I think that someone of you that can replay to false things must post a replay.

Why bother? There are lots of false things in the Internet.

--tml

On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 2:39 AM, Malix wrote:

http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2011/01/why-gimp-is-inadequate.html

I think that someone of you that can replay to false things must post a replay.

I personally have commented that blog post with what I feel, think and know. Everybody seemed to be too busy flaming to pay attention. No further reply has a point.

Best, Alexia

On 1/13/11, Malix wrote:

on this blog there is a post about Gimp that generate a lot of user comments.

http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2011/01/why-gimp-is-inadequate.html

I think that someone of you that can replay to false things must post a replay.

The fact that people don't understand what's happening in the project can only mean two things:

1. What's happening in the project is not communicated to users. 2. Some users don't care about what's communicated to them and stick to misconceptions they've grown to take for truth.

The first is now being taken care of. As for the second, some people just can't be helped.

Alexandre Prokoudine http://libregraphicsworld.org

Hello

.. a word, if I may.. even if I'm not a gimp dev..

> The fact that people don't understand what's happening in the project > can only mean two things:
>
> 1. What's happening in the project is not communicated to users.

That may be very well the case....

But....

Every day, I run into people who say "why photoshop? There's GIMP, a perfect substitute.."
On some forums at least.

Often, these people never got their hands on a program which supports adjustment layers, 16-bit handling, LAB-handling and so on. And this hasn't to be photoshop in the first place, by the way.....

So GIMP is sufficient to them, which is perfectly fine!

BUT I DO understand "the other side" if they complain that these people don't have a clue, but they misinterpret the statements of these GIMP-users that the devs themselves (you) think about GIMP as a "perfect photoshop replacement".. which it isn't (and the devs don't think
it is..).

So to speak, this special breed of "GIMP-evangelists" ( or OpenSource-evangelists, which you
can find on any Linux forum... they are often like "XX is a PERFECT substitute for closed-source YY, and if it isn't, then you don't need it in the first place..") do more harm than good.

As far as I've come to understand it, GIMP has the VISION to become a full fledged, free pixel-based graphics editor. No more, no less.

It's an unhappy fact that we (.. I'm hobby photographer myself) are waiting for some features for many years.. But that's how it is.. and there's no alternative for *NIX systems I can think of, with Krita heading more in the drawing-direction or whatever you might call it...

But with a whole lot of people just whining and not contributing nothing will get better..

> 2. Some users don't care about what's communicated to them and stick > to misconceptions they've grown to take for truth.

This is true, too. As always.... But I won't put all of the arguments aside.

Keep up your good work everybody.... don't get frustrated!

Regards,

Oliver

On 01/13/2011 01:39 AM, Malix wrote:

Hi all,

on this blog there is a post about Gimp that generate a lot of user comments.

http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2011/01/why-gimp-is-inadequate.html

I think that someone of you that can replay to false things must post a replay.

Bye Massimo

To me, most of his criticism is legitimate. I don't agree with all of it, but it's not all "false". I don't see the point in treating him as hostile; it just help him prove his point that we can't take criticism.

If we keep improving GIMP and stick to our plan, I am confident we will eventually address all of the shortcomings he points out.

/ Martin

On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 6:02 PM, Martin Nordholts wrote:

On 01/13/2011 01:39 AM, Malix wrote:

Hi all,

on this blog there is a post about Gimp that generate a lot of user comments. http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2011/01/why-gimp-is-inadequate.html I think that someone of you that can replay to false things must post a replay.

To me, most of his criticism is legitimate. I don't agree with all of it, but it's not all "false". I don't see the point in treating him as hostile; it just help him prove his point that we can't take criticism.

If we keep improving GIMP and stick to our plan, I am confident we will eventually address all of the shortcomings he points out.

Most of the short-coming he is pointing out are things we are well aware of, and that the existing developers have invested copious amounts of our time towards fulfilling. We are well on the way towards having addressed quite a few of them, the post and many of the commenters are perpetuating opinions and attitudes that might cause even fewer people contributing; and existing volunteers of open source software to stop bother volunteering their time and knowledge towards creating tools for users without sense of neither tact nor gratiude. I am not at all amused.

The only sane response to the shit storm he has caused is to be responsive and friendly towards people who seriously do contribute to GEGL and GIMPs future, on bugzilla, mailinglists and irc.

/Øyvind K.

«The future is already here. It's just not very evenly distributed»
                                                 -- William Gibson
http://pippin.gimp.org/                            http://ffii.org/
_______________________________________________
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer

On 01/13/2011 10:02 AM, Martin Nordholts wrote:

On 01/13/2011 01:39 AM, Malix wrote:

Hi all,

on this blog there is a post about Gimp that generate a lot of user comments.

http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2011/01/why-gimp-is-inadequate.html

I think that someone of you that can replay to false things must post a replay.

Bye Massimo

To me, most of his criticism is legitimate. I don't agree with all of it, but it's not all "false". I don't see the point in treating him as hostile; it just help him prove his point that we can't take criticism.

If we keep improving GIMP and stick to our plan, I am confident we will eventually address all of the shortcomings he points out.

/ Martin

Thanks Martin. That was exactly my thought. The only way to speed this up is to throw more good developers at it. I've got a little patch into GIMP and a little patch into gegl. I wonder what other small thing I can look at to get my foot a little wetter?

Patrick