Xojo Web 2.0 review on AlwaysBusy’s Corner

I think it was Realbasic, RealStudio, Xojo and originally even CrossBasic (not sure about that last one)

You had the original framework, then the new Framework and now API 2

The company renamed from REALSoftware to Xojo
The IDE renamed from REALbasic to REAL Studio to Xojo

It did originally start out as Crossbasic before REALSoftware existed

The classic API (API 1) and the Xojo framework used primarily for iOS, and now API 2

Unfortunately - I’ve detailed a few times why it was the way it was and it was actually optional and broke no existing code - unlike API 2

Why does Xojo always have to make things sound so complicated using terms like ‘preemptive threads’? Is this done deliberately to make the OP uncomfortable so he stops asking? Or is it a trick the engineers also use to keep Geoff of their back?

Just say as it is: Sorry, no, Web 2.0 can not do this, not because it is complicated, but because we took some decisions that make this impossible. Our long term plan didn’t take into account PWAs are coming fast.

just like his over-use of “ad hominem attack”… a snooty way of say “persoal attack”

Sometimes it seems they are trying to “educate” people who seem to be technically knowledgeable about the subject. And that education is “here why this is complicated or not easy”

Having been on the other end of this sometimes saying “well here’s where what you’re asking for is hard to do …” can be better than just saying “no we cant do that”. How so ? Saying we cant do that can lead to a lot of “Well why not” and on and on down that rabbit hole

BUT, saying why its hard also can lead to the “well if you just did xy then …” on and on as well

There’s no perrfect way to respond unfortunately

Another review of Xojo, Filemaker and more
https://timdietrich.me/blog/xojo-filemaker-202009/

4 Likes

Keep in mind that some won’t and probably should not move their apps. If I had a large web app that was working fine and was likely to reach the end of its life in the next 5 years, moving it to Web Framework 2.0 would not be an attractive option. However, if I didn’t know how long it would be in use and liked some of the benefits of Web Framework 2.0, I’d be considering it.

IF you are one of these folks that should not (Geoffs advice) then your options really are sucky since you cant use the latest version (no web 1.0 in it) and are stuck with using an older vesrion which will NEVER get any more fixes.

1 Like