Open Source the stuffs you can do before the hammer is falling. After you are not allowed to touch the hammer anymore is it ends in Chapter 11. That can be happened for every company and I really hope that it will never be happened for Xojo. But it is a risk all times
The only thing keeping me from taking a much closer look at B4J is that its IDE is Windows only.
Phil
3 Likes
ok lol
I already provided tons of evidences. So why lol? No Idea about? Possibly. But that does not mean that it will run as fast as C++ or others at the end. But I forgot. You believe you are the best. So: you are right, Xojo Code is fastest Code on planet. If you are ignoring Object Pascal, C++, C+ Java. Ah yes. I forgot a second thing. Multithreading is mission not really possible with Xojo. Man. You try to compare High end languages with a construct without real Multitasking … using only one core isn’t that fast. I don’t know from where you get your absolution but: in real Xojo isn’t fast. Compare it with Java. In File I/O. In Database Access. In String concatenation. You may find out that it is another world.
As a second topic: You may believe that while Xojo Code is translated / transpired to C++ it is as fast as C++. It is not while the used frameworks are not and the resulting code is also not. Especially in moments where Java, C++ and other languages are doing multitasking Xojo is hanging long behind. So the “lol” shows me: you have no Idea about.
1 Like
Maybe you don’t know what you are talking about here as Xojo code isn’t translated to c++
Okay, interesting. So Xojo code is compiled as Xojo Code with LLVM. Possible. Then it is even better: Fox the code. And why you need the C++ runtime under windows for Xojo projects and also under Linux and macOS?? Neat.
Read therefore the wikipedia Text for LLVM and CLANG. Both used for Xojo compile. And see: Xojo is not a language the Clang frontend will accept. There is the need to do a bit work for. But okay. At the end: it transpires to the LLVM lang and compiles. So…I don’t see here the Xojo own compiler technology you try to speak about.
The used have their own complier until they switch to LLVM a few years ago.
-Karen
Xojo compiler is using LLVM for compilation and linker.
They made their own custom LLVM frontend to read Xojo code and output the intermediate code for LLVM to compile to machine code.
2 Likes
No questions about. But it is not as fast as C++. Question is: why?
Possibly was the own compiler way better that times. But you can’t have all: all platforms with one Compiler AND blazing fast. Except C++, C+ JAVA…and so on
sorry yes, it is translated to the intermediate Language of LLVM Compiler.
you need to redistributable runtime since Xojo frameworks depend on them since they use a newer version of VS on Windows
its a tiny bit more complex than that but this is more or less accurate
I stopped renewing when Real Whatever was reinvented as Xojo. A strong suspicion the new direction would turn to an inward spiral was one of the reasons I sidelined the product in my toolkit. My own business did well enough in the interim that we could afford a flutter on a Xojo Pro license a couple years ago. I am unlikely to renew again until Xojo show some sign they are not floundering around pretending it’s the 1990s and failing to identify their market.
Whether Xojo can find a direction or not at this stage to persuade me to renew would probably take a Pro license on a $9.99 pcm subscription model.
Yeah, it was a DUMB move to increase the price in the current state of the tool. Just when a lot of people is wondering if is worth the money. Web2 is not even halfbaked and there is no way to use the few IDE improvements on Web1 
But yes, significant reduced price could be another incentive to renew, but maybe they cant aford it any more.
1 Like
I really don’t have any problems with the language, although the incessant renaming and re-renaming is very annoying.
What they could do to get my subscription money again is give some love to the IDE. The I&^%*& bug where the inspector keeps re-opening itself all the time, the help text or whatever it’s called under the code editor that’s supposed to show signatures while you type but doesn’t until you backspace, the ridiculous method inspector where signatures are crammed into a 10-character wide field, the nonsensical Navigator behavior, all the wasted space. Basically just make it work like RealStudio did. If you have to gussy it up a bit to make it “modern”, ok, but don’t throw a great UI in the toilet like they did when they changed to Xojo.
I don’t hold much hope of many of these things being addressed, because they’re all working on triple-34-inch-monitor setups and the space constraints don’t bother them.
Improving Windows graphics would also be a good thing.
As far as hoping for someone to buy the company, be careful what you wish for. Say what you like about Geoff, at least he has a vision, sort of, and a passion, without a doubt. Products like this that get bought often go very sour and then wither.
Web 1.0 was interesting to me because it was reasonably similar to desktop, but I have no interest in learning something as alien as Web 2.0, which also apparently requires fluency in CSS.
IoS was interesting until I learned how limited it is, especially with respect to accessing any hardware. I’d go to Swift (as I’ve done before) if I had to write an IoS app.
My bread and butter is desktop (Windows-targeted for the most part), and Xojo meets my needs, albeit with annoyances at the poor IDE UI.
5 Likes
If Web 1 was still around I would be using it now… there are apps I could have created at work where it would have been very useful for me… but that situation did not happen until after Web 2 came out (I guess i dodged a bullet on the timing!)
I used Web 1 in it’s infancy way back when for some in house stuff precisely because it was like desktop… as it did not have a significant learning curve for someone who does not know web technologies and would not need to code web apps often enough to take the time to learn them…
Now with web 2 being a 1.0 (beta?) product AND needing to know web technologies, it just is not practical or productive for me to try and learn to use it to do anything significant.
BTW the inspector popping up all the time is a REAL pain for sure!
BTW the RB/RS/Xojo IDE’s have always had their quirks… and goodness but the first versions of REALStudio were buggy to say the least! ( That as when they first started dog fooding when they transitioned away from C for the IDE)
Anyway over the last 20 years I kind of learned to take it in stride and just ignore the annoying IDE quirks… Of course I don’t code every day and my projects tend not to be huge…
Now problems in built apps because of bugs and having to keep finding workarounds, as well as incomplete features, and poor performance for some things are quite another … those get under my skin!
-Karen
2 Likes
Yes, I should have said “Make it like RealStudio - but without the frequent crashes.” 
1 Like