Re: Linux Photoshop

"J. Clarke" <jclarke.usenet@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

My problem is that people on both sides do the denouncing without first
making at least a half-assed effort to research the product that they are
denouncing.

Then you don't have much to argue about with what I had to say.
Point taken!

But lets do look at the contortions you had to go to in an
attempt to claim at least some ground for your own...

(Just keep in mind that *you* brought these topics up, and *I*
am not saying they are particularly significant.)

In your post you go on about GIMP plugins like Photoshop doesn't have this

I did *not* "go on about". I mentioned it in passing simply
because it does exist, and then did in fact "go on about" the
fact that The GIMP does *not* try to be a do it all in one
program, and instead *does* interface well to other programs.
(Perhaps you are unfamiliar with that concept, and with The
GIMP, and didn't realize that I was *not* talking about plugins?
See your first paragraph quoted above...)

capability when in fact not only does it have it, but there are so many
plugins available that other vendors of photo editing and artistic software
have been forced by popular demand to support Photoshop plugins. Even GIMP
supports them in Windows. When there are so many useful GIMP plugins that
Corel finds themselves forced to support them then get back to me.

The point is that Photoshop *still*, with the plugins, is trying
to do *everything* all in one program, and does not attempt to
cooperate well with other tools.

That is related to the same way that typically Windows users run
whatever program they are using in full screen mode; while
people who grew up with X tend to never run anything in full
screen mode... and Windows users make little use of multiple
desktops, making several of them available is standard practice
for a unix desktop.

Also note that the basic filesystem structure of Windows tends
to be used in a way that to execute a particular application one
should to be in a particular working directory, with a different
directory for each major application. (On unix a user generally
has a directory for each major project, and may invoke a dozen
or more major apps from that directory. Projects are not
restricted to a single major application, or allowed to mix
applications only when using some sort of "integrated package.
On a unix box *everything* is an integrated package to some
degree.)

One of the, IMHO very unfortunate, results of Microsoft products
being so universal in the PC/Desktop world is that many (most?)
users tend to think that the way MS does things is necessarily
the "right" way, the best way or even the only way! It
certainly is one of *multiple* *valid* ways. Apple has a
somewhat different mindset, and so does unix. For many people
those are vastly better.

You also talk about spending hundreds of dollars to try a new package--in
fact most vendors of decent Windows software, including Microsoft, have
free trialware available.

Try using it for six months on your "free trialware". Of course
one could also restructure that argument as simply stating that
to license a Microsoft product one has to spend big dollars.
Microsoft itself has just been fined $350 million dollars for
unfair trade practices that reduce competition for their
products. While that of course does not apply directly to
Photoshop, indirectly there is little question that all such
products cost more because Microsoft stifles competition for
Windows software.

If GIMP and Linux work for you then that's the tool to use. If Photoshop
works for you that's the tool to use. If Photopaint works for you that's
the tool to use. If something else works for you that's the tool to use.

So you agree with *exactly* what I've been saying all along.
Nice, but why try to act as if you are telling me something new?
That's deceitful.

I have *never* said there is anything wrong with using
Photoshop, have not made *any* derogatory remarks about what it
can or cannot do, and have more than once suggested that people
who are well adapted to that philosophy of program usage should
indeed use it. It boils down to 1) it is less complex to use,
and 2) you pay for that with less flexibility in what it can do.

There is no free lunch! What else is new?

If you think someone else is doing wrong by choosing a different tool from
your favorite then you're a loon.

Stacey is the only one who has made that sort of statement
(others have, but haven't chosen to belabor the point) which is
why I've been poking holes in those statements.

If you cannot follow a thread better than than, and have to
repeat exactly what other people have said, claiming to tell
them something new, then just who is the loon?

--
Floyd L. Davidson <http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson>
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) floyd@xxxxxxxxxx
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Linux no threat to Microsoft
    ... originally developed for Unix. ... Windows has't come on any of the machines I've ever purchased. ... Yet over those years Linux Market Share on the desktop has actually ... philosophy of Apple - later adopted by Microsoft. ...
    (comp.os.linux.setup)
  • Re: Microsoft Says Recovery from Malware Becoming Impossible
    ... a Microsoft security official said ... program manager in the Security Solutions group at ... dollar everytime I caught something on Windows I could retire very ... too have been using Windows going back to DOS 2.and Unix ...
    (microsoft.public.security)
  • Re: Linux Photoshop
    ... and didn't realize that I was *not* talking about plugins? ... Many Windows applications do use them. ... have been forced by popular demand to support Photoshop plugins. ... Most Microsoft apps have 180 day time bombed versions. ...
    (rec.photo.digital)
  • Re: To the OP: Wintroll FUD about alleged insecurity refuted (was: Re: Linux why?)
    ... onto which a 32-bit Windows kernel was bolted. ... what he said was that "Windows NT is a better UNIX ... Microsoft Xenix way back when). ...
    (comp.os.linux.misc)
  • Re: IPCop for Small-Business Network: Web Proxy Usage
    ... I have heard that Microsoft is coming out with a Unix-based ... >version of Windows, due out in 2011. ... I know you are unaware of it, but microsoft did have a "UNIX" (actually ... Linux based O/S. ...
    (comp.security.firewalls)
Loading