Nice to see Xara get a mention..

[mwenz]

Not that software comparison "reviews" were ever true dives into the software, but in the late 1980s and through the 1990s they were better. Closer to a true review.

The linked one demonstrates the author has no true clue what layout software is and should do.

[Boy]

The linked one demonstrates the author has no true clue what layout software is and should do.

In all fairness, the author clearly indicates if the listed software is for beginners (such as, Xara) or professionals etc. (such as Affinity).

[Acorn]

In all fairness, the author clearly indicates if the listed software is for beginners (such as, Xara) or professionals etc. (such as Affinity).

Boy, is it fair to fail on price and freshness of the wrong product?

Acorn

[Boy]

Boy, is it fair to fail on price and freshness of the wrong product?

Acorn

No, in fact it isn't but then we should also discuss the freshness and fairness of all Xara/Magix apps. How fair is XDA's pricing? How fresh is XDP?

I bought XDP 18 because of a timely and substantial discount and a whole load of free goodies thrown in. I love XDP and want to have a relatively current version for when Magix might stop selling it. I certainly don't want to be hooked up to the XDP+ IV and be forced to pay yearly subscription fees simply to have access to it.

To be sure, I do respect the route you favor.

[wizard509]

I’m just glad we got mentioned, although I agree with what others have said.
.

[pauland]

I never imagined a mention of a Xara product would cause an argument!

[handrawn]

Not that software comparison "reviews" were ever true dives into the software, but in the late 1980s and through the 1990s they were better. Closer to a true review.

The linked one demonstrates the author has no true clue what layout software is and should do.

that's because [as I don't need to tell you] the article does not contain any review material

to be a review the programs would need to have been tested in use and the results compared and benchmarked

in fact what the article contains is just descriptive material

it's as if egon ronay had written about menus and decor and the appearance of the staff... but not actually sampled the food....

web is full of it

[mwenz]

that's because [as I don't need to tell you] the article does not contain any review material

to be a review the programs would need to have been tested in use and the results compared and benchmarked ...

Yes, all true. I specified comparative review, which is slighly different than a full review.

For a decent comparative review, the author needs to be at least intimately literate in the software being compared and how they are used, even if the review wasn't deeply compared. That author wasn't up to the task even an informal comparison review. Else APub wouldn't have been so favorably mentioned. Scribus is far more feature-rich than APub. XaraAnything wouldn't have had a mention at all, much less a defunct application version. Viva Designer should have, would have, also had its Linux and web versions mentioned too.

Oh well. I don't put any stock in these click-bait, regurgitated reviews anyway.

[pauland]

Couldn't you guys just be glad that Xara had a mention without picking the whole thing to bits?

[gwpriester]

Couldn't you guys just be glad that Xara had a mention without picking the whole thing to bits?