Xara Xtreme/Pro 4 Reviews

[Egg Bramhill]

urther allegiance to Web design is evident with the new NavBar tool, image slicing capability and Dreamweaver integration.

Yes, as soon as I read this my brain switched off. This guy doesn't know the software.

[Xhris]

Heh, some of these reviewers...

[pauland]

I haven't actually read the reviews, though I'm sure you guys have accurately pointed out their deficinecies. I'm not quite so sure why you are as harsh as you have been though. I suspect many of these reviewers are given the task of reviewing a number of packages by some specific deadline and under those circumstances can be forgiven for cutting a few corners and not getting as aquainted with the software as real Xara users.

Whatever their shortcomings their purpose is to provide magazine content at a certain cost and on time - they won't always be benchmarked on the comprehensiveness of the review or necessarily it's accuracy (often subjective) unless it's seriously and consistently wrong.

Maybe for the next release, some people on talkgraphics might like to see if they can submit a review that catches the editors eye and see how that gets on.

Paul

[Xhris]

The reason why reviewers are harshly critiqued is because what they say is very public for the purpose helping people make a judgment about Xara software to decide whether to purchase it or not. If the reviewer's information is not accurate or not based on a reasonably thorough analysis of the software they're reviewing (irrespectively of any excuse they may have), then their comments may not be representative, factual, or valid, and this can unfairly harm the image of Xara software. This applies to any review, not just Xara software. There's no excuse for a poor review; your purpose is to objectively inform, and if you don't do that well and cause potential harm in the process, you will be slated--it's quite simple really.

It's actually a good point you raise; perhaps TG members could review Xara versions in a special TG review thread.

[raynerj1]

Ummm... Xhris...

I think several of these types "review" posts have been locked already. for everything we like, there are folks that will feel differently, or be less knowledgable about the software. Then there are the folks that are upset the tool they wanted wasn't included in this build, or too many tools where included.

Personally... as long as any software has an automated margarita maker, then it will get a good review.

[Daniel]

http://www.pcworld.idg.com.au/index....12748;pid;5686

http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/reviews/i...?reviewid=2091

[iamtheblues]

That's quite telling, Daniel.
2 different magazines, and the same review!
The reviewer seems pretty much up to speed with
previous Xara Xtreme releases, and makes what seems
to be, in my opinion, a pretty balanced review, if a little
short on detail.
Saludos,
Bob.

[Xhris]

Hmm, that review seems like a paraphrase of a previous one written by an unrelated company. It smells like classic high-school-esque copy-paste-edit-ery. But even if that was the case, they chose a good review style to model from.

Interestingly though, they ranked it better than the latest versions of AI or CD which is something useful to gather from the review.

[pauland]

Both reviews - remarkably similar - seem perfectly alright by me. They fit the space filler brief of a non-design magazine - fills enough space to tell people the important things about the software and entice some people to the magazine, yet not so long as to bore 90% of the readers who just wouldn't be interested.

I wouldn't expect much depth in these general PC magazines for a design related program.

Paul

[steve.ledger]

Stumbled apon this personal review.

I quite agree with most of it.
At least the review is from someone who actually uses Xtreme.