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."

Sell Adobe?

[Nom du Keyboard (633989)]

Time to sell my Adobe stock?

Exaggeration?

[fragmentate (908035)]

First, read this this. [slashdot.org]

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...

Re:Exaggeration?

[lidocaineus (661282)]

When I think back to the very early versions of Linux (1.0.xx) it's come a long long way.

Um, not to nitpick, but what exactly constitutes an early version of Linux? An early (1.x) Linux kernel? Because that doesn't really make any sense... Maybe you mean an early Linux distro, like Slackware 1.0? eh?

Re:Exaggeration?

[agraupe (769778)]

I think he used the kernel version as more of a timestamp than an, "I used Linux X.XX and foo bar, etc." Referencing a kernel version will have more relevence than a specific version for a (possibly) obscure distro, to all members of the linux community at that time.

exaggeration--yours

[idlake (850372)]

All tools add value to the Linux desktop, but if it's not user-friendly none of that matters.

That's just not true. There are a lot of powerful tools that are not "user-friendly", but they are exactly the sort of thing that professionals use for their work (e.g., "Photoshop"). Usability is only one of many factors determining the importance and the popularity of an application.

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

Press Release and more info...

[Simarilius (665671)]

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/ [xara.com] uber converters at: http://scratchcomputing.com/projects/uber-converte r/ [scratchcomputing.com] inkscapes at: www.inkscape.org

Speechless

[someguy456 (607900)]

Wow, this is their flagship product!
I've no idea what it does, but thanks, we really appreciate it /OSS 1, M$ 0

Why?

[popo (107611)]

" 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.

Re:Why?

[poot_rootbeer (188613)]

" has the potential to become the world's most powerful, easiest-to-use and simply the world's best graphics program"

So does MS Paint, but I fully expect that potential to go unrealized.

Re:Why?

[Albanach (527650)]

The reason it has the potential is because XaraX is already a fantastic small, fast, stable offering from a programming house that's been developing graphics apps for decades. When Xara launched their vector graphics app first for Acorn RISC OS and then on Windows, the features like transparency and speed were groundbreaking.

Seriously this means an excellent program in an area underserved on linux (vector graphics) will be available source and all.

Re:Why?

[Dreffed (526511)]

I have to agree, Xara grew up on the Archimedies RiscOS platform as Artworks, the team as Computer Concepts produces som very innovative products, it was a pity RiscOS lost out in the brawn over style schools placement battles of the 90s. I have been using the application since the mid 90s, and now it is to be ported I don't need my Windows install anymore :) at last, I am very happy

Re:Why?

[walnut_tree (905826)]

The Xara program has been around for a few years - every incarnation has had excellent magazine reviews [pcpro.co.uk]. It has a loyal base of users and one of the primary reasons is it's powerful set of features and its easy-to-use interface. They are not starting from scratch on the usability front - they already have a head start. If you have a Windows PC, the best way to see for yourself is to simply download the trial version and give it a spin. Even better, compare it to Adobe Illustrator with its plethora of floating palettes and you'll see how tired and old-fashioned the Illustrator interface feels in comparison. Of course, these are all my subjective opinions; but then, what isn't on Slashdot? :-)

Guess what? Won't happen!

[_undan (804517)]

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.

Re:Guess what? Won't happen!

[MikeFM (12491)]

On the other hand the majority of designers I know are simple minded idiots that can barely use Photoshop and Illustrator let alone anything else and all their designs look amazingly alike as they have no ability to think outside their own little box. Most designers come from a graphic arts background and have no experience in designing good interfaces or problem solving. If something wasn't taught to them in class they just can't handle it.

I know a couple GOOD designers and they are intelligent enough to see that different tools are better for different things you want to do. Personally I can't stand the interfaces of Photoshop and Illustrator but will sometimes use them when I need to do something GIMP or Inkscape can't yet do. On the other hand there are things that are hard to do in Photoshop and Illustrator that are easier in GIMP and Inkscape. It comes mostly from which tools you know best and a bit from the way the tools were designed. Being able to use all the tools you have available lets you do awesome work.

Even good designers sometimes have blindspots that are amusing. One of the best I know I heard the other day complaining to another designer that animated gifs always have white borders around the image. Duh. Years in school and work experience and neither knew how to get rid of the borders left over from converting an image to a gif? Of course you'd think Photoshop and Illustrator would take care of that issue automatically anyway since it's a fairly common problem. Anyway the point being that designers look at interfaces more from a stylistic point and they may miss the benefits of usability.

Re:Guess what? Won't happen!

[Hosiah (849792)]

have (generally) spent years learning the Adobe suite.
I work with ACTUAL designers. They all think it's an ugly piece of shit.

I *AM* an actual designer, and it never fails to amaze me how people will comfortably devote "years" to learning proprietary software that costs $485.00 http://reviews-zdnet.com.com/Adobe_Photoshop_7_0/4 014-3633_16-8918085.html [com.com] , but cannot be bothered to investigate the menus in Gimp for five minutes for free to discover all the features they claim Gimp is missing. But, uh, oh, yeah, *sure*, you guys are ALL THAT!

Not just designers that find Gimp hard to grok

[nietsch (112711)]

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 e

Glasgow Best bet for Linux Raster graphics

[temojen (678985)]

With support for 16bit/channel images and colour management, Glasgow (a branch of CinePaint) is shaping up to be a real contender in the Raster Graphics editing space. Some concerns though:

• The documentation for cinepaint really really really sucks
• The CinePaint/Glasgow developers seem to be under the impression that ALL of their users are in the motion picture industry, not still photographers). Consequntly, (as of CP 0.18) they've left out handy stuff like cropping and sizing the images in physical units

a friend of mine swears by Xara X

[xutopia (469129)]

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.

It is a little bit strange...

[Pecisk (688001)]

That annoucement reads like total marketing crap. I know Xara, their products are quite popular, but I would not claim so loud such goals. And by the way, we have tools which are user friendly and I'm used to :)

But ignoring that, I just can say - welcome! For example, open sourcing for Blender was really best way to go. Propably for Xara Xtreme too.

Re:It is a little bit strange...

[arose (644256)]

Try the FAQ [xaraxtreme.org].

If they do it under the GPL

[narrowhouse (1949)]

They specifically mention the GPL here:
http://www.xaraxtreme.org/news/11-10-05.html [xaraxtreme.org]

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.

Re:If they do it under the GPL

[ettlz (639203)]

If this is not a hoax, and I sincerely hope it's not, let's hope it starts a trend.

Are you listening, Wolfram?

Re:If they do it under the GPL

[justsomebody (525308)]

I was having the same opinion until I read mailing list on Inkscape about this. Talk about one sided canibailzing without prejudice (would take theirs, but hell no, they won't resell mine).

http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?threa d_id=8520852&forum_id=36054 [sourceforge.net]

p.s. Last comment (or it was last at the time I read was probably the only inteligent comment, about shared LGPL libraries)

Re:If they do it under the GPL

[t35t0r (751958)]

From the FAQ:

Having said that it's conceivable that a version of the Open Source Linux port could be converted back to Windows. But it would not be the official Xara version (it couldn't use the Xara name), it wouldn't include any customer support or any of the licensed components we can include. So we hope it doesn't happen, because that would jeopardise our ability to continue. Put simply, if we can't earn money from the product somehow, we can't employ full time engineers working on the Open Source product, and that helps no one.

It's not inconceivable. It will happen, maybe even under cygwin, but it will. Windows users will start to get mad since they have to continue to pay (and no they won't switch to linux). Sure the OSS version would not include some of the proprietary plugins, but if the user really wants or needs those then he/she would be happy to pay for them by purchasing the retail version. With an OSS version ported to Windows, all that Xara could do is just sell their support and expertise. But with so many online forums, chats, and help pages would their support even be necessary?

It seems to me that Xara is really shooting themselves in the foot.

And on Linux that means it has to be Open Source in order to stand any chance of success

I also think this is not true. I think they should have done the exact opposite. That is port it to linux and macosx, keep it closed source, and sell their product at their current low price on all platforms. Not only would this help them, but it would give support to Xorg/Xfree + whatever window manager/desktop + linux kernel as a feasible graphics platform with a commercial backing. If they are scared about being bought out (are they even a publicly traded company?) then open source the linux / macosx codebase in the event that it seems imminent that they will be bought out.

Re:If they do it under the GPL

[MenTaLguY (5483)]

Talk about one sided canibailzing without prejudice (would take theirs, but hell no, they won't resell mine).

That's the reality though. Everyone on the Inkscape side had, so far, been working with the understanding that (as far as Inkscape goes) we're staying in [L]GPL-land; Xara's announcement can't unilaterally change that.

Also, in practical terms, Inkscape's like the Linux kernel; due to the number of individual copyright holders we couldn't relicense if we wanted to, so it's simply not possible for much Inkscape code to make it into Xara-commercial, even if it made it into Xara-GPL.

p.s. Last comment (or it was last at the time I read was probably the only inteligent comment, about shared LGPL libraries)

Thanks. As I wrote in that email, I do think it's worth investigating ways to share future code without compromising on the [L]GPL stance. We can also probably share experience and algorithms.

Re:RIf they do it under the GPL-Cooks.

[MenTaLguY (5483)]

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.

I am one very happy Xara Ltd. customer.

[isolationism (782170)]

Well, can't say I'm sad to hear it -- I emailed the folks at Xara Ltd. almost a year ago to ask if they intended to port their product to Linux to help ease my transition in that regard (having bought versions of their software since 1.0). Their move to open source is a bit of a shock (I would have been happy with a Linux binary ported using Wine), but it's all good -- better than I could have hoped for. Hopefully some collaboration/cross-semination will occur between the Xara folks and the Inkscape guys, w

Artworks

[chiller2 (35804)]

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 [cconcepts.co.uk] for RISCOS [wikipedia.org]. 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.

Great News For Me and Hopefully You Too

[jodo (209027)]

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.

Really F*cking good

[WasterDave (20047)]

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

Re:Really F*cking good

[danharan (714822)]

So, you're on /. and claim to have an SO and then you compare her to a mountain goat.

A shame dude, your story was almost credible until that point.

A mountain goat! sheesh

This is Big.

[SpamJunkie (557825)]

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 is EXCELLENT news, and here's why

[GooseKirk (60689)]

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.

Gimp users sigh in relief...twice in one week!

[Hosiah (849792)]

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.

Xara and Inkscape

[bbyakk (815167)]

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 [inkscape.org]

slashdot invaded with msft shills/zealots?

[walterbyrd (182728)]

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.

Re:I don't like this...

[someguy456 (607900)]

Only one solution: The Ximp! (sounds better than Gara?

Re:I don't like this...

[mrchaotica (681592)]

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.

Re:I don't like this...

[RatBastard (949)]

I like any alternatve to The Gimp. The Gimp has the worst interface I've seen in a graphics application I've seen since the horror days of DOS-based apps. and many of them were easier to use than The Gimp. The Gimp isn't bad for what you pay for it, but even though it's available for my Mac I still chose to spend money on Photoshop because I can at leats get things done in Photoshop. I don't have the time or energy to try and figure out what the hell The Gimp wants me to do in order to get it to do comm

Re:I don't like this...

[Ucklak (755284)]

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/ [worth1000.com]

Re:I don't like this...

[spitzak (4019)]

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.".

Re:I don't like this...

[Julian Morrison (5575)]

You're thinking like a programmer, or maybe like a graphics geek.

It's in the layer menu because it only affects the current layer. Otherwise it would be in the image menu.

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

Re:What about Linux?

[Tim Browse (9263)]

It's modded down because it's an oft-posted troll.

Re:What about Linux?

[hubie (108345)]

I believe that this one gets modded down because it is a recycled post that shows up all the time, much like how the Netcraft/BSD used to. It is a post that can generate useful comments, but it now gets pulled out for baiting and trolling purposes. Some people claim it is part of the slashbot arsenal that gets posted automatically depending on the topic subject. Once one sees it in three or four times different discussions, one tends to mod it down for its repetition, not its content.

Re:Bah Humbug

[narrowhouse (1949)]

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.

Re:Open Source but how much?

[zero-one (79216)]

Their web site implies they want to do a full version for Linux and release it under the GPL. The website also says "The Windows version continues to include a shipping CD, they can buy a printed manual, and we provide direct customer support to paying customers. In addition the Windows version contains licensed code from third parties (some versions contain Pantone color support, licensed PDF components and other third-party Live Effects plug-ins, fonts and other things) which we can't make Open Source or

Re:Open Source but how much?

[narrowhouse (1949)]

It all depends on how they license it. I agree that there are some questions here. If they open source this entire product under a BSD or GPL license with no extra stipulations then it could be package in a DEB or RPM and shipped with a distribution just like OpenOffice.org. Either one of those licenses would also allow a free version for Windows, OSX, heck even OS/2.

Re:easiest-to-use

[datajack (17285)]

Of course it does, it means I don't have to suffer with any kludgey environment re-implementations like Wine, or interrupt everything I was doing and find another machine to boot another OS to run the app.

Re:take a look at this video

[t35t0r (751958)]

Take a look at this video [xara.com]. 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!!

Re:Another second rate product runs to Linux...

[dbIII (701233)]

Why is it that people on /. mod all criticism of Linux as Flamebait, but almost never defend Linux verbally?

Because it's no longer 1994 so most of the criticism that misses the point entirely has been addressed before. The parody of linux expressed above may look to some as criticism of linux but to me it looks like the writer is expessing the opinion "technical people are dorks", so it isn't worth reponding to that, while it is worth responding to the more civil quention from popo.

New criticism a bit mor