Ik las dit artikel op makeuseof.com over “onpraktische en niet werkelijk gebruikte” Gambas en schreef dit antwoord:
(niet gepubliceerd omdat ik niet wilde inloggen op sociale media – het artikel dateert uit 2015 en het bestaan van Gambas nu, in versie 3.X zegt op zich ook al wel iets…Misschien onderschat?)

I strongly disagree with Gambas being impractical and/or not being actually used. I do use it. In a company, for in-house software. It offers me an incredible freedom to do a lot of different things, from CLI scripts running on a server to end-user desktop applications. I can easily make libs that do e.g. the data connection/objects part, and use them in different applications. I made an appliance with it with custom adapted hardware (Raspberry Pi, camera etc) for use in the factory. I use it mainly as desktop application maker for database using applications in a small company with production, design and sales departments. We try to run as much as possible on Linux computers, and I could drop the whole license bookkeeping and spend that time on really user-driven applications. I suppose this type of use might be under the radar, as none of these applications ever comes out. And, having been a teacher myself, I really wouldn’t mind to use it for teaching, you can go lots of directions and the language has a vivid development.

Even I think “missing cross-platform” is a pity, but it is more important that Gambas sticks to its Linux roots and does the things very well on that platform.

Meer op gambas.copyleft.be