So we’re all very clear then - ask for a quote to fix bugs on the version against which they were raised.
Really ?
1 Like
Yes. I don’t expect Xojo Inc. will spend resources on Xojo 2019 unless someone pays for it to get their desired bug fix implemented. e.g. back port a fix from 2020.
1 Like
I’m sorry but we must all appreciate what we’re saying here. I have a Ford Everest with 161 bugs. Now all 161 bugs have been fixed but on the Ford 150.
I’m still driving my Everest around…
2 Likes
My guess is decisions are not driven by lack of cash but shortage of dev time. And the cost of maintenance needs to be amortised across the user base. All I will say is a Pro subscription costs much more than buying a target licence so there should be maintenance of the targets pros use.
Norman says we should only pay for existing product and not buy unless already happy, but we have been renewing to support the company that supports our development. Our feedback to “would you recommend Xojo to a friend” survey proves this because we said not until some bugs are fixed but renewed anyway. Was Norman correct? We shall see.
2 Likes
With respect, “2019” is only a marketing name. Two “2019” releases were delivered in 2020, and already it is said Web is depreciated and will not be fixed. But the real issue is Web 2 is not a viable upgrade from Web 1 in many situations so the “2019” > “2020” moniker makes no sense. A compromise solution needs to be found.
1 Like
What is the real request here?
- if a change in OS or Browser exists in the next (12/18/24) months that makes 2019r3.2 not usable. to update it to 2019r4?
- still fix Web 1.0 bugs for the next (12/18/24) months, releasing 2019r4, 2019r5, and so on with only Web 1.0 fixes?
maybe another option.
I don’t know how hard could it be to release a maintenance release with only Web 1.0 fixes, make it 2019r4 and make it clear that is only for Web 1.0 and don’t put it as a main download to not confuse users.
Maybe there will only be 1 or 2 versions needed. Web 1.0 users will not complain anymore about the sudden end of life of Web 1.0 while they wait to be able to update their project to Web 2.0 once all the features needed to do so are released. Just an idea.
2 Likes
It would not be to complex to say: we take care for 2019r3.x until Web 2.0 is completely producction ready. It would not make any problem. I am not speaking about error correctsion, I am speaking about taking care that 2019 is able to run on newer OSses when 2020 is not in a reral production stage. This would make Web 1.0 long term and thats it. That they will not take care of the bugs is anyhow clear, there where not for the last years.
Few things are impossible but a huge factor is the cost/benefit analysis. Attempting to support both would have driven the cost up quite a bit. Given that Web 2.0 is the future, it was prohibitive in terms of cost to keep Web 1.0 as a first class citizen along with Web 2.0.
So in the short term the transition causes some pain but we have to look at the long term as well and balance the whole thing. It’s a difficult task and there’s no right answer that makes everyone happy.
1 Like
I think everyone who is reasonable accepts this. However Web 1 should at least be a 2nd class citizen, not persona non grata. The integrity of Xojo Inc. is at stake.
3 Likes
does this discussion sounds to you like we have „some“ pain?
I feel like we‘re standing on the moon and have only a pen, a paper and an 70s calculator to get back to earth.
5 Likes
My vision for Xojo has always been that it be a development tool in which the user never grows out of. I have always wanted it to be inviting both to those learning programming for the first time and seasoned professionals. We have many users that have started as hobbyists, brought Xojo into their work and then became professional developers. Given that we care about all of our users we absolutely care about professional developers. Often they are the ones that do the work that is most publicly visible.
From time to time to have conversations with users and I think when those happen we both learn a lot. @Lars_Lehmann, I’ll PM you and see if we can set up a time soon to talk by video if you’re interested.
5 Likes
Pros are leaving and telling you that’s not a tool for Pros because Xojo isn’t a reliable tool anymore. You are not comprehending what is being said. 
5 Likes
@Geoff_Perlman Do you really believe that only one new user will buy xojo for starting programming out of the blum? The programmers buying and using xojo are sorted in two cathegories: hobbyists that want to start a programming for world wide web for some projects or to write a little app or something like this. They are not the ones buying a system for 700 bucks and that every year. This would be the group where you will make new business all the time with. They have one nice side: they will not complain to much cause mostly they think that they byself made the error.
The other group is more complex. Programmers. Here you have programmers came from Visual basic and have the problem to setup a programm for their company and so on. They are not able to do really complex stuffs and are mostly thinking if an error is not their own fault. And the professionals. They have multiple projects outside and have to live from the game you are playing with xojo for them. If it is not working they will loose. Not you cause the philosophy behind is: 1000 times new business for 700 per customer is the same amount of money then 1000 times business with older customers. But they are complaining, finding tons of bugs and ranting that they want them to be fixed with the time.
And yes, over many years you can do the business like it was running until now. But the times where changing. And the users also. When 200 somebody bought a Real Basic he was not thinking about the renewing until he got that he is out of support. If needed he would buy the support. Today there is no chance for professional developers without good and stable support. That’s what we are all paying for and not for updates we don’t need. This is the big gap between your view on it and our view on it. So for you deprecating Web 10 is - as a business man - really needed cause there are no chances to have both in complete maintenance.
For us it is needed that we know that with the next IOS, MAC/OS, Windows or whatever our Web 1.0 will stay. Why? Because the professional projects are not ready and standing there for five years until you get lucky. They are under maintenance. Do you have an Idea how this works? No? I ill tell you. One of my products is named hdware. It is a software used in multiple medical devices in a range of around 67 versions of supported hardware not to speak about the big pile of variants. My customers buying this and have to get later xojo license to fullfill the software live cycle requirements made by the authorities all over the world. So what if there is no Web 1.0 anymore? We have to rewrite and to re-control by the authorities. All the Hardware variants of all the products the visualizing system is builded in.
Serving professional users a half ready system is not a good Idea at all. Telling them use it or die - that iedea of yours is even worse.
3 Likes
Which bugs have you reported that we haven’t fixed?
2 Likes
I stopped reporting bugs because many were never even Reviewed. Having to lobby and come to you to get stuff fixed is nuts. Having to beg to get underline, strikethru, and the overstrike fixed in Web 1.0 was epic though. Can’t even get basic bugs fixed. But all I hear from you Geoff are excuses.
That’s just part of the issue though. Web 2.0 is essentially a public beta. Web 1.0 is gone. What am I supposed to use the dead product or the half-baked product? Most of the issues Pros are having are a management issues.
I really hope you get this and can recover. I’m going back to rewriting Xanadu in PHP because both Xojo Web are unusable. Good luck. I mean that.
2 Likes
As evidence that we are listening, you told us that what was preventing you from moving to 2020r1 was the absence of the MousePressed event along with coordinates in WebCanvas and we are adding that for 1.1.
We do listen. We can’t always satisfy every concern or complaint but we do listen.
5 Likes
@Geoff_Perlman I am also listening and I am testing 2020R1.1 yes. And I found many stuffs need a really big rework and some still missed and will come up somewhen. This is the way software is developed, no question. But for me the biggest probnlem was missing the mouse events cause then I would not be able to rewrite at all. And I do not say that I can not rewrite my code with Web 2.0. But it is not ready jet and it has a few problematical bugs. They bill be away somewhen but until that moment I have to use the Web 1.0. If I want to or not. And the reality is: it will need a bit of time.
Therefor all I beg for is that there is the security that Web 1.0 will not die until Web 2.0 is ready for production completely. This means not the fixing of Bugs in Web 1.0 cause this you will not be able to handle and it would be really, really expensive. But the programmers are in panic. Cause if within the time there will be the situation that Web 1.0 will not startup anymore with the OS or networking in OS changed or so on there is a big problem for the Developers.
Beside this I saw really late that building CGI is not possible anymore. Maybe it will come somewhen but it is jet not here. So we have to wait. And for this solutions still to write in 1.0 and are in the need that we have to have a way of production with 1.0 until a production ready 2.0.
I am not and I will never be aganinst new technology. I am not against Web 2.0. Not to understand wrong: my problem relies on the fact that Web 2.0 is not ready. If there would be no Mouse Point return I would have to say good bye xojo what I really, really dont want to. That’s why I was really ranting. Now I am only discussing and I try to get xojo to the point that we will have this way for the future.
I know it costs money and if - in this case - it will cist 100 more per year it is not the problem. The problem is coming up when there is no perspective cause of the corset everybody is wearing over the time.
And yes: I would like to be able to write my Web Services with xojo furthermore for the future and we started already to setup a new Version on Web 2.0. We get borders because of the missing links and with every build more and more of them are closed. But it is not the moment to say this is the only line of a productive system.
And I am in the knowledge of the development process since many years. When I started to develop my first Computing card for Apple II to run CP/M on it and wrote first Software packages until today. And yes, we have tons of other development environments (for the Hardware drivers C and C++, for cross plattform Desktop often Netbeans / Java and much PHP for the Web. But the xojo concept makes it really a fun to write Software and not a pain. And this fun I want to carry from Web 1.0 also to Web 2.0 but it is only poissible if there is not the deprecating of the only productive Solution. It is not this much: we only need to know that there will be an Update if there will be a big Change what makes really problems. Like the BigSur Update. It was needed and it came. And this, exactly this we need.
If we are in this stage you can deliver a ready web 2.0 in a week, a month or a year. Who cares. And I will - promised - test what I can test to have a good base for the solutions. This would be the right process. In my view. In my opinion.
1 Like
You have created a total of 22 cases in Feedback. 6 are feature requests, 3 are beta bugs and 13 are bug reports. 8 were closed as not being a bug or not reproducible. One is still open because it’s an unhandled nil object exception we can’t reproduce but we are hoping more information will at some point come to light. We have fixed all other bugs you reported that were actual bugs. Removing the two outliers (one that took 33 months to fix because it was fixed in Web 2.0 and the other that was fixed the same day it was reported), we took an average of 2 months per report to fix them. That seems reasonable to me.
You do have 1 report in a Needs Review status but again it’s a unhandled nil object exception and we don’t want to close it. We are going to add some status such as “investigating” specifically for these types of cases.
I just went through all 22 of your cases. With two exceptions (the above needs review case and a feature request that was ultimately marked as a duplicate of another report), on average, it took us 2.6 days from the time you entered a case to the time it was reviewed. That seems like a reasonable amount of time to me.
While I’m sure there are users that can point to cases of theirs that have yet to be reviewed and there’s probably someone out there with a long list of them, that’s certainly not the case for you. So I don’t understand where you’re getting the idea that we aren’t your reviewing cases.
As for lobbying, I can only say that in general we look at how many people have subscribed to a case and prioritize those that way also of course based upon the severity of the case as well. If a case isn’t getting a lot of subscribers, then yes, we rely upon users to bring cases to our attention that are very important to them but not to others. Sometimes we are able quickly resolve them and others have to wait. That’s just the reality of the limitation of the resources that all organizations face.
Sometimes our perceptions turn out to not align with reality. That happens to us all at various times of our lives. It’s my hope that this additional info helps you to see that in this particular case, that’s perhaps what has happened.
6 Likes
Good luck Geoff.
2 Likes
As you should know a long time feedback was not able to connect from Linux. Never mind I wrote Mails. Your stuffs showed me that they will only react on feedback. As this example shows there is more between that what you see and what’s real on my site.
And when asked for video for an incident really long time known I am sorry: for this Idea I have really no time.
So the result is: nada. It’s okay so I have a foundation for my decision and that’s it. You are not willing to understand what’s going on.
Also that’s okay, it is your business, we are only customers. Not more and not less.
So I guess that I for myself will stop to react to stop loosing time. It is a dead system when not production ready. Try to open a project when you have multiple elements on your site. It will need days of rework. If this is your way to react I can not change it. What I can do is avoiding this situation. That’s it. I guess it is what you wanted: getting back in your comfort zone. From some reasons I believe that it is not the right way to fight for something what should be normal. So do your stuff further but don’t try to show everybody as the stupid and the smallest. Works if it is one, not if there are hundreds.
Behind my position are many developers and many of them wrote e mails to me. Why? Cause they have the same problem. Your strategy is good for new sales but really bad for life cycle providers. And that are all pro programmers. Have a nice time.
1 Like