Discussion about The GIMP's interface
Yugo
Let's start a new thread. I'm not sure it's necessary to say this, but
just in case:
All discussions and concepts herein are deemed of the public domain. They
may be used by anybody for any purpose, either commercial or not, and may
not be licensed to deprive anybody of their use. Otherwise, please refrain.
--------------------
> What's wrong with applying Filters?Enhance?Sharpen… to the image
> or the selection!?
Why should a beginner suppose that sharpness is a filter? Why enhance? Is
there an option to degrade? Why does this fuckin menu closes everytime you
select a certain degree of sharpness?
Why doesn't it close with the ESC key only when you're through? Why can't
you get sharp*ness* in a menu when you right-click the picture? You'd then
have a -100% 0 +100% scale for blurring to sharpening, either a selection,
outside a selection, or both for the whole picture, plus the tools for
selective blurring or sharpening.
Why all those click-ke-dee-roo RTFM menus?
>>> Firefox anyone?
>>
>>
>> Yes, great! Why is it, though, that they made the fonts so small in mode
>> 1280 x 1024 that the url window is hardly readable? Anybody with a
>> slightly impaired vision can't read it. Of course, a url bar is not that
>> important in a browser.
> Filed a bug report?
Tthe problem with Linux software is you've got to file reports for the
most obvious things. It's as if the developers only saw their code and
never used their own software.
With even the 17" LCD screens coming in 1280x1024 definition, this mode is
ever more popular. I now have a good quality 19" LCD and the url windows
is readable. But on a CRT, it was hard to read and such is probably the
case for 17" LCDs. How come developers can't figure out that it would be
better fot the fonts to fill the URL window without somebody writing to
them? Are they such dunces?
If you have to fill a bug report for this, what is it you won't have to
fill a bug report about?
>> While Google now allows searches of more than 10 words, who came up with
>> the bright idea of making searches possible only in a small windows
>> where hardly more than 3 words can be entered?
> I have no problem entering 10 or more words there.
Oh, yes! The only little problem is you can't see what you've entered
before sending the query. Who cares, you have time, you can correct it later.
> Most people start a
> search with just one or two words anyway and then refine the search term
> if the results are to broad or wrong.
I see your point of view. You mean it was quite an inconvenient to fill
only 2 or 3 words in the url window for a search while you could just as
well enter 10 or more AND SEE THEM?
You know what? The pain with discussing with Linux developers is that
they're exactly like you. Their logic is nil.
>>> Openoffice?
>>
>>
>> What's the 8th most often asked question at OOo? How to save a document
>> as a default template. Of course, those bastards don't RTFMsss!
>
>
>
> That's the 8th most often question? Yes those people should consult the
> online help.
RTFM for saving a document as a default template? What is it then, that
you won't have to RTFM about?
But don't tell Linux developers that their interface is ill-conceived. The
problem is people don't want to spend days on end RTFMsss.
P.s.: As I'm trying to send this message I an told that certain characters
are not in my chosen character set. I looked 3 times through the message
and I can't find any Russian or Chinese characters. Everything seems OK.
If the software can identify some characters that are not part of the
default character set, why doesn't it highlight them?
Should I write to the developers about this too? I feel I could spend my
whole life writing to developers about just one software.
Joal Heagney
> So, it seems we're going yo have a discussion about The GIMP's
> interface. Let's start a new thread. I'm not sure it's necessary to say
> this, but just in case:
>
> All discussions and concepts herein are deemed of the public domain.
> They may be used by anybody for any purpose, either commercial or not,
> and may not be licensed to deprive anybody of their use. Otherwise,
> please refrain.
>
> --------------------
>
>
> > What's wrong with applying Filters?Enhance?Sharpen… to the image
> > or the selection!?
>
> Why should a beginner suppose that sharpness is a filter? Why enhance?
Because if we give everything a top level menu, we'd really have a
shitstorm. There is talk about merging the filters and the scripts menus
in Gimp, but even if we do, this will still probably come under the
heading "Filters" or *gasp* a more Photoshopish "Effects".
Enhance because we have under that heading Deinterlace, Despeckle,
Destripe, NL Filter, Sharpen, Unsharp (and on my machines, Unsharp2).
Do we create a new subheading called Sharpen under filters? That's
another "click-ke-dee-roo RTFM" menu entry, as you say below. What do we
do with the other non-sharpening tools such as Deinterlace? How do we
deal with the user who comes into the Sharpen menu and sees Unsharpen,
which actually does sharpen? (See. It's not just Gimp that's guilty of
silly names.)
> Is there an option to degrade?
Yep. It's called Blur. :) I think that Enhance and Blur are better
descriptions of the actual operations these filters do than Sharpen (or
Degrade). They make it very apparent that Sharpen is NOT the opposite of
Blur. Blur destroys data. Sharpen (Or Unsharp) makes an image appear
sharper (Enhancing it) but doesn't restore lost data. Ever tried to fix
up a really blurry/low res. photograph using either Gimp or Photoshop?
The best approach that I've ever found is to Unsharp like mad, then
throw a heap of noise grain into the image. Looks like crap, but to the
human eye, a noisy photograph looks like it's more detailed than a
smooth picture with sharp edges. Nothing else works as well.
> Why does this fuckin menu closes
> everytime you select a certain degree of sharpness?
Select AND apply. Do you use the preview window? Hopefully this will
disappear with Effects Layers a-la GEGL. In the mean time CTRL-Shift-M.
> Why doesn't it close with the ESC key only when you're through?
Esc means Escape. 'Nough said. Imagine a fire escape that you could only
use if you were on fire. (Okay, that was being facetious.)
> Why
> can't you get sharp*ness* in a menu when you right-click the picture?
> You'd then have a -100% 0 +100% scale for blurring to sharpening, either
> a selection, outside a selection, or both for the whole picture, plus
> the tools for selective blurring or sharpening.
Because blur is NOT the opposite of sharpen. If you want, you can go
into the preferences and set the blur/sharpen effects to key
combinations, including mouse wheel spins.
> Why all those click-ke-dee-roo RTFM menus?
Hmmm. In the Blender forums, the newer users usually complain there
isn't ENOUGH menus!!!
> > Filed a bug report?
>
> Tthe problem with Linux software is you've got to file reports for the
> most obvious things. It's as if the developers only saw their code and
> never used their own software.
>
> With even the 17" LCD screens coming in 1280x1024 definition, this mode
> is ever more popular. I now have a good quality 19" LCD and the url
> windows is readable. But on a CRT, it was hard to read and such is
> probably the case for 17" LCDs. How come developers can't figure out
> that it would be better fot the fonts to fill the URL window without
> somebody writing to them? Are they such dunces?
Or maybe their working their little butts off to ensure that real
show-stopper bugs such as the browser not eating your hard-drive should
get priority.
Plus there's probably an issue of mind-set here. The average developer
will be working so long with a GUI that he/she gets used to it's quirks
- such as setting fonts just once in the Preferences so that the URL is
readable on a 17" LCDs. Keep in mind that this is not just one
developer, but a whole raft of volunteers each working on one aspect.
As an ex-uni researcher/student I can honestly say that you work long
enough on ANYTHING (E.g. assignment, report, article, etc.) and you
eventually become blind to its small flaws.
An outside view becomes vital as you approach completion. So yes, it IS
necessary to file reports on the most obvious things - think of it as
your little contribution to the open source community. Or do you really
want to be the only person sucking up all the free goodness and not
doing a thing to put something back?
> >> While Google now allows searches of more than 10 words, who came up
> with
> >> the bright idea of making searches possible only in a small windows
> >> where hardly more than 3 words can be entered?
>
>
> > I have no problem entering 10 or more words there.
>
>
> Oh, yes! The only little problem is you can't see what you've entered
> before sending the query. Who cares, you have time, you can correct it
> later.
On the other hand, you can customise the search sites in that little
toolbar. I have Google.AU for my general search engine, Google.AU
restricted to .au for Australia-related searches, singingfish.com for
music/video searches and stumbleupon for I'm-bored-and-am-just-surfing
type searches.
> > Most people start a
> > search with just one or two words anyway and then refine the search term
> > if the results are to broad or wrong.
>
>
> I see your point of view. You mean it was quite an inconvenient to fill
> only 2 or 3 words in the url window for a search while you could just as
> well enter 10 or more AND SEE THEM?
>
> You know what? The pain with discussing with Linux developers is that
> they're exactly like you. Their logic is nil.
What about the person on a small screen. A resizable search bar is the
solution, but if the bar is a fixed size, do you think somebody working
on 800x600 will appreciate having 20 of those 600 vertical pixels up
permanently by an often-unused across-the-whole-fricking-application
search bar? And please don't just say that they should buy a bigger
monitor. I'm thinking of third world countries like India or Spain.
> RTFM for saving a document as a default template? What is it then, that
> you won't have to RTFM about?
>
> But don't tell Linux developers that their interface is ill-conceived.
> The problem is people don't want to spend days on end RTFMsss.
And that's how we got Clippy. Grrrrr. I'd love to STRANGLE that
paperclip!!!!
> P.s.: As I'm trying to send this message I an told that certain
> characters are not in my chosen character set. I looked 3 times through
> the message and I can't find any Russian or Chinese characters.
> Everything seems OK. If the software can identify some characters that
> are not part of the default character set, why doesn't it highlight them?
Might be end-of-line garbage sneaking into the replies from users on
other operating systems. :) Maybe the answer is to stop talking to Linux
users? (Just kidding!)
Joal Heagney
Neil Ellwood
Snipped all the drivel.
If you don't like the Gimp don't use it or keep on about it.
You are boring but no one keeps on about it.
I like the Gimp and find that I get better results than with any other
graphics progr. that I have used. It isn't perfect but no programme is.
--
Neil
Delete l to reply
Yugo
> Yugo wrote:
>
>> So, it seems we're going yo have a discussion about The GIMP's
>> interface. Let's start a new thread. I'm not sure it's necessary to
>> say this, but just in case:
>>
>> All discussions and concepts herein are deemed of the public domain.
>> They may be used by anybody for any purpose, either commercial or not,
>> and may not be licensed to deprive anybody of their use. Otherwise,
>> please refrain.
>>
>> --------------------
>>
>>
>> > What's wrong with applying Filters?Enhance?Sharpen… to the image
>> > or the selection!?
>>
>> Why should a beginner suppose that sharpness is a filter? Why enhance?
> Because if we give everything a top level menu, we'd really have a
> shitstorm.
Well, already, in one option, you'd already have two of the present
options: blur and sharpen. Maybe smudge and paint utilising image regions
could be put together. etc. I also believe there should be a first level
option for image colors + brigtness/contrast + saturation...
> Yep. It's called Blur. :) I think that Enhance and Blur are better
> descriptions of the actual operations these filters do than Sharpen (or
> Degrade). They make it very apparent that Sharpen is NOT the opposite of
> Blur. Blur destroys data. Sharpen (Or Unsharp) makes an image appear
> sharper (Enhancing it) but doesn't restore lost data.
Sharpen also destroys data, even if the image looks sharper. Enlarge the
image 10x, you'll see what I mean. Otherwise, it would be no use buying a
camera with a good lens.
And I do believe most people see sharpen and blur as opposites. Whether
they are from a technical point of view is totally irrelevant.
That's the problem with Linux developers: whereas they should listen to
users to learn more about their perception, they want to teach users how
right they are. It just doesn't work this way. The user is the boss.
I mean can't you figure out that having Sharpness at a level of menu under
the likes of "Glass effect" is completely ridiculous?
>> Why does this fuckin menu closes
>> everytime you select a certain degree of sharpness?
> Select AND apply. Do you use the preview window?
No, I've got it right there in my face, but I don't use it. I close my
eyes and try to set sharpness haphazardly. Arrrrgh!
> Hopefully this will
> disappear with Effects Layers a-la GEGL. In the mean time CTRL-Shift-M.
CTRL-Shift-M has no effect here. (GIMP 1.25)
>> Why doesn't it close with the ESC key only when you're through?
>
>
> Esc means Escape.
Really?
> 'Nough said. Imagine a fire escape that you could only
> use if you were on fire. (Okay, that was being facetious.)
That's exactly what you're doing when you're escaping/exiting a menu.
>> With even the 17" LCD screens coming in 1280x1024 definition, this
>> mode is ever more popular. I now have a good quality 19" LCD and the
>> url windows is readable. But on a CRT, it was hard to read and such is
>> probably the case for 17" LCDs. How come developers can't figure out
>> that it would be better fot the fonts to fill the URL window without
>> somebody writing to them? Are they such dunces?
>
>
> Or maybe their working their little butts off to ensure that real
> show-stopper bugs such as the browser not eating your hard-drive should
> get priority.
>
> Plus there's probably an issue of mind-set here. The average developer
> will be working so long with a GUI that he/she gets used to it's quirks
All of them, all the time, for months and years on end? Nobody's got a
grandma with bad eyesight? All of them, all the time, for months and years
on end?
> Or do you really
> want to be the only person sucking up all the free goodness and not
> doing a thing to put something back?
As I said, I did a lot of beta-testing in the Windows world, both
shareware and commercial software. But the mindset of developers is
completely different... at least for the comapnies I worked with: if their
software doesn't work, they're out of a job and they have nothing to feed
their family. So...
1) Their beta software works, There is no known bugs list that you have to
check all the time. The bugs you might have are related to your peculiar
hardware.
Still there is a lot of work to do. This software they gave me for my work
was sometimes on special at $100 and I would normally put in 40 hours
minimum for each beta test. I've received better wages in my life, believe
me. But I needed this software for my work and, in the end, it would work
exactly like I wanted. This was worth something to me.
2) They NEVER try to teach you the way they see things. The ONLY thing
they're interested in is how YOU see things. What is it that you don't
understand in the menus, how would you like to see things organized,
what's the name you'd use for such an option, etc. ?
IOW, if you told them that you find it weird that an unsharpen mask
sharpens the images, they wouldn't boast about this originality of their
software, they wouldn't say RTFM. They'd change the name. Final.
Maybe some day, Linux developers will understand that it's better not to
ship buggy beta software. (Bugs belong to the alpha state. It's for
developers.) But, for the second point, I doubt they'll ever understand,
except the hard way.
There will always be braggarts for whom anything Linux is great. And,
whereas commercial software developers will rather listen to people who
are not satisfied with their software -- inasmuch as their arguments make
sense -- Linux devlopers, it seems, live only for a pat on the back. They
get it, but the results, in my opinion, are just not there.
Also, there is a problem with how communautary development works now, In a
company -- a small company, not Microsoft -- the boss would have looked at
this little stupid Opera-like search window and have said: "I don't care
if you call it a feature, I don't want to see this in MY browser." If the
way he saw things were wrong and people in general didn't like his ideas,
he'd be out of a job. Otherwise, he'd get a better pay.
In the Open source community, it seems the browser is everybody's and
anybody's. Sometimes a good idea gets through. Tabs, for instance. Who
could work without tabs, nowadays? I certainly couldn't: all my reference
tools -- dictionaries, search engines, etc. -- are on tabs. I copy
paste all day long. (I don't like people who write and don't give
references.) I can't imagine how I ever could live without tabs.
Sometimes a downright stupid idea gets through, like changing the fonts
size in the URL bar or searching in a separate small windows. It's so
infuriating you wonder if some Microsoftites aren't steering the project
astray.
You can't help it, If you write to the developers, either they'll keep
silent or they'll try to explain why it's such a wonderful idea. The one
thing they won't do is listen to you POV.
What's the way out? Today, large corporations have endorsed Linux. Suse
even wants to make it on the desktop and pretend they have offers that
match Microsoft's. Somehow, it seems people aren't jumping on the
bandwagon. Why? Because Linux developers believe that they've got it right
every time and don't want to listen to non-geek POV.
If companies like Suse -- and the same goes for distribution developers --
don't want to go down in flames, they'll have to choose software whose
developers listen to users. If The GIMP developers are so convinced
they've got it right with their arcane ways, they could choose Krita. Even
though their interface a la PhotoShop unduly nibbles the picture, if it's
easier to use, it's the solution to offer. Somewhere, as an alternative,
The GIMP could be offered. Until Th =e GIMP developers understand that
they're putting a lot of work for next to nobody.
Braggarts and blinfolded pat on the back developers won't get Linux
anywhere. If there's any way things will change, it's through the distros
offering the users their own choice of software.
>> >> While Google now allows searches of more than 10 words, who came
>> up with
>> >> the bright idea of making searches possible only in a small windows
>> >> where hardly more than 3 words can be entered?
>>
>>
>> > I have no problem entering 10 or more words there.
>>
>>
>> Oh, yes! The only little problem is you can't see what you've entered
>> before sending the query. Who cares, you have time, you can correct it
>> later.
>
>
> On the other hand, you can customise the search sites in that little
> toolbar.
You could customize it just the same when the URL bar was used:
preferences = navigator - internet search
> I have Google.AU for my general search engine, Google.AU
> restricted to .au for Australia-related searches, singingfish.com for
> music/video searches and stumbleupon for I'm-bored-and-am-just-surfing
> type searches.
OK, maybe a fill-in menu could have been added. How is this an excuse for
scrapping the URL window for searches?
>> > Most people start a
>> > search with just one or two words anyway and then refine the search
>> term
>> > if the results are to broad or wrong.
>>
>>
>> I see your point of view. You mean it was quite an inconvenient to
>> fill only 2 or 3 words in the url window for a search while you could
>> just as well enter 10 or more AND SEE THEM?
>>
>> You know what? The pain with discussing with Linux developers is that
>> they're exactly like you. Their logic is nil.
>
>
> What about the person on a small screen. A resizable search bar is the
> solution,
No. Using the URL window like it used to be before Opera started this
whole folly is the way.
>> RTFM for saving a document as a default template? What is it then,
>> that you won't have to RTFM about?
>>
>> But don't tell Linux developers that their interface is ill-conceived.
>> The problem is people don't want to spend days on end RTFMsss.
> And that's how we got Clippy. Grrrrr. I'd love to STRANGLE that
> paperclip!!!!
I use Klipper all the time. I couldn't live without it. But I've got other
things to search than how my software works. My software is not an end in
itself. It's supposed to get things done, you know.
Michael Soibelman
Don't you have something to do ?? You've obviously vented for days now.
Take a rest.....This group is where people come to ask questions to get
something to work. But you've just been bitching. Now I'll give
you 'some' credit for pointing out things you don't like. But wouldn't it
be more usefull to sit down and make a list of all the changes you'd like
to see ?? Go over it a few times and put it in outline form. Section 1.
Subsection a, b,c, etc.... Then post it in a couple of places. Then keep
your cool and respond in a thoughtful way. Just doing what you've been
doing since day 1 is going to turn people against you. Yes, perhaps some
of your points are valid. Perhaps others are not. You got yourself in a
big huff before anybody could engage you in a thoughtful way. You start by
ranting and people rant back. That's what I did. But now I've figured out
your....method. It's not producing results. Don't try politics. It's not
what you're good at.
On another note, you pointed out how you used version 4, I believe, of what
was it paint shop? And it worked fine. Well, I'm not sure you understand
that in Linux things are numbered in a different way than proprietary OS's.
For instance, the version of Gimp you so foolishly are still using is 1.25.
This is not version 12 or so. This is basically version 1, with a few bug
fixes. Version 1. The newest version is version 2 with many bug fixes,
and a few enhancements. So version 2.4, which is soon to be released is
just version 2 with some feature enhancements and lots of bug fixes. By
the time Gimp is at version 4 it will be at least 2 maybe 3 years from
now. By then it will be WAY more advanced than photopaint was at version
4....Perhaps you don't like the way things are done but your only one,
albeit a very LOUD one, voice in the crowd. So Linux developers make lots
of intermediate (what we call point) releases. That's just so users can
get new features much faster than if they had to wait until the next full
version release. Usually to fix bugs, but some new features as well.
Why don't you spend a much smaller amount of your time
ranting/raving/complaining and just update your version of Gimp ?? It's so
easy and you'll be much more productive.
I could go on some more and try to give you advice but that's enough for
now. I prefer helping people who are actually using Gimp and trying to
make images.
Not one rant in return this time. Just good advice. Take that for what it
is.
Have a nice day :-)
P.S. Have you tried to contact the makers of Photo Shop (Adobe) or Photo
Paint (Jasc) and ask them when they intend to make a version for Linux ??
If you're aware of it, the number one application Linux users have
repeatedly said they would 'pay' for is Photo Shop. Add your voice to this
number and let them know you think they should port there application to
Linux. They would be far more productive. In this case every vote or call
to the manufacturer CAN make a difference.
Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch
> Joal Heagney wrote:
>> Yugo wrote:
>
> And I do believe most people see sharpen and blur as opposites. Whether
> they are from a technical point of view is totally irrelevant.
Why? I don't think it is. I'm a user and prefer software that does not
blends technically different things into one dialog. Don't you say that
developers should listen to the users of their software!?
> That's the problem with Linux developers: whereas they should listen to
> users to learn more about their perception, they want to teach users how
> right they are. It just doesn't work this way. The user is the boss.
No he isn't the boss. Why should he? He may make suggestions and the
developer might pay attention or ignore them, but the user isn't the boss.
He does not pay the developer after all.
> As I said, I did a lot of beta-testing in the Windows world, both
> shareware and commercial software. But the mindset of developers is
> completely different... at least for the comapnies I worked with: if
> their software doesn't work, they're out of a job and they have nothing
> to feed their family. So...
>
> 1) Their beta software works, There is no known bugs list that you have
> to check all the time. The bugs you might have are related to your
> peculiar hardware.
You must live in a parallel universe then. Even released software has
bugs. Any software that's a bit more complex has some.
> Still there is a lot of work to do. This software they gave me for my work
> was sometimes on special at $100 and I would normally put in 40 hours
> minimum for each beta test. I've received better wages in my life, believe
> me. But I needed this software for my work and, in the end, it would work
> exactly like I wanted. This was worth something to me.
Then pay Gimp developers to make the changes you want.
> 2) They NEVER try to teach you the way they see things. The ONLY thing
> they're interested in is how YOU see things. What is it that you don't
> understand in the menus, how would you like to see things organized,
> what's the name you'd use for such an option, etc. ?
Yeah right. Imagine a software developer who tries to fulfill all the
users wishes. First they will pretty quickly start to contradict each
other and then there are technical decisions that are left to a developer
with experience.
After all it's the software of the developer, not yours. He has to be
happy with it, that's why he is working on it.
> Maybe some day, Linux developers will understand that it's better not to
> ship buggy beta software. (Bugs belong to the alpha state. It's for
> developers.)
Open source software should be released early and often so others get the
chance to see the source and make suggestions or jump in and provide
patches. Open source software is for developers. After it's mature
enough it's also for users, but it's still for developers too. BTW I
don't understand why you always drag the Linux developers into this!?
> […] And, whereas commercial software developers will rather listen to
> people who are not satisfied with their software -- inasmuch as their
> arguments make sense -- Linux devlopers, it seems, live only for a pat
> on the back.
While open source developers *do* live for the pat on the back or the
fuzzy and warm feeling that they wrote a program that solves a problem for
them, most listen to arguments that make sense. Maybe you should think
about your arguments if no one is listening.
> Also, there is a problem with how communautary development works now, In a
> company -- a small company, not Microsoft -- the boss would have looked at
> this little stupid Opera-like search window and have said: "I don't care
> if you call it a feature, I don't want to see this in MY browser." If the
> way he saw things were wrong and people in general didn't like his ideas,
> he'd be out of a job. Otherwise, he'd get a better pay.
Maybe not enough people find this little search entry to be really a
problem. The company behind Opera has to care for costumers because it's
a commercial company after all and no open source project.
> Braggarts and blinfolded pat on the back developers won't get Linux
> anywhere. If there's any way things will change, it's through the distros
> offering the users their own choice of software.
Most distros do exactly this. There are over 18.000 packages in the
"main" repositories of Ubuntu for example. That's plenty of choice.
>>> But don't tell Linux developers that their interface is ill-conceived.
>>> The problem is people don't want to spend days on end RTFMsss.
>
>> And that's how we got Clippy. Grrrrr. I'd love to STRANGLE that
>> paperclip!!!!
>
> I use Klipper all the time.
With Clippy he meant Microsofts "talking" paper clip.
> I couldn't live without it. But I've got other things to search than how
> my software works. My software is not an end in itself. It's supposed to
> get things done, you know.
Software is complex and can't "explain itself" in many cases. So you need
manuals if you want to use the full power. Neither software nor its
developers can read the users minds.
Image manipulating software is like a digital darkroom and you don't
expect to cope with all the stuff in a real darkroom without some reading,
don't you?
Ciao,
Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch
Yugo
> Don't you have something to do ??
Obviously, not to much these days :)
> Take a rest.....This group is where people come to ask questions to get
> something to work. But you've just been bitching.
Well that's it, With Linux, if you tell somebody that their interface is
downright rotten, you're bitching.
> On another note, you pointed out how you used version 4, I believe, of what
> was it paint shop? And it worked fine. Well, I'm not sure you understand
> that in Linux things are numbered in a different way than proprietary OS's.
> For instance, the version of Gimp you so foolishly are still using is 1.25.
> This is not version 12 or so. This is basically version 1, with a few bug
> fixes. Version 1.
When this 1.25 version went out The Gimp, I would think, had been in
development for 7 years. That's a lot more than PSP when it was at version 4.
I'm not sure you understand that in Linux, things are numbered in a
different way than proprietary OS's.
> Why don't you spend a much smaller amount of your time
> ranting/raving/complaining and just update your version of Gimp ??
I explained that.
> P.S. Have you tried to contact the makers of Photo Shop (Adobe) or Photo
> Paint (Jasc) and ask them when they intend to make a version for Linux ??
> If you're aware of it, the number one application Linux users have
> repeatedly said they would 'pay' for is Photo Shop.
Now, that would be a real loss of time! They certainly won't produce a
version of PhotoShop for Linux when linux is hardly 1% of computer users
and most Linux users are not into graphcis at all. Even though the number
one application Linux users have repeatedly said they would 'pay' for is
Photo Shop, it's completely irrelevant.
Have a nice day. I hope I'm completely wrong and you can continue to
develop the GIMP in your arcane ways and give advice all over the place,
and that The GIMP will so become a real success story.
Joal Heagney
> When this 1.25 version went out The Gimp, I would think, had been in
> development for 7 years. That's a lot more than PSP when it was at
> version 4.
>
Wait, you're using 1.25?????!!!!????
Quit wasting our time and move up to 2.2 fer'gawds sake!!
Joal Heagney
Yugo
I already commented on this, so excuse me for not going over it again.
You'd then be more than justified to accuse me of losing my time.
Lars Behrens
> Quit wasting our time and move up to 2.2 fer'gawds sake!!
Come on now folks, let's stop feeding the troll.
--
Cheerz Lars