Of course Björn is right that nobody needs pro+, but it’s still relatively easy to get to $2000 a year. At the latest, a pro will soon realize that you can’t do without plugins.
Now, these are often cheap, but it accumulates, especially if you need professional plugins for pdf or databases, etc. And since you have to update Xojo regularly (because that’s the only way you can possibly benefit from bug fixes), you’ll have to update the plugins sooner or later.
You can skip that for a year, but you may lose the discount for loyal customers.
All of this would still be absolutely fine if new releases (which you need for your bugs) didn’t keep bringing up old bugs. I’m not even talking about new bugs.
Even that would be tolerable if it didn’t take forever for the next release, which then promises that the bugs would be fixed. It’s a vicious circle and nobody can work like that in a professional environment.
You can’t even put off your customers that, for example, a problem can only be solved in Q1/2023.
Not so much of a problem when you’re writing Grandma’s Recipes application, or a private stamp management program, but it kills when you have professional clients unless you hate them to the core and you want to screw their business.
I do not think so. I think (especially in comparison to other postings by him) that he gave an honest, factual, but of course subjective assessment.
The point with API2 versus API1 was probably not necessary because a beginner (as it seems) can’t understand it anyway. In addition, it will also affect a newcomer much less (except that old postings and the documentation may be confusing).
Basically, I think it’s important for newcomers to get all the opinions so that they can form their own opinion.
What bothered you about Ivan’s post? Maybe I’ve overlooked something.
Let’s assume that Ivan’s post was subjective with a negative touch about the product.
Could we also assume that the OP is a grown up who can read and make up his own mind without a Xojo employee patronising in a wholly inappropriate way?
There where many not tolerable attacks which where not moderated. That is - if it is not leaving the normal - okay and normal. We are not three here and we can stand that I hope. It is a bit rude here sometimes I know but it is also: a community. And even if I am not really believing that this is okay I can say: it is like it is. We can live here, discuss here.
If Xojo staff and Xojo cronies do that in Xojo’s forum it is despicable. Doing it here would be equally despicable. I am sure we can discuss, also disagree, without hauling insults at each other.
As we can see at the Xojo Inc ‘forum’: tolerating this kind of incivility leads to loss of credibility. Criticise, argue, but remain civil and avoid ad-hominem attacks. That is my point.
Some of his points were very valid. While most on here can translate API 1 code to API 2 Code if we have to, the fact is a lot of the resources available on the web are API 1 code, and translating them to API 2 for a newbie is not easy.
And you do need some Xojo platform specific knowledge, as well as to know declares, to get good graphics performance for some game types with Xojo.
The resource loss resulting from API 2 is significant IMO … I never understood why Xojo inc did not consider that more important, given the paucity of resources/information available for Xojo compared to other languages.
No matter how you twist or turn it, Xojo has too many issues at the moment. Some are definitely outdated, some maybe obsolete, but many are still showstoppers. But if new features are mixed with bug fixing, then nothing will change in this situation, because the current release model is the basis for the evil.
From a purely technical point of view IMHO you can only ensure that you have a stable version ASAP and patch it quickly and permanently.
At the same time, you can then add new features in a modular way.
Then you have to think about how to monetize it in a license model, but that’s the easiest exercise.
I only hear from people who were Xojo Insiders that this is technically not easy (or not even possible) to implement at the moment. But then they should work on that. If the insiders are right, then that underlines my fear that otherwise nothing will ever improve.
It can’t be a viable solutions, that you need the latest release to get your bugs fixed, but new features and dramatic changes push you to re-engineer your app significantly, if not completely.
Well, The very first source of information for most devs this days come from a public search engine. Warning a newcomer to not do that and explaining why, can save him a lot of wasted time, frustration and give xojo a chance. Just last week some other newbie post that he found some code on google but dint work.
I also share the VB6 Background and understand what he is looking for. I just tell the fact that API 2 also breaks more the likeness to VB
An example of something not necessary and trollish could be calling paul a hypocrite for saying that xojo is a spiritual successor to VB6 when they have renamed the product and now even the the keywords to distance themselves from vb but I didnt wrote that.
This distancing is while they want to distance themself from the fact that Basic Language is old school and say: it is not basic, look we have even var. Sorry. That is a conception which can’t work. Xojo’s Idea of building a business was originally to build a tool similar to VB6 but Cross Platform. Nice dream. But VB6 times are a decade or much more ago. And this people with the knowledge of VB6 becoming less and less. And with this distancing even that people will not run on Xojo and buy.
Over the years, I’ve used a lot of different BASIC-based languages, starting with my TRS-80 and from there to the first IBM PC (QuickBasic) to FutureBasic (for Mac), Visual Basic, and eventually to Xojo. At some point while using VB, I ran across a link that had a database listing something like 26,000 unfixed VB6 bugs. I was stunned and more than a little unnerved that I hadn’t encountered any of them, and I assumed my apps would crash and burn at any minute. I tried going to Microsoft’s support site and there was almost nothing about bug reports or fixes, so I got the distinct impression that MS didn’t think the bugs mattered much. Fortunately, my apps didn’t crash and burn outside of my control, so I stopped worrying. I’m sure the other languages I used had bugs, too, but only rarely did the vendor mention them except when release notes for an update would mention that they had been fixed.
RealBasic was recommended by a friend who did cross-platform work, and I happily jumped right into it. One of the things I noticed right away was that RB (and now Xojo) had a publicly-accessible list of bugs and the company seemed to encourage filing bug reports. Seeing those reports made me start worrying about bugs in the language that I couldn’t control. Xojo forum posts regularly hash and rehash bug reports, with the level of vitriol always rising. I know the reports are valid and some are absolutely critical and can be really nasty, but most of the reports I file are never fixed, usually because Xojo says they can’t reproduce them. The Xojo community is incredibly responsive and helpful to each other, which IMHO sets it apart from many other languages whose user bases are far bigger. So I’ve learned to chill out and find ways of code around the problems.
I’m sure I’ll get flamed for saying this, but those of you who depend on Xojo for their livelihood (like me) might consider tamping down the vitriol, to avoid scaring away users and damaging the long-term prospects for Xojo. If the company loses users, it will either focus on the things that users need or it will eventually disappear and we’ll lose this terrific community. Yes, press for bug fixes, but flames aren’t going to get any of us very far with Geoff or any of the Xojo engineers. It’s their baby, too. And yes, I think API 2 was a huge mistake, but I’m slowly finding my peace with it, even as I know it’s mostly just window dressing.
Sir, there is a big difference between the Bug handling of VB6 and Xojo. The Bugs filed in VB6 Bugtracker which was also public by the way where not showstoppers. That for example the Button behaves with pumping up his size when pressed: not drama. Having a Toolbox where Menu parts disappear out of control: Show Stopping. Having a Datetime Bug which shows you 3ms wrong time: not from interest. Having a Web Client time function which shows you the server time but the client time system: biiiig problem and Showstopper. And in this wise I could walk through further. If you have real hundreds of thousand Users they will find many Bugs more than 10 or 20k. That is a known fact. But Xojo has not that much users (look on community and look on the amount of people writing about). But that is not the part of it. The technical difference is clear: it is a definitive different scene you want to compare.
I had 9 Bugs which where really heavy to workout. I had a few which you can’t even correct. I have a few where I had to write Parts of the Application in JavaScript and bind it to Xojo. I have a few Bugs where I had to connect a second Software with a Socket written in TypeScript to be able to get that Job done. All while Xojo Libs where not working like expected. And yes, the community was helping while that all was and still is documented in the Xojo Forum while people wrote before about. Web 2.0 was a different animal which had only half of the functionality. What ever: Xojo has many Showstoppers. And they are not acceptable when running in.
Yes, I was sure about that it must be do-able. But how comes that they can’t roll out all bug fixes always in the next release? That sounds like they have no internal processes at all, or at least the wrong one. I have seen so many times in the test channel that bugs got fixed, but they didn’t make it to the release. Why?
Okay, I understand that they have to run their test cases at one point and they might need to freeze your bug fixing at one point too (ideally before running your internal test, followed by a last internal bug fixing or errors before release). It is good to hear that it would be technical possible, but then it is very weird why they are not fixing their release strategy.
