Slashdot Mirror


Initial Review of Microsoft's Acrylic BETA

Geuis writes "I'll admit, I'm not a big Microsoft fan. I'm an old-time user of Adobe Photoshop, and I love nearly everything it can do. However, in the interest of science, I decided to try out the new beta for Microsoft's answer to Photoshop, Acrylic. My review is posted on my blog. Final recommendation: Stay as far away from Acrylic as you can. It needs so much development work done, it shouldn't be out of Alpha testing. If this is anywhere close to the final product they are planning to release, then Microsoft should be prepared to eat another few million in lost development funds. There's no reason you should have to eat it too."

5 of 283 comments (clear)

  1. I call DUPE! by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 0, Troll

    I call DUPE!

    http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/06/10/155025 5&tid=109&tid=152&tid=185&tid=1

    BTW, the "type text in image" thing still sucks...I'd start looking for something (maybe even open source) that doesn't.

  2. Not Beta by buckhead_buddy · · Score: 0, Troll

    The phrase written in the back of the App window is "ABET" as in aiding and abetting a monopoly.

  3. What's most annoying with blogs and bloggers... by Jugalator · · Score: 0, Troll

    --rant--

    I think what's most annoying with blogs and bloggers is that his blog has so few visitors or whatever that he feels a need to post this himself on Slashdot, proudly thinking he had written an insightful and newsworthy review. Of course he do, he think his blog is about "smart words, interesting ideas" after all. Then the bright editors here of course include it without even looking at the quality of the submission (or maybe it's because it piss on Microsoft, I don't care and it doesn't matter), and voila -- strike one for the blog community.

    When in reality he was just having a fun time bashing an application without even seemingly knowing the purpose of it.

    If the blog community continues to grow and influence / stupidify the web like it's doing now, and sneaking up with their personal, biased, unprofessional, comments at high rankings on Google thanks to their interlinking system (how else will people find their thoughts in the noise they're their own creators of?), with bloggers posting their own blogs as news submissions and getting accepted, we'll one day look at journalism in newspapers by educated and analyzing journalists and writers trying to stay unbiased, as the good old days. Yes, even there, there may be some decaying going on, but at least there are still some quality news sites out there.

    Don't get me wrong, free speech is a great thing and bloggers are great at making use of this freedom, just saying the signal to noise ratio was bad on the web to begin with, and I don't feel this stuff is making it any better. I wish I could just avoid it, but when every other news item here tend to be from a blogging dude feeling important, and same with search engine results, it just start getting on my nerves.

    It's a bit scary too -- one of Sweden's largest newspapers has recently degraded into having more blogs where instead of having their journalists spending time making well written and researched articles, they just blurt out about whatever is on their mind for the moment and hit "Submit". And some people seem to think this is the coolest thing to happen since sliced bread on the web.

    --
    Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
  4. Re:Move Along by jasontheking · · Score: 0, Troll

    He was using a M$ operating system , downloading a M$ file from a M$ web site. How hard is it supposed to be? Its not like you can deliberately screw it up very easily.

    If M$ can't arrange their OS to allow easy downloading of M$ files from M$ web sites , how can you trust their code?

    oh , that's right. Its just line noise. You're shitting on someone's opinion because of line noise. go away.

  5. Re:Move Along by killjoe · · Score: 0, Troll

    "IMO that was a valid point and related directly to the OO installation process."

    Then I submit that you are a dumbass. Let me explain.

    You are comparing OO to MS office. You download and install OO. YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO DOWNLOAD AND INSTALL MS OFFICE. SO in this feature OO clearly wins. Hands down. Here is a feature OO has and MS is missing. In order to install MS office you have to BUY the thing and install it off the CD. Guess what fuckwad, you can do the same thing with OO. You can buy a fucking CD and install it just like MS office.

    In summary. Downloading and installing OO is a billion times easier then downloading and installing MS office because it's impossible to download and install MS office.

    Got it?

    --
    evil is as evil does