Why are everybody so obsessed with CMYK? Face it: most people are not professional graphics designers and don't need CMYK. If I want to touch up some photos for my homepage, I couldn't care less what CMYK is. If Joe Average wants to create a few drop shadows for his photo gallery, he doesn't need CMYK.
Besides, professionals wouldn't use Gimp even if it supports CMYK. They'd still use Photoshop because that's what they were thaught at school. Implementing CMYK wouldn't solve anything at all - the peopel who complain would just move on to new things to complain about.
2 -> what are you talking about? I select a region, I click on the bucket fill tool, I click on the region, and voila - the selection is filled, and nothing else. Where is the problem you are talking about?
IPv6 won't solve the NAT problem. Many people use NAT not because they don't have enough IP addresses, but because their ISPs don't allow them to connect more than one computer to the Internet.
No it isn't. Because the GTK file dialog looks almost exactly the same as MacOS X's file dialog. Everybody praises MacOS X for its usability, including the file dialog, and the GTK dialog looks almost exactly the same, therebefore the GTK dialog is good. If you say the GTK dialog is bad, then you must also admit that the MacOS X dialog is bad.
"I mean, it's not the lack of a kparts equivalent, being programmed in a 70's language - c++ is a bad OO language, but C is much worse as "OO language" still gnome went with C (and you have to admit those even if you're a gnome zealot)"
Yes, but back when it was developed, it made sense to use C. C++ compilers back then sucked. Especially today, rewriting everything in another language for the sake of using another language is nuts. Furthermore, even today C++ has ABI issues (see this page for details) while C does not, making it easier for developers to distribute C binaries.
KDE is nice though. It's a good move to at least ship kdelibs, so that KDE binaries can work out-of-the-box (more or less).
You can remove WxWidgets (formerly WxWindows) from that list. It is simply a wrapper around GTK. It'll be just as if you're running a GTK application.
As for Qt or GTK, it really doesn't matter much. Both are very widespread, and on desktop-friendly distributions both will have the same look due to unified themes. It all boils down to developer preference. Your question is just like asking whether you should use MFC, VCL, WxWidgets, Qt, WTL or raw Win32 on Windows.
By using a free program you waive any moral rights to complain. This has got nothing to do with open source, and everything with it being free. Heck, even Windows users are more polite than the average bitching Slashdotter! When I release an open source program for Windows, my users are very polite when they request a feature or bug fix. Slashdotters on the other hand call developers names and bitch, as if developers are somehow their slaves.
Yeah, and if you read forums on the Internet, you'll see that everybody is always complaining that those apps are slow (slow in the sense of they-hog-so-much-memory-that-my-computer-dies-from -swapping, not CPU usage).
They don't see that as lock-in. They see that as a failure of the other word processor. That's the problem. People take.doc (in)compatibility for granted.
Exactly, you are a software engineer, thus you have already lost all rights to even comment on user interface design! Leave the design to the usability experts! Programmers should be banned from interface design!
(this is the general opinion of the Slashdot crowd)
"Sorry about that "STILL"... that was my frustration from the 2.8 series coming back. I spent/hours/ trying to understand why the (then) new file selector was supposedly better for all users (including power users like me)"
It is better because it looks almost exactly like the one in MacOS X. And we all know MacOS X is the holy grail of usability!
Why is a fork a bad thing? Without forking, Inkscape wouldn't even exist.
So go ahead and fork it. If it suceeds, great, we have a better program. If the fork dies (like many, many, many forks of any open source program) then that just proofs you're wrong. It's the free market at work.
File->Preferences->Window Management->Window type hint for the docks: Utility Window
Before you ask why this isn't the default: it's because they received tons and tons of bug reports from people with broken window managers that don't support utility windows.
Slashdot Mirror
"why are you even using Photoshop?"
I don't. That's the point.
The fact that posts like yours aren't modded up just shows you how biased the Slashdot community is towards anti-Gimp comments.
Why are everybody so obsessed with CMYK? Face it: most people are not professional graphics designers and don't need CMYK. If I want to touch up some photos for my homepage, I couldn't care less what CMYK is. If Joe Average wants to create a few drop shadows for his photo gallery, he doesn't need CMYK.
Besides, professionals wouldn't use Gimp even if it supports CMYK. They'd still use Photoshop because that's what they were thaught at school. Implementing CMYK wouldn't solve anything at all - the peopel who complain would just move on to new things to complain about.
2 -> what are you talking about? I select a region, I click on the bucket fill tool, I click on the region, and voila - the selection is filled, and nothing else. Where is the problem you are talking about?
IPv6 won't solve the NAT problem. Many people use NAT not because they don't have enough IP addresses, but because their ISPs don't allow them to connect more than one computer to the Internet.
"Is that going to confuse people or what?"
No it isn't. Because the GTK file dialog looks almost exactly the same as MacOS X's file dialog. Everybody praises MacOS X for its usability, including the file dialog, and the GTK dialog looks almost exactly the same, therebefore the GTK dialog is good. If you say the GTK dialog is bad, then you must also admit that the MacOS X dialog is bad.
That doesn't matter. Kdelibs will be installed so KDE apps will continue to work. It's just that the desktop environment is GNOME.
"I mean, it's not the lack of a kparts equivalent, being programmed in a 70's language - c++ is a bad OO language, but C is much worse as "OO language" still gnome went with C (and you have to admit those even if you're a gnome zealot)"
Yes, but back when it was developed, it made sense to use C. C++ compilers back then sucked. Especially today, rewriting everything in another language for the sake of using another language is nuts. Furthermore, even today C++ has ABI issues (see this page for details) while C does not, making it easier for developers to distribute C binaries.
KDE is nice though. It's a good move to at least ship kdelibs, so that KDE binaries can work out-of-the-box (more or less).
You can remove WxWidgets (formerly WxWindows) from that list. It is simply a wrapper around GTK. It'll be just as if you're running a GTK application.
As for Qt or GTK, it really doesn't matter much. Both are very widespread, and on desktop-friendly distributions both will have the same look due to unified themes. It all boils down to developer preference. Your question is just like asking whether you should use MFC, VCL, WxWidgets, Qt, WTL or raw Win32 on Windows.
Perhaps you're interested in autopackage? We're working very hard on multi-distribution compatibility.
By using a free program you waive any moral rights to complain. This has got nothing to do with open source, and everything with it being free. Heck, even Windows users are more polite than the average bitching Slashdotter! When I release an open source program for Windows, my users are very polite when they request a feature or bug fix. Slashdotters on the other hand call developers names and bitch, as if developers are somehow their slaves.
Yeah, and if you read forums on the Internet, you'll see that everybody is always complaining that those apps are slow (slow in the sense of they-hog-so-much-memory-that-my-computer-dies-from -swapping, not CPU usage).
They don't see that as lock-in. They see that as a failure of the other word processor. That's the problem. People take .doc (in)compatibility for granted.
Because people will whine you to death if you don't make it look exactly like the Windows equivalent.
I'm not talking about my grandma. I'm talking about the hypothetic Average User Grandma that everybody's talking about.
No, on a home desktop. How can you prevent grandma from installing viruses while allowing her to install Home Garden 2.0?
You're talking about the corporate desktop. What about the home desktop?
What if the user wants to install third party apps? You can't possibly whitelist all "good" apps out there.
Nautilus was started by ex-Apple engineers.
So there.
Exactly, you are a software engineer, thus you have already lost all rights to even comment on user interface design! Leave the design to the usability experts! Programmers should be banned from interface design!
(this is the general opinion of the Slashdot crowd)
"Sorry about that "STILL"... that was my frustration from the 2.8 series coming back. I spent /hours/ trying to understand why the (then) new file selector was supposedly better for all users (including power users like me)"
It is better because it looks almost exactly like the one in MacOS X. And we all know MacOS X is the holy grail of usability!
Do you use the tabbrowser extension? It's infamous for making tabs slow.
So you train soldiers to question commands. And then what? They can't refuse. If they do they'll get punished.
Why is a fork a bad thing? Without forking, Inkscape wouldn't even exist.
So go ahead and fork it. If it suceeds, great, we have a better program. If the fork dies (like many, many, many forks of any open source program) then that just proofs you're wrong. It's the free market at work.
File->Preferences->Window Management->Window type hint for the docks: Utility Window
Before you ask why this isn't the default: it's because they received tons and tons of bug reports from people with broken window managers that don't support utility windows.