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
That exactly is one thing I always wanted to ask you @npalardy : what do you mean with not behaving quite native? Differences in File Chooser and so on? Cause the rest behavior of Windows is the same in my eyes. I would be happy to get what your problem is with Java cause maybe it will be also a future Problem for me.