Talk:Xojo

Geoff Perlman was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 16 July 2014 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Xojo. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.

The following Wikipedia contributor has declared a personal or professional connection to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.

Danamay29 (talk · contribs) / Xojo This user has contributed to the article.

Please refrain from posting personal statements of belief about why things were done to make them simply state facts when they happened.

Content dispute[edit]

There is a clear dispute over changes to the article, please discuss them here instead of reverting back and forth. Flat Out let's discuss it 02:22, 1 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The references cited are

"REALbasic becomes Xojo in 2013." This is wrong. REALbasic was rebranded as Real Studio. Real Studio was then rebranded as Xojo.
"After much interest from the community, Xojo Pi is released, letting users build applications for Raspberry Pi with Xojo in 2015." is using a bias opinion of a author who creates and sells Xojo related products.
non-athoritative. if the author is going to cite blog posts they might as well cite REAL Software's marketing as well.
the name change being instigated because less experienced developers were creating less than perfect software is supposition on the authors part. Theres no factual basis to make this claim.
the product offerings changed significantly when the name changed to REAL Studio. A new name for the product was assigned.

The author has repeatedly inserted personal opinions to the wiki entry as though they are fact. I've removed them. They've been reinserted. I've tried to make the article factual by even altering the marketing speak in certain sections. The least the other authors can do is keep it factual. Said author should read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view 162.248.33.201 (talk) 02:57, 1 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

History[edit]

The history section is a bit disjointed. CrossBasic and FYI Software is brought up, then we jump to RealBasic version 2 (when was version 1?), and CrossBasic is never mentioned again. Why is CrossBasic relevant? We start in 1997, go back to 1996, then jump to 2005 and a different company, different product. Nerfer (talk) 21:30, 23 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If CrossBasic is part of the history then it is absolutely relevant. I don't understand why you would even make a statement like that. It would be nice to have a more smooth hi-story. But if someone can only post what they know, or that's all they feel like posting, again, what is the REAL problem? (until someone wants to make it better) WillBo (talk) 06:29, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's a coverup - google perversiontracker

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Xojo. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:12, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]