Why did you choose it over nasm for example that has a huge community?
I'm totally new to asm..well.. kind of.. i know what registers and instructions are, i know what all the instructions do but dont know in what order to put them to make it do anything lol. I'm not new to programming in general.

I find it really hard to learn assembly yet its something I wish I knew, I cant seem to just drop it and give up like most people would, im way too curious :/ I know plenty of people who code in asm but i belong to no asm community I felt the need to sign up here and maybe get to know a few people.

Nasm may have far more users, but it has less of a sense of community. I converted to fasm from nasm, during a time when nasm development had waned and its future was uncertain. (nasm development is now active again). Since fasm's syntax (except macro's) is similar to nasm's I was able to convert thousands of lines to it one sitting. Like nasm it is open-source runs on many platforms (at least the ones i'm interested in ). But unlike nasm, it is actually written in asm. My suggestion is that you try several assemblers before commiting to one.

I choose it by syntax. it's simplest to me.

FASM was the simplest for me to pick up and use. Everything needed to make the porgram is contained in the ASM file. No need for command line options or linkers. I also love the community.

The no-linker part was just enough for me to start using it (although I waited for the includes to evolve a bit before starting to use it actively)

It's an assembler (i.e. program to assemble parts into something whole under control of my perverted directions, not just another compiler from source). I regularly use it to create/parse/modify files of various formats (bitmap fonts, for example).

Because it doesn't need a linker, because the macro and assembly-directives are one of the most powerful I've ever seen in an assembler (you can even build a custom executable format with it easily) and because it's simple to compile.

It's the first and only one I've used, and from what I've heard about the others I wouldn't like them nearly as much (due to reasons already stated by other people above).

One of the things I hate about HLLs is how much of a pain it is to get something to compile. I like having something that just compiles what I put into it without any weird flags or extra steps or anything.

Already asked 1'000'000'000 times:

- Syntax
- DOS support with IDE
- Selfcompilable
- Easy to use
- Small bloat
- Community / forum / Author accessibility
- Lincense

You may have questions about the usability of some, but:
"Our users have posted a total of 99828 articles"

...and counting

Why not?

Second that. Is there any other assembler with capabilities that allow such things?

It just feels good - in a wicked power hungry kind of way.

So, why FASM?
Why did you choose it over nasm for example that has a huge community?

Just because these guys said-so. They don't need a gang to be the most popular on the block like (Ms-C#, C++ or Java). They don't even care. That's what blew me away. I now know there are things no assembler can do unless done in FASM, but I don't know about NASM and I have no time for it when FASM done completed 99.9999 of all I needed, with-out giving me lip for something that can be done when others say "CAN-NOT DO". No debugger, no linker, no nothing but what I been taught through this forum, including the asmcommunity and masm32. I now translate all to Fasm code to go beyond the speed of light, with no flaws.

Give it your ALL until spring and see for yourself. Nobody/not many, hit FASM first, so you must be pretty tough anyway.