Re:Why would anyone bother with PhotoShop now ???
on
Gimp 1.2.0 Released
·
· Score: 2
The only problem is that it doesn't run under Mac OS X. You forget the Photoshop revenue for Adobe is still split ruffly 55/45 in favor of the Mac.
Someone needs to spend a weekend porting over GDK in GTK+.
The reason you wont see GIMP in more places is because most newspapers use Apple Script. A very powerfull scripting language that automates there work flow. Also I haven't seen Quark, or InDesign importing GIMP files as of late.
The largest challenge the GIMP folks have is porting GTK+ to OS X. Eg. Replacing the X calls in the GDK library to Quartz calls. This really wouldn't be too hard. You can download Apple development tools (GCC based) from their developer web site. The nice thing about things that are GTK+ based is that all you have to do is port GDK to a new platform. Recompile glibc for OS X. And poof you can compile GTK+ and in turn Gimp, and GNOME.
Don't forget, under the hood. OS X is essentially a Mach based FreeBSD.
Slashdot Mirror
The only problem is that it doesn't run under Mac OS X. You forget the Photoshop revenue for Adobe is still split ruffly 55/45 in favor of the Mac. Someone needs to spend a weekend porting over GDK in GTK+. The reason you wont see GIMP in more places is because most newspapers use Apple Script. A very powerfull scripting language that automates there work flow. Also I haven't seen Quark, or InDesign importing GIMP files as of late.
The largest challenge the GIMP folks have is porting GTK+ to OS X. Eg. Replacing the X calls in the GDK library to Quartz calls. This really wouldn't be too hard. You can download Apple development tools (GCC based) from their developer web site. The nice thing about things that are GTK+ based is that all you have to do is port GDK to a new platform. Recompile glibc for OS X. And poof you can compile GTK+ and in turn Gimp, and GNOME. Don't forget, under the hood. OS X is essentially a Mach based FreeBSD.