Old Software or Open Source?

Pakled writes "I teach a high school multimedia course. We were scheduled to get new software this year but due to several pointy haired bosses, no software was ordered. The software I have to teach is Flash 5, Dreamweaver 2000, Photoshop 7 and (god help me) Movie Maker. The question is: is it better to teach old commercial software or their open source counterparts (Komposer, Gimp, etc.)? Is the steep learning curve and slightly less uniform design worth a little student frustration to teach them software written in the past 5 years?"

Comments

Re:Wake up

[krog]

The only problem with it is if you think the Windows way of thinking is the only way to think.

Look, if you want to get out the ruler and compare dicks, I am not afraid. I have never owned a Windows machine, I've been running BSD Unix for over ten years, and I was using Photoshop on my Mac SE when you were still shitting in diapers and gumming your mom's baggy teat.

Separation from the "Windows way of thinking" is not GIMP's only problem. If anything, that's one of its strong points. It still doesn't change the fact that Photoshop is both the industry standard, and more powerful than its competition (not to mention easy to use, though your FOSS Elite Freethinking mind disagrees).

Re:Wake up

[Selfbain]

Linux and cop movie cliches don't mix very well.

Beyond Stupid.

[Whiney Mac Fanboy]

Unfortunately, this is why projects like GIMP rarely (if ever) become as good UI-wise as commercial products like Photoshop. Instead of responding to critics intelligently with reasons why they are wrong or giving critics due consideration and implementing their suggestions, the egos of open source developers get in the way, and they write their critics off for daring to disagree with their narrow, developer-centric view.

The gimp's no good because someone modded you down on slashdot?

You're an idiot.