Slashdot Mirror
Paint.NET: The Anti-GIMP?
Arno contributes a link to Paint.NET, a free-of-charge raster-graphics program for Windows XP machines. "Quote: 'Paint.NET is image and photo manipulation software designed to be used on computers that run Windows XP. Paint.NET is jointly developed at Washington State University with additional help from Microsoft, and is meant to be a free replacement for the MS Paint software that comes with all Windows operating systems. The programming language used to create Paint.NET is C#, with GDI+ extensions.' It really seems like a nice tool. I definitely prefer its UI to GIMP's."
TEMPORARILY REMOVED DUE TO BANDWIDTH CONSTRAINTS
To get the
Paint.NET v2.0 Full Installer (28.7mb
Oops! Someone forgot about a few extra people.
I managed to grab a mirror if needed. Site kinda seemed slow, especially for a .edu domain.
Before we all do the obligatory "GIMP r0xx0rz, .NET sux", please try downloading this... after it's Slashdotted. Very nice product, it doesn't have the advanced image conversion GIMP does, but very useful indeed.
I wonder if they used P/Invoke so I can run this on Mono?
-1, Flamebait.
:)
Not that it's impossible that this is useful/good software, but to suggest so to slashdot? Come on..
-- If no truths are spoken then no lies can hide --
Does it run on Mono? I'm being serious.
-Peter
So, um, isn't this the kind of thing we can run under mono without having to deal with wine regressions? Didn't M$ just help linux and windows users alike here by using .net?
The real question is any of GIMP's code that isn't tied to the UI (GTK+) in this program? Microsoft steels everything it can't have. Quite frankly the UI doesn't look as good as the GIMP IMHO.
-- DuckWing
Can't even get the screenshots to load. While it may be an anti-gimp, it probably is also an anti-photoshop. However, the site is now not responding, so I can't check features and specifications. Did anyone manage to get a mirror set up?
A blog like any other.
Are they marketing themselves as the anti-Gimp or was that just the editor(s) trying to start a flamewar for our amusement?
This program is so Anti gimp that it can walk and has full use of all it's limbs.
Go go go slashdot them !
why does the name have .NET?
.Net in paint
What are the features of
Why does yahoo do this
If it's meant to be a replacement for MS Paint as the blurb states, I don't think the Gimp should feel threatened. The chasm between Paint and Gimp is lightyears wide. It's unlikely this program could attract the OSS devotion necessary to become really big, especially what with its association with MS and the sometimes irrational dislike this inspires in some of us.
I do a bit of graphics stuff and i would never put my Photoshop to the side. it is by FAR the best graphics program out there. GIMP is nice for little things at work, but for personal use i would never use it.
75gb
dev, with mirror link: http://blogs.msdn.com/rickbrew/
http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:M2DW9zE1bnIJ: www.eecs.wsu.edu/paint.net/+&hl=en/
Paint.NET (aka Gimp for Windows) Does that make it PIMP for Windows?
Watch this thread for a .torrent as soon as I set it up :)
Much faster than either of the mirrors listed.
Sounds like it'll do a great job at tasks of Resizing, Croping, and most image adjustments. But what about it's scripting ability, in comparison to ScripFu/TinFu scripting ability or other advanced that some people need.
Although, it'll looks to fit the needs for 95% of the people out there.
Brandon Petersen
Get Firefox!
No kidding. Isn't MS Paint a lame-ass program that comes with the Microsoft O/S? It's like the Minesweeper game. Um, Photoshop has been doing quite nicely for a very long time.
Stuff that matters.
Hmm.... sounds fun. Maybe I should try it on a work computer so I can get a new one...
Unfortunately, just like most anti-particles in our universe, it appears that Paint.NET is in short supply.
You should care because one of the nicest features of GIMP, and indeed all cross platform OSS is that it DOES work on Windows. It's a major help to development to have that user base. If GIMP gets dropped for Paint.NET on windows ( which I'm not saying/seeing it will, but it DOES apparently have MS's interest ) then GIMP will lose "hands at the wheel" for development/testing and that will contribute to it losing a bit of steam, even if YOUR only concernt is linux. Ask not for who the bell tolls, sir, it tolls for thee.
There is a huge difference, in the long run, between "free of charge" and "open source". I choose open source :-)
Animoog.org
It looks like a great toy. But there's a problem. It uses the .NET framework. And I refuse to install that. Why should I install more badly designed MS software then I have too?
BSD-like License: http://www.eecs.wsu.edu/paint.net/legal.html
Image and photo manipulation software I mean, damn near anything that takes a digital photo or scans an image comes with Paintshop or Photoshop (albeit the light versions). I just know remembered that windows actually had a paint program. And those provide what most users would need anyway(non pros, which seem to be the target audience).
http://www.wsu.edu/~rolo/PaintDotNet_2_0.msi
try drawing with the fat brush
i am running a 3.0+ ghz and 2GB ram dell and the graphics painting sucks
they may want to work on speed a bit if they want to be taken seriously
Worse is the fact that many of those who slashdot these sites later do nothing or choose to post comments not related to the stories!
Now that is a fact. I realise that I have also posted a comment not related to the GIMP or the newly created .NET application.
...designed to be used on computers that run Windows XP
.NET Framework installed.
The author mentions twice that it runs only with Windows XP. It runs with Windows 2000, and presumably with any version of Windows that has the
Now I wonder, does it run with Mono?
Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. Lois, this isn't my Batman glass. - Peter
I'd say, just like the article, it's intended to be a replacement for MS-Paint. It doesn't appear to have anywhere near all of the advanced features of Gimp.
It has layers, and an effects API, but that seems to be where the similarity ends.
The interface appears to be simple like MS Paint's, but I think it's seriously overstating that it's a Gimp competitor. Heck, sounds like the project has only been around for 2 semesters. How mature could it be compared to Gimp or Photoshop?
http://www.eecs.wsu.edu/paint.net/aboutus.html .Net developer stereotype more than that???
Look at the first developer. How could he fill the
Donde esta?
Gimp is a multi-platform, ever-evolving solution, which gives people flexibility they might need for certaint projects. What can Paint.net do that PaintShopPro, Photoshop, ArcSoft PhotoStudio cannot? It's a lame freeware "program" which lacks killer features.
Show me something which is revolutionary. Announcement of ADPPW (Another Desktop Paint Program for Windows) is similar to publicizing about another WindowsXP theme which is set out to compete with Gnome or Aqua.
Next.
Indeed. Listed System Requirements: 600MHz processor (800MHz recommended), 128MB RAM (256MB recommended), Windows XP SP1 or later (all editions), .NET Framework 1.1. However...
meant to be a free replacement for the MS Paint software that comes with all Windows operating systems.
If the requirements are XP, it can only be a replacement for the MS Paint Software that comes with XP, not for the MS Paint Software for any other MS OS. Yes, I think I know what they mean; no, that's not what they said.
(Sorry, my mother was a retired English teacher.)
//Information does not want to be free; it wants to breed.
Not even a majority of people here run that hack of an OS. You know all the benefits you tout of your FOSS programs are fine, but they almost *all* run on Windows. Linux sucks. There are good FOSS programs though, which I take advantage of on Windows. Best of both worlds. Now GIMP, that also sucks. This is a nice free replacement. That's why I care about it. You can go back to the pain that is Linux now, have a nice day.
It just makes ugly looking photos.
.net a try, but I doubt it has everything I need.
I've tried a lot of gimp versions. And even the most basic image manipulation tools in gimp (contrast,hue,unsharp mask.., burn dodge, scale image) produce some mediocre looking results. Somehow the behind-the-scenes algos that photoshop uses just produce better looking results.
I wish it weren't true.
I'll give paint
Download the demo here :D emos/rh-linux-demo-x86.run/
s ch/index.htm/
http://www.3ddownloads.com/Strategy/Robin%20Hood/
And please some submit the news to Slashdot (I am French, my english is too poor...)
There is an article at epci-interactive website
http://www.epic-interactive.com/Website2004/engli
Sorry for my off-topic
Work with layers, a powerful feature usually found only on expensive commercial applications
Hrrmm...
Though I must say that even after growing somewhat accustomed to it through constant use, I would love to explore any alternative to the GIMP's UI.
Seriously? Where?!?
This is the first instance thus far of something that it looks like I won't be able to run on Windows 2000. I fell off the 'upgrade boat' at W2K and have had no intention of downgrading to 'phone home' Windows XP with it's playschool UI bloat.
.NET framework/libraries so this can run on W2K or is this the 'knee' of the slope down the hill to obsolescence for W2K?
Is there a way to load the
"What's the frequency Kenneth?"
I have .net installed on my system.
I can not afford photoshop and I would love a free graphics program that is fast, loads up quick like Xnview, has paint and image texturing functions. I could make some quick backgrounds for websites and 3d graphics programs that I am working on.
Photoshop is too fancy and the gimp is too slow and unusable on Windows.
http://saveie6.com/
Why write something using Microsoft's .NET Framework and then say it's for Windows XP? I thought one of the advantages of .NET was that it works the same on all the supported operating systems.
('Course, having developed stuff in .NET myself, I can vouch for the fact that stuff doesn't always work the same on different OSes, but it's close enough to release a functional product)
There are lots of free-as-in-beer paint programs for Windows. As long as it's closed source, it doesn't matter what it's written in to anybody other than its original developers.
Once they make it available open source under an open license, then it becomes interesting. Until then, it's just a curiosity. The most notable feature is probably that Microsoft has enough influence to push both its proprietary development model and its platform into universities.
Looking at their screenshots (can't run it from work, I'm on an aging Solaris workstation), it appears that the "layers" pannel lists the layers backwards. And when I say "backwards", I don't mean "opposite from Photoshop", I mean backwards.
The whole point of layers is that you can stack them, so that you can see through a layer ON TOP to a layer ON THE BOTTOM. "On top" is generally synonymous with "above", not "below", and if you keep that mentality, you can view the layer window as a horizontal cross-section of your image.
This is, perhaps, a minor quibble (this is not going to make or break it for me), but it just jumpped out at me as being strange. I can't think why anyone would reverse the layer ordering except to make their software look "not-Photoshop"ish.
I agree 100%. From what I've seen, VERY few people actually use the GIMP for anything other than the occasional experiment to see if it has stopped sucking yet. I only had a brief look at this .NET program, but it already looks SIGNIFICANTLY better than the GIMP in almost every aspect.
"In the spirit of all this freedom, we welcome any suggestions, as well as provide the source code free of charge for anyone who wishes to tinker with it. Please explore this website, download the software and try out many of the things you would do on those expensive commercial applications."
and the license
" Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy of this software and associated documentation files (the "Software"), to deal in the Software without restriction, including without limitation the rights to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the Software is furnished to do so, subject to the following conditions:
The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software.
"
Well fuck me, MS is sponsoring not just free software but Free software, Very interesting! Oh and can we take this and shove it on Linux?
Looks like Paint.NET just got Slashdotted to death. :)
hehe
It's always fun seeing MS servers go down
Why should the existence of a free paint program be "anti-Gimp" ? It's not like there's room for only 1 free paint app! The more, the merrier I say!
What is interesting is that Microsoft supported this. And the license is BSD-like; which is good.
First MSI. And now this. Could it be that Microsoft is inching towards opening up to OSS ideas?
You would think Microsoft wouldn't let people mirror their software - after all, they always tell people that you can't trust software on mirrors. Huge security risk, you know.
I have blog like everyone else
I grabbed it the cache someone posted here and figured I'd give it a shock. The first thing it tells me after installing that I have to reboot my computer? For a fscking paint program????? I think not. Maybe that's the part that they got help from MS on?
Yes, I'm sure that it's just part of the installer and you don't really need to reboot, but still, something to think about for version 1.1.
This is meant to be a light to middleweight photo and image editing program. Both Photoshop and The GIMP are intended to be do-everything monsters. As such, the competition is all the other lightweight photo editors out there, like PaintShop Pro and the various packages that come with most digital cameras.
I hope you're trolling. Most everyone who has used .Net for a serious programming project is *floored* by how well designed it is. Seriously, give it a shot, grab a few books on C# and VS.Net and get coding. I bet you'll never go back to whatever you use now, assuming you're a Windows programmer. All the .Net download is, is a runtime environment, just like the Java interpreter. Get some facts before you
MSPaint.NET: Now with a star shaped brush!
Wouldn't it really be the Bizarro-Gimp?
The fact is that the GIMP UI sucks and the developers don't care. Therefore it's inevitable that GIMP will eventually be replaced by something whose UI doesn't suck. It might be some evolution of Inkscape, or it might be a port of Paint.NET, but it must happen, and the sooner the better as far as I'm concerned.
Paint.NET is not the Anti-Gimp, it's just a tool to suit a different purpose and different people.
GIMP, from what I understand, is an opensource Photoshop style program, used mainly for image manipulation and touching up photos.
Paint.NET, which I've been using recently, is more of a MS-Paint, replacement, and as kiddie as Paint is, it is still the most installed image program in the world (bundled with Windows since god knows when), I'm happy Redmond is taking steps to updating this program, and would not be surprised to see it included in Longhorn....
Oh and my point was not to knock GIMP, because I think in time, and with a better developed interface, GIMP will be king... it's to state that Paint.NET is for us folks who want to doodle, or want to create simple artwork, with a more powerful interface than MS-Paint, but without the sheer complexity of a monster graphics program such as Photoshop or GIMP....
Karma police, arrest this man, he talks in maths....
You don't.
First of all, the .NET framework is not badly designed. It's one of the best-designed products Microsoft ever came up with. The reason Microsoft released so much crap over the years, is probably because all their best programmers were working on .NET.
Secondly, their exist free (as in free software) alternatives. Mono is the best-known one, an other is DotGNU Portable.NET. But they're not 100 % complete yet, so I don't know if this Paint.NET will work.
... a new application to edit plain text was released. Since you can use your keyboard to enter text, and it is open source (development sponsored by Microsft), it is a big threat to Emacs.
So, there is a new paint program for windows. Woo Hoo!
Any thing actually interesting happen today?
That being said, there are some features which the GIMP lacks (32-bit BMPs, layer groups, etc...). The UI is not the problem here, unless the user is a complete retard who is unwilling to try something new.
Mod me troll if you must, but deep down you know it's true.
First, the headline is absolutely misleading. This is not in any way intended to replace GIMP, just the ridiculously lame MS Paint. (In that regard, it's also worth noting, they are setting the bar pretty low.)
That said, it is wonderful that people can look at how bad the GIMP UI is objectively. The reason Photoshop is far superior to the GIMP is not just in features -- it's in ease of use. Of course, there's a learning curve, but it's far less steep.
go get it
Although in name Paint.NET is only an MS Paint replacement, the internally stated goal was that it be able to replace Photoshop (on dual Xeons which are required to support Paint.NET).
Does it support saving and compressing to .jp(e)g format?
Bleh. Mediocre. The brush tool sucks. Try it out, it creates lumpy looking strokes when you move the mouse quickly. Not to mention no pressure sensitivity.
It's not digitally signed!
If it won't run on Linux, how is it competing with GIMP?
You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
Now, I would be impressed if this was a vector graphics tool. But I simply don't see an MS Paint clone taking over the world.
Home Page:/
http://www.eecs.wsu.edu.nyud.net:8090/paint.net
Download Link:N et_2_0.msi
http://www.wsu.edu.nyud.net:8090/~rolo/PaintDot
and betanews link:0 96481993/1
http://fileforum.betanews.com/detail/PaintNET/1
Heretic. Turn in your Linux / Open Source badge and exit the building. Get out.
"Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
That's right, but in another company: Borland.
ZED: Bring out The Gimp.
MAYNARD: I think The Gimp's asleep.
ZED: Well, I guess you'll just wake 'em up then, won't you?
MAYNARD: How about Paint.NET instead?
While not open Source, I find the combination of Dogwaffle + Dadaware's now-free Embellish to be a good cost-free toolset for doing bits of graphics work. Throw in IrfanView and/or XnView for good measure. :-)
/. readers, use Google to find them yourself...
Since I don't want to bombard those folks' web pages with
Mainframe/UNIX Bit Twiddler and long time Windows/Linux Hobbyist.
The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then.
Rolo, is that you?
I see several interesting things here. Note how they had to use a GDI+ 'extension'? And someone is reporting sluggishness anyway, even on hardware that is fairly new. Tells me .net suffers from Java's Disease along with any other emulated environment and that the move to add in native hooks is already well underway. And of course it is in Microsoft's interest to make sure that .NET is 'multiplatform' in the hype but Windows only in practice.
.net and all it's works are nothing but a trap for the unwary. And will never live up to the hype anymore than Java did, although there is now hope for Java to become useful by jetisoning the emulation and making it just another object oriented language that GCC will grind down to ELF executables.
Let this be an object lesson for all you Mono fetishists,
Democrat delenda est
This uses GDI+, so an environment like Wine would be more feasible than a port to mono et al.
Unless I'm mistaken, I don't believe any of the OSS alternatives implement (or plan to implement) GDI+.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
This is nifty news.
Because I have an XP computer. And an XP notebook.
And I just ordered me a Nixon CoolPix 8800 as my Christmas present to me.
Guaranteed delivery Friday, the man said. Of course, he had a Noo Yawk accent and sounded like he was smiling a little too hard...
So I may be spending Xmas day taking super-sharp pictures with "the Nikon touch" color balance and messing them up in a tool that doesn't take 8 clicks and a foray into a semantic hall of mirrors to find something as simple as the contrast and brightness controls.
[p.s. when ordering from "back-east" camera houses, CALL and ask what's in the box; if it weren't for a snafu with the shipping address, I'd never have talked to them, and I'd never have found out that the reason they offered it almost $150 below everyone else was that it was a "camera-only" OEM package, esentially reselling a warranty replacement distribution, without things like, oh, the special rechargable battery, lens cap, etc...and this year's models are coming without an included SD card or CompactFlash drive, probably because they were getting a lot of requests to delete those because by now most camera-hacks have a stack of nicer ones than the mfg's were shipping in the kit...]
Oh, and I just have to link this cool picture of the unpainted body: cool picture of the unpainted body from one of the reviews.
</brag>
Real graphics manipulation should be done in C or assembler.
Truer words were never spoken.
> I definitely prefer its UI to GIMP's.
More power to you !
Personally, I definitely prefer Gimp's licensing terms.
Votez ecolo : Chiez dans l'urne !
I would like to point out that, even though I am a photoshop user, and this story has nothing to do with gimp or photoshop, that I personally hate gimp, because, well, because I just don't like it. It might be ok for doing little things here and there, but gimp is truly lacking. Only old people use gimp.
This...
...p
/.
http://www.xdp.it/cximage.htm
Not that piece of crap, it is an MS-Paint knock off.
The CxImage demo has been around for 3 years now. It is open source, originally appeared on
http://www.codeproject.com/bitmap/cximage.as
Davide Pizzolato is the author and a damn good coder. Not some college student.
Please, when you put a title on something think about it a bit.
This sounds like a bunch of his friends got together to up their rating and get this foolishness on
Blah - Humbug.
~G
I will stick with GIMP or Photoshop thanks. Maybe this program will mature in time and I wish the best to the development team. It may sound like I am being harsh and I apologize for that. But this whole topic came off very trollish to Me.
If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land,
it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. -James Madison
If it's C# & .Net, will port to mono?
It sucks if you are on Windows and don't have a program which gives you virtual desktops. Install that and you can use GIMP a lot better. (And FYI I hate programs with MDI style interfaces since I typically work with multiple monitors.)
Instead of a threat to GIMP, this is an opportunity for GIMP programmers to examine an alternative interface design and feature set and steal any ideas that they like. They could do the same for Photoshop as well.
Heck, why not invite Washington State to participate in GIMP?
This story paints (pun intended) this application as being an alternative to The GIMP. That's all well and good if you can accept that a big, 20-ton CAT buldozer is a suitable alternative to a common backyard shovel. Yes, the shovel has an easier to use interface, but it's not built for moving mountains, just tending gardens.
Join Tor today!
Are you suggesting that MS include a better graphics program with the OS? MS Paint might not be the best end-all graphics program, but as soon as MS incorporates Paint.NET (or similarly full-featured product) with the OS, they'll be sued to unbundle it (and rightly so).
Isn't it better that the MS included programs have minimal features at best? It is great to be able to read MS Word docs on the OS without having to buy / download anything, but I don't want someone to choose which programs I use.
The more that's bundled in the OS, the more people will use what they are given (just look at IE) instead of finding a better alternative.
What actually makes this "Anti-Gimp"? ... ... afterall, what is Gimp? It's more like an Anti-Photoshop. ... this would make a great replacement
If it's to be Anti-Anything, it would probably be more along the lines of Anti-Paintshop Pro
Just because a project was done with the help of M$, it doesn't mean that there is some *nix app that they are targetting
Also, look at M$ Paint? It's a useless "paint" program that hasn't changed since it was first release
ok, so.....
layer support sucks. only very few basic layer modes.
to work on multiple images, you basically have to start another instance of the program. functional but not efficient.
it is incredibly slow. i'm running it on a 1.8 GHz P4, 1 gig of RAM. I apply an effect on a decent size image, and go get a cup of coffee.
oh, try the "re-color" tool, if you've got nothing to do for a while.
can't get anti-aliasing to work right.
interface flickers quite a bit as you navigate through the menus. not critical, but rather annoying.
color picker does not display the color in hex, which makes it harder to use for web graphics.
on a good note, the interface is vaguely familiar to the ubiquitous and expensive software that we all love so much.
how is this anti-GIMP, anyways? it's not cross-platform, it's quite a bit slower, and is targeted at a totally different audience. I agree that it's better than MS Paint, but shit, MS Paint should have been retired years ago.
--- sig moved for great justice.
especially what with its association with MS and the sometimes irrational dislike this inspires in some of us.
.net towards those ends, avoiding any .net project like the proverbial plague is not only wise, it is critical to the self-preservation of any software developer wishing to work in an environment free of Microsoft's coercive control, be it Apple OS X, FreeBSD, GNU/Linux, Palm OS, Solaris, or anything else.
.NET, and, as you say, it addresses a different niche of users.
Based on Microsoft's behavior past and present, its effect on the industry and emergence of technology in general (quite negative), and their publicly stated intentions with respect to Linux, software freedon in general, and freedom to innovate vis-a-vis software patents and ligitagion in general (of which their funding of the SCO debacle is but a precursor), I'd say there is absolutely nothing whatsoever "irrational" about the dislike an association with Microsoft inspires in any of us.
Now, the expression of that dislike can sometimes take irrational forms, just as the expression of anger can on any subject, but that by no means belies the entirely rational, indeed very justified, anger and dislike being felt.
Finally, given Microsoft's long history and ongoing policy of customer lock-in, and their stated strategy of leveraging
I do agree that this program is no threat to the GIMP. Its licensing is more restrictive, it requires
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
they just didn't actually implement it on multiple platforms, though they did release Rotor for BSD.
Is Rotor available for commercial use? Does Rotor implement System.Windows.Forms? And what's this about examples compiled under one GUI platform will not run under other GUI platforms?
What is the point of ISO standardization if you don't intend it to be cross platform?
Are System.Windows.Forms and the parts of GDI+ added by System.Drawing part of the ISO spec?
..someone made a new UI for the gimp. Not that the old oen is all that nasty, it's just that a poor UI reduces usability a LOT, especially for people who don't use it full-time.
Photoshop UI is not particularly hot either.
I use both photoshop and gimp occasionally, about 10 hr a month, and the UI suxxors in both. A thousand cryptic icons, with cryptic names in the tooltips, with about 10 alt-ctrl-shift-click-drag variants for each tool is something I'm never going to learn fully.
A thousand filters with cryptic names and parameters are al useless, unless you already spent 200 hours learning which one does what. I can't invest 200 hours into this; I don't do GD full time. Now, I don't have time to rewrite the gimp UI myself either, so it being open-source doesn't help here at all. But someone somewhere had time to write the damn thing. I suppose they could spend a few more hours to design a proper UI for it to make it actually useful.
Adobe maybe has the excuse that with a $700 sale price they expect only the full-time pros to be using the program. Gimp is unexcusable.
Have you heard of page sharing and copy-on-write? Most of these 80MB is shared between two instances of the app. At the same time fore each of the processes it looks like it has 80MB of code and data loaded. In reality both processes have the same thing, except for pages that differ. So code DLLs are mapped to the same areas of physical RAM and data segments are only in physically different locations if they've been written into.
Yet windows task manager shows 80MB anyway, because that's what individual processes see.
having rabid rats claw out your eyes is a better user interface experience than using the Gimp UI.
In July O7, I got a mac pro. There's no punchline. Just endless joy and wonder.
with this app. Instead, it seems to be focused more on PaintShop Pro's users. The GIMP tries to compete with the big boy on the block - PS - and this app seems like a clone of PSP or that personal-use PS Adobe put out. I for one would like something free like this out there. Yesterday I had to create a couple of screenshots of a bug and send them to the developer on a pretty much stock machine. I was left with hitting printscreen, pasting them into Paint, writing on them with the text tool and sending them as email BMP attachments. It worked but I felt like a dufus. Paint has been in need of an overhaul for a decade. It's as if notepad was still at the level of ed.
I went on a tour of the WSU Campus last year and actually met the people developing this before Microsoft had gotten back to them about the product. It appears to be unchanged since that time, except a few small changes. So I don't think Microsoft got there hands all over it, which is nice in a way.
Probably one of the best projects on display, better then trying to disguise Dragon Naturally Speaking as your own voice recognition invention and not doing anything else all quarter... That was a different group.
Couldn't someone put a thin candy shell around the chocolaty goodness of gimp and exactly duplicate this entire program?
More like Paint.nyet. Cue "In Soviet Russia" joke...
Wasn't it supposed to be another Satan spawn privacy invasion widget? Or am I confusing it with some other MS product?
"It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
The GIMP is a poor product. The user interface is not intuitive at all and the help files AS WELL AS the tutorials you can find online are pretty lacking.
Its a shame too, because it could soo whoop PS if they really put their backs into it.
Woah, someone stop these people! You can't make an alternative to open source software, it's against everything that we stand for!
So, m$, after having paint done and un-changed (except for jpg support added) for a dozen years can't afford to create their own paint-replacement? Paint has been inadequate for as long as it's been available. Why are they doing it OSS now with help from WSU? I think they're just afraid of hurting their profit$ and have to get cheap help and beef up their academic-friendliness @ the same time.
At most, they may plink down $250, but most likely will go home with the "Ph0t0 M4st3r 2.3" software for $9.99 in the 'Value Software' bin.
If you ignore the other uses of a tool, does that make the tool less useful, or you less useful?
It's rather important to remember the difference between workset, used address space and real (delta) memory usage.
Wait, so where do you train to be a retired English teacher? Can I study to go straight into retirement in other fields?
(Yes, I know what you mean, but turnabout is fair play. :)
Like "eliminate red-eye", "add fancy border", or "auto re-balance colors/light", etc... I mean, things like this should actually just come standard.
Meh.
What bug's me about this is that not one day ago Peter Torr was stating: "Do I really trust a bunch of kids at some random university I've never heard of?" (http://blogs.msdn.com/ptorr/archive/2004/12/20/32 7511.aspx)
Now, Microsoft expects us to trust those same "University kids" with our photo editing suite? I'm sorry, but if the foot-in-the-mouth comments don't stop - I'll drop dead soon. I get tired of stuff like this. And yeah, Washington State might still be a public institution, the software isn't open source. I'm waiting for the pay-to-play version soon...oh wait! That's right, I need WindowsXP (Priced at $199.99, or higher) to run it!
Gotcha, so not really free, just "included if you use our OS."
Help me, help you. - Jerry McGuire
MS Paint is useless! All it offers is very crude editing of bitmaps; I don't know anyone who uses it at all. It's like someone developing an OSS replacement for Sound Recorder.
When I am king, you will be first against the wall.
Not that this program could compete in any way with either the gimp or photoshop, but the author touches on a painfull point for the gimp: It is too steep a learning curve to learn how to use the gimp, most of that knowledge is not transferable to other programs. In other word the interface just sucks, you have to invest much time in it and then you still are working with a bland unintinutive interface. It is about pictures right? why don't I see any when searching all those confusing menu's?
The gimp is one of those few programs that make me sream at the computer. I don't care how much you can do with it if i cannot find out/remember how to do it!
Just my Eur 0,02
This space is intentionally staring blankly at you
http://gmail.google.com/gmail/a-f4aa5a9253-835d694 e22-80e9cb5289
Thanks for this much useful tool. Now when and where can I download Browser.NET.
The overloaded home page didn't indicate that the source was available, and the announcement talked about it being free-as-in-beer. The logical conclusion is that it's not open source. If it is, all the better; the authors should fix their home page, however.
A good piece of software is a good piece of software whether it runs on Windows, Linux, Mac or your Toaster. It is even better if it is open source or free.
Nobody is forcing you to use it, but it is good to have more choices.
Cheers,
Adolfo
All their best and brightest were working on .NET? What a load of crap that is. I hat MS a lot but I recognize that MS continually hires the best and brightest programmers. On average I'd say that any MS programmer is much better than your 'average' programmer. The stupidity that MS products are mired in comes from the TOP, not the bottom. Hiring Borland programmers to work on something like .NET was a self fulfilling prophecy that was bound to succeed because the CONCEPT was solid. This is one of the reasons I really hate MS. They have good programmers and more money than God, but they still have so many crap programs and bad security.
This is what happens when your marketing department drives the company with a lack of vision.
The Gimp does have an abysmal user interface, BUT, that interface must be seen in connection with the OS you are using. On OpenBSD it makes perfect sense. As you go on using it, you learn to deal with its oddities.
More when I can actually get my hands on Paint.Net.
Most interesting though is that Microsoft actually has some hand in aiding the creation of this software. If so, does that give us any indication that Microsoft might actually try to go after sections of the user market that are already ceded to other vendors?
What happens if Microsoft suddenly embraces Open Source development for its products? Given the level of piracy that abounds, they might get a better handle on some profit by transferring from a product based to service based model. Hm.
befuddled (noun) 1. Unable to create a pithy sig
...I don't know... um... simplistic? ;P
Seriously, this looks like it will be good for beginners and will provide a good alternative to Photoshop Elements. The transparent toolboxes is a nice touch, but would never be of much use in a real photo editing environment where you don't want anything altering the colors of what you're editing. Nice eye candy though.
-"...bad old ideas look confusingly fresh when they are packaged as technology" - Jaron Lanier (Digital Maoism on Edge.o
Good for Microsofties, but most Gimp users are not
running it on the Windows OS.
Just another software news article comparing apples
to oranges.
It is very funny to see the Microsoft camp grasping
at straws to keep the bandwagon affloat, but they
always come up short in the end. Lately it was
the Firefox kill tactic, and now the Gimp.
I don't know what all the complaints are about? It runs fine on our Cray.
Did see a cache link so here the coral cache link:
/ do wnloads.html
http://www.eecs.wsu.edu.nyud.net:8090/paint.net
snowulf.com
MS _did_ do some work to make .net cross platform.
.net implementation for freebsd and solaris, that even will run some WinForms apps via Tk. .net is multiplatform - at least 2 non-windows-CLR versions exist (mono, rotor, and what happened to dotGnu?). But if you suggest that microsoft wants the windows version to be the best performing, easiest to use, and where they put the most investment, then you'd be right.
Look for the "rotor" project. Started and released by MS folk, a shared-source
My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily represent those of my employer.
...if you installed the DNF
god I really wish that was possible to install DukeNukemForever =(
A windows user.
And while there are lots of windows users, the vast majority of the people in the world are not ormer windows users. So, that majority, plus the people who are not accustomed to windows anymore (like me) will not judge a programs interface as "unfamiliar" or "unusual". It will be a good or a bad interface, aside for it's "windowness".
The whole reasoning that everything must look like windows, because you know windows is flawed and innecesary.
The gimp is good, if you learn how to use it. In fact, it is very easily related to the task it performs. You take a canvas, select a tool, and doo your job. If you want something done on the canvas, you use a context menu on itself. It's very direct.
...but it's no iPod-killer, that's for sure. :-)
Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
Photofiltre is also a powerful freeware that everybody must try on windows (98/me/2k/xp), it's more like Photoshop because it's main use is to modify/enhance picture.
At least it can make a nice addon to your graphic utility suite.
Okay I just loaded it up and I have the following to say about it:
.NET. Why? I don't have a clue.
.NET comparable thing is... Can it be ported? Again--Why is it necessary?
... at least for now. I like Paint.NET's simplicity but speed and memory consumption is unusable and it's hard to explain that to users... and the WinXP only thing is the kicker. I know lots of people still running Win98 and even though The GIMP isn't all that great for Win98, it still kinda runs anyway. (I think it'd be nice if someone out there were to build in a compile option to support Win98 and share the binaries... there's a need!)
(BTW, Thanks to whoever it was that supplied the link to the MSI. Very handy considering the death the original site suffered.)
1. It requires
2. It can only handle one document at a time, though I can load multiple instances. It doesn't QUITE make up for it... probably eats up gobs more memory than it should as a result though.
3. It is GOD-AWFUL slow. My machine is 2GHz with 512MB... not a hot-rod but no slouch neither.
4. There is no ability to drag a layer from one project to another. That's a pretty critical thing when you are importing several images to create a single image.
5. The UI is nice enough... I'm kinda torn between that and the GIMP UI. But since it's the functionality I care more about than the UI, I lean to The GIMP since it clearly has more and performs FAR better.
I could probably add more but I won't. This program is NOT (yet) a threat to The GIMP. And since The GIMP is cross-platform, there is no contest in my mind. Cross-platform, however, doesn't mean anything to those who will be using only Windows for the next 3-4 years. (And for that reason, the UI style is best for Windows-only users since they are likely to adapt to it more quickly than that of The GIMP.)
I think if they could address the problems I listed above, they'd start to have a contender on their hands. I don't like that it's needlessly not cross-platform -- I think someone mentioned something about the Mono project or whatever the Linux
Which would I recommend to users? The GIMP without hesitation
I definitely prefer its UI to GIMP's.
Hell, ls has a better UI than the GIMP.
Proud member of the Weirdo-American community.
Paint.NET is nice, but its featureset can't compare to that of the GIMP. What we really need is a GIMP fork that will overhaul the interface, since obviously the GIMP folks don't care about creating user interface that would please most users. Look at Inkscape. It started as a fork from Sodipodi (which had an interface not all that different from GIMP's) and look, everyone LOVES Inkscape. Sodipodi is yesterday's news.
GOALS. We're at v1.1 - how cross platform was Java version 1? Ans: Not very
Ahh, revisionist history. Must be a Microsoft poster!
Actually Java V1. had AWT, which was quite cross platform. It may not have been as rich as other GUI API's, but it was usable and was designed to run cross platform (using native widgets) from the start. JDK 1.1 also had a somewhat refined JNI. so you could call out to native methods if you liked.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
2.8 GHz P4 w/ 760Mb RAM (Intel i854G Graphics) on XP and the program is responding well. The paint brush maxed out is fine and recolor is almost instaneous.
Screen does flicker some, but for free, a great improvement over paint!
seems pretty damn fast to me - well most of it anyway. If you want slow try the color repicker tool. p4 3.01 1gb DDR ATI Radeon 9700 pro
A GIMP frontend that mimicks Photoshop (or almost any other image editing software), and I'd wager that you see GIMP on a hella lot of desktops in a rather short time.
GIMP is an outstanding product completely and utterly crippled by its user interface. There may be a few fans and supporters out there, but the sheer fact that GIMP hasn't taken over yet (despite it's almost feature completeness) should end this argument.
Waaaaaahhhhh!!!!!!! My pussy hurts!!!!!!! I cannot make an intelligent reply so I show the fact that I'm a twelve year old!!!!!
First of all, the .NET framework is not badly designed. It's one of the best-designed products Microsoft ever came up with
This is hearcy how in the world can you actually beleave this. I would say with that attitude your are probbily running Windows ME
Well, lets see.. how to put this without being like a troll... A paint program with the security of the popular ftp daemon syngergized with the historical reliability of a well known OS manufacturer. It should be an interesting little application.
Join the Slashcott! Feb 10 thru Feb 17!
I was playing around with this, and wondered what the hell you guys were talking about.
The fat brush worked just fine for me.
Then I turned off the "translucent windows" option... and the program slowed right the hell down.
So, it's one of those odd programs that runs FASTER with the effects TURNED-ON.
Does it make you happy you're so strange?
Rick Brew has posted a copy of the installer on his blog. Download it from http://blogs.msdn.com/rickbrew/.
Check out our infosecurity industry blog: http://securitymusings.com/
...and is meant to be a free replacement for the MS Paint software that comes with all Windows operating systems
Let's sue Microsoft for including this with the OS, just like Media Player. We're all going to be rich.
Generally, I get bored with my replies and give up on making sense halfway through.
Have you ever read a /. article where the GIMP is mentioned before? Its post after post after post of people slamming it for its UI and color management. I'd say the ratio is at least 3 to 1 for people against it. Plus it drives Photoshop users insane whenever anyone suggests that Gimp is even remotely usable. Those Adobe fans go crazy whenever you mention Gimp let alone any OSS graphics app. No I think your wrong there and /. users (90% of whom run XP) would be highly receptive to an alternative to GIMP.
If you wanna get rich, you know that payback is a bitch
but stick to factually correct statements. There are plenty of things MS actually does to be upset with, so you shouldn't have to make stuff up.
.net on unix than you have. Unless you're a dotGNu or mono developer :)
.net to do so using windows and visual studio. Previously they did that by not publishing specs and not really paying attention to the thought of non-x86-windows implementations. With .net not only have they done a better than historical job making things standardized, published, and accessible, but they've even created a sample implementation for a freeware unix.
Rotor is cool. I spent some time trying to port it to openBSD when it first came out but there were some sys-vish things fbsd had that obsd didn't that made porting it non-trivial (at least for someone of my skill level).
Let me put this another way. I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that MS has done more to put
If i had to guess, i'd say microsoft seriously wants everyone using
Compared to someone like cygnus, sure, it's certainly a less outstanding embrace of F/OSS, but compared to MS's other projects and historical record, it's pretty incredible.
My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily represent those of my employer.
According to one of the GIMP developers, BigSven:
"GIMP is also not meant to be like Photoshop and we aren't trying to win PS users over. We are creating a tool that gets the job done. Some approaches of PS are worth to copy, others aren't. GIMP is not a Photoshop clone and it was never meant to be one." -BigSven
"Gimp was not written as a competitor to Photoshop." -mac[LAG]
Please do not compare GIMP with Photoshop, because that's a very sensitive point with GIMP fanatics, who go out of their way to ignore Photoshop, and wear their ignorance as a badge of pride.
-Don
Take a look and feel free: http://www.PieMenu.com
Don't compare PS to the GIMP, not ever!
The GIMP is what it is, and good luck to it, but anyone who works professionally creating or modifying digital images for print production will tell you there's nothing to compare with PS.
Paint-Shop-Pro is a more reasonable comparison.
Even then, I think PSP7 is about the next best thing to PS if you're on a budget (and that includes PS 'Elements').
I found this one googling, seems to be up... for now! Enjoy.. and fyi, its a .msi file. Ick.
I submitted this on Fark with a funnier headline.
"The basic rule is that 80% of the people use 20% of the features. So it is not matching feature per feature with photoshop it is matching how well people can access the feature." -jellomizer
-Don
Take a look and feel free: http://www.PieMenu.com
It's not the many windows that bother me. It's first of all the crazy menu system. Then it's the weird interaction gotchas like how to cancel selection or stop adding points to a path. Then it's deeper issues like the fact that channels, layers, alpha channels and layer masks all do nearly but not quite exactly the same thing.
Speaking of nice features: the lasso-select in this thing is pretty kick ass. Does any other software have similar real time highlighting of the selected area for the lasso?
What you mean, like the GIMP? Press "F" or click the third button in the tool pane and you are using lasso select.
I'm beginning to think that there are a bunch of people out there who just like to spout off without engaging their brain. The GIMP has a ton of great features, the dockable toolbars work fabulously, it has great support for the Wacom Intuous tablet I use and it does pretty much everything I need it to do. Plus plugins like Resynthesizer make removing spots and creating tilable textures from digital photos really easy. Criticise the tools you use, not the ones where you just visited the web page.
Cheers,
Toby Haynes
Anything I post is strictly my own thoughts and doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the opinions of IBM.
No, but as someone who knows some very good musicians, I guarantee you that the ones who know two string instruments could pick up a third much easier than they'd pick up something brass or woodwind.
So it is with graphics packages. Personally I gave up on the GIMP on Windows the first time I tried it for two reasons, both as bad as each other to me. Firstly, the interface was so counter-intuitive that I couldn't achieve even simple web effects that I'd do in seconds on several other packages. Secondly, I literally couldn't run it for more than two minutes without a crash. Everything from a simple filter to saving a file took it out permanently.
Now, at that time, the Windows port looked like the *nix version, bizarre right-click menu and all. AIUI more recent versions of the GIMP on Windows have had a somewhat more usable interface. Still, you can get an equally free and legal copy of numerous other mainstream packages off any magazine cover disk, providing you only need the features they had in version ($CURRENT_VERSION - 2). That being the case, why would I bother going back and trying the GIMP again when it's obviously built on such a crappy foundation? More interestingly to this discussion, what if anything about Paint.NET would motivate me to try that instead of the established players; what's it's killer differentiator?
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
Now I realize why X-Windows is still so popular with crappy GUI application developers.
They can blame all their horrible user interface problems on the X-Windows-Manager, so they don't have to bother fixing them.
-Don
From the X-Windows chapter of the Unix-Haters Handbook:
Ice Cube: The Lethal Weapon
One of the fundamental design goals of X was to separate the window manager from the window server. "Mechanism, not policy" was the mantra. That is, the X server provided a mechanism for drawing on the screen and managing windows, but did not implement a particular policy for human-computer interaction. While this might have seemed like a good idea at the time (especially if you are in a research community, experimenting with different approaches for solving the human-computer interaction problem), it can create a veritable user interface Tower of Babel.
If you sit down at a friend's Macintosh, with its single mouse button, you can use it with no problems. If you sit down at a friend's Windows box, with two buttons, you can use it, again with no problems. But just try making sense of a friend's X terminal: three buttons, each one programmed a different way to perform a different function on each different day of the week -- and that's before you consider combinations like control-left-button, shift-right-button, control-shift-meta-middle-button, and so on. Things are not much better from the programmer's point of view.
As a result, one of the most amazing pieces of literature to come out of the X Consortium is the "Inter Client Communication Conventions Manual," more fondly known as the "ICCCM", "Ice Cubed," or "I39L" (short for "I, 39 letters, L"). It describes protocols that X clients ust use to communicate with each other via the X server, including diverse topics like window management, selections, keyboard and colormap focus, and session management. In short, it tries to cover everything the X designers forgot and tries to fix everything they got wrong. But it was too late -- by the time ICCCM was published, people were already writing window managers and toolkits, so each new version of the ICCCM was forced to bend over backwards to be backward compatible with the mistakes of the past.
The ICCCM is unbelievably dense, it must be followed to the last letter, and it still doesn't work. ICCCM compliance is one of the most complex ordeals of implementing X toolkits, window managers, and even simple applications. It's so difficult, that many of the benefits just aren't worth the hassle of compliance. And when one program doesn't comply, it screws up other programs. This is the reason cut-and-paste never works properly with X (unless you are cutting and pasting straight ASCII text), drag-and-drop locks up the system, colormaps flash wildly and are never installed at the right time, keyboard focus lags behind the cursor, keys go to the wrong window, and deleting a popup window can quit the whole application. If you want to write an interoperable ICCCM compliant application, you have to crossbar test it with every other application, and with all possible window managers, and then plead with the vendors to fix their problems in the next release.
In summary, ICCCM is a technological disaster: a toxic waste dump of broken protocols, backward compatibility nightmares, complex nonsolutions to obsolete nonproblems, a twisted mass of scabs and scar tissue intended to cover up the moral and intellectual depravity of the industry's standard naked emperor.
Using these toolkits is like trying to make a bookshelf out of mashed potatoes. - Jamie Zawinski
Take a look and feel free: http://www.PieMenu.com
Gimp is open source, code is downloadable. Grab a copy and start hacking the UI. When you have a usable UI, let me know as well.
Never noticed that GIMP had a UI...
the UI IS better than the GIMP...which makes me laugh at anyone who thought GIMP was going to be something someday. so much for open source.
Let's see.... the learning curve for me with Photoshop 4 back in grade school... about an hour to be able to do basic functions. The learning curve with Gimp, a year ago, after years of experience with software, graphics-editors included: 4 hours. Simply, on Windows, Gimp is ugly, is in literally too many windows, and is far too unwieldy to be considered anywhere near serious competition for Photoshop. Remember the thread about how no serious photographers that work in digital use Linux as their primary photo-editing environment? Using Gimp for 10 minutes makes the reasons evident. For example, it took me forever to make this thing in Gimp, but in Photoshop, I could do the same thing with much less effort. Photoshop has decades of usability testing and development behind it. Give me a break, and give me photoshop.
Why?
Anyway I'm going to download it and see if it is easier and as functional as GIMP (which personally I think has an unfriendly UI).
Funny I always download and install GIMP on a new system when I get the chance. Now maybe I have something else.
Cost of my time to create UI > cost of purchasing a product that already works fine
We all know what GIMP does.
Whilst the application may seem apealing, it is actually produced by Satan. As open religoius open source zealots, we must strive to resist the temptations laid before us in the form of "free as in beer" software. Although apealing as it seems, it's actually funded by the devil, and therefore any use of such a product is a path to hell and eternal damnation.
Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated up.
It only runs on windows. A majority of windows users probably use Paint Shop Pro or Photoshop.
Have you published the results of your usability studies in a peer reviewed journal so the rest of us can read them and try to reproduce your results?
Or are you just pulling the number out of your ass, and bullshitting your head off?
The emperor has no clothes, and you're totally blind to that fact, going on and on about how well dressed he is.
Yet another brainwashed fanatic does no good for the cause, only harms its credibility.
-Don
Take a look and feel free: http://www.PieMenu.com
Amazing. Nothing changes.
Many Windows programs rely on bugs in Windows to work. I would not expect .NET based programs to be any different. Unless Mono implements GDI+ with all of the bugs that are in Microsoft .NET, quite a bit of .NET/GDI+ will not work.
Fair enough, but your statement presumes she is still living; those deceased are normally only spoken of in the past tense. =P
//Information does not want to be free; it wants to breed.
como escribo, me podés leer en español, que sí lo se escribir bien, nabo.
Why o why o why do soooo many people whine about the UI of the GIMP? I dont get it at all.
What's so hard to understand about the GIMP?
There's a toolbox - double click the tool for options - a colour picker and a brush selector. Easy. It does reasonable AA text, albeit a little clunkily and it has a whole lot of load/save options per supported filetype. Easy. There are options per image under the right mouse button and there are options per session of the gimp application in the menu at the top of the toolbar. Easy. It allows for any number of views of the image you're working on and it has configurable shortkeys for lots of stuff. Easy. It has most of the image manipulation filters you's expect from a heavy duty gfx app and a kick-arse animation plugin. Easy.
The only thing about recent versions of the GIMP that really annoys me is the Gtk+ 2.x/Pango/atk/glib complex. This has become so slow that it's almost unbearable. Gtk+ is now a dog of a behomoth of a bitch of a toolkit. Die Gtk+ die.
Finally, the fact that there is very minimal (non-existant really) support for the CMYK colourspace is an annoyance too. Other than that the GIMP is simply great value and a lot of fun to use.
Oh, one thing though - the GIMP really needs to be run on a Unix. Win32 versions of the GIMP suck _really_ badly.
- It took western civilisation 2000 years to ensure popular literacy, and now we work with icon driven GUI's. Go figure.
Jebediah, Bob, they're on our turf! Break out the shotguns, bourbon and banjos!
/good/ thing as long as the playing field is fair? This doesn't sound unfair to me in the slightest.
Seriously folks, don't you realize that competition historically has been a
I like their varied patterns you can use for the Fill Style. I liked them better back in 1990 when they were included in Hypercard, though.
You're mistaken.
See Drawing / Mono.
While I was going through the tutorials, I actually created a little .txt file that detailed within the various modes the key shortcuts and what they do, as well as some common functions. I'll probably HTML it later, but for now that little textfile is a dandy reference for all things blender that tend to elude me from time-to-time.
"Since they say that Paint.NET is the Anti-GIMP, if I install both this software and The GIMP at the same time, will my laptop explode?"
You have a Pinto laptop?
Do I understand the license correctly: all derived works have to include the permission notice, i.e. have to allow unlimited copying and creation of further derived works? If so, then this is like GPL but without the need to provide source code. Seems like a new approach to free software licensing.
Your link is for the previous version. The new links sought after are for version 2. But having downloaded and installed v1 and v2, I didn't see much of a difference other than file size; the latter being bigger.
thanks for the info! you'd think i would check that before posting... :-\
Seriously though... What moron at Microsoft decided that naming a coding framework after a popular gTLD was a good idea?
Performance was not a problem on my PC. Some have reported it is on theirs. I am running a P4 3.2 GHz HT w/512 MB RAM.
Now to the constructive criticism...
The memory problem is a big one. I'm guessing that the history list is largely responsible for the offense, and that some disk cacheing could remedy the problems. Garbage collection isn't a license to grab all the RAM on my PC.
Anyway, a good free program all-in-all. A bit of a heavyweight to be a Paint replacement though.
To be honest, the GIMP UI sucks worse than anything I have ever seen.
For a "professional" app, it's extremely unusable, and from what I've seen of Paint.NET (I found it some time before it appeared on slashdot), it's the new piece of software to beat.
And before the zealots go wild on this post, actually THINK about what I'm saying, and don't rail me because I used the words GIMP and sucks in the same sentence.
Move sig!
No, the developers didnt port GIMP to windows, it was done third party, beyond that, if you don't like the UI, make a new one, or donate to support someone else making one. Frankly, its very easy to get a copy of, ahem, that shop photo program thingy, if you will, from a myriad of online sources. Most of us are ok dealing with GIMP or the existing windows graphics editors (Paintshop Pro, Adobe, etc) and MS is blatantly trying to take market share IE vs Netscape style with this.
This is my sig. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
Tell me, why does the phrase "damning with faint praise" spring instantly to mind? =)
//Information does not want to be free; it wants to breed.
How can a comparsion even be made?
Joe Llywelyn Griffith Blakesley
[This post is in the public domain (copyright-free) unless otherwise stated]
download the tweakui powertools from microsoft there's an "always on top" option that gets added to every window when you rt-click the titlebar. gimp toolwindow on top problem solved.
Am I the only one suffering from flicker with the transparent windows when you move between menus or opening pull down boxes?
Considering that it IS open source, your post looks rather moronic.
The blurb on Slashdot made it look like a proprietary program available free of charge. The site was slashdotted when Lord Satri submitted the comment. Therefore the error was excusable.
If they genuinely want FOSS to succeed as a mass-market movement, the slashdotters who keep pulling this line out of their posteriors will need to shut up. Not everybody who wants to use The GIMP is going to be a programmer, or a bored geek with the time free to do such things. For things like the GIMP to succeed, they need to attract graphics professionals - the majority of whom don't care in the slightest about the source code or programming. It's a stupid response, and I wish people would stop saying this every time that somebody has an issue with an open source package. It's called "User feedback", it comes from having "Users" who "Use" your software to "Do things". These strange people don't just sit around their bedrooms and scratch themselves all day, interspersed with the occasional porn download. They have jobs. They get paid to do work. They may go to their boss and say "Look, we can save $xyz by using this excellent free package instead of paying up for package ABC". They will not go to their boss and say "Look, there's this free package I like... can I spent a couple of months hacking it to make it usable for our needs?". Programmers do that. Creative professionals don't.
it is *UGLY*.
.NET apps, I predict that it is *SLOW*. Just a prediction, though.
You have to admit that. And as with all
Did you try the link Paint.Net also has available source to download.
But still .NET is the speed of Java
If this is another "Java is slow" flame, then you may be behind the times. Before, the Java virtual machine was a pure interpreter; now, it recompiles inner loops, bringing sustained execution speed close to that of native code. In practice, the Java virtual machine seems slow only because the operating system is typically not set to start it at boot time. Slow speed of HelloWorld.class includes loading and unloading the JVM. If, on the other hand, you set the JVM to start when you log in and tell apps to use an existing JVM, you'll get more perceived performance. Undoubtedly, Microsoft will start the .NET CLR when you log in to Longhorn.
with the Platform Independence of Coding in VB.
Apps written using the Gtk# assembly, which wraps Gtk+ and Glib, will run on *n?x and Windows operating systems. Apps written using those parts of System.Windows.Forms that Mono has reimplemented will also run on *n?x and Windows operating systems.
call me dense but I just dont get it. Those entries you are so proud of are either
0 5)9 )8 3)
1. crappy mods to crappy photos (http://www.worth1000.com/emailthis.asp?entry=318
2. unedited photos (such as http://www.worth1000.com/emailthis.asp?entry=4667
3. or just make you say huh? (http://www.worth1000.com/emailthis.asp?entry=316
why bother?
Source: pdn_src_2_0.zip (10,995,752 bytes)
Installer: PaintDotNet_2_0.msi (8,087,552 bytes)
My own mirrors (should download at up to 200 KB/sec, and arrive in less than 1 minute):
Source (1)
Source (2)
Source (3)
Installer (1)
Installer (2)
Installer (3)
I've tried out the program, and if you think about the fact that this was a student project done by full-time students (for senior design), it's quite impressive. I've noticed some lag on speed on some things but much faster load time and better undo, etc., than some commercial programs.
Also, keep in mind it is written in C# (which means managed code), which means there is garbage collection and other things causing some decrease in performance. Any takers on implementing this in Java with similar performance?
All in all, I'd say it was very nicely done, and with the source available, you could add your own file types and other effects with not much effort. Definitely a huge leap from MS Paint and much more intuitive to me than Photoshop.
This sig donated to Pater. Long live
1. I don't have a clue.
Like C#Develop
.NET is so piss easy to program.
.NET is so slow and fails to be truly manageable on a larger scale (take Orkut for example) projects like this may die soon. Microsoft constantly changing the protocols and APIs doesn't help much either..
.NET - are you mad ???
.. ah so many promises.
Like Enterprise Manager
Because
I mean you get more enthusiasm of people joining projects and submitting code.
I mean how many of us can submit code to GIMP or code filters?
What about Open Office have you seen their perverse "VB" - how stupidly unintituive? How can company-apps be easily migrated? That is not Open Basic that is sick-Java mutated
But again because
Still there are some absolutely IDIOTIC companies migrating their win32 apps to
Microsoft is like a mediocre daddy
Both Java and .NET are compiled to native code at runtime. The benefits of this?
a) You can copy the "executable" from platform to platform at runtime
b) You can have a sandbox which blocks some on standard library calls because things like fopen() or malloc() aren't literally linked into the executable
c) You can classes dynamically at runtime, so you don't have to run a linker in the first place
d) You can run the same program on hardware or an improved version of the standard library that didn't exist when it was written, without modifying it, and it'll take advantage of the new optimizations
But NT supported COW since its inception.
How about "Open Source ImageShop Suite"? Catchy, yet flashy. :)
Just my $.000002.
People who say they want FOSS to succeed as a mass-market movement aren't the same people who tell you to DIYFS. I don't care whether you like the GIMP's interface; It Works For Me (TM).
If you don't have Gimp, and you don't need the power of Gimp, and you run WinXP, and you're still using Paint and haven't already bought something else, try out this program.
No thanks.
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
You will find that the developers are working to improve the UI of gimp.
The problem is gimp is not a small program its UI cannot be changed quickly without breaking stuff left right and center. Ie a usable program with bad UI is better than a program that does no work at all. They are moving slowly but surely to a better GUI.
Note with the new version of gimp 2.2 with console only feature(Hey developers front ends please) The game has been opened up only taking 5 years to get to the point where the GUI could be opened up without breaking everything.
where are the mod points when I need 'em
I'm waiting for someone to pull an Inkscape and do for the GIMP what they did for Sodipodi (or should i say did to sodipodi?)
... I don't use Gimp either :)
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
Glad to see a replacement
This would be nice to be ported to Linux/BSD using mono and/or eclipse... The licence is BSD stile, the only thing required is to place the copyright notice
in a 'visible' place.
No, sorry, I myself are completly unable to even install Mono, I'm only a little Perl guy, but it would be a nice app, not spectacular, but nice
-- 29A the number of the Beast
I don't believe you - it works exactly the same here, transparent windows or not. There is a lot of flicker when everything redraws though :(
First of all, the .NET framework is not badly designed. It's one of the best-designed products Microsoft ever came up with.
Just a pity it takes up so much space ('so much' is a subjective measurement) especially since you can make programs that run without it.
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
Trying to draw any comparison between Paint.NET and The Gimp is just plain silly. It will not, and cannot do any of the myriad tasks that I have been able to use the Gimp for.
Warts and all, the Gimp is a fully developed application with a history of growth.
Paint.NET is exactly what it purports to be- an application developed by a number of students to be a replacement/upgrade for the MSPaint application. It performs that function extremely well. MSPaint is a notoriously limited application that has little or no purpose.
On the other hand, I can see users who need relatively simple answers using PAint.NET for simple needs.
As built, the Gimp will not challenge beyond a discrete community of users who have both the technical ability to use its power and the imagination needed to take advantage of everything that happens to be in there.
Just try using the animation abilities to make shorts that resemble Terry Gilliam's animation work. The Gimp makes it wholly possible. It's dissolve function makes the impossible seem simple- seamless transition from frame to frame in animations.
Paint.NET? Good work students, and I'm sure that MS will enjoy putting you to work for them for long hours with little pay when you are ready.
befuddled (noun) 1. Unable to create a pithy sig
I'd been hoping for a Windows version of Paint.
I downloaded the sources and go through it, and stuff like this crops up:
public static bool IsHyperThreadingEnabled
{
get
{
return (NativeMethods.IsHTSupported() == 1) ? true : false;
}
}
How's this?
bool is = true ? true : false;
Brilliant stuff!
No, you can't get an equally Free and legal copy of mainstream packages. Even if you don't pay for them, they are still not as Free as the GIMP.
I'm not the only one that read that as Pain.NET, right? :)
Seems kinda appropriate
I just now discovered the ability to add tabs in the main panel. VERY NICE. This reduces window clutter by a substantial amount, and makes things much easier. I'm actually impressed with this.
If and only if you have GIMP 1.2.x or higher, select a painting tool (pencil, paintbrush, etc.). Click where you want the line to start. Now hold down Shift and click where you want it to end.
In my opinion this should go in the Interface Hall of Shame if it isn't there already. What kind of interface designer thinks it's a good idea to make such a simple, common task so difficult to discover? Why couldn't they just have a straight line tool like every other paint program on the planet since at least MacPaint way back in 1985?
-- Old Man Kensey
Oh, I don't know, was anyone addressing YOU? That's right, lonely penguin, the article was written for geeks like me that read Slashdot and use WinXP. Move along, penguin.
Great post! It's about time these nixnerds understood where most of its developmer base is coming from. If it weren't for Windows, these nixnerds wouldn't be using Linux, because we ALL know they're using either Gnome or KDE :-)
So it looks like MS is giving up their basic windows tools and letting well done open source take their place.
This is a good move on Microsoft's part.
It seems far better than the Gimp. And how old is it?
A year or so?
The gimp is a piece of fucking shit. It's apparently the pinnacle of Open Source as well. That goes without saying.
wow, coming from the slashdot hivemindset, that mirror's "about" page reads like a parody: http://www.only4gurus.com/v3/about.asp For many years I've been fighting against people who don't like Microsoft. The main reason not to like Microsoft technologies is lack of knowledge about them. Microsoft is the most innovative software corporation of the last 20 years, and its compromise with the information technology world has changed the way of looking at the computers at home and at business.
---- death to all fanatics
Gimme your C# app and I'll run it on Linux before New Year ...
How's that ?.. (dotgnu has a working Windows.Forms).
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur
If photoshop is supposed to be so intuitive, then why are there so many "Photoshop for Idiots" type books out there? Granted, there would also be for GIMP if it was a better-known program, but I've spent some time in both. The UI's are vastly different, but for most things I actually learned them quicker in GIMP. I don't see what's so wonderful about Photoshop!
It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
All of your newly created painting programs are now belong to us! ...and the reply from the former developer now working for M$ ... I for one welcome the demands of our new software -absconding overlords!
I don't care if the whining bastard is not a programmer or not. He can pay someone for it if he thinks it worths it. He can buy himself a C book and start teaching himself how to code. He can try to convince the developers where he thinks they have done wrong. If he doesn't want to do any of these, he shouldn't whine in public boards like Slashdot. Gimp (and almost every FOSS project) has a users mailing list. Subscribe to it, complain about it with explaining what he thinks wrong is and how to fix it. If he can convince the users in the list, developers will pay attention because they are users as well!
In the end, the product is owned by the developers and they are not doing this for completely altruistic purposes. They are doing it because they need a program for themselves. This whole bullshit of "Developers are not the users" doesn't work with FOSS, that might have been valid with a commercial product where the whole point of the developer is being paid by the employer and employer is only concerned about making money but it isn't with a FOSS.
The one and only reason the developer starts a FOSS program is he needs the program himself. If he wants to tag a nice license to his product, he is actually making a political point, not being helpful to you user-mass without any reason.
As a User you are given the choice by the FOSS developers, if you want to use it, use it but don't whine. If you don't want to use it, don't. Go and buy something commercial for yourself. If you want to contribute, feel free.
If the developers are not listening, fork the bloody project, find some users with some development background whom also complain, become the manager/coordinator of the project and make them hacking for yourself.
Last thing: Not every program is based on Microsoft's vision of UI. Not every program should have a panel of buttons and menus on the top. Not every program should follow some other company's GUI rules. No one is complaining about WindowMaker not looking like KDE. Why do they complain GIMP is not like Adobe's PhotoShop? Yes, it has a learning curve, yes, it is awkward for someone who spent thousands of hours in front of PS. GIMP is not PS replacement for Linux. GIMP is GIMP.
No I am not. I lack some functions in the Gimp. But the interface is one of the best GUI I know. The other one is Blender's interface. And many people are bitching about it too. People want an average GUI. But those who love Blender and Gimp are very happy with the interfaces and dont want it to be broken to average.
Deliriant isti Americani.
""Gimp was not written as a competitor to Photoshop." -mac[LAG]"
I don't suppose someone in the opensource community would consider creating a competitor to Photoshop (if GIMP isn't)?!? I want an opensource alternative to Photoshop dammit!!! If anything, I want an opensource program to go one up on Photoshop.
*sigh* I find it odd that the GIMP group doesn't want to compete or beat Photoshop. It seems most of the other open software groups DESIRE to replace or give alternative to their closed breatheren. Usually due to the desire to have MORE options and productivity, not less. The only big area in the open/linux group that hasn't competed is with Macromedia Dreamweaver (In various linux forums it was revealed a larger group of linux users just port over Dreamweaver and ignore any of the lesser options).
?Why doesn't GIMP want to reach for the stars as well?
Party at O'zorgnax's Pub! Buy me a Slurmtini aye?
Layer masks do nearly the same thing as layers? What are you smoking?
Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
Can someone explain to me why this won't run on Windows NT 4.0, despite the fact that I have the .NET framework 1.1 installed? This .NET business was supposed to be write once, run anywhere (as long as it's Microsoft), right? How can there be Windows XP dependencies in a .NET program, as long as you have the appropriate version of the runtime?
I was talking about free-as-in-beer, as I'd hoped was obvious. Even if I had been talking about free-as-in-speech, your comment is only flamebait inviting someone to point out that the GPL's interpretation of "free" is considerably less free than, for example, BSD's. However, in this context, I couldn't give a **** about free-as-in-speech. I just want the best graphics package I can legally obtain to help me create the artwork I want.
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
Wow so GIMP doesn't have a container window!
If you want to see some *really* different UI go look at blender, that deserves some heavy reeming, not GIMP because it doesn't look exactly like paintshop/photoshop.
Infact the UI is for me better than the other apps I used to use; gimp is much more configurable with it's layout etc etc.
...and the Gimps UI sucks, based on replies to my post. Probably the only inaccurate statement that I've made was that UNIX users would like the UI. Aparently, even that was not the case. Sure, anyone can get used to the Gimp's UI, just like people have gotten used to WordStar's UI, Emacs' UI and other poor user interfaces. Doesn't mean that they have good UIs.
Probably one of the most insightful things said about GIMP vs Photoshop on Slashdot.
I don't think any one interface will EVER please everyone and we need to be reminded of that occasionally.
Pain is merely failure leaving the body
Have you read the small print in the license, where it says:
...GIMP crashes when you try to do anything industrial-strength, like large resolution with multiple Layers. Photoshop sails through workloads like that.
Oh how I wish I had mod points today. The fact is that GIMP works just fine if you don't look at it as a Photoshop replacement. I actually moved from Photoshop 3.0 to GIMP back in 2000 and never looked back. I was able to open all of my PSD files just fine and convert them to XCF files (to preserve layers). Most of the people who complain about GIMP are looking for a Photoshop replacement. It's kind of like the people who try something made with Carob and expecting Chocolate. Carob != Chocolate. If you eat Carob on it's own as it's own flavor, it's quite tasty. To all the people who whine about GIMP: get over it. If you want Photoshop, go out and buy a copy. If you want to try a really good (becoming great as of v 2.2) digital image manipulation program, download GIMP.
As a second point, I think the time has come to make a distinction between geeks and artists. For a while, a lot of people I know have referred to me as a "geek" because of my interests in computers. I even thought of myself as a geek for a while. But, over time, I've come to see that I really don't have a lot in common with "geeks". I think a lot of other people here on Slashdot also have fallen for accepting the "geek" moniker when it really doesn't fit. So what am I? I'm an artist. The main reason I got into working with computers and electronics at all is because of my interest in music and graphics. These are NOT geek interests. I could give a rat's ass about business, making money or the bottom line. The thing is that in order to do a lot of what I wanted to do with music and graphics, I had to move from traditional tools and instruments to computers. For me the computer is the instrument. The thing that matters the most to me about software is whether it can do what I want it to or not. GIMP CAN do everything I need it to do and more. So it's the right tool for me. The same goes for Rosegarden and it's MIDI capabilities and Ardour and it's audio capabilitites.
So I urge those of you who think you are geeks but are really artists who happen to use computers (including Perl scripting, Bash scripting and C) to throw off the inappropriate title and re-evaluate what you really are. You are artists and the computer is both a tool and a medium.
-"...bad old ideas look confusingly fresh when they are packaged as technology" - Jaron Lanier (Digital Maoism on Edge.o
Just looked at the code and found it interesting. It's a good source for a programmer to improve his/her programming skills.
and stop modding everything which is just the tiniest bit critical of linux down.
;)
Even Photoshop never used that clunky interface originally. The Photoshop MDI originated from the fact that on the Macintosh, Photoshop looked a lot more like the GIMP -- except that the menubar was on top, mac-related stuff, etc. However, the Photoshop programming team didn't want to figure out how to do that on Windows, so they simply made a "container window" to hold everything.
Interesting anecdote, but doesn't change the fact that some of us, me included, prefer to have windows in a "container" window as opposed to spread all over the desktop (perhaps because we are able to multitask
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
I agree, it doesn't have some of Photoshop's features, but we need to stop complaining about the UI.
Sure, as soon as they change it or you lot stop trying to pretend its so great everybody else should be forced to use it.
As I see it, we shouldn't try to convert the professional full-time users of Photoshop, but rather the people who pirate it. Piracy is a bigger threat to Free Software than it is to entrenched industry standard software, IMO.
Ie, when you can't pirate a program with a good interface you are stuck with a free program with a bad one?
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
Just a pity it takes up so much space ('so much' is a subjective measurement) especially since you can make programs that run without it.
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating