinformation on the Free Basic BBS. When that received little support, he took the same misinformation to the VB Wire BBS. Now, he's brought the same tired arguments here, to Wikipedia.

1- "Real World Experience" said, "PowerBASIC currently has no clearly stated Privacy policy."

This is a fabrication. PowerBASIC has published a very definitive [http://www.powerbasic.com/privacy.asp privacy policy] for over eleven years.

2- "Real World Experience" then said, "Leaving aside the recent changes to the Powerbasic privacy policy in light of this dispute..."

This is another fabrication. The PowerBASIC Privacy Statement today has the same text as the Privacy Statement of August 23, 2000. Eight years ago. This fact can be verified [http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.powerbasic.com/privacy.asp here].

3- "Real World Experience" said, "There are currently no full time staff offering support."

That is a false, reckless, and slanderous statement with no validation of any kind. PowerBASIC has highly qualified, full time technicians who provide excellent technical support.

4- "Real World Experience" said, "Little, if any, official support is provided".

This is a fabrication. For many years, PowerBASIC has offered absolutely free, one-on-one, technical support by email. Paid support is only required when it involves custom programming, debugging of user programming errors, or custom research outside the bounds of the PowerBASIC compiler. This policy is virtually unmatched in the industry.

5- "Real World Experience" then said, "Little, if any, official support is provided in these forums."

This is a fabrication. A quick review of the active forums show that PowerBASIC employees have actually posted 18,771 messages in support of PowerBASIC customers. If archived forums were included, the total would be much higher. Of course, for serious support issues, PowerBASIC recommends that customers use free, one-on-one technical support instead.

6- "Real World Experience" said, "This situation is especially relevant for new users who may suddenly find themselves without access to any real support."

This is wild speculation intended to inflame and agitate the casual reader. It has no basis in fact, and is without merit. He is saying that some unknown future circumstances ''might arise'' where PowerBASIC ''might decide'' to withhold support from some ''unknown, yet to be identified person''. It is nothing more than the writer's ''imagination'' about what ''might occur'' in the worst possible scenario at some undetermined future date. One might just as easily say '''"The moon might explode today"'''. They have about an equal chance of occurring. The truth: "No licensed PowerBASIC customer has ever been refused support in the entire history of the company." The worst that might be said is that the very occasional abusive customer is delayed just a bit, at least until he regains composure.

7- "Real World Experience" said, "[sic] user's may also find their personal information disseminated".

This, too, is wild speculation and very reckless. Never, in the history of the company, has PowerBASIC ever released a customer's contact information. No mailing address. No email. No residence address. No telephone number. Not once. Of course, when you register for the PowerBASIC Forums, you authorize the use of your full real name, since it's a published item. And, in the case of "Real World Experience", he voluntarily and personally published his city of residence in every forum message.

8- "Real World Experience" said, "String functions MCase$ UCase$ LCase$ UCode$ ACode$ only handle the English alphabet".

This is a fabrication. Many years ago, it was true, as was very common in the era of DOS programming. However, the last five (5) versions of PowerBASIC for Windows and PowerBASIC Console Compiler have offered excellent support for international character sets.

9- "Real World Experience" said, "MCASE$ UCASE$...are slow compared to ASM routines commonly applied to these tasks".

We dispute this claim in its entirety, and respectfully note that he has provided absolutely no substantiation for his allegation. Frankly, we chuckled at the notion that an experienced programmer would believe assembler routines are commonly applied to these tasks. Visual Basic, his latest compiler of choice, does not even offer an assembler.

10- "Real World Experience" said, "I assert PowerBASIC staff are very sensitive to criticism".

This is a distasteful personal attack on the employees of PowerBASIC, Inc. It clearly has no place on Wikipedia.

11- "Real World Experience" said, "users are frequently banned."

This is false, reckless, and slanderous. Did he provide a count of banned users? Did he provide a list of banned users? What is his definition of the word "frequently"? Once again, he's using charged words in a distasteful attempt to denigrate a company with high ethical standards. Yes, we occasionally find it necessary to suspend a forum member. Yes, sometimes we find it necessary to delete a thread. Sometimes for piracy. Sometimes for abusive behavior. Sometimes for flooding posts. Sometimes for other valid reasons. With close to 300,000 messages posted, there will always be a few bad apples. But, that does not equate to "users are frequently banned". This has no place on Wikipedia.

It should be noted: Even after the egregious fabrications presented here by "Real World Experience", he is not banned from the PowerBASIC Forums.

12- "Real World Experience" said, "[sic] Becuase you link your forum to the Wikipedia entry and declare it the "official" forum, and because it is the offical repository of fact relative to the powerbasic product..."

This is a fabrication. The notation of an "official" forum was added by 63.157.90.231 on May 1, 2006. It has since been removed. The PowerBASIC Forums are Peer Support Forums, frequented by thousands of folks with widely varying needs and agendas. The vast majority of them are wonderful friends and customers, but your suggestion that PowerBASIC has deemed them to have created the "official repository of fact relative to the PowerBASIC product" is not correct. Even further, at this time, there isn't even a link to the PowerBASIC Forums on Wikipedia.

13- "Real World Experience" said, "Lance Edmonds, Administrator - 0 posts (This [sic] aministrator suddenly [sic] dissapeared in July 2004 with no explanation).

This is another fabrication. On Aug 18, 2004, the following message was posted on the PowerBASIC forums by Lance:

"Hi folks!"

"Thanks all for the kind words! It was a real pleasure working for PowerBASIC and I do miss it, however life will continue in a different (and hopefully equally fulfilling) direction for me now! Anyway, I'm going to embark on some of my own software projects for the short term, and we'll see what develops from there. In any case, I'm still an avid PowerBASIC programmer and supporter, so I will still be dropping by from time to time to put my 2-cents in."

14- "Real World Experience" said, "When you consider that there were 8508 posts asking for help..."

This is yet another fabrication. By his own words, earlier in the message, there were 8508 total posts, not 8508 requests for help. The number of requests for help would obviously be much lower than the total. It's clear this was re-phrased in order to twist his mathematical calculation to fit a result which matched his agenda. The result of that calculation was then posted to the PowerBASIC page without regard for the misinformation.

15- "Real World Experience" said, "it is quite clear from this post that support is an additional cost promoted via the forums"

This is yet one more fabrication. "Real World Experience" knows it is false, because he is the one who asked the original question on the PowerBASIC Forums. Our employees are experts on the PowerBASIC compiler. Our employees provide absolutely free technical support for questions about how to use the PowerBASIC compiler. But "Real World Experience" asked us a question about Microsoft Visual Basic, not PowerBASIC. "Real World Experience" had a program written in Visual Basic, and "Real World Experience" wanted to recreate its functionality in a PowerBASIC program. "Real World Experience" did not understand some of the statements and functions used in Visual Basic, and he wanted us to provide that information, or perhaps even write the PowerBASIC program for him. If our representative knew the quick answer to his Visual Basic problem, he would have certainly shared it. We do that every day. But, we are not Visual Basic experts. In order to answer the questions of "Real World Experience" about Visual Basic, or to write his program for him, we would have to do some fairly lengthy research on that product and his specific problem. That is very clear. It's also very clear that such research and custom programming is well beyond the scope of technical support from any company. Mr. Zale wrote a very polite, businesslike message to explain it fully.

PowerBASIC is a programming tool. It is used by programmers to create an application program. We sell the tool to create a program. We will help you by answering questions about the tool, but we can't create your programs for you, and we can't generally answer technical questions about other programming tools. That would be a lifetime consulting service. If one were to follow the somewhat twisted logic of "Real World Experience", you could:

A- Visit your Sears store and buy a hammer.

B- Expect them to teach you to build a house or build a house for you.

C- Expect them to teach you to use an air-hammer you bought elsewhere.

Of course, then Wikipedia Editors would have to go to the Sears page and:

A- Add an entry that Sears won't build you a house, even if you buy a hammer.

B- Add an entry that Sears won't teach you to use tools bought elsewhere.

C- Then move on to appliances, televisions, etc.

16- "Real World Experience" said, "little (less than 0.5 percent) official help is provided in the forums".

This is yet another fabricated claim. As explained earlier, the numbers used in the mathematical calculations were manipulated by "Real World Experience" in order to provide a result that matches his agenda. However, even if his mathematics were truthful, the entire statement is immaterial. The PowerBASIC Forums Registration Agreement advises each customer that: "This forum has been created for "Peer-to-Peer" questions and discussions. While PowerBASIC employees may contribute, this forum is not a source of official support.". At PowerBASIC, we believe that free, one-on-one, technical support provides a much better result for most programming issues. Of course, it's still nice to know that PowerBASIC employees have contributed 18,771 forum posts in support of our valued customers.

17- "Real World Experience" said, "threads are targeted and deleted by Powerbasic staff".

This is a fabrication. It is not verified, it is not true, and it is not sourced. Original content is not allowed on Wikipedia pages.

18- "Real World Experience" said, "PowerBASIC differs from mainstream languages like C in a few respects, most notably in its use of the FPU for DWORD unsigned integer calculations. Since overloading an integer is fundamental to Encryption [sic]algorithm's in most languages, this presents a unique problem in PowerBASIC."

PowerBASIC is not a C compiler, and it does not attempt to emulate any particular C Compiler the writer has in mind. PowerBASIC is a PowerBASIC Compiler, a proprietary compiler built to the PowerBASIC specification. It is not built to a C specification, any more than a Chevrolet is built to a Nissan specification. In PowerBASIC, the results of a numeric overflow are undefined. The result of a stack overflow is undefined, as is the result of a buffer overflow. We believe it is prudent for the PowerBASIC programmer to write programs which avoid numeric overflow, stack overflow, and buffer overflow, too. This is a fairly straightforward concept for most programmers. Sometimes the result of an undefined operation still work as expected. But we suggest that counting on it is foolish, at best. The PowerBASIC documentation clearly states: ''"Note: PowerBASIC does not trap numeric overflow or underflow errors in equation and expression evaluation".'' None of the claims of "Real World Experience" are verifiable, true, or sourced. Original content is not allowed on Wikipedia.

A- We dispute that BASIC is not a mainstream language. BASIC has more users than C.

B- We dispute that any alleged "differences" listed here, even if they were true, are most notable.

C- We dispute that overloading an integer is fundamental.

D- We dispute "...in most languages...".

E- We dispute that the FPU is never used in an integer calculation in any C compiler.

F- We dispute the notion that use of the FPU in never appropriate in an integer calculation.

G- We dispute the erroneous claim that PowerBASIC always uses the FPU in integer calculations.

H- We dispute that "...this presents a unique problem in PowerBASIC."

I- We dispute that this entire paragraph is pertinent.

[[User:PowerBASIC|PowerBASIC]] ([[User talk:PowerBASIC|talk]]) 10:40, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

==Repetition==

You have deleted my editis in their entirity once again and pasted the same aguments you made earlier as justification. It should be noted that disputing a verifiable fact is not the same thing as disputing the verification. Following the steps I outlined anyone can verify for themselves the numbers I presented. Using the code I provided, anyone can verify the Integer issues. Simply stomping your feet by claiming you dispute this is not proof to the contrary!

It is also interesting to note that you finally registered after I suggested in a [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard#PowerBasic_Part_II COI post] that your refusal to do so is a clear indication of your contempt for the Wikipedia editing process.

I also notice that you post is at 6.40am (Florida Time) on Sunday April 20th. Since it seems unlikely that even the most conscientious employee would get out of bed in time to finish reading, editing and posting on Wikipedia by 6.40am on a SUNDAY, it seems fairly obvious that must be the work of the owner, Mr Zale. In fact, the consitency of these posts suggests that they are all the work of Mr. Zale who for some reason, feels that his [http://www.powerbasic.com/support/pbforums/showthread.php?t=37014 life's work] is in some way threatened by the few facts that I seek to respectfully present. If this isn't a clear case of Conflict of interest, I don't know what is.

[[User:RealWorldExperience|RealWorldExperience]] ([[User talk:RealWorldExperience|talk]]) 18:22, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

==Endless Repetition==

You really should note that you are engaging in unacceptable behavior according to official Wikipedia policy.

Specifically:

1- No personal attacks - saying something negative about another person

2- Never post personal details: Users who post what they believe are the personal details of other users

without their consent may be blocked for any length of time, including indefinitely.

3- Do not misrepresent other people.

I believe your statement of "...it seems fairly obvious that must be the work of the owner, Mr Zale..." is a blatant violation of item #2. You have posted what you believe are the personal details of another user without their consent.

I believe your statement of "I assert PowerBASIC staff are very sensitive to criticism and users are frequently banned." qualifies as a violation of item #1.

I believe your statement of "...these facts are being [sic] deliberatly withheld by powerbasic staff ..." qualifies as well.

I believe your statement of "...threads are targeted and deleted by Powerbasic staff..." qualifies as a violation of item #1.

Frankly, I believe there are so many violations of item #3, that I won't even try to copy them all. Just re-read this entire page.

As to newer issues, you attacked me with the unfounded allegation "You have deleted my [sic] editis in their [sic] entirity once again...". '''I have deleted nothing. PowerBASIC has deleted nothing.''' Your continuous fabrication of virtually anything is starting to wear down my good nature. Why would you do such a thing?

It should also be noted that you personally posted many links to your own postings on BBS's and forums. You have stated repeatedly that the name you used on those forums was an alias -- not your real name.

If I may offer a suggestion? Please read the Wiki pages?

Vassyana told you, "User forums and newsgroups are most certainly not reliable sources. Criticisms and other information must be verifiable in reputable references...."

FiveYears told you, "...Some of them dont comply with WP:EXTERNAL, next time when you add external links to a page, make sure that they comply with that policy..."

Gordonofcartoon told you, "I see you've also been told, endlessly, that forum postings are not acceptable as sources. But even if they were, the kind of thing you want to add is your personal synthesis of forum content (e.g. counts of support messages answered, and your assessment of the attitude to criticism there), and that's unusable per the no original research policy."

Also, you might check out your warning from Admin PhilKnight...

I sense a minor pattern here. Could that be true?

As to your invalid claim about differences in C and PowerBASIC -- Regardless of the untold number of reasons it can't be posted, add this one: To be fair and maintain a NPOV, you'd have to add the real notable differences. There are hundreds, maybe thousands. You could write a book on that topic.

== Sock Puppet Editing ==

Are you seriously asking us to believe that an employee who has signed the previous posts as "Tim Robbins" would be busily working away on a Wikipedia page at 6am on a Sunday morning? It is only logical to assume that perhaps someone that feels personally invested in this product, like say the owner, is probably trying to hide behind an employee (real or imagined). A quick visit to the [http://www.powerbasic.com/aboutpb.asp powerbasic website] reveals the identity of that person... Mr Zale, the same person that signed all 48 of his forum "support" contributions in the last six months. You have clearly demonstrated conflict of interest over and over again and should be prevented from editing this wikipedia entry.

Since you seek to add more of the differences between C and powerbasic, I won't object. Please remember to include the fundamentally significant items like utterly different data types (verified above)

It is also ludicrous to assert that [http://www.powerbasic.com/support/forums/Archives/Archive-000003/HTML/20000801-4-000465.html this] thread (available [http://web.archive.org/web/20021223174650re_/www.powerbasic.com/support/forums/Archives/Archive-000003/HTML/20000801-4-000465.html here]) relating to the unsigned integer incompatabilites, has not been deleted. Try clicking on it. Its just not there. Your claim that it just somehow died of old "age" is ridiculous.

You are clearly engaged in a systematic program of editing, contrary to the Wikipedia COI rules.

[[User:RealWorldExperience|RealWorldExperience]] ([[User talk:RealWorldExperience|talk]]) 00:22, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

== Fabrications ==

I'm asking you to believe that you are engaging in unacceptable behavior according to official Wikipedia policy.

As to your famous thread, I've asserted nothing. I have absolutely no idea if it was deleted or not. If it was deleted, I certainly have no idea why... I suppose a forum administrator might have deleted it. If so, there must have been a reason. I suppose the forum member who started the thread might have deleted it. Maybe it even had something to do with the new forum software that was installed a few months ago. There are any number of possibilities... even the possibility that you are fabricating it.

But one thing is dead certain: '''You don't know what happened either.''' Yet you continue to engage in wild speculation, then you treat that imagination of yours as though it were fact. That's fairly ugly.

One other thing is dead certain: I'm not your personal concierge, so I won't be doing your research for you. If you have a question about a PowerBASIC Forum thread, why don't you ask instead of fabricating? You can write to PowerBASIC Customer Service at: 2100 Tamiami Trail South, Venice, FL 34293.

== An Extended Suggestion ==

If I may offer an extended suggestion to Real World Experience? Please read the Wiki pages?

Vassyana told you, "User forums and newsgroups are most certainly not reliable sources. Criticisms and other information must be verifiable in reputable references...."

FiveYears told you, "...Some of them dont comply with WP:EXTERNAL, next time when you add external links to a page, make sure that they comply with that policy..."

Gordonofcartoon told you, "I see you've also been told, endlessly, that forum postings are not acceptable as sources. But even if they were, the kind of thing you want to add is your personal synthesis of forum content (e.g. counts of support messages answered, and your assessment of the attitude to criticism there), and that's unusable per the no original research policy."

Also, you might check out your warning from Admin PhilKnight...

Gordonofcartoon also told you, "Yes, but even if we accept the reliability of the source, you are making a novel and personal selection of that material in support of arguing a point: so it's both original research and WP:SOAP."

AecisBrievenbus told you, "RealWorldExperience, it appears you have an axe to grind with PowerBASIC. That is something between you and the company, and it's something that should remain between you and the company. Wikipedia is neither a soapbox nor a blog or a free webspace provider. Information on Wikipedia should be verifiable from reliable sources. We are not in the business of revealing embarrassing or inconvenient TruthsTM."

EdJohnston told you, "I agree with other commenters above that RealWorldExperience's deductions from the PowerBASIC forum postings don't belong in the article..."

I sense a minor pattern here. Could that be true? <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:PowerBASIC|PowerBASIC]] ([[User talk:PowerBASIC|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/PowerBASIC|contribs]]) 08:47, 21 April, 2007 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->

== Conflict of interest ==

Sir, YOU are the forum administrator. You own the forum and the servers it is hosted on. You (and your employees that are accountable to you) are the only ones with administrator rights. You ultimately are responsible for any content changes and you (powerbasic et al) deleted that thread (as well as many others). While I cannot prove why you deleted it, as that goes to your state of mind, it is irrelevant. The fact remains that it WAS deleted. That is not speculation as one click [http://www.powerbasic.com/support/forums/Archives/Archive-000003/HTML/20000801-4-000465.html here] shows.

It is also clear that this thread dealt exclusivly with one of the well documented issues that you are seeking to keep from public view; namely Powerbasics use of the FPU for integer operations. If untrue, please state clearly that Powerbasic does not use the FPU for these operations? You cannot. Hence this is FACT that should be included in any complete entry regarding Powerbasic.

Editing content under the name of "Tim Robbins" is also contrary to Wikipedia policy. While I cannot prove that the owner is busily working away from home at 6am on a Sunday morning, it seems very ulikely that an employee would have repoted your office in Venice, FL at 6am. Of course you could allways submit a sworn afadvit and prove the contrary.

Regarless, this level of effort by your company to manage this wikipedia entry is in itself proof of a flagrant violation of Wikipedias Conflict of Interest policy.

If you are going to quote a response on the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard#PowerBasic_Part_II Conflict Of interest noticeboard] at least qoute the whole thing. "I agree with other commenters above that RealWorldExperience's deductions from the PowerBASIC forum postings don't belong in the article. But the article at present is one-sidedly positive about PowerBASIC. This is a product which has been out for many years, and you would expect it must have been reviewed many times in the trade press. Presumably these reviews are not uniformly positive, and if we read them, we could create a more balanced picture. PowerBASIC, due to its longevity, may in fact be 'behind the curve', and you wonder if it can handle the range of tasks addressed by more recent languages that run on Windows. (What about Visual Basic?). I hope that we could answer some of these questions for our readers, but this would require some kind soul to actually dig up references and work on the article."

Your

I can only hope we get an admin with some computer science background to spend a little time on this, then I can work on contributing other content rather than standing up to a tendentious company owner. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:RealWorldExperience|RealWorldExperience]] ([[User talk:RealWorldExperience|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/RealWorldExperience|contribs]]) 19:23, 21 April 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Medcab ==

Despite any COI issues, I just want to know if there are any ''current'' problems with the article. Medcab only mediates content disputes. Is there any content dispute atm that needs to be addressed? [[User:Xavexgoem|Xavexgoem]] ([[User talk:Xavexgoem|talk]]) 21:06, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

:Apart from a need to find third-party sourcing, which is being addressed, I don't think there is a content problem; I think the Mediation was invoked on tendentious grounds. [[User:RealWorldExperience]] is an SPA focused on trying to introduce hostile material to this article based on a user forum. He has been repeatedly advised by independent editors that this is an unreliable source and that even if it weren't, his analysis of it (e.g. counting posts replied to by support staff) is original research. See [[WP:COIN#PowerBasic Part II]]. [[User:Gordonofcartoon|Gordonofcartoon]] ([[User talk:Gordonofcartoon|talk]]) 22:02, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

::I understand his worry, however; PowerBASIC is an SPA, too (no offense intended to either :-) )

::With that said, I'm going to ''close'' the case, but remain here incase of sourcing/OR disputes. Does that sound OK to everyone? <Small>this is largely because the medcab case page has gotten REALLY bloated :-p</small> [[User:Xavexgoem|Xavexgoem]] ([[User talk:Xavexgoem|talk]]) 22:26, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

:::Thanks. I agree also about his worry; but nobody AFAIK has assumed the OR problem invalidates the concern over COI edits on behalf of PowerBASIC. That side of things is being tackled: I've mentioned at [[WP:COIN]] the problem of a username "PowerBASIC" being a role account, and have been among those suggesting it'd be helpful if whoever is representing PowerBASIC could stick to one registered account. They've said they'll help with supplying sources [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Gordonofcartoon&diff=prev&oldid=207467821], which is fine. [[User:Gordonofcartoon|Gordonofcartoon]] ([[User talk:Gordonofcartoon|talk]]) 23:36, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

:::The content of this article is now 100% accurate. All of the hostile content has been removed. Thank you. [[User:PowerCoder|PowerCoder]] ([[User talk:PowerCoder|talk]]) 15:49, 25 April 2008 (UTC)