Factors That Could Impact Xojo Web1 Application Functionality

We have a single Web 1 application that we do not want to update to Web 2 … unless it stopped functioning for some reason. We would like to leave it alone but we are concerned that something could happen beyond our control.

  1. It is working perfectly running behind a well-maintained load balancer.
  2. The load balancer handles the SSL.
  3. The server hosting it is a linux server running Ubuntu 22.04 with no plans to update
  4. The web app uses PostgreSQL 14 database with no plans to update.
  5. The web app easily handles the traffic and the traffic will not increase.
  6. It does not access any web services.
  7. It is compiled as 64bit
  8. It has been running for 10 years with minor updates from time to time and no major updates are expected in the future.
  9. There are no issues with the Xojo 2019r3.2 IDE or plugins we are using and there are no plans to update the plugins.

In this situation, what could change in the next 4 years that could cause this web application to no longer function without any solution to fix it?

1 Like

The IDE will no longer run on some version of your Mac.

1 Like

You could always run the IDE you need in a VM if need be

I think biggest problem to face would be major changes in browsers that could render your web app unable to provide the functionality needed or in worst case not run at all


I don’t wish this on myself or anyone else.
But merely hoping it won’t happen could be fatal.
I might think of making some new applications with Web2, but REWRITE the old ones with Web2 is unthinkable, for me.
I plan to do it with other development tools, which of course I will not mention here.

1 Like

Why ?

because I hope not to repeat the experience of having to largely rewrite an important application after 4-5 years.
Or do nothing, waiting for the old one to break.
I lose either way.


In either of these situations, a serious security issue could occur that would require you to update to keep your data safe.


Ubuntu 22.04 is supported until 2027. It would seem unlikely that an upgrade to the OS would cause a Xojo Web 1 app to no longer function, but anything is possible.

It seems more likely that PostgreSQL could be an issue. I can imagine that a security issue might require an upgrade which then could potentially require a new Xojo plugin that would be incompatible with Xojo 2019r3.2.

Thanks for all of the input.

How using another tool may prevent that ?

Im on the same boat. Web 2 has still many bugs and “delayed” features to be considered. Also it is a total different product that requiere a rewrite with costs involved.

Well, to be honest, the speed of xojo to act on bugs and fixes is really bad, so the months to wait for a new release with the fix could be comparable with your time wasted on a rewrite.

The major concern is the host OS, but if you are not touching your server there is no problem, and even if you decide to update, Linux and Windows have an awesome long term support so it is likely that you can work with the IDE and run the web server for MANY years.

As for a suden change on a browser scenario, it has a low chance, more likely to happen on a single engine, like cromium so you will have some time with the workaround of directing the users to another browser (firefox for example)

MANY users with this problem and xojo dares to make a blog post about “being safer” than other tools :roll_eyes:

Other tools have an extended support waranty.

This is an example. Other companies dont just kill the tool overnight. They give you a waranty of some YEARS of bug fixes and/or security updates even if they are already ofering a new release of the tool.


Xojo has offered extended support for Web1.

For any other software, extended support means to patch the software with any needed security updates and fixes to keep it working on the supported platforms for the offered period of time.

xojo already made a post where they made it clear that their “extended support” for web 1 included only aswering questions about it… NO fixes for old releases.

Maybe Im wrong, but for me those 2 things look very different.

Geoff walked that back.

I want to clarify that we are using web 2 successfully and it is getting better each year. We are happy with it and we have a production app that maybe is not mission critical, but it is very important to our operation.

The reason for the original post is because we have this older web app with web 1 that is working perfectly as is. I am curious if anyone is aware of something on the horizon that could cause it to stop functioning. After reading these responses, I don’t see any reason to worry at this point. When the day comes, we will rewrite it in web 2 or maybe one day it will be retired

Web 2 is much different and the UI will need to be rethought. But we have a lot of business logic and shared code that works fine, is not ui related, and will not require a rewrite.

although I haven’t counted them, I think I would have to remake at least 250-300 Web1 elements (pages, containers and dialogs), in addition to everything else that is needed.
I think I will not.

@Geoff_Perlman I think that unlike many other posts in which an irrational criticism spirit prevailed that led you, I suppose, to not answer anymore issues related to Web 1, this post is characterized by raising a common concern to many of us who have been supporting Xojo for a long time and love this language, and this particular post is being raising the problem in a friendly way and without negative animosity, so it seems to me that it would be appropriate that you give your opinion and clarify once again what Xojo’s position is and will be in the future on this issue. Thanks

1 Like

To answer (and comment on) the original question (which I assume is what you’re asking of me), as long as nothing internal or external is changed, the web 1 app would, in theory, run forever.

Having said that, we all know that’s not realistic. Things change outside of our control. However, that may not matter because no system lasts forever. So the key is keeping the system running for as long as it needs to run which is a more potentially achievable goal.

In general, we here at Xojo are very sensitive to not making changes that break things. We have had countless discussions internally about making an improvement where we have to throw out some of the suggestions because it would break code. Other times this is unavoidable.

And yet other times it was thought it be unavoidable at the time and only later when it’s essentially too late to realistically do anything about it, is it discovered to have been avoidable. This is likely the case with the web framework. In retrospect we probably could have found a path from web 1 to web 2 that didn’t involve requiring the user to rewrite or recreate parts of their app.

In the 25 years we have been doing what we do, this has been the one occasion that required a potentially significant amount of effort on the part of the user to move a project forward. None of us are happy about that because that’s the very thing we work hard to avoid.

Hindsight is, as they say, 20/20. We will almost certainly never repeat such a thing again. I say “almost” because I obviously can’t anticipate every change that may come along in the future. If I could, I’d be in a different business. :slight_smile: We all (hopefully) are constantly learning. If I could take the knowledge I have now back to 1998, when we shipped the first release, there are so many things I would do differently. We have all experienced this. That’s just life. If we are paying attention, we don’t make the same mistakes twice. I feel confident that we are paying attention.

There are some that believe it makes them look inadequate if they ever admit to a mistake. I think this is entirely wrong. To admit when one is wrong shows that you are dedicated to truth and that’s a strength, not a weakness. For me there is nothing more important than truth. Thus as I have said, I regret the web1/web2 debacle. As a team we are dedicated to avoiding such a situation (to the degree that that is practical) in the future.

If it sounds like I’m carefully choosing my words it’s because I am. :slight_smile: The cool thing about technology is that every once in a while something almost magical appears seemingly almost from no where. Sometimes this is quite disruptive. Thus some unforeseen change could in theory require some significant departure. Having said that, as I said before, we work hard to avoid this. Our latest offering, Android, is a terrific example. The underpinnings of Android are more different than any other platform we have ever supported. That you as the developer are for the most part abstracted from them is a testament to our dedication to creating productivity by allowing you to reuse as much of what you have previously learned as possible.

I hope this makes my position more clear. As I said, truth is ultimately what is most important to me.


Thanks @Geoff_Perlman. I appreciate your sincerity and I agree with everything you said. I hope all of us, that have applications written in Web1 and don’t have conditions/plans to migrate them to Web2, could continue using them without any problem. And if any problem appears have the support of Xojo in order to try to solve them.

We would absolutely try to help. Obviously how much we can help would depend on the situation but we would not ignore someone simply because they are using an older version of Xojo.

It goes without saying that part of the reason we do what we do is because it’s how we make our living. However, that’s far from the only reason. We do it because we find satisfaction in helping others do things they might not have done otherwise or nearly as easily. We do it because we find satisfaction in helping solve problems.