(will it still be everything in one box or will the hardware be as distributed as software can be)
That's similar to what I think. I think in the future, all computers w/ simply have extremely powerful hardware, and everything else will run via emulation. Similar to how emulation is done today, certain hardware will be distributed in the form of emulator software, and we'll be able to run whatever we need at full speed.
Extremely true. "apt-get install foo" is much easier than hunting for software, downloading it manually, finding the exe, executing it, and (many times) having to reboot to use it. btw, is it just me, or is the mandrake linux install more user friendly than the Windows XP install? There are many n00b-friendly distrobutions that require no command line knowledge, and no config-file editing...everything is gui, that is. IMO, the whole "linux isn't ready for the desktop" crap has got to stop. Linux is already there.
I've tried it, and it's awesome. The interface is MUCH smoother than 1.2. Also, the new tabbing and docking capabilities make working w/ it much easier.
"Well then you have never seriously worked with Photoshop"
You're correct. But even w/ my limited knowledge in PS, gimp is much closer to PS, than win3.1 is to OSX. For the average user, gimp is very well a PS replacement. To say otherwise, would obviously mean that a PS bias is present.
Now, as a linux user, it's always good to see big name proprietary software ported. I've been waiting for FlashMX for a long while.
Slashdot Mirror
That's similar to what I think. I think in the future, all computers w/ simply have extremely powerful hardware, and everything else will run via emulation. Similar to how emulation is done today, certain hardware will be distributed in the form of emulator software, and we'll be able to run whatever we need at full speed.
Extremely true. "apt-get install foo" is much easier than hunting for software, downloading it manually, finding the exe, executing it, and (many times) having to reboot to use it. btw, is it just me, or is the mandrake linux install more user friendly than the Windows XP install? There are many n00b-friendly distrobutions that require no command line knowledge, and no config-file editing...everything is gui, that is. IMO, the whole "linux isn't ready for the desktop" crap has got to stop. Linux is already there.
that sucks....i wanted to see it :(
I've tried it, and it's awesome. The interface is MUCH smoother than 1.2. Also, the new tabbing and docking capabilities make working w/ it much easier.
"Well then you have never seriously worked with Photoshop"
You're correct. But even w/ my limited knowledge in PS, gimp is much closer to PS, than win3.1 is to OSX. For the average user, gimp is very well a PS replacement. To say otherwise, would obviously mean that a PS bias is present.
Now, as a linux user, it's always good to see big name proprietary software ported. I've been waiting for FlashMX for a long while.
you can always use gimp untill PS is ported (but IMO, gimp is a PS replacement)
you're next, Bill.
Quick, grab a licence while you still can! They're selling like hotcakes.
more linux support is always good.