I have no problem with your explanation of inflation (I agree, and it is a point well made), I have a problem with these two passages:
And shooting the messanger was never a winning strategy
I have no problem with your explanation of inflation (I agree, and it is a point well made), I have a problem with these two passages:
And shooting the messanger was never a winning strategy
I personally appreciate Markus and Michel’s contributions and think everyone else would agree.
The real question at stake here is not whether Xojo is good. It’s whether Microsoft can build a compelling case that hurts Xojo in the future. Instead of pro’s vs hobbyists we should reframe the question.
Assuming pricing between Xojo & Microsoft are exactly the same; Which would you choose today? What would Microsoft/Xojo have to offer you in order for you to switch?
I’ll start: I use them both.
I use Visual Studio (or .NET via some other mechanism) when code security is not important and access to enterprise components is vital. I also tend to choose Visual Studio if it is a project being maintained by a larger team in the future. Most teams tend to be Java or .NET or both and can take over my work very easily. It is challenging to hand Xojo projects off to other software consultants as they are unfamiliar with it. This means my projects require me to stay involved longer than I may have been in .NET world.
i use Xojo when I am deploying the app to external users. Code security, native apps, cross platform is vital. I also use Xojo by default to start any prototyping and most projects either never leave this stage or stay in Xojo because the prototype proved functional enough to build on. These projects anticipate either just me maintaining them or someone under my employ and not intended to be handed off to another team.
I prefer whichever syntax I have used most recently. If I used C# yesterday then today I like C# better.
I wanted to use Microsoft BASIC (for Macintosh), longtime ago and before I started to do that, I had the chance to read the pr telling that Microsoft killed the product.
Years later, I used AppleScript, then Frontier, then another BASIC (a paying one) and less than six month later, I discovered REALbasic (thank you Apple) and pay $99 for its first release (REALbasic 1).
On the other hand, Iit is strange to me that someone want to pay more for a product: Hey Geoff: you have a customer who want to pay more for Xojo, bill it more and he will be happy ;-
+1
About prices, Visual Studio Standalone License is $499, and Standard is $1,199.
https://www.visualstudio.com/products/how-to-buy-vs
Well when starting comparing money (and time) don’t forget to include all the addons. And Michel… as long-term Xojo User (I am paying my bills with XOJO Software and Support) I totally agree with you. But we all never should forget worst-case example Borland (Embarcadero) and how they killed Delphi (Pascal) in pushing the price tag so high, that they ruined their loyal user base back in the late 90ies and beginning 2Kties.
When Borland released Turbo Pascal, it was 700 Francs VAT included. Roughly 130 with inflation.
Today, Delphi 10 Architect is 5,968.80. Close to 45 times the original price. These people have lost their marbles.
That is not what I am advocating for Xojo at all.
The whole discussion is so typical for this community. The original topic about Xamarin quickly changed into a “why Xojo is bad” discussion. Despite the fact that all of you are using it you are discussing it over and over again
I am around for about 10 years now. I started with the NUG and then moved to the forums. Since then discussions like this one pop up now and then.
XOJO is good for rapid prototyping. The more complex an app get the more complicated organizing your project gets. And you soon hit the bounds of what is possible with XOJO. You can overcome most of these problems with plugins but not everybody is willing to pay for functionality you might get for free in other languages.
Downloading
Microsoft and Xojo cannot be seriously compared.
About free/community edition, it is easy for Microsoft to use its tremendous cash momentum to choke any possible competition. I clearly remember when Microsoft wanted to kill/buy Quicken. Microsoft Money was sold at Fry’s for $29.95. They almost succeeded gobbling it, as Quicken could not survive for very long with a competitor sold at 1/5th its leader product and was considering surrendering, until fortunately the operation was stopped by the anti trust commission.
Microsoft has often used dumping practices to stifle competition.
Not sure it is the interest of the public in the long run, to have only one supplier. Even for free.
Locking this thread because it’s gotten too far off topic, if you want to continue the discussion please start a new thread.