Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What Will Be Talked About At The Ubuntu 11.04 Summit

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Apopas View Post
    People who find Gimp inferior to Photoshop are guys who usually use Photoshop just to resize pictures and knows less than 1/1000000 of Photoshop. There is no way someone who is not Professional or serious hobbyist to consider Gimp as an inferior product.
    Does it have a higher-than-8bpp pipeline yet? As long as it doesn't, Photoshop remains ahead for professional usage. Gimp is a great program on its own right, I use it and love it, but it's not in the same ballpark as Photoshop (yet).

    That said, Windows doesn't ship with anything equivalent to Gimp out of the box (MSPaint, lol) and Gimp blows pretty much every other free program out of the water in functionality.

    Comment


    • #17
      Before posting vlakeies Blackstar, read carefully my posts.
      I said nothing different.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Apopas View Post
        I'm not saying that Gimp is superior to Photoshop ofcourse, but still both programs are rather complicated even for the above average user.
        The real problem with Gimp is the appalling interface with windows all over the screen and everything hidden in seemingly random places in menus; I've been using it intermittently for years, but I can still rarely find the option I'm looking for.

        As for OpenOffice, I generally start it once and then it's running for weeks until I have to reboot the machine for some reason; so a few seconds extra startup time is pretty much irrelevant.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by MaestroMaus View Post
          Very slow on start-up, has bugs (some of them years old), it crashes sometimes and it isn't very intuitive.
          First post here at phoronix, so be gentile Why does open office come default checked for using java? Is there some advantage?
          (I just checked the difference on my machine and it took about 1 second to load with out java, then I turned it on and it took 6 seconds to load.)

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by kraftman View Post
            I think Rhythmbox is one of the weakest points of Ubuntu. It has unusual, messed up playlist. I don't know any better GIMP or OOo equivalent on Linux.
            It seems to be okay if you accept your songs being sorted by metadata. It is designed and basically forces you to scan your media library and play things based on artist or album. As long as you do that, it's not too bad.

            However, Amarok (at least the old ones, hated the 2.x series though) had the option to do either. You could have your playlist formed by dragging and dropping files or opening playlist files etc, or you could play by searching your media library. However, I ended up just ignoring the library feature and using traditional playlists to keep my habit going, but I think meta-information is the future, and you shouldn't have to organize things by directory/folder anymore as that is no where as good as using tags and other meta-data. The former only allows organization by one aspect, the latter by multiple aspects, unless you created multiple directories using symbolic links as, say, cdimages.ubuntu.com and many other FTP sites do with their FTP structure. However, normal users don't do that.

            By the way, Clementine seems to be the successor to Amarok 1.4, forked due to users like me not liking 2.x's layout.

            Honestly though, an entire fork just because the layout is slightly different is just silly. Why Amarok 2.x didn't get an option to change the layout back to the 1.x style is beyond me, or better yet just the ability to move and close window sections to make it that way.

            Comment


            • #21
              As a follow-up, there are a lot of reasons still to sort your music by folder, like when it comes time to move or copy things around. Really, the entire desktop needs to be formulated for such an environment of dealing with meta-data instead of directly with files, and AFAIK that is the new thing Gnome 3 wants to push for, and no doubt KDE as well. Getting rid of Nautilus, and just using other software for media management. Sounds interesting, and I'm interested to see what issues arise because of it. Most likely there will still be a need for Nautilus and other file managers for a long while to come, particularly for obscure file formats and system administrators in general, but those things could be left to the Server versions of distros, while the Desktop versions could stop carrying file managers by default.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Yfrwlf View Post
                Really, the entire desktop needs to be formulated for such an environment of dealing with meta-data instead of directly with files, and AFAIK that is the new thing Gnome 3 wants to push for, and no doubt KDE as well.
                Oh, please don't. I really, really hate the way that Windows now combines all your files into 'libraries' so you have no idea where the damn files really are.

                And I'm sure this will get particularly exciting when you have your music on a server that's NFS-mounted and take your laptop on vacation so the 'smart' file manager is trying to access files on a server that no longer exists on the local LAN. Gnome handles that badly enough already.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by MaestroMaus View Post
                  Good applications please. The OS is alright but Openoffice/Gimp/Pitivi aren't capable of standing up to their MS counterparts in terms of quality. Rythmbox owns every mediaplayer on earth though imho.
                  I don't think these things are specific to Ubuntu and you sort of derailed the thread. If that was your intention, good job.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Apopas View Post
                    Before posting vlakeies Blackstar, read carefully my posts.
                    I said nothing different.
                    Yes, we actually agreed for once. Fancy that, eh?

                    Your attitude is pretty lame, though.

                    Originally posted by DanL View Post
                    I don't think these things are specific to Ubuntu and you sort of derailed the thread. If that was your intention, good job.
                    I'd argue that his wish for good/better applications is a valid one. I didn't take his post to mean that Ubuntu has to develop those applications themselves. Their job, as distributors, is to find the best applications, polish them, fund them if necessary and package them for their users.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by BlackStar View Post
                      Yes, we actually agreed for once. Fancy that, eh?

                      Your attitude is pretty lame, though.
                      While replying to posts without reading them or comprehending them is a respectable attitude?
                      Oddly we have agreed few times before...

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Apopas View Post
                        While replying to posts without reading them or comprehending them is a respectable attitude?
                        Oddly we have agreed few times before...
                        Why do you think that I didn't read what you read? You actually confirmed that our posts agree.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by BlackStar View Post
                          Why do you think that I didn't read what you read? You actually confirmed that our posts agree.

                          Apopas:
                          There is no way someone who is not Professional or serious hobbyist to consider Gimp as an inferior product.

                          BlackStar: As long as it doesn't, Photoshop remains ahead for professional usage.

                          Apopas:
                          I'm not saying that Gimp is superior to Photoshop ofcourse,

                          BlackStar:
                          Gimp is a great program on its own right, I use it and love it, but it's not in the same ballpark as Photoshop (yet).

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by DanL View Post
                            I don't think these things are specific to Ubuntu and you sort of derailed the thread. If that was your intention, good job.
                            Thanks, dad always told me I should do the things I am good at.

                            In all seriousness though, Canoncical is capable of funding more work on OO/Gimp/Pitivi/etc. which is why I said that. An Ubuntu conference would be a good place to discuss this and therefor I write this. Maybe there's someone out there at Canonical who agrees and starts talking about it over there.

                            So I think it's pretty on-topic. Feel free to disagree though. At least I try to make a constructive point. The guys above this post are the ones making the thread totally worthless.

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X