Giving up on Xara! It's not commercial software...

[raynerj1]

sorry this is not mathematics 101. We live in a finite world and are thus forced to have some limitations. As long as you can have the page size large enough to do what you need for most products than it is worth the money.

then again...

At least it is bettern using MSpaint for a graphics program.

[sallybode]

You are right, Mr. O'Neil, Xara doesn't employ a true 'active' fractal fill but a manipulable fractal bitmap that does a remarkable simulation.

If you have an example if this, i would love to see it. My understanding of InkScapes limitation in this arena came from an Inkscape description page, saying that it was not part of the GTK standard. If I am mistaken, mea culpa and all that. In any case, I think the lack of edge feathering more than the absence of pseudo-random fill patterns is a severe limitation to an illustration app. On the other hand, I saw Sally's recent InkScape project and was very impressed that she got such a fine 'meshing' of elements without it, so perhaps I am wrong there, too.

geo.

Re: Inkscape's meshing ability, Inscape can feather very well and has a fill edit which is both for transparency and gradient simulatenously. It is hard to explain if you haven't used it. As you add nodes where you assign a color in Xara, you assign "Stops" in Inkscape, but it is not interactive and you cannot set your direction like in Illustrator unless I have not discovered that yet. Each stop is capable of holding both color and transparency data, so it is unlike Xara's feature. Xara's is much easier to use. Like Illustrator, there are only two gradient types: linear and radial. So Xara is much better. You can assign gradients to lines or patterns to lines and they remain lines, so htis is different to Xara. Xara's feathering is more configurable than any progam I have used.

As far as mesh, there was nothing I drew that used any mesh whatsoever. I have not used nor do I think Inkscape has a mesh tool.

As far as a ranking as far as what does most: Xara, followed by CorelDRAW, followed by Illustrator, followed by Inkscape. This is not to say that Inkscape doesn't have some nice features. This is to rate my home use, at work the ranking changes: CorelDRAW, Illustrator, Xara. Mostly because I only know how to use Xara so my boss doesn't want me to use a program another person isn't able to edit. I use Illustrator primarily to inspect files which come in in this format. Like Xara, CorelDRAW has interactive tools, though Xara's are on steroids, in comparison. Though some people think that CorelDRAW is sluggish, it isn't if you know how to use the program and make use of scripts to automate many of your tasks.

I would hope that some automation will come to Xara, to allow users to customize their interface more and to record scripts to play back actions. It is very useful with DRAW to collect these and to share them with other users. I can only think the same would be true of Xara.

"sallybode, so much truth in what you've said. It's a great read." Thanks, Nostaw.

[handrawn]

Inscape... .....has a fill edit which is both for transparency and gradient simulatenously. It is hard to explain if you haven't used it. As you add nodes where you assign a color in Xara, you assign "Stops" in Inkscape, but it is not interactive and you cannot set your direction like in Illustrator unless I have not discovered that yet. Each stop is capable of holding both color and transparency data, so it is unlike Xara's feature..

Sally - yes!
In inkscape color is defined RGBA - so you can set the % of red or green or blue or transparency[alpha] at any stop on the gradient or anywhere else that you define a color or shade..
This is really useful to me, one of the main reasons I use inkscape.
And its default gradient goes from color to alpha, so much better for many coloring jobs.
In xara you can only have color in gradient ramps, and transparency is applied to the object, not individual shades.
The color gradient directional control in inkscape is basic though compared to xara, true.
Not tried feathering in inkscape - will give it a go.

Oh and when the vector bucket fill tool arrives in the stable version - you're gonna love it, I'm sure.

[RickX]

I use Xara every day... Because I think Xara is far better for webdesign (my primary work) than illustrator, it works fast, feels responsive and has great transparency features

Only, the development of new features, outdated user interface (looks like a win 3.11 app now) and the Magix buy gives me an overall down feeling about the future of Xara.

I was hoping that Xara was developping into a more professional company (like for example luxology with modo, small company but professional) but now I have the feeling it is slipping into a consumer software developer, and will see Xara fade away into the digital camera, music and other wacky apps from Magix.

Solution: Get some PROFESSIONAL desigers, polish your UI, new fresh modern icons (dark UI, outline icons, for example what maxon did c4d 9.6->10). Add interesting new features that will be noticed in the market (integrate 3D vector objects, fbx import?) and a good step is to bring out an apple mac version.

Otherwise forget it, Xara will fade and don't get noticed in the real (pro) design industry.

Hope the best for Xara only I can't help getting more into AI CS3.

[masque]

There is nothing wrong with the UI as it stands. Its been more or less the same for ten years plus. Its comforable and friendly. If you turn it into the drab slate grey of ms expression or adobe it would be a whole new application. Regular long term users know where everything is and what it looks like, it would be counterproductive to have a make over that changed all that. Gradual change of certain elements is fine, wholesale change, very bad.
Being a professional application doesn't mean it has to follow the look of similar applications. I stopped attempting to use the wreckage of Expression when it offered a choice of colour schemes such as drab, dark or gloomy not to mention the fact that its a lot worse to use now than it was a year ago.
Don't be pursuaded to alter the look just for the sake of it. Concentrate on the important stuff.

[handrawn]

There is nothing wrong with the UI as it stands. Its been more or less the same for ten years plus. Its comforable and friendly. If you turn it into the drab slate grey of ms expression or adobe it would be a whole new application. Regular long term users know where everything is and what it looks like, it would be counterproductive to have a make over that changed all that. Gradual change of certain elements is fine, wholesale change, very bad.

Derek is right.
Its actually quite rare to hear a regular xara user knock the interface...

[pauland]

There is nothing wrong with the UI as it stands. Its been more or less the same for ten years plus.

Being a professional application doesn't mean it has to follow the look of similar applications.

Concentrate on the important stuff.

RickX and Masque:

I actually think you're both right. The interface does look old fashioned, but it also works very well.

I also have ties that are fifteen years old and they also function perfectly and look as they did when they were bought. I probably wouldn't wear them in public.

The point is that if Xtreme looks similar to an 'old' application when professional users come to it afresh the first impression will always be that it's an old bit of software that can't possibly compete with the existing crop of tools, so why waste time with it?

We all know what great software it is, but RickX is right - it does look unloved and uninvested in. It's perfectly possible to give the UI a styling makeover just to make it contemporary without alienating existing users.

The point is that Xtremes future probably depends more on new users than the existing ones and first impressions are really important.

Paul

[handrawn]

The point is that if Xtreme looks similar to an 'old' application when professional users come to it afresh the first impression will always be that it's an old bit of software that can't possibly compete with the existing crop of tools, so why waste time with it?

Hi Paul

Do us a favour - tell me who these designers are that judge books by their covers - so I can avoid using them
I always try hard never to get fashion and functionality mixed up.

[pauland]

Hi Paul

Do us a favour - tell me who these designers are that judge books by their covers - so I can avoid using them
I always try hard never to get fashion and functionality mixed up.

Rightly or wrongly, I think we all judge the book by it's cover, then we decide if we want to open it find out more.

I do it, you do it. We all do it.

Paul

[handrawn]

sure Paul we all do it from time to time, but I wouldn't buy a house or a car or a horse or anything I value like that, I would look all the available options, and I would look carefully