Damaged by Xojo? Are you Interested in a Xojo Lawsuit?

I’m really pissed about all the time and money I spent on Xojo.

I’d like to sue, but it might not be worth it on my own. So, I’m wondering if anyone else is interested in discussing this topic.

Maybe it’d be a class action suit or maybe just a group of those of us who were damaged by Xojo’s actions.

What do you think?

Thorsten had a suggestion:

I don’t think it’s worth the hassle. Any victory would be purely pyrrhic because if we win Xojo likely goes out of business and if we received any money it wouldn’t be enough to cover any losses.

While I believe I was damaged by them I think any competent lawyer could get me to concede under oath that it might have been my fault. I could have done any number of things different. Focused on different products, services, or even moved to a different language on my own accord.

No one forced us to use Xojo in the first place. And certainly no one forced us to keep using it. That’s on us. The fault is ours for using it as long as we did.

1 Like

And maybe I’m feeling different now that I have an employer and pretty happy where I’m at.

Edit: And no longer using Xojo on a daily basis.

1 Like

I used Xojo for one low-risk in-house project which later unexpectedly became an issue with a client but not one that would cost me money (I offered the existing app for their use at no cost, otherwise they would have had to pay me to write it from scratch, which if I end up having to do it anyway, they aren’t out anything). Since it’s really just a simple in-house CRUD app, it will probably lurch along well enough as-is.

So … I can’t demonstrate any actual financial loss. Just disappointment in my fellow man, lol.

If a lawsuit were to be brought forth, I don’t think “finanacial loss” should be the center point. I think it should focus solely on the blatant violation of Texas and International law.

Financial loss will be difficult to quantify, violation of specific laws… much easier

1 Like

That’s true and false in both ways. The losses - if well documented - are a good base for argumentation. The way you spoke about is also a good way but will not give that amount of money to Hal he is expecting.

To be clear, money is not the important part to me. It’s to correct the behavior. But money might be the way toward that goal.

Class actions arent always about monetary punishments
Sometimes its , like you say, about forcing a company to ACT better
MS antitrust settlements with DOJ for instance
It didnt really hurt MS but sure made them behave in a much less predatory way

Also we are using a tool that has no policy of LTS.

So they simply can say, the purchased by the client is still there and can be still used for what he purchased at that time. If the client encountered problems or bugs the client had the option to get a refund…

And when purchasing with the rapid release model it is accepting the permanent Beta State / Half baked product.

It is a shame the poor quality of the product and the direction of chasing new useless shiny tings instead of improving quality but… No LTS, no compromise

1 Like

I’d guess that anyone that relied on Xojo’s statement of continued support for Web 1 projects when Web 2 came out that then found that claim had been revised to something else might fall into the category of “harmed”
Initially it seemed there might be ongoing fixes & work on Web 1 done.
But that proved to NOT be the case (and the statement clarified)

Possibly the same for anyone with projects using API 1 & controls that no longer get updates unless transitioned to API 2

Both of those could cost significant sums of money to deal with and so constitute “harm”


Yes, but all of this are problems to migrate your previous work to a New release. IANAL buth looks like xojo can just say that in the rapid release you agree upon purchase, xojo releases are AS IS and dont include bug fixes. There is not a “final” version that can be fixed and “Year” of updates is just that, a period of time when you can have licence to use the other AS IS independent releases shiped in that year.

Recall IANAL :stuck_out_tongue:

So without a real lawyers opinion its speculation on my/our part as to what MIGHT be actionable and what isnt

Personally I think the “We support Web 1” reversal is MUCH more actionable than anything since people might have relied on that and only later found that there IS NO “support”

Good grief. How pathetic.

1 Like

Until/unless you’re been seriously screwed over by statement about “we support” only to find out later thats not true
Or similar

Then it’s a legal issue
And why Xojo “clarified” its policy nearly 2 years later

Even that statement is a narrowing of a more general statement

EDIT : but feel free to state you opinion
Something your ALLOWED to do here
Just keep it civil

Xojo releasing a mediocre product? Sure.

They knowing it is mediocre so they dont offer warranties nor LTS, pathetic.

We expectig bug fixes to have a half decent tool, yeah, also pathetic :frowning:


With rapid Release you are not agreeing to a bad quality and also not to a beta status of a product. Rapid Release is also something they do not really provide: I can’s see something like “we produce rapid release and therefore we have many bugs and…”. No. They say: Xojo is a high quality System following to the newest technological standards and one of the best if not the best System for Cross platform engineering.


Life is too short to dwell on the past in one’s professional life. In this case, I don’t care about the money either; the success of former Xojo users is the best way to taunt them.
INN serves as the pyre, the confessional for slander, and the daily therapy sessions until the mental damage has healed.