[scribus] When is a new release for Windows coming out?

[Jeffrey Silverman]

On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 4:16 PM, Henry Hartley <henryhartley at westat.com> wrote:
> Nick Vettese wrote:
>>>
>>> > * Every Windows software tool that you think you need has an Open
>>> > Source *equivalent*. That may be very different on the surface!
>>> > But that is also better, faster, easier to use, has better
>>> > community resources.
>>>
>>> Stating that software has a Linux Equivalent is telling him that
>>> each piece of software comes with the Linux Kernel.
>
> My complaint is with the "better, faster, easier to use" bit.
>
> I personally don't find GIMP to be better, faster or easier to use than
> Photoshop. Some but definitely not all of that certainly has to do with
> years of using one over the other. Also, I haven't used the most recent
> GIMP but then again, I haven't used the most recent Photoshop, either.
> In my view GIMP is playing catch-up. I could make do with GIMP only but
> I'd be making do.
>
> --
> Henry

Okay, so, you obviously didn't read the footnotes or see the subtext,
but that's okay.

Subtext 1: I am exaggerating in the hopes of sublimating the pervasive
FUD from the commercial software world.

Subtext 2: Take all of the exaggerations and statements with a grain
of salt, but also a kernel (more than a kernel, really) of truth

Subtext 3: I really really like Linux and am a big supporter of Open Source

Subtext 4: I am a little goofy

Subtext 5: Oh, I dunno, fill your own in here


GIMP vs Photoshop is a great example and point of entry for a
discussion about commercial software vs Open Source. Personally, after
years of using GIMP (and not using PS since like PS 5.5 or so) I find
GIMP *MUCH* easier to use than PS. (Well, maybe just "much" and not
"*MUCH*" but that goes along with subtext 1)

The problem comparing the two is that both are very large, complex
pieces of software with big learning curves, that, unfortunately,
produce roughly the same end results. I say "unfortunately" because
the end results are what gets them compared to each other, quite
often, although the two are very, very different in terms of
how-to-use. It takes a LOT of retraining for an expert PS user to
forget his PS reflexes and learn to use the GIMP.

I really don't think GIMP is "playing catch up" at all[1] -- I think
that PS users don't know how to use the GIMP properly. Yes, I'm
accusing you, so there.

What drives me crazy is the attempt to compare GIMP and PS as 1 to 1
comparables. Apples and oranges. Ever hear of them?

Okay, thanks, seeyabye.




[1] Well, okay, in some areas, e.g. color management, it is.
-- 
JDS