Was just browsing the mailing list and it appears JLM(?) has made some patches for xaralx. Has anyone tried these yet?
Printable View
Was just browsing the mailing list and it appears JLM(?) has made some patches for xaralx. Has anyone tried these yet?
There are two programmers working on XaraLX, one porting to Cairo, another improving the existing code.Quote:
Originally Posted by con
Nothing has been placed on the download website since 31 January.
frank
well, something is in move...
If the port to Cairo will go well - we will loose some speed but - we will win the world ;)
Yes, I have, on two machines... they work as advertised. It's wonderful to see progress again with XaraLx.
frank
w00t!! I had to get out of my chair do a few jumps ;D this is great!
Gosh, say that again... the world, yes! All I really need now as an improvement is the ability to copy and paste text to the Linux clipboard. Then I'll no longer need anything from Windows. That day is coming. Maybe JLM will tackle such a task. There must be lots of code around, as most Linux apps do use the clipboard.Quote:
Originally Posted by SorinN
frank
Other good news - from http://sk1.sourceforge.net/ - SK1 is a new graphic editor for vectors and the good point is that SK1 guys get done an "Universal CDR importer" and they work forward for an Universal Convertor "import filters: CDR, CMX, AI, CGM, WMF, XFIG, SVG, SK, SK1, AFF and export filters: AI, SVG, SK, SK1, CGM, WMF" ... then a lot of peoples wil leave MS OS.
Well the things goes on ..
P.S.
Anyway I am waiting for XaraXtreme Pro on Linux...
According to Xara's speed charts, Cairo was severely bashed for speed. Why is time being spent porting to Cairo? That work is being done to improve the existing code is pleasing to hear.
Because you don't understand the problems with the open source community and the closed source parts of Xara Xtreme for Linux. Read some threads in this forum about this...Quote:
Originally Posted by Xhris
Remi
Are there any particularly good ones you'd specifically recommend? Thanks.Quote:
Originally Posted by remi
In a nutshell, OpenSource developers (well, most of them) want all parts of the source code open, and don't want to use/deal with/work with anything that does not fit that model. In the case of Xara, the CDraw library that does all of the rendering has not been released as source, and most likely never will be.
Although Xara has stated that they're never going to revoke the license on CDraw which would stop anyone that was using XaraLX from being able to continue using it, a lot of people don't want to work on a project that relies so heavily on a chunk of code controlled by someone else.
As a result, the code was forked so that it could be modified to work using Cairo as the rendering engine instead of CDraw. Development can then move forward because there is a version of xaralx that is completely self sufficient from outside code.
This thread is a good starting point to read something about the problems with the Xara Xtreme for Linux source code and the OpenSource community.
Regards,
Remi
That line of thinking from the OS community is a great shame. Such distrust is costing them. Can Xara really not be trusted; do people really not empathise with the feeling Xara has toward their code?Quote:
Originally Posted by Odat
It will be interesting to see just how slow Cairo is. It seems like a poor use of effort to go down that route to me. But at least someone is improving existing code. It's times like this I wish I had mainly the time, but also a bit more hardcore coding experience. (Although I'm not a fan of Linux having used it a lot recently, but that's a different story.)
I guess at the end of the day it has to do with the word 'Open' that comes before 'Source', there's a clue there somewhere I'm sure of it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xhris
And knowing the feeling xara has for its code is one of the best reasons I can see for porting elsewhere - no disrespect to xara who play a different game.
I wish em well - I like linux - and I'm more likely to be there than vista 5 year hence. I don't have the skill to help either, sadly.
.
about Cairo,
it's a work in progress, and they work hard inside of it's core - each new version it's a visible step forward (at least for me). Indeed is slow maybe for now but the sky is the limit here on the Open Source side. Time is on the Open Source side.
On closed source work flow - it's not so easy, limited number of engineers, other specifications, other timeframe, etc ..for example ask Charles Moir how much time take for Xara Dev. team to get CDraw as is right now.
Also - as I said before - which professional designer need to work with free software ? Why I care about Cairo, if XaraXtreme Pro for Linux could give me what I need, I don't care about the rendering engine. My scope is to do my job - not to use free tools for professional grade work.
Inkscape, Gimp - are wonderful tools now - but becoming Pro tools ( in paralel with free versions ) they can get a quick advance ( mode dedicate developers, a precise production roadmap, etc ). I don't see any harm here.
Free Inkscape, Xara, Gimp for teaching and for homework - Inkscape Pro, XaraXtreme Pro, Gimp Pro - for professional DTP / Webdesign work.
That's the correct, sane way.
You don't see the point..
It's not only about the software, but about the ethics beyond it.
The purpouse is to have a Free (as Freedom of Speech) Pro tools, that's the point. Nothing Less.
The double solution you're talking of doesn't work in this philosophy ;)
Need pro tools in Free Software? Let's give a hand to the developers no? ;)
tell me your p.o.w. ^^
What do you think are the ethics behind Free software?
(I wish there were also free food, free apartments, free cars and free cinema films available.)
Remi
So do I, but that has nothing to do with OSS. What is free software?Quote:
Originally Posted by remi
I know the fine differences, but in practice it's nearly the same as "free beer":
"You may have paid money to get copies of free software, or you may have obtained copies at no charge. But regardless of how you got your copies, you always have the freedom to copy and change the software, even to sell copies."
[source: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html]
That means, if Coca Cola would deliver me their soft drink together with their recipe (open source), I would be able to change their recipe or leave it the same and sell my own product with it. Personally I have no problem, if they would decide to do something like that, but I'm not sure how much employees would be fired after that. Not every freedom comes without a price.
Remi
Yes! Exactly! And when coca cola co. decide not to support your bottle of coke anymore, and instead are trying to get you to buy coca cola version 2.1 which doesnt offer any advantage, you can make bugfixes for it yourself or hire someone else to do it. Isnt that Great?
No, I would prefer to be the owner of Coca Cola and get some millions (billions?) from another company, which would like to buy my company and not, that the whole world could use my (hard) work and make money with it (for nothing).Quote:
Originally Posted by con
Remi
lol....i like this discussion...actually I was the owner of a bakery for 10 years and we used give our recepies to our customers all the time, and guess what the company is still in business makin as much money if not more as when I was there. And no one, not single person managed bake anything that looked or tasted anything like our products. So dont worry, you will still get your billions.
I hope so. :D ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by con
Regards,
Remi
Just to include in discusion.... but for me here has some contradiction....
You like programmer make some free for me software
I like designer use your software and make my own product ie design which I cell for some money to third persons ie clients...
After some time line you still be there creating some free software for somebody
I will have my money
It is not fully fear I think
For that my opinion is that if no body didnt pay for creation of software in some time programmer will stop to work, becouse in our world money are motive power.
And for that by my opinion linux didnt rise so fast, he still is in some startup position, and almost havent PRO grafics software for him
Yes, a lot of the current open source reality is more unfair, than fair from the view of the developers (that's the reason, why I ask for the ethics beyond open source).
Rich Green, Sun's executive vice president of software said on the 2007 JavaOne conference in San Francisco: "A lot of people are creating innovation that other organizations are benefiting from. I think this is unfair and unsustainable. It's Robin Hood backwards. We are stealing from the poor and making other people rich, and this seems very bad. Humans will not do this, nor should they have to. We have to look closely at working with those who contribute to the open source but whose contributions generate revenue for Sun and share that wealth. I'm sure we are going to do that." ([1])
Remi
Anyone who uses OSS to make a living has to ask him/herself "how much is this software worth to me?". Alot of ppl and companies make monetary contributions to OSS projects.
Anyone who works on a OSS project has to ask him/herself "can I afford not to get paid?". No one is getting tricked into working for free, dont speak for them. If you feel anyone who is developing OSS being treated unfair, send them money!
When OSS devs feel they are being treated unfair they stop writing the software, its quite simple. People working on OSS are for the most regular ppl like you and me with jobs and families or they are students or whatever. They decided on their own to start a project or help on a excisting one, they work on it when they have time, its a hobby. Dont forget alot of ppl enjoy programming its fun, its not like working in a coalmine or cottonfields.
Am I making any sense? Bottomline is, for the most part OSS is not about money at all, business ppl love to make it look like it is to protect their own interest.
Re. CDraw vs. cairo, as I understand it:
CDraw is clever and fast, it is an important part of Xara's ability to earn money so the Xara people can eat. If it were open sourced, Xara are afraid that nobody would have a reason to pay them any more and they would starve. Maybe there is a patent in there somewhere too, or other IP rights difficulties, I don't know.
But because CDraw is not open to be modified by anybody, the free software community have a moral objection. Cairo overcomes this objection, at the cost of speed.
The obvious answer is to make two versions available:
1. An open-source cairo version, obtainable for free.
2. A pay-for CDraw version, fast enough for the professionals.
The only other way would be to convince the Xara folk that they really have more to gain than to lose by opening-up CDraw. I don't know how that could be done, though. Maybe the situation would have to change radically first, for example if the corporate user base ever gets large enough for Xara to survive on support contracts.
Oh, yeah, and another way would be to speed up cairo ;-(
CDraw is not the be all and end all of everything... At some point in the near future I'm certain CDraw will be irrelevant, and whatever fork (if any) of Xaralx survives will function just as well if not better than it does now. Either that or Inkscape or possibly some other project will have progressed well beyond it.
Yes, currently Cairo does need a lot more optimizations to speed it up, but it is progressing quickly. Also, QT developers have done some really awesome optimizations that likely rival CDraw in performance. So for now a QT based Xaralx may be the best way around the speed issue if Xaralx Open Source has any chance of progressing any further without a negative impact on performance.
On the topic of Open Source. If you don't understand or appreciate the concept then, it's probably best that just stay away from it. Acting like it's going to destroy the world as we know it is ridiculous. No one forces developers to contribute to open source projects. They do so out of choice and it is that choice along with the openness and collaboration involved that produces some really great software, some of which would likely never be produced under the constraints of a commercial product. As humans we want to share with others, and this natural desire to share is what drives Open Source.
Many corporations and developers are fearful of Open Source, because they fear the competition and they fear losing the ability to lock people into proprietary products and formats because,by and large, that is how many of them make their money... By trapping people into a product or format, rather than by innovating and providing good service. This is why there is such opposition to open source software, everything else is FUD.
I'm sure, that Sun's executive vice president know something about Open Source and know the principles behind Open Source projects. Personally I use lots of Open Source solutions, too. But the problem is, that only the companies who started the projects are earning money through professional support contracts or something else - all the "free" developers don't see a penny. And that's the point, when he says, that "I think this is unfair and unsustainable. It's Robin Hood backwards. We are stealing from the poor and making other people rich, and this seems very bad. Humans will not do this, nor should they have to."
It's not the originally Open Source concept, but it's the reality you're able to see all over the world in these days. Or could you show us your personal list of your bank transfers to each of these Open Source developers?
Remi
Remi, the BIGGEST problem is with companies that clearly are benefiting from Open Source software but never giving back to the open source community. Be it contributions to the code or monetary donations, there is a severe lack thereof.
For example, companies that use open source software like LAMP severs (Linux, Apache, MySQL, PHP, Perl and Python) to run their corporate websites/intranet. These companies clearly benefit from open source development and should return the favor to the projects that they benefit from. Unfortunately this doesn't happen often enough. If it did, more open source projects would have the funding to pay some full time developers and progress more quickly. There are some exceptions though. One really good example is Google. Google is built on Open Source technology and does a great job of returning the favor back to the community through, both financial support and code contributions and even legal support. If more companies were like Google, the Open Source community would be ecstatic.
Another issue is the likelihood that some commercial software is illegally using code from open source projects. The proprietary barrier shields this from coming to light in most cases. These are the worst type of offenders. It's fine to use open source code in your projects, but you MUST abide by the license. Which in most cases, unless it's a BSD type license, you mush share your changes with the community.
I agree with you: shame on them.
As long as not all players play by someone's rules, it's a unfair game.
Remi
See also our other threads, in order to learn something about the problems with Xara LX as an Open Source project:
Regards,
Remi
Hi,
i hope you can understand, what i like to say, because English is not my nativ language (I'm from Germany, if you like to know).
I understand your point of view. You see a Company that have created a great kind of Software to make money with it. Thats ok. You also see that this Company like to share a big part of this software with the community, and thats a great Idea. This Company is worry about the posibillity, that they can't make money with their work in the future, if they give every part of this work free. It's ok.Quote:
I agree with you: shame on them.
As long as not all players play by someone's rules, it's a unfair game.
But this is only the perspektiv from the Companies point of view!
Open source developners also like to share their work, but thei like to make their work free aviable for everyone. An yes, thats also ok. But if this Developners wort, for free, on xara xtreme, thei can't be shure that their work ist free aviable for everyone.
But it's not free for Windows users
But, as example, a future version of Linux can break the usability of the closed source component. Only the company have the control if they fix it or not. But companies and Managers can change.
You say, shame about them, because:
- They don't like to work on a Software for free, thats partly cloused Source
- They dont't like to work on a Software, that don't match their point of view what free software is.
- They don't like to work for free on this Software, cause the free linux edition, with his Work can be unuseble, if the company someday lost the interesst in a community edition.
- Under this conditions, they are not willing to work for free to make xara xtreme better, cause of the risk that, in some time, his free work is only aviable in a commercial, closed source product, and they have get no mony for it.
Opens Source developners are not the sklaves of a company. Many examples show, that a cooperation between a company and the community can be a win win situation. but only under conditions, that both sides can apply.
For example, open office is totaly free, but sun can make money with staroffice, it works.
The idea from xara was good, but you can't really think, that somewone have to work on xara for free, if the conditions don't match theire interrests.
Somewhere on this forum i read, some time ago, that the open source modell isn't fair. I think, thats wrong. Many Open Source Developners have get a Job, cause a Company like theire Work. Many of this Companies pay for Open Source Developners, cause they use theire software and like to help with money, to make this software better.
Open Source ist not better or lesser than closed source software. But the idea is a very different. Thats like "Share" against "Get". Both is ok, and in both systems many People can live from their work.
I hope you Guys can understand both sides, than we all can learn something for the future :)
Tarabaz
Hi Tarabaz,
I'm glad that you found the time to study the threads about Xara LX as an Open Source project. Unfortunately you get something wrong:
I said "shame on them" in regards to jbus post #30, in which he complained about companies who don't spend a Cent to Open Source projects. So, shame on these profiteers.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tarabaz
But in order to come back to reality: I don't believe, that very much companies are spending money. Maybe some big companies like IBM, in order to get a marketing advantage. Getting money from other companies or users is more the "hope" of the Open Source developers, but not the reality. Instead, a lot of my customers are using tons of Open Source Software (Apache Webserver, MySQL database, Mozilla Firefox, ...) and never spend money to them.
Have you spent some Cents? How much? And to which Open Source project?
This was being said in this thread in my post #25. And I've said that the current Open Source reality (in german: "die derzeitige Open Source-Wirklichkeit") is more unfair, than fair from the view of the developers. That's not the same as saying that the Open Source model is unfair by itself. The Companies who are trying to use this Model and change it into their own commercial benefit are the one, who are changing Open Source into a unfair reality ("It's Robin Hood backwards" - see also post #29).Quote:
Originally Posted by Tarabaz
Remi
I would really like to see people working on xaralx again. I've financially supported a few OSS projects and even bought a copy of Xara Xtreme Pro to help support the linux version. I'm really disappointed that all development on it has pretty much stopped, but I can understand it from a company perspective.
I actually wouldn't mind to pay for software on the Linux system.
For me this is not about getting everything for free and see that you can get just as good programs for free.
My reason for moving from the other OS to Linux was all about getting a stable OS, and hopefully in the future buying the software that I used to use under the other OS.
I also hope that development of Xara pics up.
Another idea could be to change the name and leave the Linux-version to the community (allowing forks and what not). It will either live or not live, but then it is all up to the community to keep the development alive.
T
After trying the Linux version, I would buy a license for this software without question if it was up to date on Linux. I didn't move to Linux just for "free" software but because I much prefer Linux.
If Xara Extreme works under Wine I might even consider buying but if it doesn't Xara have definitely lost a sale, not because the software isn't great but because they ditched Linux.
Unfortunately, it was the other way around; the Linux community ditched XaraLX. But hey, there's always Inkscape...(cough).
It looks like the usual and predictable failure of the open source scheme.
You see, the open source was invented as model of developing software by programmers for programmers. Generally speaking to unite all the sources made by everyone.
The problem is that programmers tend to develop software that they need or want or like to develop.
And here's what we have - artists prefer XaraLX, programmers prefer Inkscape...
Open source is generally not the best approach at developing software. It lacks the regulating factor. In commercial model the market always balances demand and proposition. So that interest of consumers rules the software development. No such thing exists in open source world. If the demand is represented by the non programming group, it will never be properly fulfilled.
Look at the open source software range. Developer tools and system software prevail in enormous variety comparing to commercial world. While the application software is extremely poor, badly developed and of low quality if present at all, comparing to commercial world.
There's simply no motivation for programmers to develop software the way users want it to be, so they develop it the way they want it to be. Good if users and programmers interests are similar, like in case of OS user interfaces or office software, but very bad if they are different, and even worse if there are not enough programmers interested in subject to develop a project.
It's like a communism - it works only when everyone is a communist. Open source really works only for programmers. And it may become a generally acceptable model only in case if all users became programmers. Which is not very likely. Until then, the most effective regulating factor is a market, and so the demand is best covered with commercial software.
XaraLX is just a one of many painful proofs of this old well known truth.