<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Gimp Sucks II (A Photoshop Tutorial)</title>
	<atom:link href="http://piestar.net/2009/09/07/gimp-sucks-ii-a-photoshop-tutorial/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://piestar.net/2009/09/07/gimp-sucks-ii-a-photoshop-tutorial/</link>
	<description>A pragmatic look at the state of FOSS</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 10 Dec 2011 00:02:30 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Conzo</title>
		<link>http://piestar.net/2009/09/07/gimp-sucks-ii-a-photoshop-tutorial/#comment-8674</link>
		<dc:creator>Conzo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Aug 2010 08:07:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://piestar.net/?p=214#comment-8674</guid>
		<description>I&#039;ve always been very surprised at a certain subset of linux-migraters&#039; moaning about their many forced reinstalls of windows. I&#039;m sorry, but it doesn&#039;t bode well about someone&#039;s computer skills if he fucks up his computer so much that he ends up with a forced reinstall.

I&#039;ve reinstalled XP 2ce over the years, once because I installed new hardware and once, because I started working on music production and wanted to take the opportunity to re-think my whole system layout (especially partition layout).

I&#039;ve reinstalled Vista once, also after going from my E6750 with old mobo to my i7 920 with new mobo. Again, this wasn&#039;t strictly necessary, but I tend to get unhappy with the way I&#039;ve set up my system and when I&#039;ve upgraded anyway, I take the opportunity to do a clean install of all the software on my system. 

So, in my opinion and experience, for a user with a slightly above-banana level computer knowledge a forced reinstall is a very, very rare thing. Said moaning always makes me wonder how the hell you can fuck up your system so much that you need it.

And then they let themselves Linux ? Well, then that explains a lot about the sorry state of lots of FOSS software ...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve always been very surprised at a certain subset of linux-migraters&#8217; moaning about their many forced reinstalls of windows. I&#8217;m sorry, but it doesn&#8217;t bode well about someone&#8217;s computer skills if he fucks up his computer so much that he ends up with a forced reinstall.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve reinstalled XP 2ce over the years, once because I installed new hardware and once, because I started working on music production and wanted to take the opportunity to re-think my whole system layout (especially partition layout).</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve reinstalled Vista once, also after going from my E6750 with old mobo to my i7 920 with new mobo. Again, this wasn&#8217;t strictly necessary, but I tend to get unhappy with the way I&#8217;ve set up my system and when I&#8217;ve upgraded anyway, I take the opportunity to do a clean install of all the software on my system. </p>
<p>So, in my opinion and experience, for a user with a slightly above-banana level computer knowledge a forced reinstall is a very, very rare thing. Said moaning always makes me wonder how the hell you can fuck up your system so much that you need it.</p>
<p>And then they let themselves Linux ? Well, then that explains a lot about the sorry state of lots of FOSS software &#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ted</title>
		<link>http://piestar.net/2009/09/07/gimp-sucks-ii-a-photoshop-tutorial/#comment-8511</link>
		<dc:creator>Ted</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Jul 2010 18:52:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://piestar.net/?p=214#comment-8511</guid>
		<description>&quot;First GIMP can do most of what PS can&quot;

Although Kerberos shows -quite clearly -in this article that it can&#039;t, and if it can, it&#039;s needlessly complex, where PS is intuitive and easy.

&quot;PS 8 has been great but I’m not going to upgrade…&quot;

If you assume each CS version is a major release of Photoshop, it&#039;s now on version &lt;b&gt;12&lt;/b&gt;. The upgrades are worth it, and GIMP falls further behind.

&quot;News has it that Adobe may release a version for Linux &quot;

Where? Anything credible that&#039;s not a Linux fan-site&#039;s wishful thinking? A press release from Adobe, and we might take notice.

To be frank; airborne pigs, blue moons and Satan skiing to work will happen first. Adobe simply do not care about Linux.

&quot;as its becoming a more popular OS…&quot;

With whom, exactly? 

&quot;then go and part with a thousand bucks….&quot;

So it&#039;s all about cost to you? What about costs in lost time or retraining? 

Also, do you really think everyone pays full price for every version? Ever heard of upgrades? Or upgrade cover on licenses? Pay Adobe less than $100 a year per copy after the initial license purchase and you get every new version of Photoshop as it&#039;s released. For a business using Photoshop, that&#039;s less than the coffee that employee wil drink over the year.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;First GIMP can do most of what PS can&#8221;</p>
<p>Although Kerberos shows -quite clearly -in this article that it can&#8217;t, and if it can, it&#8217;s needlessly complex, where PS is intuitive and easy.</p>
<p>&#8220;PS 8 has been great but I’m not going to upgrade…&#8221;</p>
<p>If you assume each CS version is a major release of Photoshop, it&#8217;s now on version <b>12</b>. The upgrades are worth it, and GIMP falls further behind.</p>
<p>&#8220;News has it that Adobe may release a version for Linux &#8221;</p>
<p>Where? Anything credible that&#8217;s not a Linux fan-site&#8217;s wishful thinking? A press release from Adobe, and we might take notice.</p>
<p>To be frank; airborne pigs, blue moons and Satan skiing to work will happen first. Adobe simply do not care about Linux.</p>
<p>&#8220;as its becoming a more popular OS…&#8221;</p>
<p>With whom, exactly? </p>
<p>&#8220;then go and part with a thousand bucks….&#8221;</p>
<p>So it&#8217;s all about cost to you? What about costs in lost time or retraining? </p>
<p>Also, do you really think everyone pays full price for every version? Ever heard of upgrades? Or upgrade cover on licenses? Pay Adobe less than $100 a year per copy after the initial license purchase and you get every new version of Photoshop as it&#8217;s released. For a business using Photoshop, that&#8217;s less than the coffee that employee wil drink over the year.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tracy</title>
		<link>http://piestar.net/2009/09/07/gimp-sucks-ii-a-photoshop-tutorial/#comment-8509</link>
		<dc:creator>Tracy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Jul 2010 15:10:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://piestar.net/?p=214#comment-8509</guid>
		<description>...this blogger is a real dwebe....First GIMP can do most of what PS can. PS 8 has been great but I&#039;m not going to upgrade...

The people who offer gimp do so...not to replace PS but to offer a substitute...

News has it that Adobe may release a version for Linux as its becoming a more popular OS...

And those that listsen to bitter twisted F... then go and part with a thousand bucks....</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8230;this blogger is a real dwebe&#8230;.First GIMP can do most of what PS can. PS 8 has been great but I&#8217;m not going to upgrade&#8230;</p>
<p>The people who offer gimp do so&#8230;not to replace PS but to offer a substitute&#8230;</p>
<p>News has it that Adobe may release a version for Linux as its becoming a more popular OS&#8230;</p>
<p>And those that listsen to bitter twisted F&#8230; then go and part with a thousand bucks&#8230;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Temzil</title>
		<link>http://piestar.net/2009/09/07/gimp-sucks-ii-a-photoshop-tutorial/#comment-7967</link>
		<dc:creator>Temzil</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jun 2010 15:22:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://piestar.net/?p=214#comment-7967</guid>
		<description>The people on this site dishing Gimp and linux (Unix based as is Apple OS)are obviously partime users of any graphics program. I waited for Gimp 2.6 and still use PS -CS. The reason is its catching up, its free and photo-manipulation is on par with PS. Even Adobe have taken ideas from Gimp.

The cost of PS is high and as GIMP is free, developed free, it deserves credit over a $600 dollar package from Adobe. Hey you want to pay go for it...bet most GIMP dishers here are using pirated PS.

As for the dude that gave this simple tutorial...well it shows how pathetic you are at graphics and even more so at explaining coding... you should have used the more explanatory term &quot;algorithms&quot;.... as GIMP has several million lines of code all accessing library files...it wouldn&#039;t function without complex coding....arrays are SO ..very Visual Basic...basically loop structures...this makes you a very angry dense ponse....AKA prick.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The people on this site dishing Gimp and linux (Unix based as is Apple OS)are obviously partime users of any graphics program. I waited for Gimp 2.6 and still use PS -CS. The reason is its catching up, its free and photo-manipulation is on par with PS. Even Adobe have taken ideas from Gimp.</p>
<p>The cost of PS is high and as GIMP is free, developed free, it deserves credit over a $600 dollar package from Adobe. Hey you want to pay go for it&#8230;bet most GIMP dishers here are using pirated PS.</p>
<p>As for the dude that gave this simple tutorial&#8230;well it shows how pathetic you are at graphics and even more so at explaining coding&#8230; you should have used the more explanatory term &#8220;algorithms&#8221;&#8230;. as GIMP has several million lines of code all accessing library files&#8230;it wouldn&#8217;t function without complex coding&#8230;.arrays are SO ..very Visual Basic&#8230;basically loop structures&#8230;this makes you a very angry dense ponse&#8230;.AKA prick.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: netgrazer</title>
		<link>http://piestar.net/2009/09/07/gimp-sucks-ii-a-photoshop-tutorial/#comment-5934</link>
		<dc:creator>netgrazer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 20 Feb 2010 22:38:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://piestar.net/?p=214#comment-5934</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m happy with my ubuntu, love almost everything about it. Switched over from windows a couple of years ago after yet another unavoidable re-installation, figured I might as well try something else, since I don&#039;t play any games anyway.

But the moment I installed photoshop on my &#039;buntu, was the moment I felt like I could officially say goodbye to windows. Haven&#039;t looked back since.

Running PS CS4 now, it works perfectly. Haven&#039;t dusted off my old tablet yet, don&#039;t own a printer, so I can&#039;t comment on compatibility in that respect, but for my needs it&#039;s just brilliant. Those include web design, photo retouching, plugin-art, and font play.

As for GIMP... I tried it, looked through a tutorial on doing something completely trivial, and felt nauseous for a moment. Closed the tab. Uninstalled GIMP. The end.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m happy with my ubuntu, love almost everything about it. Switched over from windows a couple of years ago after yet another unavoidable re-installation, figured I might as well try something else, since I don&#8217;t play any games anyway.</p>
<p>But the moment I installed photoshop on my &#8216;buntu, was the moment I felt like I could officially say goodbye to windows. Haven&#8217;t looked back since.</p>
<p>Running PS CS4 now, it works perfectly. Haven&#8217;t dusted off my old tablet yet, don&#8217;t own a printer, so I can&#8217;t comment on compatibility in that respect, but for my needs it&#8217;s just brilliant. Those include web design, photo retouching, plugin-art, and font play.</p>
<p>As for GIMP&#8230; I tried it, looked through a tutorial on doing something completely trivial, and felt nauseous for a moment. Closed the tab. Uninstalled GIMP. The end.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Seanbot</title>
		<link>http://piestar.net/2009/09/07/gimp-sucks-ii-a-photoshop-tutorial/#comment-5577</link>
		<dc:creator>Seanbot</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Feb 2010 09:42:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://piestar.net/?p=214#comment-5577</guid>
		<description>I love how you people are just complaining.
Of course I&#039;ve never done anything useful in my life, and I probably never will, and that DOES stop me from having an opinion.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I love how you people are just complaining.<br />
Of course I&#8217;ve never done anything useful in my life, and I probably never will, and that DOES stop me from having an opinion.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: dave</title>
		<link>http://piestar.net/2009/09/07/gimp-sucks-ii-a-photoshop-tutorial/#comment-3735</link>
		<dc:creator>dave</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Oct 2009 20:18:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://piestar.net/?p=214#comment-3735</guid>
		<description>As you admit yourself, you don&#039;t know how to stroke a path in GIMP. Engough said.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As you admit yourself, you don&#8217;t know how to stroke a path in GIMP. Engough said.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Linux Sux</title>
		<link>http://piestar.net/2009/09/07/gimp-sucks-ii-a-photoshop-tutorial/#comment-3295</link>
		<dc:creator>Linux Sux</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 Sep 2009 04:32:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://piestar.net/?p=214#comment-3295</guid>
		<description>&quot;otherwise I’d go on for far too long =/&quot;

Fully exploring the suckage of the GIMP would take hundreds of libraries of congress&#039; worth of space. That&#039;s assuming you actually fill the buildings with 2TB hard drives. And that you zip the text first.


&quot;Painter on it’s own justifies buying a high end tablet with tilt and interchangeable pens!&quot;

Totally :) I couldn&#039;t live without mine, both in Photoshop and Painter. And yes, it&#039;s a different product, but it just shows further how behind the GIMP is, no matter what you compare it against. And that Linux has nothing similar to offer like usual.

As for Lightroom, it&#039;s not all that different. Loads of photographers use it to edit their pics, and it works just fine (a trillion times better than the GIMP for sure). A large number of GIMP users seem to use it only for that as well...


&quot;The vector side of things is in even worse shape, mind you.&quot;

Is that even possible?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;otherwise I’d go on for far too long =/&#8221;</p>
<p>Fully exploring the suckage of the GIMP would take hundreds of libraries of congress&#8217; worth of space. That&#8217;s assuming you actually fill the buildings with 2TB hard drives. And that you zip the text first.</p>
<p>&#8220;Painter on it’s own justifies buying a high end tablet with tilt and interchangeable pens!&#8221;</p>
<p>Totally <img src='http://piestar.net/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' />  I couldn&#8217;t live without mine, both in Photoshop and Painter. And yes, it&#8217;s a different product, but it just shows further how behind the GIMP is, no matter what you compare it against. And that Linux has nothing similar to offer like usual.</p>
<p>As for Lightroom, it&#8217;s not all that different. Loads of photographers use it to edit their pics, and it works just fine (a trillion times better than the GIMP for sure). A large number of GIMP users seem to use it only for that as well&#8230;</p>
<p>&#8220;The vector side of things is in even worse shape, mind you.&#8221;</p>
<p>Is that even possible?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: GIMP Sux</title>
		<link>http://piestar.net/2009/09/07/gimp-sucks-ii-a-photoshop-tutorial/#comment-3294</link>
		<dc:creator>GIMP Sux</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 Sep 2009 04:23:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://piestar.net/?p=214#comment-3294</guid>
		<description>Version 2.8 is coming. With not totally retarded MDI shit for a change.

Now it&#039;ll finally tie with Photoshop 2.5:
-both have a &quot;just ok&quot; interface
-the GIMP&#039;ed up editor has a couple small (hardly noticeable) things that photoshop 2.5 didn&#039;t have (being 16 years younger kind of helps)
-and yet, Photoshop 2.5 still has better a CMYK mode. And Lab color. And Pantone swatches, and...

Congrats to Linux! You&#039;re now only 16 years out of date for the most part. Another 10 years and you might finally catch up to Photoshop v4 (nevermind we&#039;ll be using Photoshop CS10 by then)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Version 2.8 is coming. With not totally retarded MDI shit for a change.</p>
<p>Now it&#8217;ll finally tie with Photoshop 2.5:<br />
-both have a &#8220;just ok&#8221; interface<br />
-the GIMP&#8217;ed up editor has a couple small (hardly noticeable) things that photoshop 2.5 didn&#8217;t have (being 16 years younger kind of helps)<br />
-and yet, Photoshop 2.5 still has better a CMYK mode. And Lab color. And Pantone swatches, and&#8230;</p>
<p>Congrats to Linux! You&#8217;re now only 16 years out of date for the most part. Another 10 years and you might finally catch up to Photoshop v4 (nevermind we&#8217;ll be using Photoshop CS10 by then)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ted</title>
		<link>http://piestar.net/2009/09/07/gimp-sucks-ii-a-photoshop-tutorial/#comment-3259</link>
		<dc:creator>Ted</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Sep 2009 20:05:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://piestar.net/?p=214#comment-3259</guid>
		<description>&quot;The kernel API is intentionally unstable as an attempt to strong arm devices manufacturers to release the code for their drivers (kernel devs are known to intentionally remove hooks that blobs depend on)&quot;

And eventually, the developers at ATI and Nvidia will just throw them a funny look and say &quot;And exactly who the fuck are you again?&quot; MS can get away with moderate strong-arming or imposing standards - they&#039;re the runaway market leader, keep their APIs relatively stable and come out with mostly good standards or APIs. As an example, DirectX -  DX pisses all over OpenGL now for game programming, as it doesn&#039;t have OpenGL&#039;s clusterfuck of vendor-specific extensions or a glacially-slow approval process of new features.

It won&#039;t surprise me if device manufacturers just say bollocks to it one day, and stop working on Linux drivers.

&quot;They argue that if you release the code, they’ll keep it working for you&quot;

I don&#039;t know if it&#039;s just me, but I think this is one of the most arrogant conceits in the whole Free/Open Source ethos. That a bunch of part-timers will be able to write better drivers than the people who designed the fucking silicon and know it inside out!

The &quot;many eyes make bugs shallow&quot; mantra is FALSE, or at the very least, seriously mistaken. Having thousands of outsiders with access to the source of a driver will not fix it, even if they&#039;re professional developers - not all developers have experience in the design and programming of graphics chipsets. The rest just won&#039;t know what the hell they&#039;re doing. The saying should be modified to &quot;Enough _qualified_ eyes makes all bugs shallow.&quot;

Ten thousand monkeys bashing on typewriters won&#039;t get you Shakespeare.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;The kernel API is intentionally unstable as an attempt to strong arm devices manufacturers to release the code for their drivers (kernel devs are known to intentionally remove hooks that blobs depend on)&#8221;</p>
<p>And eventually, the developers at ATI and Nvidia will just throw them a funny look and say &#8220;And exactly who the fuck are you again?&#8221; MS can get away with moderate strong-arming or imposing standards &#8211; they&#8217;re the runaway market leader, keep their APIs relatively stable and come out with mostly good standards or APIs. As an example, DirectX &#8211;  DX pisses all over OpenGL now for game programming, as it doesn&#8217;t have OpenGL&#8217;s clusterfuck of vendor-specific extensions or a glacially-slow approval process of new features.</p>
<p>It won&#8217;t surprise me if device manufacturers just say bollocks to it one day, and stop working on Linux drivers.</p>
<p>&#8220;They argue that if you release the code, they’ll keep it working for you&#8221;</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t know if it&#8217;s just me, but I think this is one of the most arrogant conceits in the whole Free/Open Source ethos. That a bunch of part-timers will be able to write better drivers than the people who designed the fucking silicon and know it inside out!</p>
<p>The &#8220;many eyes make bugs shallow&#8221; mantra is FALSE, or at the very least, seriously mistaken. Having thousands of outsiders with access to the source of a driver will not fix it, even if they&#8217;re professional developers &#8211; not all developers have experience in the design and programming of graphics chipsets. The rest just won&#8217;t know what the hell they&#8217;re doing. The saying should be modified to &#8220;Enough _qualified_ eyes makes all bugs shallow.&#8221;</p>
<p>Ten thousand monkeys bashing on typewriters won&#8217;t get you Shakespeare.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

