Linux.com article

[geminiguy]

That's my entire point.... You want it "free"?? Why should it be free for some and not for others?? Why should Xara just simply give it to you for free??
This is exactly my point with many Linux users.... they want and expect that all the software is free... This is exactly why many other types of developers refuse to format for Linux... Why should they??
Do you realize what it costs a company to format their software for Linux??? Why would they go through all that work and spend all that $$$ just to simply give it away?
Linux does not mean "everything free" This is not its basis of ideology. And this, is just one of many reasons that this project completely flopped.
There is someone still working with it though, as we continue to get updated versions, and I thank that or those people
If the project were ever to be finished / complete and Xara said "Ok, now... that will be $79.00 please" I would more than happily fork over the dough.... because it's great software... Im not gonna get mad and not use it cuz it should be free because Im a Linux user.....
But I would truly like to know your reason as to why it should be "free" for you and other linux users.... when everyone else pays $79.00 for it?? (BTW a much more than reasonable price for such a great software... compaired to up to $700.00 for others which are not even as good or user friendly)
But I guess that's not enough..... in Xara's end

[ss-kalm]

Well said Paul, I couldn't agree more!

[Dai]

The point of opensource is the code is free to use and change, being that the code is free to use and change, how can any company charge a fee then someone come along alter it slightly and release it free of charge. If it is going to be opensource it has no option but to be free. The money making model has to be in a another form other than the programme. You can get outside development on it but you then have to pay royalties to the outside programmers. Why should an opensource developer spend time and effort on it and not get rewarded. This is the other side of your argument. Or you could have two versions one free one enhanced version that you pay for. Many companies use this model. This way Xara get a revenue stream and the opensource community get a brilliant free package of graphics software. It seems the most logical way of doing it that both sides can be happy with.

I think you are missing my original point. There is no good reason for opensource developers not to get involved even if the part that is proprietary is kept by Xara
so long as the programme is free. Otherwise the opensource community is being used. That does not mean you don't have a pay for version it just means the free version is always playing catch up as it is always an older version with less features.
To give an example of this look to Sun they have staroffice and the opensource version openoffice. Sun are one of the biggest names in the business if they can do it so can Xara.

[remi]

Why should an opensource developer spend time and effort on it and not get rewarded.

That's the point: Why should an developer spend time and effort on it? What could be the motivation, if you know, that the company earns money through "enhanced versions" of that software (which also contains your code = your work/time/effort)? The company makes the big money, but the open source developer works for nothing?

Ok, another idea: The software should be open and nobody should make money with it. The developer should code just for fun, in order to create a great solution. That's a fine idea - "the modern socialist movement of the Open Source Community".

But how is reality? Do you live in such a system of economic organization?
No, in reality the company which starts a open source project tries to earn money through commercial services like support contracts or individual projects with customers. Perhaps the company is in need for an developer to help them with such a project and the company ask one or two open source developers to work for them. But if the primary goal of the company is, to use the capacity of their own developers, the open source developers don't see money for their generous free work, again.

Ok, this can not be. Our open source developer isn't willing to believe that it is so bad. He is thinking about the third concept: The developer knows, that he earns no money and accept the fact, that other people earns money through his "free" work. The developer knows, that the work he is doing is a great thing and he knows also, that he can use the source code to develop another project with. But wait, there is a license agreement: He can't use this code in other projects, if the second project uses another (incompatible) open soure license. Oh my, that's right. And the next problem seems to be, that some of the other open source projects are using completely different libraries. Therefore he is not able to use his code within Inkscape. But wait, our open source developer knows, that he is able to use the complete source code of this project for years and therefore it's really worth to invest time in this project. Err, excuse me. I'm really sorry, but there is a little problem: One of the most important part of this software isn't available as source code. The company hasn't released it and isn't willing to do that in the future.

Hmmm, ... the developer starts to think about Open Source software. Do you know, why he should spend time and effort on it?

Remi

[geminiguy]

Dai, That "was" the problem, Xara said they would not free their "Main / Secret ingriedient" so the Devs got mad and quit. Their arguement??? "Xara should just give it to us... we can go no further without it"
My answer... why not use one of the engines from InkScape?? or Gimp?? Or one of the many others out there?? Slower?? Yes, of course it is... but then again it's free
Devs say "Not good enough, forget it"
But Xara continues to update, and make those updates available to us.... I think that's pretty cool of them, don't you?
And remember... this is after Xara put "a lot" of time and $$$$ into this project... They're still holding up their end, as best they can.... Where's our Devs?? (no disrespect but... I mean..... c'mon)

[Dai]

I know Novell actually sponsor the work on OpenOffice. Since there are alternative engines there is no reason for development to stop from the opensource community it's not as if we are over flowing with quality graphics software.

[remi]

The problem is, there are no more Open Source developers interested in Xara Xtreme.

The graphics engine of Inkscape is really slow. That's the reason why the Inkscape developers are trying to change the code to use another graphics engine. But it's a long way to go. The code is in development (since months).

I don't think, that's possible to use Gimp's graphics engine.

Once again, the question is why should a developer spend time and effort on it?

Remi

[con]

The problem is, there are no more Open Source developers interested in Xara Xtreme.

Couldn't have said it better myself...But still hoping it would change.

[geminiguy]

All, in all though... the last Ill say on this is... even unfinished, Xara LX proves to be an extremely useful graphics tool, and it is very pleasant to work with. I enjoy it very much, and it is what I use to produce a good 80% of my work
It may never be finished, but I am very grateful for what there is.

[Vadi]

I've been using Xara for a long while now, and I really like it. I see no "Donate" button on the site though - what's up with that? I often pay for programs that I like, and use often, and gladly will for this one.