It finally died... what's my new computer going to be?

Need to do more things than Corel Draw. Ignoring that and the AMD headspace...

It's $700US for 32 cores 16 threads + motherboard. The negative in the clock speed of 2.2 GHz.

$4,000+ for a new 32 core, 5 GHz max.

Sounds like a lot of bang for the buck.

At my age I wonder how much AI integration I'll see.  As far as 2d static images I'm not real impressed. The noise reduction,  sharpening tools have me waiting until the next upgrade.  However the technology is in its infancy.  

With 2d static images only current  AI features for resolution, sharpening and noise reduction would be viable with Photo-PAINT.  Unfortunately my testing shows that my current tool set is just as good, not as automated but the end result works.

Corel already uses an AI upsampling in Draw and Photo-PAINT and it's very good.

If Corel wants to move to be more accepting of AI features they need to rethink their entire process. Start with where AI features are and will be in demand. 

I'm seeing a great deal of YouTube hype for photography which is why I checked them out. However there is a strong undercurrent of non acceptance do to the end result.  As you and I know the programming will grow past that in a year or two.

I told Corel this 25 years ago, make an integrated modular application. The user can buy the web package, the photography package, the entire package for manufacturing. 

However their code is so intermingled it is just not possible. 

Driving your decision using marketing and profit as a motive, clearly what has been occurring, then hiding stuff like bug reports... it's not really the way things are done in 2023. It's the sales on effect where to sell the company you need to justify the price based on existing code and potential market share.

The real value is held by long term staff that are committed to the outcome.

Modular and workflow focused.

Interestingly, the 2 products that I see a lot of activity on, youTube videos etc, are BlackMagic Resolve and SketchUp.

BlackMagic, Grant the owner gets out there and does the technical videos himself.

SketchUp, the programmers introduce the features they develop.

In both cases they have maximum development turned on at the programming level.

Perhaps 2d and publishing are just boring stuff now that isn't going to attract programmers or users? So far in this recent incarnation of Corel, all I see is profit seeking from the user base and not much else is noticeable. If they are going to make the user base bleed with this insane pricing model then they need to do a lot more of everything else to keep value in the proposition.

If there isn't investment in what matters then the open source products will race past Corel in development and Adobe will has such a complete tool set that they are impossible to catch.

If I was responsible for the purchase of Corel, I wouldn't be punishing the users with the subscription model as a first gesture of what the future will look like. I'd freeze the product to bug fixes and put the development effort to a new product that has the potential to relight the fire of interest.

As you say, modular and with a workflow focus that sees all other applications by anyone as a "best friend".

What Trimble (SketchUp) and Blackmagic (Resolve) has in common is they sell hardware. They were hardware businesses that became software developers.

That's what is necessary for Corel. Dupont Corel, Xerox Corel, Fuji Corel... They are the companies capable of getting market-share and value back into the product. Fuji likely has the most market spread from cameras to plate-makers and are known for the highest quality outcomes. It's just where we belong. Not with venture capitalists or superannuation companies. Selling Corel Graphics to Fuji with agency would be what I'd be doing as CEO. The other stuff they should keep and bleed the users. Fuji have sales, marketing and management, they would be buying developers, history, users and code. Clearly, marketing and management are costing too much ATM hence the out of order subscription model, which has "I'll pay it once to cover the year I move to a different product" all over it. I can't see the numbers of course but user activity in here is at an all time low.

This mob of owners need to prove they are going to take the users to some magical wonderland and get to it. Else the product will lose value year on year and the current state is the "high" point of relevance. In that case this mob should develop a strategic plan entitled "Flog it to Fuji".

Perhaps we need to send a petition to the head of Fuji, pledging our allegiance to the Samurai family, seeking integration back into the stream of graphics businesses. "Please save us before we become the renowned only as "the once tool favored by church newsletters".

You need to be a pretty die hard supporter of Draw not to jump ship and go with Adobe. For a start you are not going to have to defend the fact that you used Draw in the first place against "that's not industry standard". In fair comparison of the apps Corel is worth, at best $180AU a year. To keep this up, the next version would need to have mind blowing improvements, not a few things hacked on. I don't think that is going to happen. They will do the minimum to claim a new version, keep to the insane pricing and lose more market-share. It's the fool's battle that comes from seeing Corel as being a permanent 2nd place to Adobe and first at absolutely nothing. It's baggage being carried forward year on year by marketing.

I hope you are enjoying this rave, we will see what we agree on and crystal ball ourselves into 10 years on.

Professionally, like in the pro market, no one is attempting to be in 2nd place to Adobe and charge X3 more for it and there are good reasons for this. And it is not where Draw belongs in any case. Draw is a unique and powerful bit of software. The correct path forward is to make Draw central to a work-flow or at least the most integrated application within that work-flow. And attention needs to be focused within multiple development cycles to bring that about.

How about fix the damned curves and show us some movement towards better workflow management. Why are we 20+ versions into Draw and don't have a tool that allow you to see the content of the Draw file as objects to be edited in any program? Present the Draw file as objects, text, text, thumbnail etc with descriptions. That would enable edits without opening the Draw file. Somewhat dangerous but with appropriate warning, highly useful. It there something particularly horrible about the way Draw creates a file that it can't be displayed as XML objects?

There's so much scope to go down a path that isn't 2nd to Adobe but first unto itself. So clearly not the right way to go as while Corel have been busy being 2nd to Adobe they have fallen behind in most of the specialist streams. And focused on being 2nd they developed this unnecessary culture of secrecy that gets in the way of doing anything. Our bugs, plans, personal... it's a secret! The opportunity is a workflow that includes Draw. PhotoPain is really of little relevance. It's an emergency editor and good with text. It will never make it as a must have in multiple workflows.

Draw is different. It is, among other things, a visual database for objects. And it has that hidden feature of being able to attach data to those objects.

Here a potential example of such a workflow...

Put all incoming graphics, photos, renders and drawing into Draw pages. The client wants to see all the bits for the job and we need to check them on the printer.

Open the Object file for that Draw. See any warning about file issues. Easily edit the object data in one place and with some assistance like mini templates or copy existing from... get some data into this empty hole that has the potential to be so useful.

So now I have access to the objects without entering Draw, what else can I do? Update text from a URL, update an image for a URL, it's about time we could embed a video into a PDF and have it update.

They have been buggering around for 30 years and can't see the wood for the trees. It's not about buying some junk software for a quick profit but doing a far better job at exploring the opportunities that exist because some smart people added some stuff that had little purpose at the time but could now be mined for gold.

As a manufacturing person there are many capabilities in graphic products, CorelDRAW included that need to remain static or move forward slowly because the evolution of the deployment of manufacturing equipment is slower than software development. 

However if the product is coded properly that shouldn't preclude new features however with Draw, in my opinion it's another story.

A very simple example is the 30,000 x 30,000 pixel limit in images, this is a nothing thing, until you hit it. This limit requires me to have another application, it's peanuts in terms of cost but it's a pain in the butt. No Corel recognized this on offered free PhotoZomm free for a couple of cycles. However when they supposedly recorded during 2019 they failed to remove the issue in their products. No continuity in development.

Another simple example was web graphics, like it or not graphics for web use is a standard today. It took 2 cycles to make it work, it's still a bit convoluted and the process was demonstrated incorrectly on their web site.

Your concept of inter application compatibility is the future but I'm not sure of the value of the base code in the product. When color management was moved from application based to document based it was a Herculean effort. It broke things that (while in the end it made sense) it was unbelievable how complex the change was and how long it took.

I may be wrong but I believe Corel is slowly trying to replace the code to make it more viable. Yes they recorded in 2019 but I believe all they did was make coding their existing outdated coded easier for 3 platforms.

Surely creating reader for the objects in the file isn't earth shattering. That's the place where I'd start.

The issues of swapping things about that might have different size attributes is manageable.

Gets the program back to an enterprise level tool. Surely we all believe in trickle down best code to consumer product?

I've never seen the inside of a Draw file but I would imagine it to be some sort of XML format or easily converted to and from one.

You could go as far as to build in Draw and render on a server as PDF using local and remote linked files.

I'll bet you everything is in place within Draw and the file file structure to do it. And there has likely at some point been a diagnostic tool made for use in house to review file structure errors.

You don't have to make changes to Draw to do this. It can all be done by review of the objects in the file.

You wouldn't need to fuss with linking within Draw, place holder images and text only need the size and other characteristics and some image that is recognizable in thumbnail as what it is.

I'm sure I'm not the only person that uses Draw as a kind of free-form visual database.

Things that can be done within Draw as far as professional publishing goes, it's most going to be fluff going forward as most of the big deal stuff in done.

Things that can be done to a Draw file when seen as a database of visual objects is untouched.

One of these has a lot of bang for the buck and the other is near worthless.

The lack of pixel space is PP is far less of a concern than the s##t curves!

The pixel issue only impacts some specific jobs, the s##t curves impact every job and waste much time.

You always complain about curves. Are talking drawing paths or tone curves?