Displaying pictures on Web

Hello guys,

I’m hardly trying to find a use for this Web 2.0 thing but unfortunately is killing me , does anyone find a better way to use that or I guess I should even quit using it for anything as is useless .

So I’m trying to have a login page, which in html takes 1 min to do properly, here I put the canvas, I draw the logo in it, it simply becomes super pixelated and weird, I add a WebImageViewer maybe is better, well I get the image cropped, looked into the docs as from what I remember the WebImageViewer always resize the image automatically to the container size, well not anymore.

So in the end it takes me 5 min max to have a proper login page in html, but it takes ages to have the same proper page in a fricking Xojo Web. again where is the RAD here ? how we should use this thing ? when we will see a Beta version at least as this is not even a beta , functional ?
How do you keep aspect ratio on a picture that could be done nicely in css, but not here, what is the purpose of WebImageViewer ? if the image put there does not resize properly and in order to do that you cannot have a simple option to set Autofill for example ore resize keeping aspect ratio, but in stead you have to take the image, re-draw it again in a picture and then re-set the picture again in the WebImageViewer. I mean come on , is this the best way to do this thing ?

I guess not my day today but this drives me nuts.

Of course I will have a lot of things like why not use css, why not use a html viewer, well why should I when we supposed to have all the controls here to help do the job.

Honestly this gets frustrating and in the same time makes you feel quitting on the whole ide part just because of some stupid things.


It is frustrating. As you posted at the state web 2.0 is it shouldn’t be counted as anything else but a Beta, but here we are. What is frightening is the thought that Web 2.0 will run the same faith as Xojo iOS and be forgotten for years.

But what I really find frustrating is the fact that Xojo has something with great potential, really this could be awesome, but it is not there yet and perhaps never will be.


Well now looking on web 1.0 even if it’s more than a decade old i guess is way better than this thing, no idea on your side but on us we have a saying , who is chasing 2 rabbits will catch none , same here, Web 2.0 is out but not useable, IOS is out but except doing simple things that mostly require a lot of declare is 0 , now the famous android on its way so jumping from on product to another without even having a finished product is insane .

I get reviews from customers that apps look old and outdated , well what can i say, some said give them a slack they are just a bunch of guys doing their best, well i cannot tell to my customers , pay me and wait couple of years as they will eventually doit, hopefully not 10 as the previous change, so from a developer perspective it is not so bright, a lot of improvements on desktop, but still a lot to come , but come on , you launch a product , we have to pay a price to have it and the cannot use it for years as it is unusable . I mean what do we do ? We cry on the forum, get help from fellow developers , beg people to do plugins and do declare examples to have simple things , well i’m honestly delaying a project for the past 3 years with the hope that web2.0 will come and now we are at the limit of quitting all and trying new options , so indeed i guess frustrating , and just so that you know , graphics is not only drawing squares on the screen or circles that look pixelated and hope that people will not notice. I guess i better stop here before i catch on fire again


Then why not using any of the freely available tools, programming languages? Perhaps because the learning curve is steep? Because often they work best with commercial add-ons? Perhaps because a professional IDE is recommended for these as well and will cost money too. Perhaps because you will need to learn multiple languages, frameworks, segregation between front- and backend? Especially on a “classic” webproject a 3 years old solution would be outdated too (but I agree at least you would have a solution.

A cross-development platform, as every other platform will always have pros and cons - but especially never cover 100% of all available features of all platforms, and is up to each of us to come to our own conclusion.

Of course we all have different needs. I’m addressing it this way to my customer: we can develop a nice and fairly well looking Windows / Web solution for you at these cost $$, if you want to the shiny best-looking solution we can do this as well, but it will cost $$$. Usually this is a very short discussion and all in favor of Xojo.

The current release of Web 2 is not perfect yet, but calling it a beta is a bit harsh and unfair. If I want full feature set of iOS then I should develop natively. If a customer is asking for a quick and light mobile version of his app, then I’m happy that I can offer it and that I can re-use a lot of code. Just the fact that plugins are now possible on iOS is a big step, and will reduce the need for declares significantly.

Well don’t get me wrong , I like XOJO, but unfortunately I try to use it and I cannot how much I would want, and if in the end we would select other tools to do our job just because xojo is not ready than why we use it and why we need it ? and specially on this situation with this crappy covid you cannot say to the customer it costs you $$$$ because you cannot have it in XOJO as they are not ready and you have to wait few more years, just look on the Web 1.0 history, 10 years and still not ready and it was replaced by 2.0 and I say it truly when I say it, and I did not said a beta, I said Not even a beta. and last magic word that I would like you to define for me , RAD, where is it ? why do you think I still use XOJO ?

I see simply that for simple things like list boxes , other controls I either have to use 1.0 or use something else, I see that things that are common on any other platform are not here, I see that using a picture is not even close simple as any other thing, but I still want to use it for something but I cannot , I see things better in 1.0 than on 2.0 usually is upside down, when you increment you do better not worst .

I can say only Good Luck XOJO and hopefully we will have mature products soon. and I would like the moderators to lock this post as I don’t want to open any war here but in the same time to remind them that we are here and we try to use their products in a nice way and hopefully not to take years to have 1

1 Like

Well, I understand your frustration, but all I can tell is, that while others (not you) started whining I tried out what I can do, what is not possible and I achieved really quickly a working intern app (for doing something useful to test). And it even works on mobile, even though I didn’t spend a second yet on that part, not beautiful but useable.

As I have developed exactly the same in the past with python/Flask and python/Django I can judge on the differences. Though you have more freedom with both python frameworks (no surprise here, as they are using solely HTML/CSS and you can change every pixel) I was at least 10x times faster for the UI design, I call that RAD.

Last but not least, it is only Web 2 allowing me to copy tons of routines for Dashboard showing customer activities as I can pick it up from customers apps. Ok, APIv2 needs a bit of care and love, but it was mainly drag and drop. Definitely easier and faster(!) than translating the code to a different language.

Now I know that it doesn’t help you to see a shiny success story when you are facing issues to realise anything on your own. It is true, that Xojo is limited to the Xojo Bootstrap 2 controls and that desirable functions are still missing. Any yes, there are as well a few bugs, and there will always remain bugs but you can already build something useful. My pieces of advice:

  • Sadly forget what you did in Web1, you might be able to release something close to it in the next releases, or with plugins appearing on the market, but for now it will block you mind, as web2 works differently. Learn the toolset first!

  • Go first trough all the examples in the Xojo folder and try them out. Debug them, change them, ask questions if something doesn’t work, etc. Redo the same work the next day, the world will already look brighter.

  • Start thinking about how you could use parts of these examples to build something new: YOUR app.

And read fundamental documentations about bootstrap, to understand that framework, it is quickly done and you will get a better understanding. Of course you need to learn it, no one can help you on that. But yes, for some plans you might have in mind, it can be that Web 2 is the wrong approach. As much as every tool on this planet has its pros and cons.

My 2 cents on web design and Xojo: I understand that Xojo had to switch to a framework. It is debatable if bootstrap was the right decision, but it likely was, mainly for it is stability and as long as it already exists. A Framework is helping to simplify the design, this comes at a price: the were not invented for pixel-accurate design everywhere on your page, on every browser, on every platform. One of the reasons why so many Wordpress / Bootstrap blogs are looking the same these days.

And of course Xojo had to further limit the freedom of bootstrap, as Xojo has to interact with this framework, it is the nature of the beast.

BTW pure HTML / CSS is no way better if you want to achieve a fantastic design you should have images in 3 different sizes, etc … don’t give up please, but start working on small little items and very quickly you will see progress and what is achievable and what not. If you want to achieve the next best looking website, using the latest and greatest HTML/CSS/JS features then investing into Xojo Web is the wrong path but that’s not the purpose of Web2 for my understanding.

1 Like