it won't load anymore; when i click on the photoshop dock icon it crashes my computer.
so now i got rid of my mac, since without photoshop, it's useless. how much does ubuntu cost?
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-21 3:34
Nobody's gonna comment on >>33? I worked hard to write that in just a break :( .
>>38 was making sense until he mentioned he couldn't install it. I though these comments were related to the actual interface.
To think GIMP was the application they developed GTK for, and its interface fails miserably, while GTK, questionable or not, was a success and many quality GTK applications exist today for both Linux and Windows.
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-21 13:47
I use the Gimp for some things because it does some things better than Photoshop
I also have CS2 installed.
All you fags can eat a dick all day
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-21 21:01
I use the Gimp for some things because it does some things better than Photoshop
lolwhat
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-21 23:04
>>43
there is no plugin for photoshop that works as well as greycstoration.
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-22 11:26
Use a standalone version. It will spare you the pain of the GIMP.
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-22 14:34
The GIMP UI is goddamn terrible. Apparently, all those years of user complaints doesn't faze the programmers.
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-22 15:53
What, you want them to just do another photoshop clone, duplicating all its flaws for the sake of it?
They are trying to do it right, and ignoring whiners like you is the first step. RTFM before you complain. People don't even bother to learn about the gimp then they go crying "hay change this like it's set up in photoshop" like using a MDI interface just because photoshop does it to emulate the mac os feel.
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-22 19:21
They are trying to do it right, and ignoring whiners like you is the first step.
Just because you try doesn't mean you'll succeed.
and ignoring whiners like you is the first step.
Because ignoring potential customers is a brilliant way to make software they'll want to use! Are you in politics?
like using a MDI interface
Even using a virtual desktop with appropriate mouseover selection (lol is dat sum MDI emulation?), GIMP is a complete fail. It's been that way since I first used it (1998), and doesn't look like it'll be changing any time soon.
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-23 18:55
I'm not a programmer, but why isn't GIMP skinnable? Someone artistic can rid the rest of us of the eyesore...
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-23 22:11
>>47 They are trying to do it right, and ignoring whiners like you is the first step. >>48, also well, if they are trying to do it right, they have failed. Non-dockable toolbars are clearly inferior and have numerous terrible usability issues.
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-23 22:43
this is why i love /comp/.
my psuedo-troll threads like this, browser wars, etc get like 50 posts within a week [not to mention actual discussions].
if gimp could handle vectors anywhere near as well as adobe products, it -might- be worthwhile.
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-24 16:24
Ask anybody with eyeballs.
I want more specific reason. if you are hinting that the gimp is ugly looking, please enlighten me how ugliness is a usability issue.
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-24 16:29
>>55
"i have to change my brush entirely just to resize it? wtf?!"
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-24 18:06
The ugliness is irrelevant. Adding shiny stuff won't fix the serious usability issues, and because fixing them would mean getting rid of most of the GIMP's legacy, it won't ever happen.
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-24 20:28
"i have to change my brush entirely just to resize it? wtf?!"
that parallels with what happens in real life ('A`) however, there is little reason why different brush shapes cannot have any independant resizing mechanism.
>57
give me examples of negative usability issues relating to the gimp.
I did. All the usability issues that I've read are - the file chooser sucks, different brushes for different sizes, and it works differently to photoshop therefore I lose productivity because i'm habituated to photoshop.
I read that it has negative usability issues. The three I listed in this post is a good start. I want more examples.
>>60
That you can't get anything done without excruciating pain with the GIMP is a serious usability issue. I'd get out of computer graphics if I were stuck with this piece of shit.
fuck filters. 95% of those filters aren't nearly as useful as any half-intelligent graphical designer armed with an excellent bezier pen tool interface.
Why would you use a bitmap editor if you want to make vector graphics?
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-26 21:07
>>65
Because vectors are a clean way to make lines in raster art?
Like, you know, most the shit that gets posted on 4chan?
Name:
OP here2006-09-26 21:58
this thread is made of fail.
i demand you adobefags gtfo at once.
now lets get back to my problem.
i installed ubuntu on a spare pc my friend gave to me. installation went well, but i'm having trouble adjusting my screen res, and then photoshop won't seem to work on ubuntu.
what should i do /comp/?
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-27 4:37
>>65
Because sometimes you need to design an outline, then size, place and tune it before converting to raster, or combine vector and bitmap graphics; but you haven't done any real work so you never had the need and don't understand it.
>>67 i demand you adobefags gtfo at once.
I've never used Adobe Photoshop, and I don't like Adobe. You don't need to use Photoshop to realize GIMP's interface is terrible.
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-27 8:57
>>67
this was my original reaction. The interface is not that bad, and it actually fits rather well to a system configured (properly) with a window manager that treats menus in the same fashion (fluxbox, enlightenment, etc.).
It also doesn't look like ass with a decent resolution screen and a GTK theme that doesn't suck nuts. However, considering most people in /comp/ are here for tech support with their AIDS-ridden Dells and asking if we think this Alienware computer is worth $2700 I doubt more than 10% of you have ever seen a linux desktop that isn't put together like a retarded Frankenstein monster
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-27 9:05
>>69
Bullshit. Do you do any serious stuff with it? No? Then what makes you think your opinion is more qualified than mine? And yes, I'm using a decent window manager, decent GTK theme, and window snapping. This doesn't fix the issues you genius. Read my GIMPlog, as well as what I said in the /prog thread.
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-27 9:40
It also doesn't look like ass with a decent resolution screen
Translation: I don't edit anything larger than my monitor, and I don't zoom much either.
A lot of editing occurs with images that are way larger than any monitor currently out there, particularly on images that will be printed. I am no pro, yet even I routinely work on images that are 3k*3k and up.
Gimp's layout when the canvas is taking up the entire screen is a pretty bad, no matter what you do. :(
>>70 I don't give a shit what you said in your post, this thread is tl;dr and it doesn't change the fact that you're a faggot and GIMP is not as shitty a program as you say it is
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-27 13:08
>>72
So you never do anything serious with GIMP. Of course, to edit your typical small pictures without zooming in much, and an occassional wallpaper minor fix, it's sort of alright (the interface still sucks, but at least you don't get it fully messed), but as soon as you need to do anything more than you'd do on MSPaint, you'll realize how much it sucks.
The graphics engine and filters may be good (even if they lack some features such as vectors), but the interface is terrible. I can't think of a worse interface for GIMP.
>>72
Get two monitors because the program can't handle big images? Wow, you're a big loser.
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-27 19:12
You need at least one monitor to display the GIMP interface. The GIMP assumes that you use a WM that isn't completely retarded, and every WM supports two monitors nicely.
I too can excuse my shitty behavior by blaming it on the environment, but that doesn't make it so.
Besides, GIMP isn't making any 'assumptions'. It's had that idiotic style of interface for the past decade. Do you remember what linux and hardware was like in the 90s?