OK then. I paid for the Xara Pro+ today. As you say, the price isn't over the top for the things I get.
Just another webp question though. I do have some files of that nature and as expected from the explanation I can't drag and drop them onto a page.
So, the rendering is done by Xara from jpeg or png? How does that impact on a sites Google scrutiny? If anyone's browser can't handle webp the page loading will take longer when it's rich in images. It's that very thing I want to avoid. I know there are dozens of things that can impact page speed but I want to nail this on the head. If Xara has the option to render, then surely it must have duplicate images in the file system, or is the rendering done at time of page load and if so then that must also surely slow page opening thus removing the advantage of small image file size.
Finally, can you point me to a site where webp images are shown in webp for supported browsers so I can compare them to a non supported browser.

The funny thing is that even the images on Xara's own website show as png's so perhaps they are blowing a lot of smoke on website rendering. Or maybe they aren't using Xara Pro+ themselves????