"Third, it is this unwillingness to empathise and understand the point of view of the mainstream world and corporate/government users which is what will keep Free Software in the fringes, which means that collary issues (DRM, DMCA) are also kept to the side as well."
Thank you for using this free software-built forum (are you using a free software web browser?) using this free software web server on the free software supported World Wide Web, which is part of the biggest phenomenon of the past fifty years, the internet, which, by the way, would have been impossible to make or run without free software, to voice your opinion that free software was, is and will always remain a fringe phenomenon. (You could have used the word freak instead of fringe, you insenstive clod!)
"The decision makers are going to look at the fact that the writers were juvenile enough to call the program THE GIMP"
Those decision makers of yours sound like complete retards. Why on earth would the GIMP developers want their software be used by such folk?
Next you're going to ask for a filter in the GIMP that will make sure no bank notes can be scanned. Or one that will add a water mark in images, so that images that are critical of the government can be used to find their makers. Because that is the sort of thing that the sort of retards you are so fond of will want to have put in.
"--You do not fake anything when being paid $150/hr. Your provide an honest to God four color file( or more, if you have any necessary spots or varnishes) tagged with the proper ICC profile.
Now you're twisting the argument, GIMP can technically do CMYK seperation either as 4 layers or exported as 4 seperate images."
I think the OP was talking work-flow as much as end-product. Also, GIMP does not support spot-colours, which means you'll be giving the pre-press folks or the printer more work.
Odd, though, that all this colour management should be done this early in the process. For simple printing needs (i.e. no spot colours) I should be able to give the printer an RGB file.
"--multiple forms of color correction (curves, Hue/Saturation/Brightness, Levels, etc.) of which you may need to use two or three on one image"
Hey, you're making it sound the GIMP is no better than PS Elements! The GIMP does have all of these.
What the GIMP does not support is 48 bpp, which means you cannot do many operations in a row without losing too much information.
To me, that is the biggest problem with the GIMP. ICC and other forms of colour management is nice, but only if you want to do pre-press, which is true for probably less than 5% of all graphics professionals. But a person should be able to use a photo editor without having his photos deteriate.
"It could use a bit of an overhaul on the interface. It's not very intuitive to use."
Define "intuitive". I find that once you've worked with it for a couple of weeks, it is pretty intuitive.
"It would be nice if you could get a version of GIMP that was designed more for the idiot^H^H^H^H^Hnovice user for quick touchups, without all the extras cluttering up the interface."
Sure, and who is going to maintain that mess? If you want a simpler photo editor, build one. If you don't want to build one, buy one. There are plenty of the sort you are looking for.
Er, no, it does not. This is how FOSS works: hacker A thinks feature X would be really nifty. Hacker A sits down and adds feature X. See, no money required.
For all other things there is the proprietary model. This includes paying somebody to add feature Y to a FOSS program that you have got a copy of. Systems for this already exist. Sometimes these features even get folded back in the program.
"I'm sure some people out there would prefer a graphics editor without a GUI."
I find a GUI relatively useful for apps with a canvas. Still, for graphics operations that do not require a canvas, GIMP die-hards often recommend ImageMagick.
"Can I calibrate and create an ICC profile for my monitor with the video drivers for nVidia cards?"
Yes, you can. There are several manufacturers that have created the software and the targets that allow you to do so. I don't have URLs at hand, but Google is your friend.
"To me, the show-stoppers for using Linux/Gimp for my photo work are the following:
* Color management. Not aware of ICC color profiling. Can I calibrate my monitor with nVideo and ATI Linux drivers? Can Gimp load an ICC profile of my output device to proof my print?"
It seems to me that the major show-stopper is your own laziness to find out these things. GIMP has allowed you to proof your prints using ICC profiles since version 2.0.
AFAIK there was only one developer who showed he was a little dismayed. Also, GIMPShop only makes the GIMP a little friendlier to those who are used to the unfriendly interface of Photoshop.
"Under some theories of netiquette, linking to an HTML page that references a Flash file is more polite than copying the Flash file to your own server because the former is normal use of the World Wide Web and the latter is copyright infringement."
Typically, hotlinked works are displayed within a webpage. The typical (graphical) display of that webpage then becomes a derivative of the hotlinked work; which is copyright infringement if it happens without the holder's consent.
"To put it into RIAA terms, "stealing" bandwidth is preferable to "stealing" a work of authorship."
"Usability test after usability test has confirmed this"
In that case you won't have any problem providing links to the results of at least some of these tests. Because, quite frankly, I don't believe you. Usability tests rarely produce such generic results.
"I hope these usability guys flay the GIMP developers alive for that one alone..."
Heh, I feel your pain.
You will be glad to hear that since a year or two, in the Mac and Windows builds at least, the default setting is to have the menu bar in the image window be switched on.
Heh, I also saw three classes, but different ones:
1) Buzzword bingo. The clearest example: "Software that permits any Net-connected gadget in your home to access and display services like VOIP, instant messaging, and streaming television." This reads like the VC in question hasn't spent a single thought on what s/he is actually looking at.
2) Might as well fund it yourself. For instance, VCs looking for somebody building an application from a pretty much concrete idea. Best example: "I'd want to see the technology working, with a few customers onboard." Sure Greg, but if I had a working technology, why would I need you?
"Is it just me or did everything sound incredibly boring?"
I remember freelancing for a web design company five years ago, and they were looking in astonishment at the mobile phone market, and especially at the popularity of SMS. Nobody had predicted that. Nobody. SMS was like an afterthought put on mobile phones because it could be easily done. Nobody had imagined kids would run away with it.
In poor countries, SMS is what the internet is for you, here, in the "first world".
Yet, if you look at the technology surrounding mobile phones, that is a piss poor shroud. Win prizes, use your phone as a flashlight, download ringtones, that is basically the dent the commercial space has made in the world of mobile phones. Surely there is much more to offer to customers who have already indicated that they like mobile technology!
So, if you think that cell phone technology is pretty boring, you probably lack imagination. Keep in mind that VCs are people who do not come up with ideas, but who evaluate the ideas that you come up with. The people in TFA merely indicated which direction they were looking at. Looking at the mobile market is certainly not a bad idea if you are a Venture Capitalist.
As with all loans, the rule is that you can only get it once you don't need it anymore. VCs don't like taking risks, so they rarely give money without wanting you first-born's first-borns to the tenth generation in return (or something with a similar emotional value).
The only exception I can see is when VCs try and venture (pun intended) into markets that are unknown to them. Hence the Dot Com Bubble. If you want to know which markets these are, try and find start-ups where the owners are driving in Porsches.
Having said that, the process of going through a VC application may be worthwhile in order for you to work out where you want to go and what you need to get there.
If the MPAA, as the representatives of the copyright holders, are using Bittorrent, they are giving permission to copy the movies that they claim are being illegally copied. It would seem an untenable position to claim copyright infringement for a work that you offered up for free copying in one and the same breath.
"I wonder what the re-entry strategy will be for an orbital version."
Rutan may have experience with a TPS similar to the one on the Space Shuttle: "but much more durable - carbon and metallic-silica tiles for the hottest regions, and flexible blanket-like material for areas receiving less heat during atmospheric reentry".
"And while NASA does the heavy work, and lets Scaled enjoy the fruits of their work, Scaled in return keeps on asking "why is NASA wasting so much money?""
Perhaps I'm hearing you wrong, but it seems like you are suggesting that Scaled Composites is not allowed to criticize NASA because they are profiting so much from NASA's research? Scaled Composites is made up of tax payers, tax payers that send astronomical amounts of money to NASA, so that NASA can burn it on any fancy that strikes their minds. In the meantime, as an organisation of the people, NASA's work is supposed to benefit those same people, including the people that make up Scaled Composites.
As an industry insider, Burt Rutan is eminently qualified to be the voice of those fellow tax payers that wish to criticize NASA.
In doing so, he is taking a risk, because SC is one of NASA's suppliers. If my suppliers were bad-mouthing me, they'd need a pretty good reason to so if they didn't want me to cut the life-line.
Slashdot Mirror
"Third, it is this unwillingness to empathise and understand the point of view of the mainstream world and corporate/government users which is what will keep Free Software in the fringes, which means that collary issues (DRM, DMCA) are also kept to the side as well."
Thank you for using this free software-built forum (are you using a free software web browser?) using this free software web server on the free software supported World Wide Web, which is part of the biggest phenomenon of the past fifty years, the internet, which, by the way, would have been impossible to make or run without free software, to voice your opinion that free software was, is and will always remain a fringe phenomenon. (You could have used the word freak instead of fringe, you insenstive clod!)
Don't let the door hit you on the way out.
"The decision makers are going to look at the fact that the writers were juvenile enough to call the program THE GIMP"
Those decision makers of yours sound like complete retards. Why on earth would the GIMP developers want their software be used by such folk?
Next you're going to ask for a filter in the GIMP that will make sure no bank notes can be scanned. Or one that will add a water mark in images, so that images that are critical of the government can be used to find their makers. Because that is the sort of thing that the sort of retards you are so fond of will want to have put in.
"--You do not fake anything when being paid $150/hr. Your provide an honest to God four color file( or more, if you have any necessary spots or varnishes) tagged with the proper ICC profile.
Now you're twisting the argument, GIMP can technically do CMYK seperation either as 4 layers or exported as 4 seperate images."
I think the OP was talking work-flow as much as end-product. Also, GIMP does not support spot-colours, which means you'll be giving the pre-press folks or the printer more work.
Odd, though, that all this colour management should be done this early in the process. For simple printing needs (i.e. no spot colours) I should be able to give the printer an RGB file.
"--multiple forms of color correction (curves, Hue/Saturation/Brightness, Levels, etc.) of which you may need to use two or three on one image"
Hey, you're making it sound the GIMP is no better than PS Elements! The GIMP does have all of these.
What the GIMP does not support is 48 bpp, which means you cannot do many operations in a row without losing too much information.
To me, that is the biggest problem with the GIMP. ICC and other forms of colour management is nice, but only if you want to do pre-press, which is true for probably less than 5% of all graphics professionals. But a person should be able to use a photo editor without having his photos deteriate.
"It could use a bit of an overhaul on the interface. It's not very intuitive to use."
Define "intuitive". I find that once you've worked with it for a couple of weeks, it is pretty intuitive.
"It would be nice if you could get a version of GIMP that was designed more for the idiot^H^H^H^H^Hnovice user for quick touchups, without all the extras cluttering up the interface."
Sure, and who is going to maintain that mess? If you want a simpler photo editor, build one. If you don't want to build one, buy one. There are plenty of the sort you are looking for.
"Open source needs a well of cash to draw from."
Er, no, it does not. This is how FOSS works: hacker A thinks feature X would be really nifty. Hacker A sits down and adds feature X. See, no money required.
For all other things there is the proprietary model. This includes paying somebody to add feature Y to a FOSS program that you have got a copy of. Systems for this already exist. Sometimes these features even get folded back in the program.
"Then stop calling it GIMP, or especially "the gimp.""
Sigh. It's bad enough that Slashdot editors post duplicate articles without trolls posting duplicate comments.
If you want a GIMP like program with a different name, just fork it. Forking is good!
"I'm sure some people out there would prefer a graphics editor without a GUI."
I find a GUI relatively useful for apps with a canvas. Still, for graphics operations that do not require a canvas, GIMP die-hards often recommend ImageMagick.
There's a large body of complementary apps for the GIMP.
"Can I calibrate and create an ICC profile for my monitor with the video drivers for nVidia cards?"
Yes, you can. There are several manufacturers that have created the software and the targets that allow you to do so. I don't have URLs at hand, but Google is your friend.
"To me, the show-stoppers for using Linux/Gimp for my photo work are the following:
* Color management. Not aware of ICC color profiling. Can I calibrate my monitor with nVideo and ATI Linux drivers? Can Gimp load an ICC profile of my output device to proof my print?"
It seems to me that the major show-stopper is your own laziness to find out these things. GIMP has allowed you to proof your prints using ICC profiles since version 2.0.
AFAIK there was only one developer who showed he was a little dismayed. Also, GIMPShop only makes the GIMP a little friendlier to those who are used to the unfriendly interface of Photoshop.
"Under some theories of netiquette, linking to an HTML page that references a Flash file is more polite than copying the Flash file to your own server because the former is normal use of the World Wide Web and the latter is copyright infringement."
Typically, hotlinked works are displayed within a webpage. The typical (graphical) display of that webpage then becomes a derivative of the hotlinked work; which is copyright infringement if it happens without the holder's consent.
"To put it into RIAA terms, "stealing" bandwidth is preferable to "stealing" a work of authorship."
The RIAA would say that, would they not?
Will it have the recent Evil Bit?
"Usability test after usability test has confirmed this"
In that case you won't have any problem providing links to the results of at least some of these tests. Because, quite frankly, I don't believe you. Usability tests rarely produce such generic results.
[Context menu woes]
"I hope these usability guys flay the GIMP developers alive for that one alone..."
Heh, I feel your pain.
You will be glad to hear that since a year or two, in the Mac and Windows builds at least, the default setting is to have the menu bar in the image window be switched on.
"Think about it. Do you really think these guys would give their really choice ideas for free?"
Obviously yes. Venture Capital is seed money. VCs make their money off of funding promising ideas in return for a large chunk of the vast profits.
Good ideas are cheap. Anybody can sit down and come up with 20 money makers in a few minutes. It's the implementation that counts.
"None of those ideas come to anything."
/.-worthy.)
The initial plan of the magazine is flawed. VCs should not come up with ideas, they should be evaluating ideas that others have come up with.
But of course, asking VCs to point at the general direction they are looking at would have been even less useful. (And certainly not
"Many more of us will go broke working 75 hour weeks, while big investors walk off with a tax break, if not the rewards for effort."
If you don't like that, you're doing something wrong. I wonder what causes that: lack of skill? lack of desire? lack of funds?
Heh, I also saw three classes, but different ones:
1) Buzzword bingo. The clearest example: "Software that permits any Net-connected gadget in your home to access and display services like VOIP, instant messaging, and streaming television." This reads like the VC in question hasn't spent a single thought on what s/he is actually looking at.
2) Might as well fund it yourself. For instance, VCs looking for somebody building an application from a pretty much concrete idea. Best example: "I'd want to see the technology working, with a few customers onboard." Sure Greg, but if I had a working technology, why would I need you?
3) Other. The serious directions.
"Is it just me or did everything sound incredibly boring?"
I remember freelancing for a web design company five years ago, and they were looking in astonishment at the mobile phone market, and especially at the popularity of SMS. Nobody had predicted that. Nobody. SMS was like an afterthought put on mobile phones because it could be easily done. Nobody had imagined kids would run away with it.
In poor countries, SMS is what the internet is for you, here, in the "first world".
Yet, if you look at the technology surrounding mobile phones, that is a piss poor shroud. Win prizes, use your phone as a flashlight, download ringtones, that is basically the dent the commercial space has made in the world of mobile phones. Surely there is much more to offer to customers who have already indicated that they like mobile technology!
So, if you think that cell phone technology is pretty boring, you probably lack imagination. Keep in mind that VCs are people who do not come up with ideas, but who evaluate the ideas that you come up with. The people in TFA merely indicated which direction they were looking at. Looking at the mobile market is certainly not a bad idea if you are a Venture Capitalist.
As with all loans, the rule is that you can only get it once you don't need it anymore. VCs don't like taking risks, so they rarely give money without wanting you first-born's first-borns to the tenth generation in return (or something with a similar emotional value).
The only exception I can see is when VCs try and venture (pun intended) into markets that are unknown to them. Hence the Dot Com Bubble. If you want to know which markets these are, try and find start-ups where the owners are driving in Porsches.
Having said that, the process of going through a VC application may be worthwhile in order for you to work out where you want to go and what you need to get there.
If the MPAA, as the representatives of the copyright holders, are using Bittorrent, they are giving permission to copy the movies that they claim are being illegally copied. It would seem an untenable position to claim copyright infringement for a work that you offered up for free copying in one and the same breath.
(IANAL. This is not legal advice.)
What is this tight-assed crap, Cowboy Neal? Wake up! I agree with the poster who wrote that this must be the worst story ever.
"NASA paved the way for SC, and all SC can do about it is whine."
You are exagerating. I know for certain that besides whining SC is also designing and building and selling (parts of) air- and spacecraft.
Actually, I would like to see some proof of how and where SC is whining, because quite frankly I don't see it.
"I wonder what the re-entry strategy will be for an orbital version."
Rutan may have experience with a TPS similar to the one on the Space Shuttle: "but much more durable - carbon and metallic-silica tiles for the hottest regions, and flexible blanket-like material for areas receiving less heat during atmospheric reentry".
Another project used "a water-cooled heatshield".
"And while NASA does the heavy work, and lets Scaled enjoy the fruits of their work, Scaled in return keeps on asking "why is NASA wasting so much money?""
Perhaps I'm hearing you wrong, but it seems like you are suggesting that Scaled Composites is not allowed to criticize NASA because they are profiting so much from NASA's research? Scaled Composites is made up of tax payers, tax payers that send astronomical amounts of money to NASA, so that NASA can burn it on any fancy that strikes their minds. In the meantime, as an organisation of the people, NASA's work is supposed to benefit those same people, including the people that make up Scaled Composites.
As an industry insider, Burt Rutan is eminently qualified to be the voice of those fellow tax payers that wish to criticize NASA.
In doing so, he is taking a risk, because SC is one of NASA's suppliers. If my suppliers were bad-mouthing me, they'd need a pretty good reason to so if they didn't want me to cut the life-line.