David Marrs wrote:
> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>> I thought some of you might find this interesting. It is from Slashdot,
>> published about an hour ago:
>>
http://developers.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/03/31/231227&tid=152&tid=156
>>
>> Mr_Silver writes "One of the many complaints about the GIMP is that of
>> its user interface and how it should be more like Photoshop. If you feel
>> that this is true then Scott Moschella has hacked together GimpShop which
>> turns GIMP's user interface into something more akin to Photoshop for
>> OSX. However, if you're not running that operating system, fret not,
>> because there is a version for Linux too."
>
> I never understand the logic behind moving from a mature product like
> Photoshop to the GIMP when one /prefers/ Photoshop in the first place.
> It's almost as if these users were running the crack.
While I'm against this imitation of an existing product, I think it has some
pros too. There is a lot of effort going into distinguishing one
application from another, one operating system from another and this is all
very confusing to the end user. I still have a mesh of shortcut keys for
Macs, PC's and Linux in my head and I wish there was standardisation. But
what can you do? People are anarchists.
> I'd rather that all this effort had been put into actually improving the
> GIMP's UI instead of just making it behave like Photoshop (which strikes
> me as a tad lazy)...
I prefer the GIMP's UI. I used Photoshop and Painshop for years. That wasted
space at the background of the main window and the lack of context (as
menus are at the top) make the GIMP better in my eyes.
> , but, if nothing else, it does go to show the
> flexibility of free software.
Quoting the above again:
> I never understand the logic behind moving from a mature product like
> Photoshop to the GIMP when one /prefers/ Photoshop in the first place.
It's free software. You need never pay for licences in the future. That's
one of the many advantages.
Roy
--
Roy S. Schestowitz
http://Schestowitz.com
|
|
