Printable View
I haven't been using Xara for a while now, having stuck to using Wordpress for my needs, but I now want to get back to HTML and so am looking at updating from v11 to the latest - 15 or X whatever the latest one is. However, I cannot see whether the new designer uses Viewport or whether it still uses variants, the blurb isn't really clear so I just want a definitive clarification of how Xara handles responsive websites before I pay for the upgrade.
Current version is 16 and it still uses variants to allow for WYSIWYG. So, it's adaptive but not responsive.
When you think about it, isn't it better to have variants that work with a specific size range and over which you have design control than one or two variants that arbitrarily adjust and restructure to fit each browser variation?
Many thanks for the replies. I can see what you say, it's just that having just come from WP and looking at many sites around these days, I really want to stick to 'responsive' so I was interested in whether Xara was doing the same.
Thanks anyway.
Not when Google keeps complaining that your pages are too wide for mobile. I have 3 variant sizes: 320px, 480px, 960px. I am pretty sure that 320px is not too wide for any modern mobile device. But Google still complains. They also complain that I don't have a viewport... or something like that. EdQuote:
Originally Posted by gwpriester
Version 16 is 64 bit only. 15 can install both 32 and 64.
I checked for updates and it tells me that my version is the most current. However it shows to be 15.1.0.53605. So how do I get to version 16?Quote:
Originally Posted by Boy
Thanks, as always.
Curly In KC
Try https://www.xara.com/us/web-designer/download/.Quote:
Originally Posted by CurlyInKC
If you no longer have access to the Update Service, complain to Xara that you were not advised that v16.0 was available.
Acorn
Got the latest version. Thanks!Quote:
Originally Posted by Acorn
Curly
Well done Curly and thanks for advising back.Quote:
Originally Posted by CurlyInKC
Acorn
Hello Restless:
It appears your comment went unnoticed, as the thread continued on with a discussion of version #'s. I too am frustrated by Google insisting my content is too wide for mobile. I too use variants that are 320px, 480px, 960px, and even 1200px, but Google keeps reporting errors related to content width, viewport not set (but it is!), etc. So, I'm wondering if you did finally receive any resolution from your comment. Thanks for posting.
Thanks for the message. Nope, haven't heard anything else from the forum. For some reason text - the individual characters - is bigger online than it is on my computer, so I am having to to all of our Xara websites and adjust it as best I can.Quote:
Originally Posted by STS
We have been using Wordpress for new websites, and are slowly switching our Xara websites to WP. The Beaver Builder plugin works great, a lot like Xara. Once we figured out how WP works, it was easy:
We put items side-by-side, and when the page changes to a smaller size they stack up one above the other. The right sidebar (column) goes all the way to the bottom. Now that I know that, I know how to design pages that work okay on all devices. And no matter what the size, the page fills the whole width of the screen.
So far, no complaints from Google about any of the WP pages.
Ed
Had issues with Xara and ecwid e-commerce not playing well together. Had to find an alternate (I still use Xara most often) that played well with ecwid. I choose WYSIWYG Web Builder, WWB. It offers responsive but allows you to design breakpoint (variants) that you can customize layout for a particular size. A bit of the design control from Xara variants plus responsiveness. The last few WWB sites I built I used Xara to prototype for the customer. Xara is just so much faster. I do wish Xara could figure out how to implement better responsive design AND address the issue with add ins like ecwid.
onlye, The simplicity and power of Xara none can match. Have a look at what you described, menu after menu and command after command, it is very structured and technical, surely not for the creative minded person. I have been using xara for few decades and when I design something for print, it instantly and with very little work can be used for the web. The mobile variants are great and I just add a one to the main website that I am working on. So my main site is 1130 px and mobile can be 700 px. I have found that this works great on pretty much every tablet and phone. Xara is a force to be recon with and I am sure with time it will improve even more. I would love to see some of your clients work, you can find mine in the Web gallery here on the forum.
I also tried WWB. It took me a while to get started, and then I couldn't figure out how to make it responsive. Then I tried the Beaver Builder plugin for Wordpress. It didn't take nearly as long to figure out how it works. They have a lot of modules to make things easier. Very nice Pricing Tables - compare 4 products side by side, with picture at top, features list, Buy button. Would take me a long time to do that in Xara. Same with Info Boxes. Then I realized that Info Boxes are just a collection of modules, so I decide to do my own:Quote:
Originally Posted by onlye
I selected a "row" with 4 "columns" and dragged it onto the page. In each column, I put a Photo module, Text module, Button (for more information), another Text module, and another button (to by the product).
True, I don't control exactly what will display on smaller screen sizes, but I know this: When the screen width reduces a certain amount, there will only be 2 Info Boxes per row. Reduce more and only 1 Info Box per row - the 4 will be stacked vertically.
True, Xara gives you more control over complex layouts. But many people seem to like simplicity - something they can grasp in 2 seconds (or less).
We still have a lot of Xara websites, and we are not i a hurry to replace them. They get the job done.
Thanks for your insight, and for sharing your experiences.
Ed
I don't understand what you mean exactly. With html, css, and javascript there's complete control; after all, this is precisely what Xara uses in a round-about way.Quote:
Originally Posted by gwpriester
What Xara does not do is support mobile-first. And for the sake of those who read this post and don't know, I will explain.
Not every phone has the speed and power of a $1000 mobile phone, and most mobile phones are not as powerful as most desktops, or even laptops. Furthermore, most stationary (non-mobile) devices have faster dedicated internet connections available to them. Mobile devices can use Wi-Fi to access these same connections, but a hardwired connection is usually faster than a Wi-Fi connection.
The speed problem boils down to size, heat, and battery life. But speed aside, there is a main reason for mobile-first. There are simply more portable devices accessing websites than there are stationary devices; so, hence, mobile-first.
Mobile data is used to connect mobile devices to the internet and the idea is to cater to the majority -- mobile devices are the majority!
Mobile-first dictates three main things that Xara does not seem to address:
1. The website is designed from the smallest screen size first and expanded to the larger variants later, i.e. Desktop is the final variant and Xara obviously has this backwards.
2. The code (html, css, javascript) downloaded from individual websites is optimized for mobile, and this code is then later altered and appended for bigger viewports/variants. This assures that mobile code will download completely and be viewable immediately without first downloading a bunch of code for desktops that can be bulky and time-consuming for mobile devices; and the code then modified variant-by-variant until you get to mobile.
3. In a perfect world, each device will only see what it needs to render the web page in question; and mobile devices with slower processors, less memory, limited data, and slower connections are given top priority, because they are the majority and need all the help they can get in some cases.
I have not gotten into caching, picture sizes and formats, etc. in order to keep this post simple (to some degree).
Xara and Google have very different views on what is important. Hopefully Xara will make some much-needed changes. SEO ranking depends on it, as do happy customers like me; and right now I am not happy and stuck at version X 11 until Xara has an ah-ha mindset-change moment.
What's stopping you from designing mobile-first with Xara?Quote:
Originally Posted by TwoEdgedSword
Yes, you can start designing a site with the mobile page. However, with Xara's one .htm file per page for all variants, all assets are downloaded in one go. With slower connections, this will mean longer loading times.
Nothing now, as it seems there is a little light at the end of the tunnel. There was a new update June 18th-ish.Quote:
Originally Posted by pauland
New features include a ‘fit to width’ option for websites (scales the page between variants).
I can rewrite the xara code to address its mobile-first shortcomings. :)
I upgraded yesterday and I am back-on-board!
Thank you thank you thank you! I hadn't heard about the new "fit to width" option. For me, it is the best new feature since they added Variants several years ago. I just tried it on a couple of our existing site and they work great... except for the Add This buttons at the bottom of the page. Guess I'll have to remove them.Quote:
Originally Posted by TwoEdgedSword
Also thank to Chris M on another thread for explaining how to turn the Fit to Width option on (Website Properties > Web Export Options).
Now (thank goodness) we have a reasonable Xara alternative to Wordpress.
Thanks again.
Oops... just found a problem: When I add a picture and use Repel Text Under to wrap the text around the picture, the picture doesn't adjust to compensate for larger type - some of the type is disappearing under the photos.
So now I am back to the original question: Which takes longer - to update all my Xara web sites... or to just rebuild them all on Wordpress with the Beaver Builder page builder plugin.
Ed
np, glad to help¿ ..well, almost. Anyway, I've already bit off on X16 and I'm not going back; it's just not my way of doing business. I would say that you've uncovered a bug and could you please report it.Quote:
Originally Posted by restless
As an aside, there are a few things that you might try, but one being an adjustable margin/buffer using percentage of VH. Honestly, although I am trying to sound competent, I don't know what I am talking about. Perhaps another idea being to possibly add a border around the image?
I believe that if the image grows as the text grows, then there shouldn't be a problem. I just hope that it spawns some ideas. I also purchased Bootstrap Studio, so right now my head is spinning just a little bit.
Xara has an AddThis Widget in the content catalog.
I followed their instructions and Inserted it - 3 times - and still can't find any trace of it: No widget visible on the page, on code added to the Body, and no AddThis buttons when I publish.
No problems like that with Wordpress.
Only problem is: I have 50 Xara website, and only 8 Wordpress sites. And I have way too many other things on my To-do list to try to convert 50 Xara sites to Wordpress.
Actually, I already have separate buttons on the sites for Facebook and Pineterest and our YouTube channel. They stay put. And they are probably all we need.
Ed
Ed, all I can suggest is that in following "Configure your button and click on Get Your Button.", you are not copying the code into your Clipboard. Highlight the button code instead and Copy it and then press the Insert button.Quote:
Originally Posted by restless
Acorn
Thanks Acorn, I did all that. I made sure I copied the code each time I tried it. The way it looks, the only option is to put the buttons on the side and not at the bottom, and then they cover up part of my content. So I'll wait and see what happens.Quote:
Originally Posted by Acorn
Appreciate your help as always.
Ed
After a month of experience with Xara's new Fit-to-width" option, I have mixed feelings.
Have you (anybody who uses the fit-to-width option) gotten any feedback from visitors?
It is a little disconcerting to go to a website and suddenly without warning the page changes size.
If I were a first-time-visitor, I think I'd exit immediately. Too many stories about people causing harm to your computer.
If I were a regular visitor, I think it might get rather annoying. It is getting more annoying to me every time I log on to one of our websites and the page suddenly j-j-jumps to a different size.
So... I am switching them back to just the 3 variants, and I am adding the Add This buttons back to the bottom of the pages (now that the Add This buttons know where the bottom of the page is).
I guess I'll just slowly keep converting our sites over to Wordpress. I don't expect it to last forever - nothing does. In the last 18 years I've gone from Trellix to Cute Site Builder (Trellix by another name) to very brief encounters with a few I'd rather not remember to Xara and now to Wordpress.
I have a number of sites running v16.2 'scale-to-fit-width'. I have found it works well with two variants, 480px & 1080px, with the maximum set to 1080px (same page width as the desktop variant). My website variants do not use (share with variants); the mobile variants are hand-crafted to work in that size; they are naturally slightly different to provide a better mobile experience. The desktop page width of 1080px scales well on most tablets provided you use reasonable font size on the desktop version.Quote:
After a month of experience with Xara's new Fit-to-width" option, I have mixed feelings. Have you (anybody who uses the fit-to-width option) gotten any feedback from visitors?
User feedback has been positive: Examples here: https://barnesbowling.org | https://omnodisplay.uk | https://yewhitehartgs.uk
It would be worth trying out the option with just two variants.
Gary
Thanks Gary, I agree with your findings.Quote:
Originally Posted by Initiostar
Xara is suggesting that truly adaptive might be on the cards. Until then and if at all sooner, the Variant and Main ought to allow a mix of Conventional and Supersite.
Acorn
Hi Acorn,
I remember we had a conversation here about a short-term workaround where one could publish a Xara doc as a conventional website, and another separate Xara doc as a supersite, both to the same directory, with bidirectional links between the two.Quote:
the Variant and Main ought to allow a mix of Conventional and Supersite
I posted this example in another thread http://myform.initiostar.co.uk. The original challenge was to overcome a pesky widget that did not want to operate across variants, but I have used the principal work-around for a Newsflash supersite working with a conventional website.
The example here has a mobile variant for the conventional website (with scale-to-fit-width), but the supersite (in this case) is one size, but also uses scale-to-fit-width.
Gary
All duly noted but Xara needs to be more proactive and make it work for all. I did all of this well before Xara ever dreamed of Variants and had Scale to Fit included.Quote:
Originally Posted by Initiostar
Acorn
I have been using these setting and works well. I do not use fit to screen etc... desktop 1130 px. Mobile 700 px.