Xara Co. READ THIS!

[Ross Macintosh]

I remember reading that CorelXara required 45 person-years of programming to develop. I also remember them saying the effort required to evolve it to Xara X was a significant further investment. As Klaus notes, Xara's expertice is in coding in assembly (thats why xara is so fast). It has been pointed out by Xara Ltd. in the past that their coding is a poor candidate for porting. The same things codewise that make it so speedy limits the port-ability.

I agree with RamWolff's point that maybe Xara's efforts should be directed at their import/export filters. (Like others I'm still waiting for that DXF import capability).

Regards, Ross

<a href=http://www.designstop.com/>DesignStop.Com</a>

[mckinney]

Klaus, you've got a good point about the economics of actually making a port of Xara happen. I doubt that we will ever see it because of the effort it would require. On the other hand, Xara should keep in mind that a port to other platforms such as OS X and Linux would probably increase sales of the Windows version as well. There are many potential customers out there that buy software products because they are "universal" and can be used on several platforms, making collaboration easier and not tying the user to a particular OS platform down the road. Indeed, porting to multiple platforms may be necessary if Xara wants to challenge the market dominance of the it's major competitors.

- Pete

[Sheff]

So the arguement is that Xara should ignore a market segment because they don't have manpower to port Xara to Mac?

If Xara were to invest in porting to Mac I believe they would see a return on their investment in increased sales.

Sure, Apple may only have 5%(where did this figure come from?) of the market segment, but a majority of that market is designers, ad agencies, print bureaus, etc. These are people who would and could use Xara.

It's fine to predict the demise of the Macintosh. Whether it happens or not is another matter. I don't think it's fair to say that people who cling to macs are reactionary or deluded. They obviously have the money to purchase expensive hardware to service their clients, they more than likely will have the finances to purchase Xara products.

If you're a commecial printer, you have to have Macs in your shop because that's what the designers use. And if you're a designer, more likely that not you will probably purchase a mac because that's what the print bureaus use. It's a vicious unending cycle that will keep Mac production around for a long time.

Do you think that Adobe or Macromedia will stop making products for Mac because only a mere 5% of all people in America use them? No because a large majority of that 5% are companies/people who need and use Adobe and Macromedia products.

The whole issue is about getting Xara into people's hands. Most designers/printers are still on Macs. If there is no way for them to use it or even see it in a practical usable way, it's just pointless to even consider purchasing it.

Adobe Illustrator is the the 800 lb gorilla of vector illustration. Arguably the Mac is the dominant platform of choice among designers. Until Xara enters that arena, it will never be a realistic alternative to Illustrator.

So, for the sake of arguement, lets say the Mac is dead. No more hardware sales. What do you think Apple will do? There are rumored versions of OS X on intel based processors. The only way that will ever become a public product is if Apple can make more money sellng operating systems than hardware.

If OS X can become a viable operating on intel, that would give all of us who have been stuck with MicroSoft products, a choice.

With the problems with security within IIS, the problem with Windows trying to be all things to all people, the time is ripe for something significant to happen.

More and more internet companies are moving away from Windows and MicroSoft. I really don't think MicroSoft will continue to be the only show in town. Someone someday will come along and exploit the weaknesses in their products by making a better viable operating system. Whether it's Apple or Linux or BeOS or someone we haven't seen yet, it's bound to happen.

Look at Intel, AMD has gained significant market share because the MADE A BETTER PRODUCT.

And that's what Xara is. It IS the better product. The problem for them is to get people to buy it. If it's not on the shelves and not available for Mac users or even Windows users for that matter, then it's not going to move as many units as other products that are.

Sheffield Abella
sheff@sheff.com
www.sheff.com

[Ross Macintosh]

As a Macintosh, I stand up to say I intend to be around for a while! (Although I did almost get plowed down by a speeding car in a parking garage this morning - I was inches away from serious harm).

Many participants to these forums are graphics professionals. The Mac users being talked about here are primarily graphics professionals too. Such folks are not the only ones who use graphics software! The real market for Xara is not such pros. The real market opportunity is everyone who owns a pc. While graphics pros can use it, so can kids, office workers, students, seniors, and probably even bums like politicians.

Seriously, I think there is the potential for a late night TV infomercial (30 minute TV advertisement) pounding home that Xara X is the program everybody needs. I firmly believe it is an easy sell. Such an infomercial could do more to establish xara's marketshare in one evening's showing than a year of ads in journals read by graphics pros. Anybody want to join me in developing one?

Regards, Ross

<a href=http://www.designstop.com/>DesignStop.Com</a>

[Klaus Nordby]

In a way, I feel a thread like this is senseless: it's not as if WE here can come up with a "solution" for Xara Ltd. which they aren't able to think of themselves. No one knows better than the folks at Xara the problems of porting XX to Mac - or of the near-impossibility of convincing Macnoids to start using Wintel machines.

I agree with Ross that XX - unlike most graphics apps - probably has a potential market far beyond that of graphics pros - let's just hope Xara will find a way to tap into it, so we will get to use XX2, XX3 - and XXX!


K
www.xaraxone.com/FeaturedArt/kn/
www.klausnordby.com/xara

[Klaus Nordby]

Ross: "Such an infomercial could do more to establish xara's marketshare in one evening's showing than a year of ads in journals read by graphics pros.

The half-page and full-pge ads I have seen for XaraX in journals read by graphics pros (the've had a handful of ad in the British Computer Arts) were amateurish as ads and technically flawed: one full-page ad had PIXELIZATION where there clearly should have been none!!! They're brilliant programmers, but otherwise blind as bats.

"Anybody want to join me in developing one?"

Get down to Earth, please: First you have to get your hands on the million dollar it will cost to air it.


K

[Ross Macintosh]

[klaus]Get down to Earth, please: First you have to get your hands on the million dollar it will cost to air it.[/klaus]

The situation could well be different in Europe and elsewhere but over the last couple of years here in North America there has been huge growth in infomercials. On the cable tv service I subscribe to we get about 35 channels. After 1:30am if I turned on the TV I could typically find 4 infomercials on at the same time selling everything from laundry whitener to stupid exercise devices. They are on TV because they sell. I highly doubt any I have seen cost big bucks to produce or broadcast. We aren't talking 'Superbowl' ads here.

If anyone wants perhaps we can start a new thread on this subject.

Regards, Ross

<a href=http://www.designstop.com/>DesignStop.Com</a>

[Thatch]

I'm surpized you remember that story Gary, but it was quite true. They, like many shops now days are less concerned with the tool and more concerned with the output. If a shop runs things legally it had to buy another copy of photoshop and illustrator and (insert expensive package here) to bring you on. The cost of Xara is a strong motivator and sold in a way to show that you will be more productive with a cheaper system is an attractive argument.

Now I say this but in one sence your mother is correct. Learn other things. Learn all you can. Take photoshop classes. Learn how to use illustrator. Learn Flash. There is no telling what you are going to be working on in the future and each tool has its benefits and if its made available to you you should use it. Also there is the issue of getting other peoples projects. This often happens and knowing the program it came from and how to run it will make your life easier.

As for porting the software over.... I would LOVE to have Xara on the mac. I have been a Xara pundit for years and would love to have a package I could preach to everyone ... however. I don't think the actualy effort is worth it. You don't just port something like Xara over in a week and yer done. To make Xara as good on the mac as it is on the PC (ie, fast, small etc) you would have to do a full rewrite. Then you have the testing... years of testing on Xara to get it where it is now would be meaningless on the mac. There are different "gotchas" on each platform.

Like I said, I'd love to see it... but I doubt you could convince the company accountant at Xara that it was a good move.

Joe Skeesick

[gwpriester]

Design professionals rarely participate in these forums. There are a handful of Xara users who fall into this category who do participate, and most of them have posted in this thread.

Most design professionals work on a Mac. Most design professionals use Illustrator. And probably an older version at that.

These people do not like computers and software. They use what they use because they have been told they have to use it. They don't read computer magazines and they don't read computer manuals. The computer and software they use is a tool that helps them get their job done.

And they are terrified of learning anything new.

Several years ago, Corel Corp. under the leadership of John Gylenses, a true Mac user from the ground up, and marketing director for the Mac version of DRAW, did extensive focus groups with design professionls who worked on the Macintosh platform. Corel demonstrated CorelDRAW for the Mac, (not the earlier port version 6 but the version designed specifically for the Mac OS.)

The participants were all very impressed. They thought what they saw was very cool and understood they were seeing things that Illustrator and FreeHand could not do.

When asked if they would try DRAW just about all said no. They said they knew how Illustrator works and feel comfortable working with it. Most felt they were too busy to try to learn a new application, even though they admitted it was better than what they were using.

I have said this before. The only way for any product to penetrate the professional design market, is to get the product into the design colleges and schools and get the kids while they are still enthusiastic and unjaded. A prime example of this is our own Steve Newport.

Steve, it is up to you guy :-)

Gary

Gary Priester

Moderator Person

<a href="http://www.gwpriester.com">
www.gwpriester.com </a>


XaraXone


http://www.gwpriester.com/flag.gif

[Klaus Nordby]

Gary's right: the old fogeys have to die out, and then the new blood can take over!


K