Slashdot Mirror
Gimp 2.8 Finally Released
Cryophallion writes "After many years of development, GIMP 2.8 is finally released. Among its features: the oft-desired single-window mode, layer groups, and many other massive improvements, including some of the GIMP UI team's work. This might be the release that helps make The GIMP a much more user friendly experience for newcomers, and has features that are rivaling those of certain exceptionally expensive commercial programs. While the porting of GEGL is still ongoing (and recently reported to have made massive advances made), this is a major step forward for one of the premier open source projects." Here are the official release notes.
The Gimp Users website is a design trainwreck.
Every time there is anything posted about GIMP the entire comments consist of nothing but people complaining that it is not photoshop. What does it contribute to the discussion? We have all heard it before, many times. If you irrationally hate some piece of software, don't use it. If not enjoy the progression and the new features.
I for one, am glad that GIMP exists and want to thank all the people involved for all their hard work. It is not perfect but gets better with every release. I happily use it for all my photo manipulation needs.
GNU
Image
Manipulation
Program
It is only offensive to those who feel a deep seated need to be offended.
Unfortunately there are a lot of people who just can not spend a whole day without being "Deeply Offended" by something.
Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
Considering your signature, I fear this is going to fall on deaf ears. You have a very high threshold for offense, and believe everyone should too. I suspect this because you are willing to equate a piece of computer hardware to criminal sodomy out in public, but please correct me if I am wrong.
But here's the thing, if you are a disabled person then Gimp is just like "the N word", and insult hurled at you in anger and derision. It is also a word you reserve the right to yourself. You don't have to like it, you don't have to agree, but you do have to accept that, because that is the reality out in the world — at least with enough people to matter.
And I can see why you think your explanation, giving the name in full, is cogent. But here's the thing: If the default were to say "The GNU Image Manipulation Program" and some people shortened it to "GIMP" then that would be one thing. Unfortunately that isn't the case. The devs of the program called it GIMP from the beginning, and took a very long time to accept that anyone could be offended by that. And now it is a line in the sand to them, one they will not cross.
The name is a problem. It stops people using it, it stops schools teaching it, it hurts the app.
What do you know I wrote a novel
Your stubborn refusal to consider someone else's feelings, combined with your signature, makes me think you have a remarkable lack of sensitivity, empathy, and social awareness. As such, you may not get much out of this post.
Sometimes one has to pick one's battles. You can choose to fight on the naming of a piece of software based on your assertion that it's only offensive to people who want to be offended. Alternatively, you can choose to accept that whether you agree with the sentiment or think it's foolish, nonetheless the term is offensive and/or silly and/or nebulous to potential users. The bigger issue could be that you want to spread the word about free and open source software and this is a great example of something that has come out of the community and matured, but which potentially is being held back by its name.
I'm not a FOSS evangelist, but if I were I'd think it was a valid concern and wonder if I could give up the battle ("I wanna keep the name GIMP!") so that I have a better shot at winning the war. (And I really dislike using that terminology, by the way, because it should be about choice and giving people something that's better, not a fight against the enemy.)
Look, it comes down to this. Like it or not, the name is a problem for more than a handful of people. Do you really want that to be the impediment that stops one of the best examples of free and open source software from being more widely adopted? Is it really that important to you? Where do your priorities lie?
(And no-one is going to call it "GNU Image Manipulation Program". One syllable versus eleven. Easy choice.)
What, that geeks don't value marketing?
No, that 99% of geeks are so clueless about marketing that they don't even understand why it's desirable.
This isn't a business that's seeking to conquer the world and "gain market share", it's an open source project where people want to create a tool for others to use.
If they want others to use it........then change the fucking name. How difficult is this concept, really?
It's been extraordinarily successful in that regard.
No, it's been somewhat successful. It could have been and could still be extraordinarily successful, were the developers not clueless twits.
If some people can't get past a name just to use a product, then why is that the developers problem and not the people who choose to not use a product for childish reasons?
It's the developer's problem because the developers will go down in history as clueless twits who provided a marginally useful tool, rather than smart folks who genuinely "got it", understood their user base, and provided a seriously useful tool for them.
I mean, as another poster suggested, why not call it NIGGER? I'm sure there'll be leagues of those "childish" people flocking to it, right?
A good mechanic when shopping for used cars, can tell the difference between a car maintained by a fucking moron, and one by a person with half a clue. Guess which car he will gravitate towards purchasing?
A materials scientist who is a plastics expert isn't going to buy some cheap ass garbage plastic basket made out a material which he knows won't last 6 weeks; he's going to buy the one next to it that costs a dollar or ten dollars more. It's not even that the cheap one will break; it's the *knowledge* of it being a cheap piece of shit that would haunt him in his sleep if he knowingly bought such garbage.
So given all the above logical, reasonable statements, why the fuck would you assume that an artist is any different? Why would a person who is finely attuned to artwork and design sense gravitate towards a half assed graphics program so moronically designed that the very name gives it away?
I think it's a stupid name, but I also think if someone is that hyper-sensitive to a name, then perhaps they should fork over a few hundred bucks for photo shop so they won't be offended. I kind of like the idea that being hyper-sensitive to things costs people money.
No--being hypersensitive to things makes people money.....a concept the "GIMP" developers might have half a hope of understanding, were they actually artists rather than your average geeks with zero artistic sense. It is precisely because the GIMP geeks aren't anything like their ideal user base (you know....artists) that their tool is nowhere near as good and as popular as it could be.
The name was not a problem.
First came the name. Then came the problem.
Also.
The "N" word is fucking stupid. If someone is being offensive and says the word "Nigger" then they are an easy to spot dumb fuck.
Blacks can use the word nigger all they want. I will be modded down because I have used the word twice.
I did not use it offensively. The word itself is not offensive because blacks can say it all they want.
That means that is is only offensive because I am not black.
That is racism. That to me is offensive.
I am not often offended, but people who corrupt language to change thinking are in my opinion evil and highly offensive.
A couple of points for you to consider...
As for the naming of GIMP and whether it should be changed... would it be such a big deal? We've watched many projects go through forks and renames and changes of ownership. StarOffice, OpenOffice.org, LibreOffice. Phoenix, Firebird, Firefox. I think we'd get along just fine with a name change.
To be obstinate on this topic is short-sighted if we (as a community) would like to see this product succeed at an ever-growing rate. If the name is holding it back from adoption or acceptance to any measurable degree, isn't it a good thing to seek improved marketing?
I only post comments when someone on the internet is wrong.
Quite right.
Aside from any offensive connotations, which of these names clearly fails at being clear about what it does?
Photoshop
Paint
GIMP