Xtreme Pro 4 way too big!

[BONES]

X1 comes with a footprint of around 10 MB on my hard drive, X4 with 116 - that's a whopping 12 times as large!

In the same time-frame, HDD capacities per dollar have probably increased three or four times as much. Maybe you need to update your thinking if you still worry about every little kb.

Other than that, try to optimize the code as you've done in X1 - small, fast code and not bloatware: not everyone of use wants to invest into new hardware...(I'm switching to Mac now because I can't stand Windoze anymore and definitely Vista is the wrong way to go).

So, apart from the obvious, "so why would you care what happens with a Windoze-only application", I'll tell you that I think you're making an ill-informed decision. The only people I can recommend Mac to are those who don't push the limits of what their computer can do or those who need something that is Mac-only, like Final Cut or Logic. You should do some testing before you switch because I would be very surprised if you get anywhere near the viewport performance in Cinema 4D that you are used to.
I think you'll find that a lot of the extra space it takes up actually contains useful stuff like clip-art, fonts [which generally seem to take up a lot of room these days], help movies and such. When I was using X1, I would definitely have taken the time to remove stuff like that because I only had two 2Gb HDDs but my current laptop has 160Gb and my workstation more than 1Tb of storage, so I don't see the problem. Even if Xara is using more memory now, my PCs have four to eight times more RAM than they did back then, too.

there is away to avoid even the error message - but I forget

Its easy - don't double-click an image. I think that might have happened to me once or twice, ever. I blame my own ineptness for those occasions, not Xara.

It is not a question of cheap storage space! Your answer, gwpriester, comply the level of this board and its software, sorry pal. Because harddrives getting cheaper, there is not necessity to fill them with poor written software.
I cannot understand why it is not possible to write good working software finaly?

I am sure that is not the issue. Earlier versions of Xara did not install any clip-art or fonts and things like the help movies had to be downloaded before you could watch them.
Even if that weren't the case, what is the advantage in wasting development time saving HDD space when it is so cheap? It would be like a car manufacturer trying to build a more spacious car without increasing its dimensions. It would require a lot of effort when the simple solution is to widen the track or increase the wheelbase. As long as it fits in a lane and you can park it, it really isn't relevant, is it? Surely as long as the user experience is slick, it is of no consequence how many lines of code are used? So why waste time that could go into putting in more improvements and features?

We use computers for nearly 30 years on this planet, we fly to the moon and build up an international space-station out there, but working with computers is always a pain in the ass!.

Really? I find my PC to be one of the great joys of my life. I love it and it requires a lot less maintenance effort than any of my other great joys, I can assure you. e.g. I spent three hours on Saturday afternoon washing and cleaning my car and the only thing I got out of it was a clean car. OTOH, I spent 5 minutes installing Vista SP1 last week and my computer now runs measurably faster than it did before.

It is really, really sad, that there is no good working vector-graphics-software out there! As I came to Xtreme a couple of years ago, I liked it small size and its speed. But now it is bigger than Adobe's Illustrator 10, which I use on my machine, and its speed is gone long ago.

I think this is mostly in your mind. have a look at the Xtreme.exe - PRO 3.2 was 6.85Mb, the new one is 9.5Mb. So for all the cool new features, I've had to sacrifice less than 3Mb of my 160Gb HDD. How is that any kind of issue at all?

I give the Xtreme developers some advices: Do NOT put more and more so called features in your software, because some amateurs demand them! Instead get rid of all the bugs, make your code better and develop a userfriendly Interface.

I think Xara already has a very user-friendly interface - it is simple, elegant and extremely powerful. I really can't think of any way it could be greatly improved. Sure, there will always be tweaks that could be applied but the basics are very solid.

But I'm not sure why you think that disk-space, which is essentially free at this sort of scale, is a useful guide to quality.
The real negative consequence of a feature being added which you don't want is *not* the disk-space which it uses, it's that the developer who added that feature wasn't doing something which you'd have preferred.

Finally! Someone with a brain in his head. Hallelujah!

I am not against new features. The problem with Xtreme is the same like Nero Burning Rom: The developers added more and more features which have nothing to do with the core funcionality. At the beginning Nero was a software for burning CDs, now it has features to rip and edit Audio, encode and cut movies etc., etc. But all these features do not do their job very well and the software wastes more than 100 MB harddisc-space and thousands of registry entries so you need special knowledges to get rid of it, if you decide to uninstall it.

I would disagree here. I have used most of the functionality of Nero over the past year and at times it has been a life-saver [when I had to create a DVD with menus for my showreel in a hurry to get a job]. It has saved me from having to spend money to do something I only need occasionally.
With Xara it is even less true - everything in Xara is relevant to design. If you want to pidgeon-hole it so narrowly, that is your problem and I am really glad that the company has a little more vision than that.

The same with Xtreme: with every upgrade there are more and more new features which do a poor job, while all the bugs and usability flaws still remained. For example the HTML-page-feature! Isn't Xtreme a vector-graphics-software? If I'd like to build HTML-pages I get a software, that do this effectively. The websites, generated by Xtreme are worst - the code is worst - unusable, if you want quality.

This is, for me, an excellent example of exactly the kind of vision I appreciate. Xara has taken a process that involved a lot of fiddling around - exporting dozens of individual graphics, placing them in an HTML editor, testing, going back to Xara to tweak things, refreshing the web-editor, trying again, etc, etc. Now I can lay out a page, export once and get exactly what I was after. I can finally now take PageMill off my system, which gives me back more HDD space than the new version takes away. So I'm back in front!
The bottom line is that the less often I have to switch applications, the easier it is to do a first-rate job and to let my inspiration guide my work.

Look into the forum! There are bug reports over bug reports. A software, that produces so many bugs after a new upgrade cannot be named well written. But there is no need to read bug-reports, a single look on the wasted amount of harddrive-space after installation tells you the quality of the software. I know what I am talking about, because I am part of the IT-business and I have learned to program.

This is a no-brainer for me and none of it comes close to making Corel or Illustrator or anything look like an alternative. There are a few issues I have but I see it as the price of progress and I am more than happy to pay it.

Don't forget: the hard drive in my computer - however big or small - is **my hard drive** and **I** want to decide what will be installed there and why and when.

So where does that end? What if I want to be able to choose which tools are compiled into the application? Maybe I don't need any transparency tools but it would be absurd to think that I should have the choice to install that functionality or not. You choose to install Xara or you don't. beyond that, I have no interest in how much space it takes up with clip-art, fonts and movies that I know I will never need or use. As I said, I think you need to modify your expectations. If its really an issue, take a look at your installation and remove what you don't want. e.g. There is a 146mb of clip-art and 35Mb of fills, if you desperately need the space that will just about halve the size of the installation. Take out all the templates and themes and you'll get a little more space. but why would you bother? By the same token, I wouldn't like to see the developer's waste their time on such trivial stuff, any more than I would waste my own time removing it after the fact.

I'm with pauland, I see almost no resemblance between what is written here and my own experience. Xara is slick in every way that matters to me and has no more bugs than anything else [and I use some very expensive software].

[ankhor]

I give the Xtreme developers some advices: Do NOT put more and more so called features in your software, because some amateurs demand them! Instead get rid of all the bugs, make your code better and develop a userfriendly Interface.

Hmm our money is different from your money in what way?

[Tao jones]

I am not sure why people both knocking xara when any new version comes out. If you don't want it don't buy it, stick with what works for you. I personally like the fact that xara keeps developing their software. If they put something in their that I don't use what the heck someone else may love using that part. I never use the flash but I think it is good it is there....taojones

[ankhor]

Look into the forum! There are bug reports over bug reports. A software, that produces so many bugs after a new upgrade cannot be named well written. But there is no need to read bug-reports, a single look on the wasted amount of harddrive-space after installation tells you the quality of the software. I know what I am talking about, because I am part of the IT-business and I have learned to program.

In germany we say: "Schuster bleib bei Deinen Leisten!", which means you should do, what you can do best.

I don't care if it has even many bugs, most software has some, but I care more how fast the company fixes them. Let's not forget that computers
come in very different variations of hardware mixes.

[willdean]

Hmm our money is different from your money in what way?

I'm not in the 'anti-amateur' camp at all but there are significant differences in the *amount* of money people spend on hobby software and the amount they're prepared to spend in business. I agree it's the same kind of money, but the size of the pile does differ.

Nobody running any kind of credible business in Western Europe or the USA would even pause to think about spending a couple of hundred dollars on a decent bit of software (except possibly to wonder if its low price was a bad sign). I don't think everyone on this forum can spend their own money like that, though.

All the sane people around here are aware that Xara's progress is terribly constrained by resources (developers/money). I suppose some of us in the "would buy a hundred dollar upgrade just get the basic drawing improved" camp feel a bit sad that we've been passed over in the allocation of these scares resources in favour of the "would like to try an different panorama program to the one which came for free with my camera" camp.

Of course, if there are twenty times as many 10 dollar hobbyists as there are 100 dollar commercial users, then Xara know exactly what they're doing. That's entirely plausible...

[pauland]

Of course, if there are twenty times as many 10 dollar hobbyists as there are 100 dollar commercial users, then Xara know exactly what they're doing. That's entirely plausible...

Apart from everyone paying more than the 10 dollars, I actually think that's the situation. Naturally, I don't actually know..

[jens g.r. benthien]

As sad as it is, only Gary understood what I meant. What's wrong with an installer that'll give the users a choice of the installed components?

I really give a damn on what you think about the code or if the storage space is just a cent or less per MB - all I want is to be able to have it MY WAY.

I guess none of you superheroes would accept glibbery kidneys as a breakfast in a 5 star hotel - you want a CHOICE, and you certainly wouldn't debate with the cook an how to prepare kidneys.

Nobody likes being forced to do what he doesn't like, not even you.

Got the idea now?

[pauland]

Jens, most, if not all of us understood what you meant. It's not as easy to do as you might imagine and I'm pleased Xara haven't wasted their time on it.

Yes, we get the idea. As the stones would say "you can't always get what you want". I'd move to another hotel, but then again I don't frequent five star hotels, nor are Xara charging five star prices for their software.

There are several features I'd like in Xtreme, several features they've put in that I'm not bothered about. I'll live with it because it's the best at what it does even if it's not as good as it could be. When something else comes along that's better and I can afford it, I'll go with that.

BTW I'm not upset about html generation, picture editing or 3D extrusion despite having a raft of Adobe CS3 software that does those things, plus a dedicated 3D modeller.

For some reason I use Xtreme rather than Adobe Illustrator. I wonder why?

Paul

[steve.ledger]

Jens - fair enough, and we got it honest.
But well, you've posted on a public forum and looks like you've opened a can of worms

Discussion is free and provided no-one get's way out of line and starts abusing others, I think it should continue as it is, but with a little more tolerance and objectivity from everyone agreed?

[willdean]

What's wrong with an installer that'll give the users a choice of the installed components?

What's wrong with it is it has a cost - it costs money to develop and it costs money to support. Every time Xara spend time and money on one feature they're not spending it on another.

Every on/off option you provide in the installer DOUBLES the number of different configurations people have. The application would also have to cope with funtionality which might or might not be present.

You might think that such costs are trivial, but supporting software is fantastically expensive, and one way to try and control this cost is to keep all your users' installations as similar to each other as possible.

Engineering is all about trade-offs, and however much you wish things to be different, I seriously doubt you're going to persuade anyone that trading a cent's worth of your customers' disk-space against even a single support incident is worthwhile.