The descriptions are more an introduction to the person behind the job than a formal CV-style text. I quite like how they are written.
It anyhow makes no difference what they have studied. If they are fit for the Job they do they are fit for the Job they do. And so: hope is the only route, hope for getting all bugs fixed.
I think I was the only Comp Sci graduate working there when I was there
Well Iâll be I had no idea he did
Or maybe I did and forgot
Another thing to consider⌠having or not having a degree doesnât necessariy indicate how smart you are or how knowledgable about a particular subject matter your may be
6 Likes
But you are rejected (here in France) when you do not have it.
This is something that is not handled well in Europe. The US culture is far more flexible in that regard.
People do not necessarily work in the exact profession they learned/studied at the beginning. Earning a degree is one way of getting knowledge and experience, growing into a job is another.
Of course, some advanced and complex fields make it quasi obligatory to have a specific degree in order to get the necessary knowledge and toolset.
In my experience it was always so that the Degree holders had much more background knowledge. Most non-studied are enthusiasts. So: where is the mixture of it I asked my self always and still do. One Point is: calling them Engineers in Europe is coupled to the right for the person to hold the title engineer. And that is possible only with the degree. But that is outdated.
As far as I can see the quality of the person related from the education. And you canât make a difference. You will see if they have the knowledge or not.
One thing for sure, Xojo needs a dedicated engineer per platform.
Iâm currently investigating an issue for a customer, which appears to be caused by Xojo not following the platform guidelines (it may be purely coincidental).
What makes it worse is that I am pretty certain I have filed a feedback for this once upon a time.
2 Likes
That would be a big bunch of engineers needed. While for all platforms an engineer is needed (Windows,MACOS,Linux,Android,IOS,WEB) and for the Xojo frameworks also engineers are needed (Desktop,Web,mobile) and for the development of new technologies also there is half of it available. But double amount would mean also: somebody has to pay them. And that could be dangerous. So they will not setup it like this I believe.
This is all the same old arguments many of us have had for years. Too many targets too few developers. Geoff says theyâre âadequately staffedâ and in his keynote this week said, happily, that over half the developers (so 3?) have compiler âexperienceâ. I actually laughed out loud at that one because theyâve had dedicated compiler developers in the past and Iâm sorry but fixing bugs or tweaking something in the compiler is not the same thing as being a competent compiler developer. Thatâs a very specialized skill.
Their argument that they get some targets for free because of LLVM is such BS. Every target requires some development and QA time. Thatâs just a fact. Every new target just weakens the overall product.
They definitely need more staff. Shoot, they could have a developer do nothing but bug fixes for years and still barely make a dent in the list. They could add another developer for each major target (Mac, Win, Linux, Web, and Mobile) and still probably not make much of a dent in the overall work.
I also laughed out loud when he said theyâd spend 2 weeks in each development cycle to work on bugs. UmâŚthey should dedicate at least a third of their cycle to nothing but bugs. But they gotta get new stuff out for marketing purposes so I guess we now know how serious they are about bugs.
I honestly believe that Geoff has made a conscience decision to keep the development staff small. Heâs definitely had larger teams in the past. Maybe itâs money related or maybe itâs about his ability to (micro) manage a smaller team vs a larger team.
I suspect what Geoff considers or calls âthe compilerâ is the IDEâs front end to the actual compiler written in C++
Tweaking that isnât the same as tweaking the C++ code
And, as you note, tweaking the C++ code isnât anywhere the same as altering it any significant way
Even adding VAR as an alternative to DIM wouldnât require a rewrite of the compiler - alter the GRAMMAR and then regenerate everything. Quite honestly it should be about 5 minutes to alter and then recompile.
Again NOT a thing that requires a âcompiler engineerâ
its all about the frameworks - every new target requires a framework. Maybe they can recompile existing code (ie/ Window on Intel vs Window on ARM) and so lower that sink of time - maybe
As we can see Norman: they have problems. And yes, when there are framework problems they are not compiler related. But as a vendor like Xojo I wouldnât feel comfortable not to have a compiler specialist. No Compiler Code is bug free. So it would bring much more than only five minutes.
And so they could work on their compiler based code completion and âŚ
What ever I write here, they anyhow will not do it. It is like speaking with a crocodile. It will - after speaking - eat what it getâs. What I said about is uninteresting. And that feeling I have here.
1 Like
This has long been true - yes even when I worked there. And before that.
For my $ they seem to be more visible now
And it seems many more pope are saying so
But their fingers are still firmly planted in their ears
This has been confirmed here. It is 2 weeks per cycle, means an average of about 5 weeks per year or about 110 bugs fixed.
Xojoâs team page is back online, with some changes.
Having listened to the keynote and having researched the web for evidence, you may be well right.
Director of titles in such a small company are ⌠pretentious ?
Notice they dont list âthe teamâ so the company maybe appears larger than it is
Oh well âŚtheyâve long done that
I wonder how long theyâll keep doing this - at least publicly - and touting that they do this ? âevery major releaseâ - so not during a point release but only in point zero releases ?
Thats no more than 8 weeks MAX per year
I wish theyâd just alter their prices to
-
CREATE fewer bugs from the get go
I mean how many bugs have been reported in the new Desktop, Web, and Mobile controls already ? -
deal with existing noes consistently and in a timely manner
The bug bash is PR - not much more
There are many more directors now than before. Thatâs really great news!
FWIW they were before as well 
Of course that is what they try. Director of who? Without anyone below you? Just like their blown-up accumulated number of users, forum members, apps made with Xojo etc⌠And âThe biggest Xojo event of the yearâ? It had almost no attendees (out of the self proclaimed 450000 users). Social media and even TOF (20000 users! 
) showed little to no interest to it.
I found this thing below also worth a giggle as they donât have any intention (or money) to do so. Who is appointed to also wear the cap of director of HR this week? But as you say, it makes them âappearâ to be a big companyâŚwhich doesnât even has an office buildingâŚ
Like everything with Xojo: lots of hot air.
1 Like