Slashdot Mirror
Xara X to Be Released as Open Source
zero-one writes "Xara today announced that they are releasing an open source version of their vector drawing program, Xara Xtreme. They already have a Linux demo but source code is not available quite yet. Xara Xtreme on Linux will not only bring a leading-edge graphic tool to the platform, but with community assistance, has the potential to become the world's most powerful, easiest-to-use and simply the world's best graphics program. If they get this right it could bring the Linux desktop into whole sectors of the market that is has not been able to address before."
Time to sell my Adobe stock?
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
First, read this this.
All tools add value to the Linux desktop, but if it's not user-friendly none of that matters. To be able to say we have the exact same tools as Windows means nothing if those tools are frustrating to use. We recently began the process of ridding ourselves of certain proprietary software (primarily Microsoft products). It's been painful because after watching a Window-savvy person struggle with Linux I began to understand why Linux hasn't really kicked-in on the desktop yet.
I think the value of a single product is being overstated here. The Linux development community has to work on usability first, as well as product integration. There is a level of inconsistancy between applications that hampers Linux-desktop.
When I think back to the very early versions of Linux (1.0.xx) it's come a long long way. But no single product along the way has contributed any large amount. Primarily, it has been the work of the individuals that understand that, although we don't want a duplicate of Windows, we do want something that people making the switch can more easily slide into.
I am always excited when a new product is ported to Linux-desktop (simply X?). But let's keep things in perspective -- although Xara is quite "neat", it's not going to attract legions of people to Linux all of a sudden.
In truth, this may all help Mac OSX more than Linux...
My ZooLoo
This comes hot on the heels of them sponsoring the uber converter project to the tune of $10000 to create a XAR>SVG conversion util, to increase compatability with inkscape. Press releases for both can be found at http://www.xara.com/press/ uber converters at: http://scratchcomputing.com/projects/uber-converte r/
inkscapes at:
www.inkscape.org
" has the potential to become the world's most powerful, easiest-to-use and simply the world's best graphics program"
Why does it suddenly have this potential? Why is it suddenly the "easiest to use"? Why is it suddenly the "world's best"?
I'm happy its being opensourced and ported to Linux too, but typically the process of opensourcing and linux-porting doesn't go hand in hand with making an application best-of-breed.
This isn't flamebait, just a reality check.
------ The best brain training is now totally free : )
Illustrators and designers like their shiny macs and have (generally) spent years learning the Adobe suite. Why do you think nobody gives 3 tosses about Corel?
Okay, so 10/10 for style, minus several million for yet another "OMG OPENSOURCE WILL SAVE TEH WORLD SQUEE" post.
And, before anyone says "But, GIMP!" - I work with ACTUAL designers. They all think it's an ugly piece of shit.
He drew up a map in it in about 5 minutes. It reminds me of Cool Edit Pro except it's for drawing instead of sound. Before you master it, it seems like nothing big but once you start knowing how to get the power from it you can not go back to another tool.
They specifically mention the GPL here:
http://www.xaraxtreme.org/news/11-10-05.html
This will be huge news, sodipodi and inkscape could use their algorithms for new functions. Abiword could support their file formats. The Gimp could build compatibilty in easily. Bravo Xara, I will be the first one to mail a check when I know this is really going to happen. I just hope this doesn't go down like the GOBE Productive announcement a few years back.
Insert pithy comment here.
A vector graphics application has nothing to do with the GIMP, save for the fact that they'll interoperate a little better with GIMP's new "SVG copy-and-paste" feature.
If you want to worry about Xara taking away from some other Free Software drawing program, worry about Inkscape instead.
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
Grr! All of these great things have come from one place, namely the Acorn computing market who could have had it all and blew it. Xara is simply the PC port of ArtWorks for RISCOS. Now Xara is set for potential greatness. Just like when Acorn spawned ARM Ltd, and now ARM cpu's are everywhere. Where are Acorn?
Boo hiss and all that.
--- Commission free trading & free stock up to $500 - use http://share.robinhood.com/kelvinp6
This will be worth a lot if it is GPL just so that the algorithms can be used. The inkscape developers are always looking for sources for things like morphing functions, gradients, etc. Even if this program where a falling corpse the parts are worth salvaging.
Insert pithy comment here.
I have used xara for years. I maintain an old windows machine just for xara. It is an outstanding drawing and for me a one page or smaller layout program. Great for print ads and web graphics work.
It does not compete with The Gimp.
The windows version is very easy to use. Hope the linux version uses the same interfaces.
Woohoo!!! Gets me excited about linux again.
"Don't Follow Leaders." Bob Dylan
All I see is bitching, whining and moaning from a people who've never used it. My SO uses Xara X damn near constantly and loves it. She was up the learning curve like a mountain goat. There's good documentation, the /real/ thing ships with a CD full of video tutorials, a whole bunch of things work like they ought to - so much so that since we're so accustomed to things not working properly you initially discount the possibility of whatever you're trying to do actually working.
And it's FAST! Xara was initially written in the mid 90's and the system specs included "pentium processor recommended" so it goes without saying that it goes like a rocket on modern hardware. We're running it on a P3-933 and, just, whoosh.
This is a good piece of kit. Probably the best thing I can advise is finding a windows box and playing with the downloadable demo. Be happy. Get involved in porting it. Fuck Adobe.
Dave
I write a blog now, you should be afraid.
Take a look at this video. It shows off some of Xara Xtreme's capabilities. I am quite impressed and can't wait until the full Linux version is released! It can use photoshop plugins too!!
I'm a designer and I've used Xara quite a bit. It is a very, very good piece of software. In terms of ease of use and speed it kills all the big boys like Illustrator and CorelDraw. In fact this is the software that Corel owned/distributed at one time as CorelXara. Then they pillaged it for features and set it on its way. It has fantastic transparency abilities and some cool bitmap-like effects such as realtime blurs. It also has some decent bitmap abilities built-in. I know most designers won't know anything about it and the open source community won't either, so please trust me when I say this is a fantastic development. I hope to take a swing at the code, with any luck creating a mac version. Sweet.
This isn't a competitor to Gimp.
It's more of a competitor to Inkscape.
Gimp is a competitor to MSPaint, Photoshop, Corel PhotoPaint, JASC Paintshop Pro.
Xara is like Acrylic, Illustrator, Inkscape and even Macromedia Flash.
Flash adds a timeline with animation but it is vector based.
Gimp is a raster editor. If your canvas is 640 pixels across and 480 pixels down, you have 640 pixels times 480 pixels of resolution to edit in. Scalable with software help. Quality varies with size.
Xara is a vector based program. Your canvas size has no limit. 100% scalable.
Artists use vector programs to 'create' in. It's what is used to create icons that we sometimes take for granted but the reality is that someone had to create it. (like fonts)
Raster programs are used to edit existing content to produce a final result. Think http://www.worth1000.com/
if you steal from one source, that is plagiarism, if you steal from many, well, that's just research.
Try the FAQ.
Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
I've been using Xara for nearly 10 years. It is a phenomenal piece of software. It's fast, stable, and it gives you the tools you need with a clean, intuitive interface and without a bunch of crap in your way. Give an untrained person a choice between the nightmare of Illustrator and Xara, and it's no competition at all. Corel and Xara are closer, but last time I checked, Corel was way over-bloated and buggy. Fireworks is probably closer yet, but while its interface isn't as FUBAR'd as Illustrator's, it's still too idiosyncratic.
Xara is the best general-purpose vector graphics software out there. It's the easiest to learn how to use, and it really is a pleasure to work with. This is the right move for Xara, and I think it's great news for Linux. As we get new, regular users transitioning to Linux desktops, hopefully Xara will be included with some of the best distros... it should be an exciting and significant feature for a decent percentage of users. Even people who just want to make a flyer for their garage sale will find Xara cool and fun.
On a personal note, Xara is the main reason why I still haven't switched to a Linux desktop for myself. I can't live without my Xara... now it looks like I'll finally be able to switch! Tonight, I will literally go out and toast to Xara. This is the best news I've had in months.
I've used Xara X on and off for a number of years. Fantastic vector image program. I only moved over to Illustrator after discovering the Xara .AI/.EPS output filter didn't work 100% with some applications and there were a few other little niggles. This might have been fixed since then but otherwise it's fantastic application and porting it to Linux is a brilliant move.
Once a decent/user friendly bitmap editing application is available for linux, then I might be able to move over fully.
Now, Photoshop robots will have *TWO* Open-Source programs to bitch about!!! Yes, Gimp can now expect half the Photozealots to switch their flames from Gimp to how much they hate Xara for not being Photoshop. Welcome to the *deep inside*, Xara, and you can share my bread crust, but not my bunk.
If you read their FAQ, they are more than aware of the existence of Inkscape. They give credit to Inkscape for "features that Xara does not have" and a higher rate of development. In fact, they say that the ultimate goal is a single merged vector editor combining the best in Xara and Inkscape. And as an Inkscape developer, this is something I'd like to see as well.
It remains to be seen how exactly this merger will proceed, who will be on the giving side and who on the receiving side. Whichever way it goes, however, their goal is the same as mine: to create the best vector editor in the world. So I guess this means Xara and Inkscape are bound to be friends overall, even though an element of competition will be present as well.
For an overview of how Inkscape and Xara compare, read this:
http://wiki.inkscape.org/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?Xara_X
[Gimp] is very similar to iPhoto or Elements.
Not really. iPhoto is so simple your grandma can use it. Gimp's interface takes a lot of getting used to, it's another great example of where open source falls down - it's all run by geeks and programmers. Where are the interface experts, usability consultants, test groups etc? One thing commercial softwaredoes have that open source generally doesn't, is wholeness and polish. Geeks write features when they need them, and get used to the interface on the way. Nobody turns around and says "Hey you know what? the behaviour of the windows in Gimp is painful. How come if I click a tool on the toolbar, I have to click back in the job window before I can use the tool? And why do they clutter up my taskbar like that?"
As far as function goes, you can't compare it to Photoshop elements either. The pixel wrangling is so much smoother in Photoshop, the tools are so much more mature and cooperative. Gimp looked ok up against Photoshop 4, but whereas Photoshop is now up to version umm...8 I think, with matured tools and interface improvements, the latest version of Gimp looks like and feels like a point release of the same version we had 6 years ago. Photoshop Elements doesn't have the feature set of full photoshop, but it does have the maturity and polish
No disrespect to the Gimp developers intended - you do what you can with the people and time available, and they've done well. But people like to roll it out as an example of why Open Source 'has the apps' too, and it's really a good example of why Open Source apps just don't compare for normal users.
All available data suggest that regardless of any of this, the sun will still come up tomorrow.
New criticism a bit more rooted in reality is a different story, and any "linux isn't ready for the desktop" statement is at least five years or maybe even ten years out of date (win3.11 was ready for the desktop remember). Linux on the desktop is not good enough for XYZ makes more sense than some blanket statement that was proved wrong by a lot of people years ago.
No, the developers of Gimp did not experience this horrible thing, the horrible Default Window Manger functionality of Microsoft Windows. A window manager with no Focus-on-Mouse-Over, and a taskbar that didn't properly ignore Gimp's dialog boxes.
Gimp was not created for Windows, it was created for X-Windows. That the port to win32 wasn't perfectly implemented to work with Windows' quirks is not related to the original quite decent design.
That's why they didn't turn around and say "Hey you know what? the behaviour of the windows in Gimp is painful. How come if I click a tool on the toolbar, I have to click back in the job window before I can use the tool? And why do they clutter up my taskbar like that?"
Because, they didn't have those problems. They had a decent Windowmanager, and a decent taskbar replacement.
Without the slightest doubt, Photoshop is *not* for normal users, either.. just look at the pocket-industry of photoshop educational videos, photoshop tricks, tips, manuals, and secret methods. Normal users don't need that stuff. They just crop photos, and print. Artists/Professionals/Hobbyists do need that stuff, 'cause Photoshop and the Gimp, like most decent applications are complex and *Gasp* not exactly like every other application.
If you think the news is no big deal, that's fine. But, why are so many posters here enraged?
I'm noticing this trend on slashdot more and more. Some good news for Linux is announced (often no BFD). And many posters here are screaming about how Linux is so inferior to msft.
Frankly, I don't care what desktop you use. I don't care if you don't like Linux. But, it seems strange to me that this sort of news would make so many posters so angry.
Now see, it's stuff like that that causes GIMP's UI to suck. Understand: layers are not what the program is there for. Layers are a means, not an end. Unless forced by necessity, UI controls should serve ends, not be subordinate to means.
I'll give an example to explain. Here's another way the brightness/contrast UI control could have been done. First: in regard of layers, what's the normal thing a user wants to do? A novice user won't be using layers. A pro will, and normally wants to affect the current layer. So, default everything to affecting the current layer. Straight off the bat that saves a lot of UI duplication! Make the common case simple, the rare case possible. So, allow edits to all layers at once if a toggle is set (I'd put it prominently on the layers dialog). Meanwhile, the "colors" and "transforms" menus go at the top level, because they're the sort of thing every Joe Digtal-camera wants to use. So from being buried two levels deep in a place that relates to an incidental technicality, brightness/contrast is instead up in front where the user can "grab it and go".
Coincidentally, this approach I outlined above would add new features in a simple way. Autocrop the layer, autocrop the image, depending on the "affect one/all" toggle. (Joe Digtal-camera isn't using layers, so the toggle behaves as if set to "affect all", and does what he expects.)
BTW path and stroke, you must be a graphical geek if you think it's tolerable. It's a pitiful hack! "Stroking" a vector (render to editable pixels) is a rare case. Normal case should be as with other combi vector/pixel editors, vectors remain vectors and are "stroked" when you export to JPG. Yes it might be nice to have a menu option to stroke a vector, for the cases when you need it. It shouldn't be the normal way to operate! (I understand GIMP's attitude is "I edit pixels, vectors had better start acting like pixels if they want to be edited". Thinking like a programmer again!)
Obviously you have not been paying attention. I remember at least two flames in earlier discussions where somebody said "it's really hard to make a flyer in Gimp". When asked about Photoshop they than said "On Windows I'd use Illustrator, obviously.".
When I switched to Linux, Xara was the only app I missed. I am delighted to hear a Linux version is available. It really is very good indeed -- very powerful, flexible and easy to learn. I tried a few alternative vector drawing apps for Linux but the ones I found were dreadful.
Mike Wilson, Wrexham, North Wales, UK
Gimp has a lot of features, some of them i like, some that I may have never tried out yet. I don't do windows or Photoshop, so I cannot compare to that.
But the Gimp certainly has made me scream at it. I never seem to be able to figure out how a certain feature works (the stuff with pasting and layers for instance). I am no useability expert either, but I am sure that if you get the user in a state of sreaming, there is something seriously wrong with the software.
There are two ways to fix that problem; the easy way and tha hard way. The easy way is just dismissing evey complaint about it as caused by an unwillingness to learn the interface (stupid user excuse).
The hard way is to actually listen, analyse and do something about the problem. But that requires hard work (not neccesarily the coding part, finding the problems in the UI may be much more work).
The moral of this story: pointing fingers at photoshop or the user will not make UI issues disappear, so please don't do that.
This space is intentionally staring blankly at you
Like the other poster said, the problem isn't keeping track of the patches, but being able to find current contact information for all the contributors (which we don't have), successfully contacting them (for many long-running projects, some might be dead), and assuming you make it that far, getting them to unanimously agree to the relicensing (I already know some wouldn't).
People problem, not a technical one.
DNA just wants to be free...
I guess you know what the G in GTK stands for, don't you?