91–100 of 132 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
do you expect a year of 5 stellar devs will be enough to re-implement photoshop? I am doubtful.
No, 1 stellar dev for 5 years. https://www.photopea.com/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
At least Europeans put the currency sign after the number. If a dev cannot be United States centric and condescending, I'm not sure of their worth as an engineer.
The discussion is specifically about American salaries, so yes, the position of the dollar sign matters when someone is trying to brag about the quality of their work.
$235K does not seem like the amount of money needed to take on Adobe. At the very, very best this gets you 4 developers and an artist for a year, I don't see how that is enough to even compete with the numerous FOSS alternatives. This is an artist wanting to make multiple high effort products. I wouldn't be surprised if there is some serious confusion about what it takes to develop software going on here. I also don'…
Stuart Semple is kinda known for pulling stunts like this. Whenever Vantablack was released to the world, the artist Anish Kapoor got exclusive artistry license rights for the pigment. Semple was rather upset about it, so he then made a pigment called "Pinkest Pink" and one of the terms and conditions of buying it is that you agree to never share it was Kapoor. I don't know what his intention is with this project, bu…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'll name it. You need at least 25000$ to hire a "decent" Software Dev and 50k for Senior Dev in India. They can produce much better output compared to US counterparts both in terms of Quantity and Quality. The hiring needs to be direct or else the "agency" will eat most of the money and give you 3000$/yr "senior" devs further perpetuating the stereotypes. With 235k, you can make an incredible 5 people team + cloud c…
You need at least 25000$ to hire a "decent" Software Dev and 50k for Senior Dev in India. They can produce much better output compared to US counterparts both in terms of Quantity and Quality. If that dev can't even put a dollar sign in the right place, then I'm not sure the quality is everything you claim. Attention to detail matters. Especially in coding.
> Attention to detail matters. Especially in coding.
Let me guess, you're one of those people who think nitpicking on every small thing leads to "quality" code?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
At least Europeans put the currency sign after the number. If a dev cannot be United States centric and condescending, I'm not sure of their worth as an engineer.
The discussion is specifically about American salaries, so yes, the position of the dollar sign matters when someone is trying to brag about the quality of their work.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Adobe seems exeptionally unproductive with incredible product stagnation so this doesn't seem that infeasible to me.
Exceptionally unproductive? What are you on about? Could they make larger swings? Sure. Are they exceptionally unproductive? Compared to whom? They dominate pretty much all market segments they're in. For example, they took on Apple, after a grudge, and won (Apple had something to do with that too). AI showed up, Adobe is pretty much the only major established player that put it in consumer hands ASAP and in a way th…
- Figma
- Blender
- Maxon
- Davinchi
- Autodesk
- Stability
Honestly hard to name a company in the space shipping less than Adobe.
Inkscape and Graphite have contributors...can the whole community be galvanized behind 'the one to rule them all'?
I haven't heard of Graphite. But yeah, Inkscape, Gimp, Dark Table, Blender, etc. World class programs. There's no need for this.
But the whole way this has gone about seems incredibly naive both to the realities of building piece of software like that and not to mention just trying to make the "Open Office" to Adobes "MS Office" is really shortsighted considering what modern tools look like.
Feel the ultimate end of this is running out of money probably with barely a prototype and causing a lot of bad blood with the artists and illustrators who trusted him with their money, also naive to how much this stuff actually costs when the founder can't create anything towards the goal themselves.
Oh I also notice they fell into amateur crowdfunding trap of offering merch for a tier as low as £129. Getting those produced will cost at least £30 each for only 320 of them, shipping anywhere in the world, hoodies are heavy and bulky can go up to £50, the time/money wasted organizing the logistics of it isn't worth it. By the end of it you've probably lost money.
There is a Photoshop alternative already (Photopea), but its maker chose to keep quiet about battling corporate overlords and such matters. Obviously a marketing noob, compared to this fiery kickstarter.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, no. If everything is open source, $235K is good for perks and incentives - and to ensure that the project is alive and active. People will do a whole lot when the incentive is not the paycheck.
Gimp and Paint.net have probably benefited from a million hours of open source labor and yet their capabilities are nowhere near Adobe's products. People underestimate how much work commercial software takes by many orders of magnitude. This kickstarter is maybe performance art but if they're serious there is no chance in hell they will actually produce software that is actually competitive with an Adobe suite produc…