Estimating is an Art, Not a Science

A question that comes up quite a bit is how to do proper estimating.  It’s not an easy thing to quantify as much of involves gut feeling at times.  It’s why I feel that estimating is an art, not a science.  The hard thing about estimating is that it takes experience to know if you’re doing it right or not.

My first bit of advice is start using a tool to track your time.  If you can’t do it by specific task, as least do it by overall project.  Once the project is done you can then see if your estimate matches reality.  It won’t at first but that’s why you track your time so you can make adjustments on the next project.  After looking at several projects I came up with the idea of the times three for estimates.

When you look at part of a project, say a form, your estimate tends to be something like this:  if I know everything up front and there are no major surprises this is what is how many hours it will take to complete the programming and testing of this form.  However, we rarely know what those major surprises are up front so at best this is my guess and multiply it times three to come up with a more realistic estimate.

After a while I started to realize that some forms just aren’t going to take that long.  An About Window just won’t take more than fifteen, twenty minutes – ever – so why do the multiplier on that?  It makes no sense.

What makes one form harder to develop and test than an other?  Complexity.  A simple List form and an Add/Edit form might take an hour each (if that) to complete but busier versions of both might take three to four hours each.

What brings in the complexity?  Well, that depends on a number of factors.  Number of controls on the forms is a good start.  The business logic is another.  If how things work depend on what the user is doing in the controls you can rest assured that programming and testing of it is going to take longer than you expect.

Another part of complexity is the number of unknowns.  If you have to do a complex calculation that involves a bunch of math (especially if you’ve never done said math before) it should up the complexity.  Doing some programming concept in Xojo that you’ve never done before should up the complexity as well.  In both cases you should expect some research time, maybe even time to do a small example project, and a restart or two since you’re learning as you go.

In my initial guess I still do the ‘if I know everything up front and there are no surprises’ estimate.  And then my multiplier is my feeling of the complexity of that part of the project.  The complexity factor is now my multiplier.  So an About Window has a complexity of one.  A simple list form has a complexity of one and half, but a form with several page panels or containers that do different things based on user input might be a complexity factor of three or four (or more).

I tend to break projects down to several parts.  The first is overall project design.  There are certain number of hours just to set up the project and create the classes I need.  There’s usually some database design and implementation.  Do I need to make any special classes or subclasses for functionality that I already know about?

When it comes to the UI I often take the database design as the guide.  Each database table is (probably) going to need a List form and a way to edit it.  Figure that a list table is only going to need a few of the fields for listing but the Add/Edit form is going to use all of them.  Are they all text fields or is it a mix of lookup fields with foreign keys?  Each of these adds to the complexity of the forms in question.

Coming up with an estimate is sometimes an art.  It takes experience (and failing a few times) to get the hang of it which is why you need to track your time.  Using the complexity as a multiplier might be a good way for you to start getting more accurate estimates.

Let me know if you do something different for estimating.  How do you track your time?

Happy coding!

Tools of the Trade

We are currently getting our kitchen remodeled.  We’ve used the contractor before because we know he does quality work and gets it done when he says it will be done.  Plus, when he gives us a bid, we know that he’s already calculated into the bid stuff that we don’t even know about yet.  There’s not really much difference with doing software consulting.

Most times when clients come to us they have only a vague idea of what they want and need.  Usually we can count the number of paragraphs of specifications on one hand.  So when we start our estimating process we just add stuff in ‘just because’ we know that a typical desktop or web app will require certain types of things.

For example, we know that nearly all applications are database driven.  Thus, we include ActiveRecord unless there is a good reason not to use it.  ActiveRecord gives us some other advantages like speed of development time, fewer bugs, and in an update to ARGen (coming soon) the ability to create initial List and Edit forms (for both web and desktop) with controls already laid out.  It’s far from perfect but using ActiveRecord and ARGen saves us a lot of time.

Many business applications require reporting.  BKeeney Shorts has been around a number of years and has allowed us to create code driven reports.  Now, with the integrated report designer we can give users the ability to create their own reports.  It’s still a young product, and there are things it can’t do yet, but for a vast majority of business reports it works great.  Now, instead of taking a couple of hours to code a report it now takes minutes to design the report and see it right in the designer.

We’ve used the same preference class for many years because it works natively on Mac OS X, Windows and is good enough in Linux.  We’ve developed our Window Menu class that works well too.  For web apps we have our own paging control as well as a customized sorting listbox.  These are all things that we assume we’re going to use in most projects.

Do we factor these things into our estimates?  Of course, we do. We spent time and effort to develop them in the first place.  These tools are part of our standard toolkit and using them saves us, and the client, money.  To put it in terms that our kitchen remodeler might use, he knew going in that he would use a tile saw.  He could go rent one just for our project but he’s purchased one years ago because he knows that he typically has to use one.  Renting makes no sense for him when he uses it for practically every project.

I’m not saying that you need Shorts and ARGen to get your projects out the door (not that I wouldn’t mind the sales), but if you struggle with the tedium of database programming, or you dread doing reports because the built-in tool isn’t what you need, then these tools might be good solutions for you.

Regardless, if you use our tools, or something elses, you need to establish your toolset.  Having a variety of tools to get your projects done is crucial for a consultant.  Whether you use plugins or third party code these have the possibility of saving you hundreds of hours of coding time.  At the end of the day, time equals money.

Happy coding!

Imposter Syndrome

Today I’m going to talk about the Imposter Syndrome.  That feeling that says everyone knows you’re faking it and they’re going to find out, at any minute, that you’re a fraud.  You’ll be cast down into the depths of despair in humiliation because EVERYONE WILL KNOW YOU SUCK!

I’ve experienced this feeling and I’ve had conversations with developers I greatly admire that struggle with this too.  This is both heartening because it means we’re not alone in this despair, but it’s also sad since that means there’s really not a point where you’ve ‘made it.’
Feeling like an imposter doesn’t go away as you gain experience but it’s not as big a deal.  With more experience you know the things you know and have hopefully gained enough knowledge and wisdom to know where to start looking for the things you don’t know.  Still, sometimes, you have to fake it.

Wait, fake it?  Yes.  Sometimes you have to be an imposter.  Let me use a poor analogy to explain it a bit more.

When you start a new video game you just start playing, right?  You know a few rules and as you progress you make mistakes.  You learn from them and at some point you level up.  This comes with a fancy cut scene showing your character victorious over the foe, gaining an object of some value, and gaining experience.  Your character is more wise and capable of doing more things.  You were up for the challenge and overcame the barriers to the next level.LevelUp

Being a consultant and software developer is no different than a video game.  You have to play the game to learn the rules.  The consequences of not learning the rules can be disastrous but hopefully you’ve done your research so those rules don’t kill you (metaphorically speaking, of course).

At some point you level up from time and experience doing consulting and programming projects.  Sadly, there is no amazing cut scene with dramatic music since we rarely, if ever, see the level up process.  It’s shame really because I’d really like to have dramatic music just play from nowhere and obtain some cool device from my endeavors.  But I digress.

For a Xojo consultant, like myself, it’s knowing parts of the framework really well and realizing that I don’t know some parts as well.  I do a ton of small example projects to learn those bits better.  It means creating my own tools to make my daily life easier.  Those tools involve ActiveRecord, and Shorts to name a few.  These were not developed overnight but over the period of a decade.

So the next time you feel the Imposter Syndrome hitting, recognize that it’s a natural part of the process.  You leveled up without noticing and that’s okay.  You can handle it.  It means you’re winning.

VB6 and Windows 10

It looks like the Visual Basic 6 holdouts can breathe yet another sigh of relief.  Visual Basic 6 seems to work with Windows 10 as do VB6 apps, though not without some caveats.

I’ve been reading a few threads in various forums where most people have had few to no problems developing VB6 apps or running them in Windows 10.  I’ve seen at least one VB6 developer that claims they’re OCX laden application has issues when loading.  They say that some of the controls simply fail to load at runtime.  Funny enough, it happens only on 32 bit Windows and 64 bit Windows 10 works fine.  They gave no information if these were new installs or legacy upgrades.

Another developer claims to have problems installing VB6 Service Pack 6 on Windows 10.  They tracked it down to two Registry keys not being written.  This website gives a process to install VB6 in Windows 10.  The fact there is now a procedure to install an old app on a new operating system should be pause for concern.

The only way to get hold of VB6 is to have a MSDN subscription.  The subscription is $500 so that doesn’t seem like a huge burden.  But then again, remember that Microsoft is not supporting VB6 though the VB6 runtime is shipped with Windows 10.

There are a boatload of VB6 applications still out there so I think support for VB6 will be around for a long time.  In April, 2014 an InfoQ article  stated there were hundreds of VB6 developer positions listed on Dice and Monster.  VB6 officially went out of support in 2008 so good luck finding entry level and even junior developers to fill those spots – no one is learning VB6 any more.  One of my old clients has had a revolving door of VB6 developers for several years now and it’s getting harder and harder to find competent VB6 developers, and developers that wish to work with it.

As a Xojo consultant we’ve converted quite a few VB6 apps.  Well, convert is a strong word, really it’s a rewrite.  Despite both using a BASIC-like language, the two languages are diverging rapidly (not that they were ever really all that close to begin with).  Many issues that we spent a lot of time working around in VB6 just don’t happen in Xojo.  In our experience entire modules and classes just disappear because we don’t need them in Xojo.

Xojo is updated several times a year while VB6 isn’t.  Xojo is about ready to release a new version that creates 64 bit versions of Mac OS X, Windows, Linux for desktop, console, and web apps.  iOS will also be 32 bit and 64 bit.  VB6 is stuck building only 32 bit Windows apps.

Is Xojo a perfect alternative for VB6?  No.  It is not perfect for every application.  Because its strength is really cross platform applications there are compromises all over the place.  If you look at Mac and Linux applications they just don’t have the complex controls that Windows does.  For some this is a deal breaker because their application demands it.  However, if you want a Mac OS X or Linux version of your application you’ll want to redesign the UI anyway.

Ten years ago our clients came to us for Windows apps first and if we could do a Mac version for the graphics geek that was great.  Now, they come to us for Mac apps first and if we can do a Windows version for the accountant in the corner that’s great.  Xojo does web apps now and that’s become an increasingly larger portion of our business and VB6 just doesn’t compete in that area.

The Xojo universe is full of VB6 developers and the Xojo forums are full of them.  The developers that have found and started using Xojo usually go through a short learning curve and a few WTF moments.  And then, after they stop trying to make Xojo work just like VB6, they embrace the tool and enjoy life again.

Windows 10 is yet another bullet dodged for VB6 hold outs.  At what point do you start to panic and find an alternative?  I guess if you’ve waited this long you’re hoping that Microsoft keeps supporting the VB6 runtime forever.

I am biased, naturally, but Xojo really is a good product and a good solution for many applications.  If you would like to find out some rough costs of moving your application to Xojo we have a utility that will give us some metrics on your VB6 project.  It can be found at http://www.bkeeney.com/vb2rbconversion/

Happy coding!

Licensing Systems for Xojo Applications

For years we’ve been using eSellerate for purchasing and licensing and registration of our apps.  We’ve recommended it to clients too and, for the most part, it’s worked quietly, steadily, and hassle-free for many years.  Their plugin is still using the old Real Studio format and they’ve said in several emails that they will not support Xojo going forward.  With Xojo moving to 64 bit in the R3 release it’s time for us to look at alternatives.

We liked eSellerate for a number of reasons.  For one, it was pretty simple.  Once you learned the intricacies of their web portal it was easy to add products.  Their sample app sucked but we figured out a better sample and offered it as an example for others on our website.  After years of using them I could set a new product up in as little as five minutes.  Then, they handled all of the various sales taxes and VAT for the states and countries that need it.

After the purchase, eSellerate would send an email to the user with purchase details.  This included license code, download instructions, and any other messages that we wanted to give them.  And all of this without any intervention on our part.  It just worked.

eSellerate also has an in-application purchase which we found to be pretty useful.  Users could purchase the application without ever having to leave the application.  For some people this was a nice feature but I’m not sure how necessary this is any more.  Lot’s of people purchase things over the internet with no qualms.

When it came to the registration part of things they had a number of nice features.  I could control how many machines could be activated with a single license.  This led to some instances where users didn’t deactivate a license on an old machine and couldn’t activate it on a new one.  However, a 30 second trip to the eSellerate web portal usually solved this.

On very rare occasions we’d get a user that couldn’t activate an app because of security restrictions on their network.  To solve this eSellerate had a manual activation process that would bypass all of that.  It was kind of tedious but then that’s why it’s called a ‘manual’ activation.

Bundling products together was pretty simple and even setting up payments to a third party was easy.  It was flexible and I know it was used in a number of bundle offerings over the years because of its simplicity.

So now we are on the hunt for the next purchasing/licensing/registration system.  We could write our own but I really don’t want to do that for a lot of reasons I won’t go into here.  Ideally, we’d find an existing system that integrates into our website that takes a variety of payment types and also handles sales taxes.  The last thing I want is to get hounded by a government entity – I just want that to happen automatically.

I’d also like to keep the per machine registration with restrictions on how many activations a single license can do.  It must work on Mac OS X, Windows, and the most popular Linux distributions.  Not that we have a lot of Linux applications but we have some and I don’t want two different systems if I can help it.

The in-application purchase and registration was nice but that’s not necessary any more.  I think most people are comfortable now buying over the internet.  However, offline activation is still something that is a requirement.  There’s no telling where customers are and what security restrictions are in place.

I guess the other part of the equation is that I, nor or customers, need something them an arm and a leg.  I’ve see a few licensing schemes that want $300 per product per month.  While they seem really nice, that’s above and beyond what we want and need.

A few names that have come up recently are LimeLM, Paddle, FastSpring, and I suppose even the venerable Kagi is in play.  FastSpring is more of an eCommerce front end so what are you using for application licensing?

What I’d like, Dear Readers, is for you to share your experiences, both positive and negative for any of the services listed.  Have any missed any that should be on the list?

Having the Same Object Handle Multiple Tasks

It’s often tempting to write some code to do a task and make it generic enough to handle similar but different tasks.  A great example that we dealt this this week was a picker dialog that was used generically for people, organizations, and skill sets in a Xojo web app.

It made sense.  The dialog is called from multiple places and it does the exact same thing in each place (displays a list and the user can filter on the list).  What’s different is what data we pass into it for initialization and what data it loads for display.  We wanted the exact same UI in all three cases.

We all want to write as little code as possible.  That’s what’s great about being a lazy programmer.  Do more with less.  That works until it doesn’t and, to be honest, we’ve learned, the hard way, that sometimes the best approach is to make your objects do one thing and one thing only.  Why?  Because inevitably the client will say, this is great, but we want to filter for ‘x’ on people, and ‘y’ on organizations, and neither of those things are interchangeable UI-wise and neither x nor y make zero sense for skill sets.

The first approach is to put lots of if-then-else blocks into what was once a very generic picker dialog.  Now it’s a complex UI that has three distinct code paths.  This complicates testing since every time you make a change it now has to be tested in all three areas.  What worse is the code becomes complex and if you’re in a hurry (and who isn’t?) it’s easy to change the WRONG bit of code.

Our solution was to write the first dialog, get the UI working properly, and then duplicate the entire object and customize it for its new task.  <Gasp>  I know, bad OO programming, right?  We disagree and that’s coming from the school of hard knocks.

The end result is that we have specific pickers for people, organizations, and skill sets.  It’s now simple for a developer to make a change for the picker in question.  No longer do they have to think, “gee, which datatype am I fixing this time,” and possibly get it wrong.  Keeping it simple reduces accidental coding bugs and it reduces unintended bugs due to code changes.

Testing also becomes easier because if we’ve done something to the employee picker, we don’t have to test organizations or skill sets.  Likewise for the other two areas.  Simple is good.

The one area that it does become a bit messier is if we have to do general user interface overhaul.  Now you potentially have three places to do it.  However, since we have WebStyles with web apps this becomes trivial unless you’re rearranging UI elements.  Xojo Desktop apps are a little harder since there are no styles but in those cases it’s actually fairly easy to copy/paste UI from one form to another (assuming that’s possible).

Call me cynical, but I would gladly work on UI for an hour to ensure they’re identical to futzing around with code in three separate code branches that are nearly identical.  I am a lazy developer after all.

Our experience says that generic, reusable objects, often lead us into trouble, so we tend simply not to do them.  But how do you teach that to a new developer and one that’s trying to do their best to use good OO conventions?  And when do you reach that breaking point where the generic way makes it harder than its worth?  Good questions that I don’t have good answers for.

Happy coding!

You Don’t Need to Be A Rock Star

I have been a Xojo consultant for nearly fourteen years.  It’s crazy to think it’s been that long and it’s sometimes hard to remember back to the early days of how I knew nothing and didn’t even realize that I knew nothing.

It also tickles me to no end that people consider me an ‘important’ person in the community.  Some might even consider me a ‘rock star’.  I claim no fame in the Xojo world other than I’ve stuck it out when many other developers have left the Xojo ecosystem.  Let’s just say that at times I feel like I’m the Last Man (consultant) Standing.

Can you become a Xojo consultant?  Absolutely!  There is nothing special about what I’ve done and you can do it too.  I have an electrical engineering degree so it’s not like I’m an idiot and it wasn’t until I met my wife who happened to be a software developer that I was given permission to change careers.

In retrospect that was the best thing that ever happened to me (besides meeting the love of my life).  I was an uninspiring engineer and I dreaded many of the tasks that I performed on a daily basis.  Software development, on the other hand, inspires me.  I wake up every day and (usually) can’ wait to start coding.  The fact that I get paid to do it is just icing on the cake.  To get paid to do what I love?  Sign me up!

If you know a little bit about Xojo you can become a consultant.  First, ask yourself WHY you want to be a consultant.  If it’s for the money don’t expect it to happen right away.  I think it was two or three years before we really made any money at it.  It took six years before I hired a second developer and ten years before a third and twelve before bringing my wife on as a software developer (she had always been doing those pesky taxes and payroll things that I hate doing).

So if you do become a consultant don’t expect to make money right away.  Or if you do, don’t expect the money to be consistent for a number of years.  Even now we fight with cash flow so it takes some discipline to ride out the really good times when cash flow is great and the not-so-good times when cash flow is poor.

The road to becoming a ‘name’ is not a quick one.  I spent many years in obscurity.  The first developer conference I went to I was a wall flower and barely talked to anyone.  By the third conference I co-hosted a session with another consultant because I didn’t feel like I was qualified enough to do it on my own.  Now I’m a regular presenter at the developer conferences.

One way to become a recognized name in the community is to teach others.  I’ve written a fair number of tutorials and example projects and I decided to doing video training and so far I’ve got about sixty-two hours of video available for streaming (and offline use now) with hundreds of individual videos and project files for new developers to learn from.

I think this is the part that makes people think that I’m a ‘rock star’.  I get people coming up to me all the time at conferences and engaging me in conversation and thanking me for some forum post, tutorial, or training video that made a difference for them.  It’s gratifying and sometimes a little scary (as an introvert) to have people do that.

Here’s my dirty little secret on those tutorials, example projects, and training videos.  Those are my way to learn something about Xojo and leveraging that experience for others.  Put another way:  The best way to learn something is to teach it to others.  If you are not doing something like this (maybe not for sale but for yourself) you should be.  That’s the only way you’re going to learn parts of Xojo you don’t know as well.  You really don’t want to learn new stuff on client projects (though it does happen occasionally).

As a consultant I don’t know everything.  There are still things that I’ve never touched in Xojo and things that I touch so rarely that I have to go relearn it.  Those small projects become invaluable review later on.

I don’t want to discourage anyone from becoming a Xojo consultant.  It’s not an easy road at times and it is sometimes frustrating and you put in long hours and you deal with bad clients and all the really bad things that come with consulting.  But the money can be good, it can be fun, it can be rewarding, and some clients you’ll be friends with for many years.  If you love, truly love, coding and enjoy the mysteries of it and putting the pieces of the puzzle together then maybe you, too, can become a rock star consultant.

Happy coding!

Capturing Unicorn Tears

I ran across a post on the forums where the developer was asking how to call the Action event of a Pushbutton.  The simple answer is use the Push method.  It simulates the user actually pushing the button with the mouse thus causing its Action event to fire (and on Mac OS X the button actually animates the push – I don’t know about Windows or Linux).  The longer, more nuanced answer, is don’t do that!  It’s a bad idea.  Let me explain.

Let’s start off with a typical development experience.  You’ve created your wizbang new utility.  It starts of simple and you have a simple Pushbutton.  You add the Pushbutton to your window, you then add the Action event and you put your super duper code that captures unicorn tears.  You test and it works great to much acclaim.

Version one goes out the door and users ask for more features.  So you add a PagePanel to your Window and move the existing UI to one of the pages.  But, because capturing unicorn tears is THE feature of your app you add a Toolbar to the window and then add a Button to it.  In the Toolbar action event you need to make the same thing happen that the Pushbutton did before.

At this point you can either copy and paste the code from the Pushbutton Action event into the Toolbar Action event and be done with it.  This is bad because if you change something in your process it has to be fixed in two places.  But you’ve read the documentation and know that there is a Push method on the Pushbutton that allows you to simulate the push and fire the Action event.  This is slightly better because you only have one copy of the code.  But it’s still not great.

The better choice is to create a method that does whatever was in the Pushbutton Action event.  Maybe a method called “Handle_Capture_Unicorn_Tears” is a better idea.  Because then it can be called from either the Pushbutton or Toolbar action events.

I know, this seems like a lot of work, but now version two ships and someone asks, “Hey, wouldn’t it be great to have a keyboard shortcut for getting those Unicorn tears?”  And you say, “Yup,” and proceed to add it to the Menubar with its own MenuHandler.  If you had copied the code from action event to action event now you’d have a third place to maintain it.

Have I mentioned yet that this is a bad idea?  So don’t do it.  I’ve had to fix projects like this where code was copied and pasted each time it was used.  All of them slightly different.  Are there reasons for them to be different in this location versus the other location?  Only the unicorns know and they ain’t telling;  it’s very hard to debug apps like this.

But no, you’ve been trying to be a good developer and know that copy/pasting the exact same code in multiple places is a bad idea.  But you did use the Push method and you now try to call that from the MenuHandler.  Except the window that the Pushbutton resides on isn’t even open yet when you try to Free the Unicorns.  Except that in testing you always had that window open when calling the MenuHandler and now users are reporting a Nil Object Exception and are pretty angry.

I’m sure must be a valid reason to use the Push method.  I just haven’t found it yet in fifteen years of coding Xojo applications.  The Push seems to be the lazy way out when putting the code from the Action event into its own method would be just as easy (and preferable).

Push works for Pushbuttons, but there is no equivalent for it in other controls.  Nothing.  Learn how to call the same method from two places.  It’s not that hard.

I’ll mention a forward looking thing based on Xojo for iOS experience.  In the existing framework setting a controls value via code will always fire it’s action event.  For example, if you set the Value of a CheckBox it’s Action event fires.  In iOS, setting the equivalent Switch value via code does NOT fire its ValueChanged event.  This is on purpose and all iOS controls are like this.  I was told by a Xojo engineer that this will come to the desktop and web frameworks too.  Be warned.

Capturing unicorn tears is cool and I encourage to make such a utility.  Be smart about it and be lazy and not just lazy now but lazy for a year from now.  If you ever have a need to call a control event from another location, make a method and call the method from the spots it needs.

What say you my fellow Xojo maniacs?

Xojo Freemium Model Continues

Late last week Xojo announced that the Freemium model is NOT going to be cancelled and will continue indefinitely. According to a very brief forum post they discovered new information that showed there was no significant revenue difference between the Freemium and 30 Day Models and therefor the Freemium model will continue.

I don’t care which model they end up using. We’ll be buying a license anyway. Freemium has a LOT of advantages to the community. I’m also glad that the revenue difference isn’t significant – which is, by far, the most important part that some are forgetting.

What concerns me the most is the apparent lack of due diligence on Xojo’s part. In the original announcement (since removed – I’ll get to that in a minute) they said they didn’t make this change lightly. It took roughly a week of the community questioning the move for it to be reversed because of ‘new information’.

What the hell? If there is nothing that I’ve learned in my tenure as a Xojo developer is that the community HATES change. Every time there is an IDE change, name change, framework change, licensing change, or pricing change, it will upset more than a few people. Who needs or wants that level of aggravation if it can be helped?

Major policy changes need to be thoroughly vetted well in advance by everyone on staff. Once everyone is on board then, and only then, should it be made public. The change, and subsequent reversal, doesn’t pass the smell test. I believe the decision was made by a select few and not fully investigated internally before it went public.

So lets talk briefly about removing the blog and forum post. First, Xojo has every right to pull it, shred it, burn it, and otherwise recycle the bits. Should they have done that? Well, that’s open for debate. I believe they should have edited the original post with an update at the beginning and end of the article with a quick note and link to subsequent information. That way there’s no hiding the information but also immediately corrects it. But Xojo’s not my company and not my responsibility.

Removing the blog post and forum thread does remove the original blemish. After all, they reversed the decision and really there’s nothing that changes for any user – new or existing. It does leave a minor scar though. Xojo is a small company and the engineers and staff members are incredibly accessible which leads many of us to think “transparent”. Removing historical data leaves a bad taste for some.

Rightly, or wrongly, we expect Xojo to be accessible and transparent and removing those items exposes that as patently false even though it’s never been true. They have zero obligation to be transparent nor do they have any obligation for the engineers to be accessible. They mostly do all those things because they feel like it and it happens to be good for business.

It’s my belief that this will quickly be forgotten. After all, who has it harmed? Not a single person. Xojo may have a little egg on their face but at least it shows that they are flexible. A stubborn regime would have stuck to their original announcement and weather the storm it generated.

Instead they reversed their decision. Removing the blog post and forum thread is questionable but, again, I feel it harms no one except those that feel inclined to be angry at change.

Time to move on and do some coding!

Xojo Ends Freemium Model

This week the Xojo blog announced that they were ending the Freemium model and going to back to the standard 30 day trial period model. As you would expect this has led to an outcry of folks on the forums and there are lots of opinions as to why Xojo is wrong to end the Freemium model. They’re wrong and here’s why.

Xojo said that the Freemium model increased downloads but didn’t change buying habits. The original thinking was that more downloads would get more eyeballs and thus more revenue in the long run. The IDE was free to try and use until you wanted to do a final executable.  It didn’t.  Period.  Their two year experiment with the Freemium model failed.

I don’t mean to belittle the hobbyist developers out there, but there is ample evidence that many of them simply just ran their apps in the IDE rather than compile them as standalone executables, thus not even purchasing an inexpensive desktop license. Obviously this was not the intent of the Freemium model and certainly violates the spirit of the model if not legally as well.

We can argue all day long as to why the freemium model didn’t attract more paying customers. I’m sure there is not just ONE reason but combinations of many smaller issues and here are some wild guesses. Perhaps desktop programming is experiencing a decline and perhaps web apps aren’t growing as much as once thought. Perhaps iOS isn’t an attractive target without Android. Perhaps the lack of business-only features hurts them. Perhaps the IDE design pushes some people away. Heck, I’ve asserted for a long time that the insistence of dumbing down the IDE in favor of newbie programmers is a detriment to the health of the platform. <Insert your favorite theory here>

One argument I might buy is that they didn’t give it a long enough try.  Some times it takes a while for things to take hold.  Add in that two years ago they changed the name of the company/product and lost whatever internet search rankings they may have had and it’s quite possible that it’s only now that people are finding Xojo.  It doesn’t matter now.

Regardless, the bottom line is that the Freemium model didn’t increase revenue for Xojo. At best, it means that revenue stayed the same and, at worst, they lost revenue. No company can stay in business by having static or negative revenue.  Expenses only go down through layoffs and no one wants that.  It’s the right business decision or otherwise we might not have our favorite development tool around in another year or two.

So while it’s sad it didn’t help them I can’t complain. They know the financial numbers better than we ever will. They told us the reasons so it’s time to move on.

What do you think?