But as you mentioned, through your load balancing, you can achieve your objective right ? (not dismissing the Xojo issue here at all btw)
Agreed! We are talking about a workaround. Not about a target state.
2 Likes
Yes, mostly 
1 Like
@Lars_Lehmann, Have you created a case in feedback for this memory leak you are seeing? I ask because I don’t see one listed on this thread.
I have showstoppers unfixed:
web canvas is not updating sometimes while normally updating without problems
the memory errors Greg spoke about
timing errors of Javascript and server resulting in errormessages
While Greg said xojo will fix Showstoppers I believed in his words. This was an error at all. Nothing will be done on Web 1.0 even if they know (and they know exactly about) that the showstoppers are there.
So: promises are worth: nothing at all.
3 Likes
Lars, what do you think why I was protesting so loud last year when I realized that this situation comes up? I said in front that this will be the result. Nobody wanted to hear, nobody wanted to listen.
1 Like
Not providing assistance for Showstoppers was bringing me to rewrite our entire Software so that there is only a rest of Xojo in the market. Why? Because it was cheaper to rewrite and recertificate instead of finding workarounds for Software which is not working, has Showstoppers and is not updating them like it’s promised what is evidenced in this thread exactly.
1 Like
Web framework 1 cases are closed instantly I assume.
I just wrote this thread here to find out, if it’s us or if someone else notice a similar behavior. I know, you stopped fixing old issues and bug on Web 1.
Why this escalated a bit, was the statement of @Greg_O_Lone (see below). This was the opposite I’ve read in your Blog article.
3 Likes
Lars, this was the opposite when it was written down. It was only on pressure that Greg was writing this and it will never be fulfilled. It is a Marketing speaking.
1 Like
Dude can you please stop hijacking others forum threads?
We ALL here know, you’re angry. But I am here to find solutions, not complaining about the ever-same-topic over and over.
A small memory-leak is not a showstopper. It is unfortunate, and I wish it would be fixed, but I am realistic enough to know that it wont.
When you had the chance to rewrite your stuff. Fine. We still have to deal with our Webapp for the next time.
5 Likes
From the CEO itself. I am pretty sure Geoff thinks twice, if he wants to break its promises.
But as I said. Bugs are bad. fixes are welcome, but Xojo was very clear in telling us it wont happen.
Am I happy with it? NO for $%§$% sake. But it is what it is.
First of all: I am not Dude for you. This is not the Language civilized people should use. Second: I wrote exactly that what is happened. Nothing will be fulfilled and people like you are standing there with their Webapps what is in its conclusion not okay. So this was not Hijacking in my eyes. Sorry if you see it so.
3 Likes
As for a workaround, could you detect idle instances (like no active session) for, let’s say, 30 minutes, 20 hours after last load and run? When such conditions are met, the app calls an spawner of a new instance and quits.
That’s not workaround at all. That’s garbage and absolutely unprofessional. But it’s like it seems the only way
1 Like
TRY
CATCH err as contradictionException
FINALLY
MessageBox(“Granted, a memory leak or any other issue is not resolved by emotional derailments.”)
END TRY
9 Likes
And its not resolved by blaming others. I know that in your eyes xojo is the midpoint of the world. But in my eyes the xojo inc has not fullfilled what they promised. Started with further support of Web 1.0 and ending with the error correcting culture they have. So maybe it is not in your oppinion that somebody is not letting others speaking in this wise. But what you are doing here is even more: you try to blame me for trues. The Point that xojo behaves like this with owners of licenses is one fact. That there is no workaround then restarting the App is another one. Might be that you have the comfortable situation that you can live with the workaround. If you would have this on IOT Applications or medical devices you would look different on it. And if at this point you would get the message “rewrite with Web 2.0” you would be nearly at the point like me. If you in that moment would get that, from regulatory point would need to rebuild the applications you would find out, that you lost in that moment a few hundret thousand dollars. And then, on top, comes Jeanot Muller and tells you how live has to function. Sorry. Your conclusions are wrong and your Idea of Software development having nothing to do with professional development at all if you do not get that this behavior of the Software is Garbage and has nothing to do with professional programming.
3 Likes
I’m afraid this is whataboutism. I am not offending you, but I don’t want to lose the thread of the discussion here. And I don’t want to read yelling over coffee in the morning either.
This is a Xojo forum, and this is about making Xojo better or making the best out of Xojo. The fact that products get discontinued is usually annoying, but then it’s about finding ways and eventually convincing the manufacturer with facts to reconsider its release strategy, perhaps. That has been going well for years, which doesn’t mean that Xojo consistently implemented all my(!) feature requests. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose.
To make one thing crystal clear: yeah, I’m a Xojo fanboy, and I’m proud of that too.
2 Likes
It is okay that is no question. But I am professional programmer. I bought xojo, we tested and we wrote many Webapps with it to find out shortly later that tehre are showstoppers inside. We wrote about them like many others and we tried to get xojo to the point to fix them. Instead of fixing they brought Web 2.0 which has in wide parts the same problems but also new ones. And there is no chance to get the Web 1.0 Apps to run; instead of this we have to rewrite completely. If you believe that this would be professional behavior of a Software vendor like xojo I have to tell you that I am not accepting that. And indeed you where not getting until now: I am not against xojo. I am against the policy to leave customers with their problems behind to get out new versions with new features. That has nothing to do with consistency and reliability. And yes: my target is also to get a better xojo. But instead of standing at the side and yelling Hurrah I am pointing on the stuffs which have to change.
1 Like
Let’s agree that we disagree. I am a professional developer too, in many areas not Xojo only. I can add to whataboutism too: When SAP moved to SAP R/3 they left many customers of SAP R/2 with no fixes, their sole answer was: migrate to SAP R/3 - now they are doing the same with SAP HANA. Y2K was used by many software vendors to force their newest and greatest release and not supporting older versions.
Web development is changing for years at an incredible speed and it should ring a bell when the original developer for the excellent Web1 agrees that the product reached a dead road and Xojo clearly communicated that some of their original plans were not justifiable to be implemented and full backward compatibility impossible. I support more the idea to enable Web 2 with missing core functionality from Web 1, where feasible, rather than continuing to ride a dead cow.
This said I have a lot of sympathy for @Lars_Lehmann’s particular finding. Memory leaks are ugly. And I have an own interest too. We are running many Web App 1 apps, which we won’t convert any time soon, if ever. So ensuring that the old product can still run in its current state (with all known bugs, missing features etc., just running AS-IS) is what we are currently trying to discuss here.
As a businessman, I would probably book Xojo’s consultancy services, rather than burning thousands of dollars in a redevelopment. If I will ever decide for the latter, I’ll just move on and will never look back. Time is the most precious thing we have in life.
You where not understanding correct or I was not describing correct: I can not leave a product in the Market under regulatory Authority if I have such known errors which we had because of the showstoppers. When xojo decided not to correct but bring out Web 2.0 there was no, really no chance to hold the apps in use and no chance to develop them on xojo Web 2.0. That was the end of the story cause in that moment there was no chance to get out of this. Xojo had no Idea how to get out cause there would never be an Update anymore, Web 2.0 was not a solution I could rely on. So I had to decide to switch the platform cause I could not say “waiting for…” because there was no “for what”. Maybe you are not working under authority and you may have not this kind of problems when you have an issue like this.