I'm not sure what you mean by "padding tricks" but I have to disagree and your analogy is what makes it clear. By using two 16-bit registers you can fully represent a 32-bit value.
Correct, but this is like storing the same (or very similar) 32-bit integer in two 16-bit registers (the same integer, put in both places). The top data is sliced off both of them.
Let me quote the great-grandparent poster, the one I originally replied to:
Did you start hiring those people to help you improve the free program yet? I like free software too... But apparently, nobody else think its worth it to support GIMP with developers and/or money.
And then, the parent to that post, which I also replied to:
Why stress software freedom? I want the social solidarity that you only get in freedom; I want to be independent from masters and make sure my computer only obeys me. I'd rather have less functional or powerful free software than a more powerful or reliable proprietary program because I can hire people to improve the free program or I can ask the community to help me improve the free program. I can't free Photoshop. The catch here is that most people haven't been taught to value their software freedom, so they don't know to look for it and they haven't been taught to think of the consequences when their freedom is absent. I aim to change this by teaching people to value freedom for its own sake. I hope you will too.
I think you misunderstood me, sir. I did buy Photoshop. I like Photoshop a lot, it does what I need it to do. My point is that there are things the GIMP cannot do, and Photoshop does well.
I don't have the time to work on The GIMP, and I don't really have the inclination to get involved in a project with the kind of horrific-management stories I hear about. Would I rather use an open-source tool than a closed-source one? This is an unqualified yes. All other things being equal (or even close), I pick the open-source tool over the closed-source; I use OpenOffice instead of Microsoft Office and I use Firefox over IE or Opera, even though Opera is arguably a better browser. Hell, I develop open-source software (and really need to get cracking on getting my Google Summer of Code project, WPM, into a releasable state; school's been kicking my ass).
Here's the thing. Since I don't have the time to work on it, I'd gladly donate money to the GIMP project. But I want assurances of returns. The "bounty" system seems to work well for open-source programming, after all. It doesn't work so well with a large-scale group, though; you can't really offer a bounty to an entire team. But you can turn it around. If the GIMP developers said "pay us $X and we'll implement CMYK", I'm sure they'd get that money from various sourcess who also value open-source software. I would not pay for that; I don't personally need CMYK except in very rare cases.
"Pay a non-GIMP dev" doesn't work very well for this sort of thing, because they lack commit access. If I pay Joe Dev $Y to change the GIMP user interface to ape Photoshop exactly, I can't upgrade because I'd risk breaking Joe Dev's patches (and that's assuming that I want to go through the hassle of compiling new versions myself. It needs to be a GIMP dev with source access, or it needs to be a group willing to commit to a long-term fork of the GIMP. (GIMPshop is a nice try, but it's not really even close to Photoshop. I'm very tempted to say that it's not really possible for GIMP to function like Photoshop, and a large part of it's GTK+, which works okay on Linux and badly elsewhere. But that's my own personal Qt bias showing.)
You can't just say "donate money." I won't donate money when I don't know how it'll be used, and I don't think many other people will either. But when that money will be used for a purpose? I can see them getting the funding they need.
Protip: When you use the I-am-a-political-tard word "quagmire", you raise a really, really big flag that more or less says you're a dipshit. The only people who use it are Democratic commentators and Cindy Sheehan types.
Re:Software freedom is better.
on
GIMP 2.4 Released
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
How much do I have to donate in order to get a Photoshop-esque UI without the GIMP brain damages?
How much do I have to donate in order to get Photoshop-compatible CMYK?
How much do I have to donate in order to get them to change that fucking name?
I'm guessing it's more than the cost of Photoshop.
But not everyone will, and the single person who donates just gets it in the ass.
Hell, if everyone who wanted GIMP to work like Photoshop donated $650, do you honestly think the we-know-better-than-you GIMP developers would actually take their wishes into account at all?
And I don't know about you, but I'm not going to essentially fork a project and hire developers to make changes. It's cheaper to buy Photoshop.
The GIMP doesn't do what I need it to do. Photoshop does, and as companies go Adobe's quite reasonable and I've never had a single bit of trouble with them, nor are they patent trolls or anything else that the Slashdot groupthink hates (except, of course, being closed-source).
Adobe's not going to open Photoshop if I stop using it, and GIMP isn't likely to improve to the point I need it to be at in order to use it simply because I adopt it. Hell, if I donate the price of Photoshop to the GIMP developers, I'm still not going to get the tools that I need.
Make a product worth using, and people will use it. Compete on features.
Re:Software freedom is better.
on
GIMP 2.4 Released
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
But what if you value a piece of software that actually works? The GIMP simply doesn't do what many, many professional artists need. If it did, it'd do really well and eat Photoshop's lunch. Most professional artists know of the GIMP--and they know it simply isn't up to snuff.
It also is intentionally perverted when compared to the industry standard, Photoshop. If it worked similarly, the market share would probably be higher even with the whole "free" price tag.
Hell, I strive to use open-source software whenever I can, and quite frankly the GIMP is useless for me. Why not make the software work better, then proselytize when you have something worth bragging about? Take Linux for example--I have used Linux since about 1998, but it was only when I first tried Ubuntu 5.10 that I felt comfortable recommending it to others as a primary operating system, because at that point it had reached a stage where it was useful.
(And a side note: Most people I know would still shoot themselves in the foot before using something called "The Gimp" in a professional environment.)
On the infield, playing 2B and playing SS are fairly closely related, and playing 1B and 3B are closely related.
Correct. But if you're benching Lugo, you have to move either Lowell or Youkilis to shortstop. How are you going to rationalize that? Shortstop and third/first base are completely different areas of play, and neither Lowell nor Youk are built for it. Both are too big, neither are fast enough. It'd be like having no-range Derek Jeter playing shortstop for the Sox, albeit with fewer self-congratulatory fist pumps.
And no, you can't put an outfielder anywhere. Take Jacoby Ellsbury, for example. When Drew was sucking wind, why didn't you have Ellsbury in RF? Because Ellsbury has a Damon-esque chicken arm, and that's not good for a right fielder (and that goes double for Fenway; RF there is nasty). You can put some outfielders everywhere, but you can't put all outfielders everywhere.
How exactly do you bench Lugo without playing someone else in a position they've never played? In the World Series?
It doesn't work that way. These guys are professionals, but that doesn't mean they're supermen. (Except Pedroia. Little midget jumps buildings and hits with a Canseco swing.)
Are you out of your mind? Youkilis has never played at shortstop in a professional capacity.
Both Lowell and Youkilis are hitting considerably better than an injured Ortiz (who has said to the media that the cortisone shot in his knee is wearing off, and that he doesn't want another). Ortiz is 2 for 11 in the last three games. Youkilis just finished an ALCS where he hit.500 on the nose and Lowell is hitting about a hundred points higher than Ortiz, too.
Unless Ortiz goes 4-for-4 in Game 1 or 2, he's riding the pine for pitchers' pinch-hitting spots during the Colorado games.
Bethesda sucks. Morrowind was boring, Oblivion was unplayably dull and lifeless, and Fallout 3 shows all the hallmarks of Not Being A God Damn Fallout Game.
Having drivers is one thing but installing them is an other... Recompiling the Kernel, Add a kernel module....
WRONG! Ubuntu's driver process can be simplified to one step, so long as you have purchased hardware on which Linux is guaranteed to run:
1) Install it.
Now, if you have esoteric hardware, it takes a little more effort.
1) Open up Add/Remove Programs or Synaptic. 2) Enter part of the device name. 3) Double-click on the package with the driver.
The only time I have had to ever drop into a terminal to install a new driver was with an ATI card, because I couldn't be arsed to figure out how to use their restricted driver setup and I already had the ATI binary driver installer downloaded.
Or just run setup.exe
And hope you haven't downloaded a trojan, because you have very little way to verify security.
Then after you do have that driver then how to you access it?
Uh...uhm...it does it for you, maybe?!
Linux Software bundle isn't always that great. With Stupid Naming schemes GIMP (Who would think that is anything like Photoshop?) KSomething Gsomething all very confusing.
Except that your launcher menu in Ubuntu/Kubuntu and in openSuSE looks like this:
K menu -> Internet -> BitTorrent Client (KTorrent)
Games Web Browser (Firefox)
Graphics Instant Messenger (Konversation)
Development
System
etc.
Gee, that looks so much harder than Windows! Do I need to go into the name retardage of Microsoft Excel? Microsoft Access? Microsoft Outlook?
Grow up.
I can it was a couple of weeks ago. Some people are not into this Holy quest so if the site doesn't work then they will use something else. Besides all Windows users should be using Firefox due to its superiority to IE. what kind of crap is that. Sure I use firefox but, to say that everyone should no. Freedom people have the right to choose. and some peoples freedom doesn't like Firefox. Freedom means making your own choices not just following what someone else does.
Wrong again! Hey, fucker, your choices affect other people. People who use IE, whether intentionally to REFUTE TEH FIREFOX FANBOIYZZZZZZ or just because they don't know any better, damage others. Their computers are inherently less secure than they are even when they're just running Windows. This opens the door for botnets to crapflood other people. Their browsers don't implement CSS correctly, which means the rest of us must tolerate workarounds that waste our time and money in order to make it not look like liquefied diarrhea on Internet Exploder. It's not a "holy quest," it's "get the fuck off of broken shit." We don't care if you use Firefox or Opera or Safari, just don't fucking use Internet Explorer.
"Freedom people"? What are you smoking? (And they aren't "making [their] own choices", they usually don't realize they have a choice.)
It all depends on where you go a newbie can stumble on an expert site where they get the rude comments.
Or you use a distro that's newbie-friendly, such as Ubuntu/Kubuntu, where their IRC channel is packed with about two thousand users at any one time, most of whom can help you with almost anything. Their forums are also top-notch, and the distro itself funnels you to those places when you go to its help feature. If you're a newbie using Slackware, you deserve whatever the hell kind of "rude comments" you get, because you were too fucking dumb to do your research before blindly going "INSTALL! INSTALL!".
Or if you were not fixed on Linux is God then you will face more resistance....Except that this attitude is entirely absent on Ubuntu's forums, openSuSE's u
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, but what about hollow objects, like an egg?
Squeeze bulb?
I'm not sure what you mean by "padding tricks" but I have to disagree and your analogy is what makes it clear. By using two 16-bit registers you can fully represent a 32-bit value.
Correct, but this is like storing the same (or very similar) 32-bit integer in two 16-bit registers (the same integer, put in both places). The top data is sliced off both of them.
I could see it being a space station, though.
Let me quote the great-grandparent poster, the one I originally replied to:
Did you start hiring those people to help you improve the free program yet? I like free software too... But apparently, nobody else think its worth it to support GIMP with developers and/or money.
And then, the parent to that post, which I also replied to:
Why stress software freedom? I want the social solidarity that you only get in freedom; I want to be independent from masters and make sure my computer only obeys me. I'd rather have less functional or powerful free software than a more powerful or reliable proprietary program because I can hire people to improve the free program or I can ask the community to help me improve the free program. I can't free Photoshop. The catch here is that most people haven't been taught to value their software freedom, so they don't know to look for it and they haven't been taught to think of the consequences when their freedom is absent. I aim to change this by teaching people to value freedom for its own sake. I hope you will too.
I think you misunderstood me, sir. I did buy Photoshop. I like Photoshop a lot, it does what I need it to do. My point is that there are things the GIMP cannot do, and Photoshop does well.
I don't have the time to work on The GIMP, and I don't really have the inclination to get involved in a project with the kind of horrific-management stories I hear about. Would I rather use an open-source tool than a closed-source one? This is an unqualified yes. All other things being equal (or even close), I pick the open-source tool over the closed-source; I use OpenOffice instead of Microsoft Office and I use Firefox over IE or Opera, even though Opera is arguably a better browser. Hell, I develop open-source software (and really need to get cracking on getting my Google Summer of Code project, WPM, into a releasable state; school's been kicking my ass).
Here's the thing. Since I don't have the time to work on it, I'd gladly donate money to the GIMP project. But I want assurances of returns. The "bounty" system seems to work well for open-source programming, after all. It doesn't work so well with a large-scale group, though; you can't really offer a bounty to an entire team. But you can turn it around. If the GIMP developers said "pay us $X and we'll implement CMYK", I'm sure they'd get that money from various sourcess who also value open-source software. I would not pay for that; I don't personally need CMYK except in very rare cases.
"Pay a non-GIMP dev" doesn't work very well for this sort of thing, because they lack commit access. If I pay Joe Dev $Y to change the GIMP user interface to ape Photoshop exactly, I can't upgrade because I'd risk breaking Joe Dev's patches (and that's assuming that I want to go through the hassle of compiling new versions myself. It needs to be a GIMP dev with source access, or it needs to be a group willing to commit to a long-term fork of the GIMP. (GIMPshop is a nice try, but it's not really even close to Photoshop. I'm very tempted to say that it's not really possible for GIMP to function like Photoshop, and a large part of it's GTK+, which works okay on Linux and badly elsewhere. But that's my own personal Qt bias showing.)
You can't just say "donate money." I won't donate money when I don't know how it'll be used, and I don't think many other people will either. But when that money will be used for a purpose? I can see them getting the funding they need.
I didn't know about this. That's pretty troubling, and I don't think I'll be buying CS4 unless I see that apology you mentioned.
:-/
That said...Photoshop still does what I need better than the GIMP.
And yet they can't hit anything!
Protip: When you use the I-am-a-political-tard word "quagmire", you raise a really, really big flag that more or less says you're a dipshit. The only people who use it are Democratic commentators and Cindy Sheehan types.
How much do I have to donate in order to get a Photoshop-esque UI without the GIMP brain damages?
How much do I have to donate in order to get Photoshop-compatible CMYK?
How much do I have to donate in order to get them to change that fucking name?
I'm guessing it's more than the cost of Photoshop.
But not everyone will, and the single person who donates just gets it in the ass.
Hell, if everyone who wanted GIMP to work like Photoshop donated $650, do you honestly think the we-know-better-than-you GIMP developers would actually take their wishes into account at all?
And I don't know about you, but I'm not going to essentially fork a project and hire developers to make changes. It's cheaper to buy Photoshop.
The GIMP doesn't do what I need it to do. Photoshop does, and as companies go Adobe's quite reasonable and I've never had a single bit of trouble with them, nor are they patent trolls or anything else that the Slashdot groupthink hates (except, of course, being closed-source).
Adobe's not going to open Photoshop if I stop using it, and GIMP isn't likely to improve to the point I need it to be at in order to use it simply because I adopt it. Hell, if I donate the price of Photoshop to the GIMP developers, I'm still not going to get the tools that I need.
Make a product worth using, and people will use it. Compete on features.
But what if you value a piece of software that actually works? The GIMP simply doesn't do what many, many professional artists need. If it did, it'd do really well and eat Photoshop's lunch. Most professional artists know of the GIMP--and they know it simply isn't up to snuff.
It also is intentionally perverted when compared to the industry standard, Photoshop. If it worked similarly, the market share would probably be higher even with the whole "free" price tag.
Hell, I strive to use open-source software whenever I can, and quite frankly the GIMP is useless for me. Why not make the software work better, then proselytize when you have something worth bragging about? Take Linux for example--I have used Linux since about 1998, but it was only when I first tried Ubuntu 5.10 that I felt comfortable recommending it to others as a primary operating system, because at that point it had reached a stage where it was useful.
(And a side note: Most people I know would still shoot themselves in the foot before using something called "The Gimp" in a professional environment.)
On the infield, playing 2B and playing SS are fairly closely related, and playing 1B and 3B are closely related.
Correct. But if you're benching Lugo, you have to move either Lowell or Youkilis to shortstop. How are you going to rationalize that? Shortstop and third/first base are completely different areas of play, and neither Lowell nor Youk are built for it. Both are too big, neither are fast enough. It'd be like having no-range Derek Jeter playing shortstop for the Sox, albeit with fewer self-congratulatory fist pumps.
And no, you can't put an outfielder anywhere. Take Jacoby Ellsbury, for example. When Drew was sucking wind, why didn't you have Ellsbury in RF? Because Ellsbury has a Damon-esque chicken arm, and that's not good for a right fielder (and that goes double for Fenway; RF there is nasty). You can put some outfielders everywhere, but you can't put all outfielders everywhere.
Koreans also eat, sleep, and breathe StarCraft. You think that they're a reliable baseline?
(Kidding...sort of.)
How exactly do you bench Lugo without playing someone else in a position they've never played? In the World Series?
It doesn't work that way. These guys are professionals, but that doesn't mean they're supermen. (Except Pedroia. Little midget jumps buildings and hits with a Canseco swing.)
The best players from around the world play in the (American) major leagues. They're already invited.
Are you out of your mind? Youkilis has never played at shortstop in a professional capacity.
.500 on the nose and Lowell is hitting about a hundred points higher than Ortiz, too.
Both Lowell and Youkilis are hitting considerably better than an injured Ortiz (who has said to the media that the cortisone shot in his knee is wearing off, and that he doesn't want another). Ortiz is 2 for 11 in the last three games. Youkilis just finished an ALCS where he hit
Unless Ortiz goes 4-for-4 in Game 1 or 2, he's riding the pine for pitchers' pinch-hitting spots during the Colorado games.
No it isn't!
RMS has his moments of toolage just like everyone else.
Needs more Gundam and Go-Bots (to be promptly eaten alive by the transformers in the first thirty seconds).
Bethesda sucks. Morrowind was boring, Oblivion was unplayably dull and lifeless, and Fallout 3 shows all the hallmarks of Not Being A God Damn Fallout Game.
Exactly. 1994?
(That's a not-so-subtle jab that Windows is far behind.)
look how long it took to get to a point where we had a genuine 32-bit operating system that practically didn't crash
1994?
WRONG! Ubuntu's driver process can be simplified to one step, so long as you have purchased hardware on which Linux is guaranteed to run:
1) Install it.
Now, if you have esoteric hardware, it takes a little more effort.
1) Open up Add/Remove Programs or Synaptic.
2) Enter part of the device name.
3) Double-click on the package with the driver.
The only time I have had to ever drop into a terminal to install a new driver was with an ATI card, because I couldn't be arsed to figure out how to use their restricted driver setup and I already had the ATI binary driver installer downloaded.
Or just run setup.exe
And hope you haven't downloaded a trojan, because you have very little way to verify security.
Then after you do have that driver then how to you access it?
Uh...uhm...it does it for you, maybe?!
Linux Software bundle isn't always that great. With Stupid Naming schemes GIMP (Who would think that is anything like Photoshop?) KSomething Gsomething all very confusing.
Except that your launcher menu in Ubuntu/Kubuntu and in openSuSE looks like this:
Gee, that looks so much harder than Windows! Do I need to go into the name retardage of Microsoft Excel? Microsoft Access? Microsoft Outlook?
...Except that this attitude is entirely absent on Ubuntu's forums, openSuSE's u
Grow up.
I can it was a couple of weeks ago. Some people are not into this Holy quest so if the site doesn't work then they will use something else. Besides all Windows users should be using Firefox due to its superiority to IE. what kind of crap is that. Sure I use firefox but, to say that everyone should no. Freedom people have the right to choose. and some peoples freedom doesn't like Firefox. Freedom means making your own choices not just following what someone else does.
Wrong again! Hey, fucker, your choices affect other people. People who use IE, whether intentionally to REFUTE TEH FIREFOX FANBOIYZZZZZZ or just because they don't know any better, damage others. Their computers are inherently less secure than they are even when they're just running Windows. This opens the door for botnets to crapflood other people. Their browsers don't implement CSS correctly, which means the rest of us must tolerate workarounds that waste our time and money in order to make it not look like liquefied diarrhea on Internet Exploder. It's not a "holy quest," it's "get the fuck off of broken shit." We don't care if you use Firefox or Opera or Safari, just don't fucking use Internet Explorer.
"Freedom people"? What are you smoking? (And they aren't "making [their] own choices", they usually don't realize they have a choice.)
It all depends on where you go a newbie can stumble on an expert site where they get the rude comments.
Or you use a distro that's newbie-friendly, such as Ubuntu/Kubuntu, where their IRC channel is packed with about two thousand users at any one time, most of whom can help you with almost anything. Their forums are also top-notch, and the distro itself funnels you to those places when you go to its help feature. If you're a newbie using Slackware, you deserve whatever the hell kind of "rude comments" you get, because you were too fucking dumb to do your research before blindly going "INSTALL! INSTALL!".
Or if you were not fixed on Linux is God then you will face more resistance.
Now, if only the frontrunners of the Presidential primates could follow his lead.
T,FTFY.
Novell. Think about that one for a second, bud.