GIMP is terrible! Says Linux Geeks! - Linux

This is a discussion on GIMP is terrible! Says Linux Geeks! - Linux ; "Peter Köhlmann" stated in post 48969e39$0$11738$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net on 8/3/08 11:14 PM: > Snot/Snit/Michael Glxsser blubbered incoherently: > >> "Peter Köhlmann" stated in post >> 489691ff$0$11736$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net on 8/3/08 10:22 PM: >> >>>> That is a fork of the Gimp project..... >>>> So ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 56

Thread: GIMP is terrible! Says Linux Geeks!

  1. Re: GIMP is terrible! Says Linux Geeks!

    "Peter Köhlmann" stated in post
    48969e39$0$11738$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net on 8/3/08 11:14 PM:

    > Snot/Snit/Michael Glxsser blubbered incoherently:
    >
    >> "Peter Köhlmann" stated in post
    >> 489691ff$0$11736$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net on 8/3/08 10:22 PM:
    >>
    >>>> That is a fork of the Gimp project.....
    >>>> So WHY didn't the Gimp developers incorporate that into Gimp?
    >>>>
    >>>> Why?
    >>>
    >>> Simple: They obviously liked their design better. So do I, BTW.
    >>> This is what forks are for.

    >>
    >> So you liked the attempts to copy someone else's work more than the
    >> "original" work from the OSS community.

    >
    > Your extremely bad reading comprehension problems rear their ugly head
    > again, Snot/Snit/Michael Glxsser
    > What part of "I like the original Gimp design better" was too difficult for
    > you?
    > And since when is it "sleazy" (your words) to have a similar look as some
    > other product?


    First: my error with which UI you prefer. Fair enough... though as is your
    norm you respond to a mistake with no class.

    Second: When someone takes a lot of time and effort to build something it is
    sleazy to "borrow" it. It is not like they are just getting a good idea
    here or there - the goal is to make it essentially like Photoshop.


    GIMPshop is a modification of the free/open source GNU
    Image Manipulation Program (GIMP), intended to replicate
    the feel of Adobe Photoshop.

    And from the same link:

    It shares all GIMP's advantages, including the long feature
    list and customisability, while addressing some common
    criticisms regarding the program's interface: GIMPshop
    modifies the menu structure to closely match Photoshop's,
    adjusts the program's terminology to match Adobe's, and, in
    the Windows version, uses a plugin called 'Deweirdifier' to
    combine the application's numerous windows in a similar
    manner to the MDI system used by most Windows graphics
    packages.

    Hmmm, common criticisms. Interesting. And you have to love something
    called a "Deweirdifier". Wonder if you would be willing to install it in
    yourself.

    >> I am not surprised.
    >>
    >>

    > Neither am I. You read something and understand *nothing*
    >
    > All you do is interpret it in your own, totally faulty way and try to troll
    > with your ignorance


    Hey, when I make a mistake I own up to it. If after you pointed out my
    error I insisted I was right and that you "painted that picture" - as Rick
    says - *that* would be lying.

    So now we have it - I made a mistake and owned up to it.

    Let's see when you, Rick, and Thufir grow up enough to do so!


    --
    When thinking changes your mind, that's philosophy.
    When God changes your mind, that's faith.
    When facts change your mind, that's science.


  2. Re: GIMP is terrible! Says Linux Geeks!

    On Sun, 03 Aug 2008 23:28:16 -0700, Snit wrote:


    > First: my error with which UI you prefer. Fair enough... though as is
    > your norm you respond to a mistake with no class.



    Oh..my..****ing..god. Can you be more of an ass?


    -Thufir

  3. Re: GIMP is terrible! Says Linux Geeks!

    "thufir" stated in post
    wOylk.56422$nD.36466@pd7urf1no on 8/4/08 1:09 AM:

    > On Sun, 03 Aug 2008 23:28:16 -0700, Snit wrote:
    >
    >
    >> First: my error with which UI you prefer. Fair enough... though as is
    >> your norm you respond to a mistake with no class.

    >
    >
    > Oh..my..****ing..god. Can you be more of an ass?


    You snipped what I was in response to:

    Your extremely bad reading comprehension problems rear their
    ugly head again, Snot/Snit/Michael Glxsser What part of "I
    like the original Gimp design better" was too difficult for
    you?

    Funny how you ignored that, eh? LOL!


    --
    Projects should really look to the whole Linux desktop and see how they can
    appeal to both sides.
    - Mark Shuttleworth (founded Canonical Ltd. / Ubuntu Linux)


  4. Re: GIMP is terrible! Says Linux Geeks!

    Snot/Snit/Michael Glasser blubbered incoherently:

    > "Peter Köhlmann" stated in post
    > 48969e39$0$11738$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net on 8/3/08 11:14 PM:
    >
    >> Snot/Snit/Michael Glxsser blubbered incoherently:
    >>
    >>> "Peter Köhlmann" stated in post
    >>> 489691ff$0$11736$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net on 8/3/08 10:22
    >>> PM:
    >>>
    >>>>> That is a fork of the Gimp project.....
    >>>>> So WHY didn't the Gimp developers incorporate that into Gimp?
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Why?
    >>>>
    >>>> Simple: They obviously liked their design better. So do I, BTW.
    >>>> This is what forks are for.
    >>>
    >>> So you liked the attempts to copy someone else's work more than the
    >>> "original" work from the OSS community.

    >>
    >> Your extremely bad reading comprehension problems rear their ugly head
    >> again, Snot/Snit/Michael Glxsser
    >> What part of "I like the original Gimp design better" was too difficult
    >> for you?
    >> And since when is it "sleazy" (your words) to have a similar look as some
    >> other product?

    >
    > First: my error with which UI you prefer. Fair enough... though as is
    > your norm you respond to a mistake with no class.


    It was *your* mistake. One of many
    It is not my problem that you have a serious reading comprehension problem

    > Second: When someone takes a lot of time and effort to build something it
    > is sleazy to "borrow" it. It is not like they are just getting a good
    > idea here or there - the goal is to make it essentially like Photoshop.
    >
    >
    > GIMPshop is a modification of the free/open source GNU
    > Image Manipulation Program (GIMP), intended to replicate
    > the feel of Adobe Photoshop.


    Yes. They try to replicate the menu structure of Photoshop.
    Like Open Office replicates the menu structure of MS Office, like a lot of
    other apps replicate the structure of yet another apps

    No "sleaziness" at all about that

    > And from the same link:
    >
    > It shares all GIMP's advantages, including the long feature
    > list and customisability, while addressing some common
    > criticisms regarding the program's interface: GIMPshop
    > modifies the menu structure to closely match Photoshop's,
    > adjusts the program's terminology to match Adobe's, and, in
    > the Windows version, uses a plugin called 'Deweirdifier' to
    > combine the application's numerous windows in a similar
    > manner to the MDI system used by most Windows graphics
    > packages.
    >
    > Hmmm, common criticisms. Interesting. And you have to love something
    > called a "Deweirdifier". Wonder if you would be willing to install it in
    > yourself.


    Again, Snot/Snit/Michael Glasser makes assumptions which he pulled right
    from his ass.
    What part of "I don't install such a thing" because I
    a) do not use a windows version of Gimp (I use linux, remember, Oh Really
    Stupid One)
    b) have no need for a tool which is used for a version which I do not prefer
    (remember, I prefer the original Gimp, Oh Incredibly Stupid One)

    < snip more Snot/Snit/Michael Glasser balderdash >
    --
    Just out of curiosity does this actually mean something or have some
    of the few remaining bits of your brain just evaporated?


  5. Re: GIMP is terrible! Says Linux Geeks!

    The liar Michael Glasser (Snot) snotted:

    > "thufir" stated in post
    > wOylk.56422$nD.36466@pd7urf1no on 8/4/08 1:09 AM:
    >
    >> On Sun, 03 Aug 2008 23:28:16 -0700, Snit wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>> First: my error with which UI you prefer. Fair enough... though as is
    >>> your norm you respond to a mistake with no class.

    >>
    >>
    >> Oh..my..****ing..god. Can you be more of an ass?

    >
    > You snipped what I was in response to:
    >
    > Your extremely bad reading comprehension problems rear their
    > ugly head again, Snot/Snit/Michael Glxsser What part of "I
    > like the original Gimp design better" was too difficult for
    > you?
    >
    > Funny how you ignored that, eh? LOL!
    >
    >


    Well, you *do* have a bad reading comprehension problem, Snot/Snit/Michael
    Glasser.
    Far too often you misread quite simple sentences
    --
    This problem was sponsored by Microsoft


  6. Re: GIMP is terrible! Says Linux Geeks!

    "Peter Köhlmann" stated in post
    4896bb94$0$11746$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net on 8/4/08 1:19 AM:

    >>>>>> That is a fork of the Gimp project.....
    >>>>>> So WHY didn't the Gimp developers incorporate that into Gimp?
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Why?
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Simple: They obviously liked their design better. So do I, BTW.
    >>>>> This is what forks are for.
    >>>>
    >>>> So you liked the attempts to copy someone else's work more than the
    >>>> "original" work from the OSS community.
    >>>
    >>> Your extremely bad reading comprehension problems rear their ugly head
    >>> again, Snot/Snit/Michael Glxsser
    >>> What part of "I like the original Gimp design better" was too difficult
    >>> for you?
    >>> And since when is it "sleazy" (your words) to have a similar look as some
    >>> other product?

    >>
    >> First: my error with which UI you prefer. Fair enough... though as is
    >> your norm you respond to a mistake with no class.

    >
    > It was *your* mistake. One of many
    > It is not my problem that you have a serious reading comprehension problem


    Now we have each made a mistake... I was incorrect about a claim I thought
    you said... you lashed out in obvious anger and spewed absurd and
    unsupported accusations.

    I handled my mistake well - I admitted to it quickly.

    How will you handle your mistake? I bet I know - absolute denial.

    >
    >> Second: When someone takes a lot of time and effort to build something it
    >> is sleazy to "borrow" it. It is not like they are just getting a good
    >> idea here or there - the goal is to make it essentially like Photoshop.
    >>
    >>
    >> GIMPshop is a modification of the free/open source GNU
    >> Image Manipulation Program (GIMP), intended to replicate
    >> the feel of Adobe Photoshop.

    >
    > Yes. They try to replicate the menu structure of Photoshop.
    > Like Open Office replicates the menu structure of MS Office, like a lot of
    > other apps replicate the structure of yet another apps
    >
    > No "sleaziness" at all about that


    Well, now we know your level of morality - you have no problem with one
    group doing a lot of work and another using it even though there is no
    reason to think they had permission to.

    I disagree - I think people should think for themselves.

    >> And from the same link:
    >>
    >> It shares all GIMP's advantages, including the long feature
    >> list and customisability, while addressing some common
    >> criticisms regarding the program's interface: GIMPshop
    >> modifies the menu structure to closely match Photoshop's,
    >> adjusts the program's terminology to match Adobe's, and, in
    >> the Windows version, uses a plugin called 'Deweirdifier' to
    >> combine the application's numerous windows in a similar
    >> manner to the MDI system used by most Windows graphics
    >> packages.
    >>
    >> Hmmm, common criticisms. Interesting. And you have to love something
    >> called a "Deweirdifier". Wonder if you would be willing to install it in
    >> yourself.

    >
    > Again, Snot/Snit/Michael Glxsser makes assumptions which he pulled right
    > from his ass.
    > What part of "I don't install such a thing" because I
    > a) do not use a windows version of Gimp (I use linux, remember, Oh Really
    > Stupid One)
    > b) have no need for a tool which is used for a version which I do not prefer
    > (remember, I prefer the original Gimp, Oh Incredibly Stupid One)


    I did not suggest you install it on your computer... you missed the joke.

    So now I have misunderstood you... and you have misunderstood me.

    I reacted by admitting to my mistake. I bet you just deny your mistake...
    but I would love to see you prove me wrong.



    --
    "For example, user interfaces are _usually_ better in commercial software.
    I'm not saying that this is always true, but in many cases the user
    interface to a program is the most important part for a commercial
    company..." Linus Torvalds


  7. Re: GIMP is terrible! Says Linux Geeks!

    "Peter Köhlmann" stated in post
    4896bc33$0$11746$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net on 8/4/08 1:22 AM:

    ....
    >>> First: my error with which UI you prefer. Fair enough... though as is
    >>>> your norm you respond to a mistake with no class.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Oh..my..****ing..god. Can you be more of an ass?

    >>
    >> You snipped what I was in response to:
    >>
    >> Your extremely bad reading comprehension problems rear their
    >> ugly head again, Snot/Snit/Michael Glxsser What part of "I
    >> like the original Gimp design better" was too difficult for
    >> you?
    >>
    >> Funny how you ignored that, eh? LOL!
    >>
    >>

    >
    > Well, you *do* have a bad reading comprehension problem, Snot/Snit/Michael
    > Glxsser.
    > Far too often you misread quite simple sentences


    You mean as I pointed out you doing just a minute ago.

    LOL!

    You lashed out with your normal hate filled bile. I called you on it. Now
    you can go cry on Thufir's shoulder... seems like he cares.

    Oh, by the way, when will you figure out how to use your kill filters?


    --
    "If a million people believe a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing."
    - Anatole France




  8. Re: GIMP is terrible! Says Linux Geeks!

    On 2008-08-04, Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    > On Sun, 03 Aug 2008 18:13:55 -0700, Snit wrote:
    > As for the UI the Gimp people were flooded with requests to change the UI
    > from the multiple floating Windows to something else.
    >
    > They ignored the requests.


    And I'm glad they did. For me the UI of the Gimp is one of its best
    features. I don't need all tools all the time.

    --
    I find television very educating. Every time somebody turns
    on the set, I go into the other room and read a book.
    ~ Groucho Marx

  9. Re: GIMP is terrible! Says Linux Geeks!

    * RonB peremptorily fired off this memo:

    > Psyc Geek (TAB) wrote:
    >
    >> At the bottom of the article are the linux guys saying that
    >> PHOTOSHOP kicks GIMPS butt. *Biggest problem, OMG,
    >> you got it: *The INTERFACE.

    >
    > Lot of people *love* Gimp. Me, I don't have a reason to use Gimp or
    > Photoshop. And, this may come as a shock to you, Gimp is *not* part of the
    > Linux OS.
    >
    > Get a clue.


    Turning on "autoraise" while dealing with a bunch of pictures and GIMP
    dialogs can drive one a bit nuts. However, it works fine and has a lot
    of features, way too many to learn quickly. That's why you can find a
    book or two on GIMP in the same shelves as Mac graphics books at
    Barnes&Noble.

    Here's one I djinned up as a nice wide-screen wallpaper:

    http://www.gnome-look.org/content/sh...?content=86514

    I'm probably only about 10% up the learning curve for GIMP.

    --
    There are a few things that never go out of style, and a feminine woman
    is one of them.
    -- Ralston

  10. Re: GIMP is terrible! Says Linux Geeks!

    * Peter Köhlmann peremptorily fired off this memo:

    > Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >
    >> That is a fork of the Gimp project.....
    >> So WHY didn't the Gimp developers incorporate that into Gimp?
    >>
    >> Why?

    >
    > Simple: They obviously liked their design better. So do I, BTW.
    > This is what forks are for.
    >
    >> They ignored the community as usual..
    >>
    >> Again, thanks for proving my point....

    >
    > Idiot


    Indeed. These numbskulls don't realize that the power of open-source
    comes from being able to edit it yourself, should you really want a
    certain feature.

    I would be curious, though, to see if it is simple to add the option for
    an MDI model.

    However, the main convenience of this would be to have all the image and
    dialog windows pop up at once.

    --
    QOTD:
    "I used to be an idealist, but I got mugged by reality."

  11. Re: GIMP is terrible! Says Linux Geeks!

    Andrew Halliwell writes:

    > "Psyc Geek (TAB)" wrote:
    >> On Aug 3, 8:40Â*pm, RonB wrote:
    >>> Psyc Geek (TAB) wrote:
    >>> > At the bottom of the article are the linux guys saying that
    >>> > PHOTOSHOP kicks GIMPS butt. Â*Biggest problem, OMG,
    >>> > you got it: Â*The INTERFACE.
    >>>
    >>> Lot of people *love* Gimp. Me, I don't have a reason to use Gimp or
    >>> Photoshop. And, this may come as a shock to you, Gimp is *not* part of the
    >>> Linux OS.
    >>>
    >>> Get a clue.
    >>>
    >>> --
    >>> RonB
    >>> "There's a story there...somewhere"

    >>
    >> Please point out where I said GIMP is part of the Linux Kernel.

    >
    > Please point out where he said gimp WASN'T part of the kernel.


    Huh? What logic is this?

  12. Re: GIMP is terrible! Says Linux Geeks!

    Linonut writes:

    > * Peter Köhlmann peremptorily fired off this memo:
    >
    >> Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >>
    >>> That is a fork of the Gimp project.....
    >>> So WHY didn't the Gimp developers incorporate that into Gimp?
    >>>
    >>> Why?

    >>
    >> Simple: They obviously liked their design better. So do I, BTW.
    >> This is what forks are for.
    >>
    >>> They ignored the community as usual..
    >>>
    >>> Again, thanks for proving my point....

    >>
    >> Idiot

    >
    > Indeed. These numbskulls don't realize that the power of open-source
    > comes from being able to edit it yourself, should you really want a
    > certain feature.


    So all one has to do is "edit" to add a certain feature.

    Tell us Liarnut, how many OSS projects have you "edited" in order to add
    features and give back into the community?

    I bet a big fat zero.

    >
    > I would be curious, though, to see if it is simple to add the option for
    > an MDI model.


    LOL! What a fraud!

    >
    > However, the main convenience of this would be to have all the image and
    > dialog windows pop up at once.


    Bwahahahahha!

  13. Re: GIMP is terrible! Says Linux Geeks!

    On Sun, 03 Aug 2008 22:53:19 -0700, Snit wrote:

    > "Moshe Goldfarb." stated in post
    > m6wosgph7xyi$.1p4ikiwt68gyg$.dlg@40tude.net on 8/3/08 10:22 PM:
    >
    >> On Mon, 04 Aug 2008 07:18:54 +0200, Peter Köhlmann wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>> He doesn't. He does not even know if there was "usability testing" with The
    >>> Gimp, there are surveys, so in reality Snot/Snit/Michael Glxsser wants to
    >>> install yet another Snot circus

    >>
    >> Peter Kohlmann lies once again.
    >>
    >> So if the public didn't want the Gimp UI fixed why is there a fork to fix
    >> it?

    >
    > Wait... Peter is right that I do not know what type of usability testing was
    > done with the GIMP... but he shows no signs of knowing either.
    >
    > Doing a quick Google search I find this:
    >
    >
    >
    > A team of *four* people... and they spend "a month and a half evaluating
    > GIMP". They have decided that adjustment layers are not needed and that
    > layer modes have something "horribly wrong" in that "the best a user can do
    > is scroll through the list of modes and see what happens". Meanwhile Adobe
    > is focusing on usability testing to see what might be easier ways of dealing
    > with layer modes (read their blog - they have talked about this).
    >
    > On and on... but nothing I saw talking about testing it with large numbers
    > of people in any controlled way.
    >
    > Pretty much as I expected.


    Like I said...
    They have their friends try it out, more or less.

    What they should have done was approach a college that specializes in
    visual arts etc and whose students most likely use PhotoShop and let them
    try it and see what they think.

    Of course they might actually learn some truth there and we all know that
    in the Linux community truth and facts are dirty words.


    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

  14. Re: GIMP is terrible! Says Linux Geeks!

    On Mon, 04 Aug 2008 15:20:36 +0200, Hadron wrote:

    > Linonut writes:
    >
    >> * Peter Köhlmann peremptorily fired off this memo:
    >>
    >>> Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> That is a fork of the Gimp project.....
    >>>> So WHY didn't the Gimp developers incorporate that into Gimp?
    >>>>
    >>>> Why?
    >>>
    >>> Simple: They obviously liked their design better. So do I, BTW.
    >>> This is what forks are for.
    >>>
    >>>> They ignored the community as usual..
    >>>>
    >>>> Again, thanks for proving my point....
    >>>
    >>> Idiot

    >>
    >> Indeed. These numbskulls don't realize that the power of open-source
    >> comes from being able to edit it yourself, should you really want a
    >> certain feature.

    >
    > So all one has to do is "edit" to add a certain feature.
    >
    > Tell us Liarnut, how many OSS projects have you "edited" in order to add
    > features and give back into the community?
    >
    > I bet a big fat zero.



    I'm not a programmer but I have the source code for Amarok.

    Could you tell me how to turn on the stability bit?




    >>
    >> I would be curious, though, to see if it is simple to add the option for
    >> an MDI model.

    >
    > LOL! What a fraud!


    He must be drinking again.
    That's way out there even for Linonut.

    >>
    >> However, the main convenience of this would be to have all the image and
    >> dialog windows pop up at once.

    >
    > Bwahahahahha!



    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

  15. Re: GIMP is terrible! Says Linux Geeks!

    On Mon, 04 Aug 2008 10:25:00 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:

    > On Sun, 03 Aug 2008 22:53:19 -0700, Snit wrote:
    >
    >> "Moshe Goldfarb." stated in post
    >> m6wosgph7xyi$.1p4ikiwt68gyg$.dlg@40tude.net on 8/3/08 10:22 PM:
    >>
    >>> On Mon, 04 Aug 2008 07:18:54 +0200, Peter Köhlmann wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>> He doesn't. He does not even know if there was "usability testing"
    >>>> with The Gimp, there are surveys, so in reality Snot/Snit/Michael
    >>>> Glxsser wants to install yet another Snot circus
    >>>
    >>> Peter Kohlmann lies once again.
    >>>
    >>> So if the public didn't want the Gimp UI fixed why is there a fork to
    >>> fix it?

    >>
    >> Wait... Peter is right that I do not know what type of usability
    >> testing was done with the GIMP... but he shows no signs of knowing
    >> either.
    >>
    >> Doing a quick Google search I find this:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> A team of *four* people... and they spend "a month and a half
    >> evaluating GIMP". They have decided that adjustment layers are not
    >> needed and that layer modes have something "horribly wrong" in that
    >> "the best a user can do is scroll through the list of modes and see
    >> what happens". Meanwhile Adobe is focusing on usability testing to see
    >> what might be easier ways of dealing with layer modes (read their blog
    >> - they have talked about this).
    >>
    >> On and on... but nothing I saw talking about testing it with large
    >> numbers of people in any controlled way.
    >>
    >> Pretty much as I expected.

    >
    > Like I said...
    > They have their friends try it out, more or less.
    >
    > What they should have done was approach a college that specializes in
    > visual arts etc and whose students most likely use PhotoShop and let
    > them try it and see what they think.
    >
    > Of course they might actually learn some truth there and we all know
    > that in the Linux community truth and facts are dirty words.



    Translation: OSS has to work exactly like Windows and Windows apps or it
    is crap.

    Another test would be to find people that have worked with, are
    comfortable with and like working with GIMP, and have no experience with
    Photoshop. Let those people try Photoshop and see what they have to say.

    --
    Rick

  16. Re: GIMP is terrible! Says Linux Geeks!

    Linonut wrote:

    > Indeed. These numbskulls don't realize that the power of open-source
    > comes from being able to edit it yourself, should you really want a
    > certain feature.


    I don't know if power is the right word, but it's a huge hassle that
    virtually nobody ever undertakes.




  17. Re: GIMP is terrible! Says Linux Geeks!

    Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    > On Mon, 04 Aug 2008 15:20:36 +0200, Hadron wrote:


    >> Tell us Liarnut, how many OSS projects have you "edited" in order to
    >> add features and give back into the community?
    >>
    >> I bet a big fat zero.


    7 likes to talk about having the source code. When I ask him what for he
    pulls that Harry Potter 'invisibility blanket' over his head.



    > I'm not a programmer but I have the source code for Amarok.
    >
    > Could you tell me how to turn on the stability bit?


    In KDE: Start button | System | Synaptic Package Manager | Search | Amarok |
    Mark for removal | Apply.




  18. Re: GIMP is terrible! Says Linux Geeks!

    On Mon, 4 Aug 2008 10:50:47 -0400, DFS wrote:

    > Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >> On Mon, 04 Aug 2008 15:20:36 +0200, Hadron wrote:

    >
    >>> Tell us Liarnut, how many OSS projects have you "edited" in order to
    >>> add features and give back into the community?
    >>>
    >>> I bet a big fat zero.

    >
    > 7 likes to talk about having the source code. When I ask him what for he
    > pulls that Harry Potter 'invisibility blanket' over his head.


    I think all those nano-bots running around inside his body have fried his
    brain....

    >
    >
    >> I'm not a programmer but I have the source code for Amarok.
    >>
    >> Could you tell me how to turn on the stability bit?

    >
    > In KDE: Start button | System | Synaptic Package Manager | Search | Amarok |
    > Mark for removal | Apply.


    Thanks!


    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

  19. Re: GIMP is terrible! Says Linux Geeks!

    "Rick" stated in post
    1JydnWsamschjwrVnZ2dnUVZ_qTinZ2d@supernews.com on 8/4/08 7:31 AM:

    >> Like I said...
    >> They have their friends try it out, more or less.
    >>
    >> What they should have done was approach a college that specializes in
    >> visual arts etc and whose students most likely use PhotoShop and let
    >> them try it and see what they think.
    >>
    >> Of course they might actually learn some truth there and we all know
    >> that in the Linux community truth and facts are dirty words.

    >
    >
    > Translation: OSS has to work exactly like Windows and Windows apps or it
    > is crap.


    Wow. You lie a lot!


    --
    Is Swiss cheese made out of hole milk?


  20. Re: GIMP is terrible! Says Linux Geeks!

    On 2008-08-04, Psyc Geek (TAB) wrote:
    > There is a thread about Pidgin being better then Microsoft Messenger,
    > in COLA. GET THIS.
    >
    > At the bottom of the article are the linux guys saying that
    > PHOTOSHOP kicks GIMPS butt. Biggest problem, OMG,
    > you got it: The INTERFACE.


    Gimp and Photoshop BOTH have that same problem for the same reason.

    They aren't "novice" software. Neither one is.

    It has nothing to do with bull**** design excuses.

    --
    Sure, I could use iTunes even under Linux. However, I have |||
    better things to do with my time than deal with how iTunes doesn't / | \
    want to play nicely with everyone else's data (namely mine). I'd
    rather create a DVD using those Linux apps we're told don't exist.

    Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.usenet.com

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast