And obviously it is quite simple to crossreference this info with data available in other databases. On a final note, the FBI is now hiring computer scientists to implement a project that sounds very similar to what I just did.
And this speculation from yet another Mac Rumour Site should be taken with how many grains of salt too?
Mining voluntary information on a public website? Come back and tell us when you can mine the info as easily from say real amazon sales records of what I actually did buy not what I might want the public to think I am buying.
But that is the problem. even if they do care about that who cares about something that is pleasant to use but doesn't do the job, is insecure, unstable and expensive. Well ok maybe if it's pleasant to use everything is OK and we are all good with that.
Where gnu/linux people would spend all that money and time on coding applications that work MICROSOFT will spend it on making 'soundscapes' and other kind of marketing things.
No wonder it won't run on anything less than a 1GHz cpu
what about places like new zealand where it is illegal to sell a region coded piece of hardware. does this count as like rpc1? does this mean Win Vista will not run in new zealand? if not then whatever new zealanders do will be able to be used anywhere else to get region free dvd drives on windows. if yes, then microsoft loses new zealand to linux in ten seconds flat.
The NOAA link I give above notes that in 1933 there were 21 named storms. So apparently they were recording and naming them seventy years ago. When exactly is it that you're claiming "we only used to record hurricanes"?
Here is the thing.
Tropical storms could not be completely detected in 1933. Only ones that reached land in an area that shared information with the United States.
Not all reached land, and not all reached land that shared info with the US. What you have to realise is that technology for detecting these things has improved.
It is like the fallacy that cancer rates have risen since the middle ages. In the middle ages people fell ill and died. They were presumed to have been in ill health, or taken by various other reasons. But not recorded as cancer deaths even if they were recorded at all. Only visible cancers were detected, and others were not.
It has only been since the age of satellites that can record all weather realtime that we can tell what is a tropical storm.
So in 1933 there were 21 named storms. How many unnamed ones that did not get noticed were there? I put it to you that there were many more. If you think there were less then you are naive.
This is what the "greenies" forget. they get all up in arms about there being more storms in a hurricane season when we never used to record storms. we only used to record hurricanes.
If you only count hurricanes, you will see this is a milder season than any we've had in the last 25 years except for some late 1990s years.
It's called changing the definition, and it doesn't wash. A government might do the same when they say Unemployment has fallen from 10% to 2% in 5 years
Yet unemployment might have counted the entire pool of people who were capable of working 5 years ago, where the current unemployment figures might only count the people ACTIVELY LOOKING FOR WORK.
So the numbers are bogus. It's the same with this situation.
What will happen next I fear is they will start counting "tropical depressions" and name them too. Once they're named they'll contribute to the total, and we will have 40 or 50 in a year. What happens then is the doom-mongers will claim the world is quickly getting worse.
All been available in gimp for most of its 10 years and obviously so in the menus. If you can't find them already you can't be serious about wanting them in gimp.
You should try gimp 2.2. Working with large images bigger than the screen is supposed to be much much faster in gimp than in photoshop. Where you would be waiting around for photoshop to be completing simple things like color adjustment or say something else like levels in a large image gimp would complete it in seconds.
Internet Explorer, SQL Server, Windows Media Player, MSN Messenger, Paint, Notepad, Word, Windows Guardian.
Almost all of which have greater market share in their fields than gimp does in its.
which is the point many people I guess also don't care about but many of us would like to see open source software get used by people after putting much effort into it. the whole idea "selling" open source software in mindshare means something to me.
Well here is the thing. If you don't already know background on graphic editors and you want to look for a program to edit graphics what would you pick?
I think you might not pick the last one and you might not even get to the point of finding out it really stands for Superior Program And Scripts To Image Control
That is the same thing faced by people who could benefit from gimp but skip over it because of the dumb name. So who named gimp that anyway?
I think you are correct. A friend of mine who works in the industry (he is running a network for a big graphic place so he knows his stuff) says photoshop and gimp have been feature-parity for all intensive purposes since photoshop 5.0 and that dates back to 1999
So a free program has been able to do what a program costing thousands in upgrades and purchases since 1999 but it is still not making solid inroads into the graphics business. Why is this? My friend says the first thing people laugh at is the name. It might be called GNU Image Manipulation Program but nobody calls it that, it even calls itself GIMP. I think it should be called Graphic Image Manupulation Program and renamed to not use the acronym gimp.
It has all the ability to take over the graphics design business and that's some of the most entrenched markets of adobe. If only the name weren't turning people off:(
> Then I will probably be the first to yell "what the hell were they thinking ???".
They were thinking that they didn't need to have a mac version with the same legacy cruft as the windows version and it ended up better than the windows versions at the time. But that is in the past now.
What is more important when looking at the about window of MSIE for mac is you see how many other copyrights and patents and various things that are owned by other people licensed to Microsoft are in MSIE for mac.
MS has hands tied because of that.
And if they had to go through and strip all the licensed technology out or pay extra licenses to open source it all that would be effort on their part for a dead product to them. So I don't see it happening.
if a company has a dead product and releases source code for free then it might be a day or two effort to make an archive of source. if they have to expend more effort than that I don't see it happening.
Thats the problem with cross licensing things and that GPL solves. you don't end up with hands tied even with your own product. If you made a closed source app with ten licensed technologies in it from MS, Sun, Apple, etc then you can't even open source your own application without affecting upstream.
GPL uses this effect against proprietary in the same way.
> Peter Mattis and Spencer Kimball created GTK (which stands for GIMP Toolkit) > as an alternative to the Motif tool kit, which at that time was not free.
If true this proves the innovation in the free and open source community goes back a long way
Slashdot Mirror
And obviously it is quite simple to crossreference this info with data available in other databases. On a final note, the FBI is now hiring computer scientists to implement a project that sounds very similar to what I just did.
And this speculation from yet another Mac Rumour Site should be taken with how many grains of salt too?
This thread should prove interesting
Yes you can if they set it to publicly visible.
If not then you can't. Up there by choice.
Mining voluntary information on a public website? Come back and tell us when you can mine the info as easily from say real amazon sales records of what I actually did buy not what I might want the public to think I am buying.
Nobody cares if something is plesant to use
But that is the problem. even if they do care about that who cares about something that is pleasant to use but doesn't do the job, is insecure, unstable and expensive. Well ok maybe if it's pleasant to use everything is OK and we are all good with that.
Where gnu/linux people would spend all that money and time on coding applications that work MICROSOFT will spend it on making 'soundscapes' and other kind of marketing things.
No wonder it won't run on anything less than a 1GHz cpu
OK thanks for the answer, I wasn't sure how it worked and whether or not MS would be making things extremely hard for themselves in a place like that.
Well yes this is true what is your point?
what about places like new zealand where it is illegal to sell a region coded piece of hardware. does this count as like rpc1? does this mean Win Vista will not run in new zealand? if not then whatever new zealanders do will be able to be used anywhere else to get region free dvd drives on windows. if yes, then microsoft loses new zealand to linux in ten seconds flat.
> Is that correct?
No. You need to go back and learn basic comprehension.
Well you might call facts an "illusion" but the rest of us we call them "the real world" not fantasy.
Since we live in the real world its best you listen to fact.
The NOAA link I give above notes that in 1933 there were 21 named storms. So apparently they were recording and naming them seventy years ago. When exactly is it that you're claiming "we only used to record hurricanes"?
Here is the thing.
Tropical storms could not be completely detected in 1933. Only ones that reached land in an area that shared information with the United States.
Not all reached land, and not all reached land that shared info with the US. What you have to realise is that technology for detecting these things has improved.
It is like the fallacy that cancer rates have risen since the middle ages. In the middle ages people fell ill and died. They were presumed to have been in ill health, or taken by various other reasons. But not recorded as cancer deaths even if they were recorded at all. Only visible cancers were detected, and others were not.
It has only been since the age of satellites that can record all weather realtime that we can tell what is a tropical storm.
So in 1933 there were 21 named storms. How many unnamed ones that did not get noticed were there? I put it to you that there were many more. If you think there were less then you are naive.
This is what the "greenies" forget. they get all up in arms about there being more storms in a hurricane season when we never used to record storms. we only used to record hurricanes.
If you only count hurricanes, you will see this is a milder season than any we've had in the last 25 years except for some late 1990s years.
It's called changing the definition, and it doesn't wash. A government might do the same when they say Unemployment has fallen from 10% to 2% in 5 years
Yet unemployment might have counted the entire pool of people who were capable of working 5 years ago, where the current unemployment figures might only count the people ACTIVELY LOOKING FOR WORK.
So the numbers are bogus. It's the same with this situation.
What will happen next I fear is they will start counting "tropical depressions" and name them too. Once they're named they'll contribute to the total, and we will have 40 or 50 in a year. What happens then is the doom-mongers will claim the world is quickly getting worse.
Pushing their own agenda.
In 10 years the Apple zealots will again have rewritten the history and given Apple the spot for first dual core/SMP laptop, just as they always does.
Looks like PC zealots like you have already started
Apple did dual processor laptops 10 years AGO in 1996.
Go find another drum to beat.
Has anyone even seen any parallel port peripherals in the last 10 years?
And then it skimps on firewire by only giving unpowered slow firewire 400
You probably need to make sure your graphic card drivers are up to scratch.
If they are not high quality ones it will slow programs down, especially graphical ones.
Make sure that you have current new drivers for your card, and then try again. I think you'll be surprised at the speed increase over photoshop.
Levels, curves, colour, contrast etc...
All been available in gimp for most of its 10 years and obviously so in the menus. If you can't find them already you can't be serious about wanting them in gimp.
You should try gimp 2.2. Working with large images bigger than the screen is supposed to be much much faster in gimp than in photoshop. Where you would be waiting around for photoshop to be completing simple things like color adjustment or say something else like levels in a large image gimp would complete it in seconds.
Internet Explorer, SQL Server, Windows Media Player, MSN Messenger, Paint, Notepad, Word, Windows Guardian.
Almost all of which have greater market share in their fields than gimp does in its.
which is the point many people I guess also don't care about but many of us would like to see open source software get used by people after putting much effort into it. the whole idea "selling" open source software in mindshare means something to me.
Well here is the thing. If you don't already know background on graphic editors and you want to look for a program to edit graphics what would you pick?
ImageTool
GraphicEdit
PixelPerformer
PhotoEdit
SPASTIC
I think you might not pick the last one and you might not even get to the point of finding out it really stands for Superior Program And Scripts To Image Control
That is the same thing faced by people who could benefit from gimp but skip over it because of the dumb name. So who named gimp that anyway?
I think you are correct. A friend of mine who works in the industry (he is running a network for a big graphic place so he knows his stuff) says photoshop and gimp have been feature-parity for all intensive purposes since photoshop 5.0 and that dates back to 1999
:(
So a free program has been able to do what a program costing thousands in upgrades and purchases since 1999 but it is still not making solid inroads into the graphics business. Why is this? My friend says the first thing people laugh at is the name. It might be called GNU Image Manipulation Program but nobody calls it that, it even calls itself GIMP. I think it should be called Graphic Image Manupulation Program and renamed to not use the acronym gimp.
It has all the ability to take over the graphics design business and that's some of the most entrenched markets of adobe. If only the name weren't turning people off
Support one of the sites giving this story for free. Google news link
And in debian you type "apt-get" to REMOVE software
apt-get remove and so forth.
> Then I will probably be the first to yell "what the hell were they thinking ???".
They were thinking that they didn't need to have a mac version with the same legacy cruft as the windows version and it ended up better than the windows versions at the time. But that is in the past now.
What is more important when looking at the about window of MSIE for mac is you see how many other copyrights and patents and various things that are owned by other people licensed to Microsoft are in MSIE for mac.
MS has hands tied because of that.
And if they had to go through and strip all the licensed technology out or pay extra licenses to open source it all that would be effort on their part for a dead product to them. So I don't see it happening.
if a company has a dead product and releases source code for free then it might be a day or two effort to make an archive of source. if they have to expend more effort than that I don't see it happening.
Thats the problem with cross licensing things and that GPL solves. you don't end up with hands tied even with your own product. If you made a closed source app with ten licensed technologies in it from MS, Sun, Apple, etc then you can't even open source your own application without affecting upstream.
GPL uses this effect against proprietary in the same way.
> Peter Mattis and Spencer Kimball created GTK (which stands for GIMP Toolkit)
> as an alternative to the Motif tool kit, which at that time was not free.
If true this proves the innovation in the free and open source community goes back a long way
Does gimp still use GTK+ of some version or some other for its toolkit?