71–80 of 186 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apple's OS X Human Interface Guidelines[1]: "In general, quit when users close the last open window in your app." [1]: http://developer.apple.com/library/mac/documentation/UserExp...
Like iTunes.
"If an app continues to perform some function when the main window is closed, it might be appropriate to leave it running after the user closes the main window. For example, iTunes continues to play after the user closes the main window."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For people who need to put some text on an image[1] or who need to tweak some minor stuff gimp is a "photoshop killer" - and it's nice to push people to legally free software rather than a pirate download of Photoshop. [1] But see this gimp document - the first returned hit in a search for [gimp drop shadow text] - which appears to be weirdly complex. http://www.gimp.org/tutorials/The_Basics/
If you need to do basic image editing on OS X I'd say use Acorn[1] or Pixelmator[2]. [1]: http://flyingmeat.com/acorn/ [2]: http://www.pixelmator.com
OT but is this an official signed application that can work with gatekeeper on 10.8? I recently discovered that my open source project won't work by default on osx 10.8 without me paying $99 to get an apple certificate, which I'm not very interested in doing. What are open source/free projects supposed to do about gatekeeper?
Tell users how to turn it off. I've never seen a user object to doing so, possibly because they don't understand what it's doing in the first place.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm confused. You double clicked an application icon, and the application opened? You seem to be conflating the popular hate for focus being stolen due to some non-consensual event, and the consensual starting of an app. If GIMP didn't have a splash screen, there'd be no indication it was loading at all (and it's one big fat app.. several generations of code including a huge chunk of Python loaded at boot).
It sounds like your parent poster is saying it shows the splash screen over all applications and there's nothing you can do about it. Which is needlessly inconsiderate.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you need to do basic image editing on OS X I'd say use Acorn[1] or Pixelmator[2]. [1]: http://flyingmeat.com/acorn/ [2]: http://www.pixelmator.com
I like LiveQuartz http://www.rhapsoft.com/
http://paintbrush.sourceforge.net/
...what?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apple's OS X Human Interface Guidelines[1]: "In general, quit when users close the last open window in your app." [1]: http://developer.apple.com/library/mac/documentation/UserExp...
"In apps that are not document-based ..." GIMP is document-based.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As someone who uses Photoshop almost every day, it's nowhere near a "photoshop killer". The workflow is still one of the worst I have stumbled across.
My experience (which is a little stale) of watching "photoshop experts" is that this is a familiarity effect. Photoshop workflows are uniformly bizarre and awful, in my experience. Serious practitioners are like voodoo priests, pulling tools out that have no sane relevance to the problem at hand and making them work. But it works, because you know it really well and have spent (literally, in most cases) years perfect…
For the record, The GIMP doesn't even have what we call "Non-Destructive editing" which allows to make a change to some of the filters and transformations you did on the image much later even when the image has been touched by other editions. It has been supported by Photoshop for way more than a decade, already. After all of this time, the Gimp still works like a toy and has zero productivity.
Zero. There is nothing productive about The GIMP. Anything you can do in The GIMP will be done faster with a competitor, Photoshop being the best in the category.
And before anyone comes to tell me that "THE GIMP IS FREE!!!11!ELEVEN!", Photoshop isn't expensive for a Photographer either, so price does not enter the game here. If you're a photographer with one or more DSLR bodies, lots of lenses, travel equipment and so on, spending some money on one measly Photoshop license is not going to kill you. The gain in productivity will more than make up for the money spent anyway, the Gimp truly is an awful tool compared to Photoshop. If you can't afford something like Photoshop it means that you can't afford being in that business in the first place.
I love it! GIMP is one of those tools that's "almost" a photohop killer, not quite yet, but this is a big step in the right direction. Good job GIMP team! As an asside, I think the plugin API and scheme joice is great and a blast to develope with I'd just like to see others jump on board. EDIT: I thought I'd add this since there seems to be a large discussion below as to the type of user for which GIMP is applicable.…
For anyone who's not doing graphics as their main job description it is a photoshop killer. Asides from integration with other Adobe products, print colour management and a few higher level features it has everything a person might need who's main job is not image processing. That's most of the "market" in terms of general home users and web designers who need to process photos and do logos etc. So while I imagine ph…
Doing Graphics is not my main job description, far from it (somewhere between damage control and janitor is more like it), but I still do a lot of front end development, at my job I prefer to do all the graphics production work myself for the apps I'm building and have tried using GIMP a crap ton of times over the years - I've never found it to be a suitable replacement. Maybe its familiarity but I've honestly tried to use gimp in this role and just getting around has always been a complete nightmare compared to Photoshop. It may be able to do the job that Photoshop does, but nowhere near as easily.
Having our Devs at our shop use Photoshop is an expense, but like good chairs and big ass monitors, at the end of the day a few hundred bucks every few years isn't really that much and if its that much easier to use then its an expense we'll eat and happily. This also means from our devs perspective the choice between PS and Gimp is not a financial one, and once you take money out of the picture most folks are going to choose PS. So anyway, no I don't think this is a Photoshop Killer.
This is a great move. Serious question: how did this not happen 5 years ago? Is there some technical reason? It's so hard for me to understand why the creators wouldn't have always had this as the #1 feature improvement to make ASAP.
I don't mind paying <$100 for a decent graphics editor. My primary use case is tweaking screenshots, app icons, buttons, and the like for my iOS apps and the web site. I want to get in and out as quick as possible, so I can get back to my other work.