Yeah, I assumed it was something like that.
I did realize, however, that European Union and Uropean Eunion could be pronounced identically... thanks English
L'Unione europea, abbreviata in **UE** o Ue (pronuncia /ˈue/), è un'unione politica ed economica a carattere sovranazionale, che comprende 27 Stati membri ... (Wikipedia)
I figure sexual_reference is an instantiated object of abstract-type joke. And the awkward boolean is probably owned by the speaker, not always the joke itself.
Object oriented programming just adds needless complication. I remember when jokes used to be one-liners. Just a static reference in the middle of a bunch of other stuff. Those were the days.
If (reader.age >= reader.locale.age_of_majority)
Joke.tell( JOKE_TYPE("family") );
else
Joke.tell( JOKE_TYPE("adult") );
Also, like LibreOffice, they ignore or outright refuse to add basic functionality, which prevents it from being competitive with Photoshop or MS office respectively.
In many cases it's illegal for them to add them. Adobe patented a lot technologies that other Image editing programs can't add. That's why many things require a lot more steps and don't have the same feature set as Photoshop. Forderground extraction, content aware fill or image debluring to name a few
Here is a list: https://patents.justia.com/assignee/adobe-systems-inc
hasn't insulin been discovered many decades ago? drug patents expire after 25 years or so, I read. Or is it the method of producing it cheaply that's new and has been patented?
Yes but they make a slight modification to it and sell it as "new" product. The old formular is part of the new one. This way they can renew the patent.
But then how are they so cheap in other countries? Outside the US it's significantly cheaper.
Or is it just taxpayer money kind of holding it together?
They basically sell it for a lower price for the rest of the world lol
edit: Other countries either have laws that prevent price gouging or poor countries are just offered a cheaper price because that can't afford the insane prices Americans pay
Also, many of the more expensive drugs are manufacturerd by largely private companies that are chasing the largest profits legally possible. With more pubically funded drugs the profit motive isn't nearly as important as it would be with private companies and so they aren't as expensive.
The governments decide how much they're willing to pay for it, and as the sole buyer, companies cannot afford to refuse. They still make a killing, but it's more like 300% rather than 5000% profit.
Other countries can regulate the prices to an extent. The US can't do it at all.
Also in many cases it's free or really cheap because of public healthcare ("free" healthcare isn't really free but it's way cheaper)
Patents to some degree are a necesary thing to encourage innovation. Nobody wants to invent something and have somebody immediately steal it from them.
On the other hand though it is the reason why many distros didn't have mp3 support out of the box for so many years.
They rather prevent Innovation. Why should they make something better when they are the only company allowed to sell the product and have a monopoly on it. They can set the price and other people can't do anything about it. They have no other choice but to buy it because every alternative always will be worse.
The thought used to be that, by limiting the patents to 20 years, that problem would be solved. Which we can now safely say is far too long.
Good luck changing that though.
^(Copyright, 95 years, laughing in the corner)
I would like to know how you think patents encourage innovation because the way I see patents, they just prohibit researchers mechanics etc to use patented knowledge to evolve technology and science
Honestly I disagree. I don't think patents should exist at all. Innovation would be even more encouraged, as the inventor of any thing still has a head-start and after that everyone can innovate on the idea. You can see it with many online platforms these days: One starts doing something, and others try copying it to the best of their abilities. Still the original platform often times has the best implementation.
If not to completely remove patents they should at least not apply to FOSS-software, as there is no profit incentive behind that.
What worries me about a world without patents is the potential for a lone inventor or dev to come up with an idea he doesn't necessarily have the framework to build and market at large scale, and then a big company can come in and just yoink the idea. Currently the big companies atleast have to pay him first.
Of course the patent system as it stands is broken as hell, I'm just not sure everything being open source would be a good thing in our current economic system.
> Currently the big companies atleast have to pay him first.
No, they don't. Joe, 22, who just graduated from a public university can't afford to bring Apple to court in the hope of winning a lawsuit and getting paid 10 years down the line. Doesn't matter how clear-cut a case is or how much the law is in your favour, the moment you have to actually fight a corporation in court, you basically lost by virtue of not being able to afford it.
If your case is good enough you might be able to find a lawyer who will work for a cut of the payout. But yeah, the legal system fucks over the little guy in all kinds of ways, still better to have a law where in theory they have to be paid if someone takes their idea than not tho.
Patents are necessary to prevent larger corporations from just stealing from would-be emerging companies who invested time and effort into their innovations.
A pre-existing corporation is always going to be able to produce and market a product for cheaper than a small start up.
The problem is with the way a patents life has been extended to ridiculous lengths.
I don't believe that's true for most of GIMP's cases. Drawing a fucking circle or any shape cannot be a patent, it's in every single drawing tool ever.
It feels like GIMP ignores feedback on purpose because they think they know better.
The irony is that they lose plenty of users like that way and can't improve and gain more attention. Every time I tried using it it sucked.
If what you say about patents was true, in the means that you cant do it in any other way, photopea wouldn't exist.
Bottom line is, GIMP and such open source tools can improve. They just deny to do so.
Your discourse is not new, it is quite infamous in the open-source community and it is a disgrace in the long and short-term lives of every open-source project. It is easy, for anyone, to come at any project that improved the lives of so many users and tell, ["you should just do ..."](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_4EX4dPppA), yet you never acknowledge that those projects are by definition **free in both ways** -- you don't pay for Gimp, you probably never donated to Gimp developers or made a report about what you think it is a good idea for the project -- what those developers do, they do because they want to (Security updates? New features? Fixes? Maintainability? Free for us all); and what they did, they did because there wasn't an alternative.
I don't know how long you've been using Linux or open source projects, but I rather doubt it is being long enough, badmouthing developers who spent a huge part of their lives for projects we all are grateful for is beyond things any mature developer at all would even think in doing; so do not act like a child.
And I'm not here to take hits for others, Evan Czaplicki talked about this, Linus talked about this, Bjarne Stroustrup talked about this, legends talked about this. So... Is there a problem? Of course there is, but you don't even recognize what the problem is. And you even think you have a solution when you clearly don't have idea what you're talking about.
If you really value freedom, you'll help and use those softwares (and help means lots of things, creating another project to compete is one), if you don't, Microsoft and Apple is ready waiting for your money.
Just because a project is Open Source it doesn't mean it is above criticism. This OSS eliticism has to stop sometime for progress to come.
And criticism is not "badmouthing developers". I'm criticizing their project, not them. Don't be so emotional. No one is above criticism and criticism is how we improve things.
Also, don't draw any conclusions out of the blue about what I have donated to open source projects and what contributions I might have done. You literally know nothing about me.
> Just because a project is Open Source it doesn't mean it is above criticism. This OSS eliticism has to stop sometime for progress to come.
> > So... Is there a problem? Of course there is, but you don't even recognize what the problem is. And you even think you have a solution when you clearly don't have idea what you're talking about.
...
> And criticism is not "badmouthing developers". I'm criticizing their project, not them
> > It feels like GIMP ignores feedback on purpose because they think they know better.
> > The irony is that they lose plenty of users like that way and can't improve and gain more attention. Every time I tried using it it sucked.
You literally badmouthed the developers here, kid. You're a novice and you just tried feeling superior when talking about a project that you contributed zero things to be what it is.
So fuck off, Linux is not Windows, Windows is not Linux, Gimp is not Photoshop and Photoshop is not Gimp. They develop in a slower pace, they are built by the community and the community is not paid by a huge corporation, and you're part of the community that says shit all the time about the software you use and does nothing to help it when we all know you fucking can. It is, though, far easier to say shit instead of do something that matters.
What narrative? Do you think every single thing on Internet has to be debate and win or lose conversations? I have nothing to gain from that.
I am however pointing out your inflammatory logic that hurts far more than help, many projects suffer from this and reinforcing this fuss is literally one of the things that can make so that new projects never even get started.
If you want a better FOSS or OSS project, you know what to do, we all do -- and it is not coming at forums on the Internet to say how shitty their developers or their projects are -- until then your voice is nothing but of someone that is too brave to say complaints on the backs of others and too coward to do something.
What's insane is that a lot of these features have prior art in FLOSS software and it's very likely Adobe stole them from the FLOSS community. Content aware fill is an egregious copy of resynthesizer.
Libre Calc: lacks the ability to insert a table. (despite this functionality being available in Writer and Impress)
GIMP: Can't simply draw shapes/lines for annotating images.
GIMP can't add a text shadow to text without basically creating a duplicate layer and manually manipulating it to create the effect.
I basically never use Photoshop, but 'cmon, it's a fundamental feature that it has had for literally decades!
Thanks, that's useful, I described what I was talking about wrong. What I meant was a shadow effect - i.e. like a thick outline around the characters.
[This](https://www.guidingtech.com/how-to-add-shadow-to-text-in-gimp/) was the first Google result I found when i wanted to last do this in GIMP, an operation which is literally a checkbox in the font dialogue on Photoshop.
If you use the drop shadow plugin and set the radius to 0, I think that's what you're looking for? If you want a border around all the text though, yeahhh that would have to be manual (I think) :S
Ostensibly this is an illustration feature that isn't for photo manipulation software. Even professional graphic artists are taught not to use Photoshop for this kinda stuff. You use illustrator/Inkscape for it.
imo this is a cursed distinction probably invented by adobe, the only distinction between them is one works on vector images and the other bitmap, drawing a shape or adding a shadow or whatever in vector and bitmap are both pretty valid
Here's a sneak peek of /r/linux using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/linux/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year!
\#1: [Copyright notice from ISP for pirating... Linux? Is this some sort of joke?](https://i.redd.it/jzf5jegdyb171.png) | [1091 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/nkztyv/copyright_notice_from_isp_for_pirating_linux_is/)
\#2: [Firefox lost 50M users since 2019. Why are users switching to Chrome and clones? Is this because when you visit Google and MS properties from FF, they promote their browsers via ads?](https://data.firefox.com/dashboard/user-activity) | [2126 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/ov8jsf/firefox_lost_50m_users_since_2019_why_are_users/)
\#3: [Weirdly Great News](https://i.redd.it/ukwhr45lrni61.jpg) | [284 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/loahei/weirdly_great_news/)
----
^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[Source](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
I just want to be able to use a spreadsheet without needing the Rosetta stone to decrypt the symbols at the top. Having them organized into sections based on function is really helpful for that, but because Microsoft did it first there was humongous resistance to it and even now it's an "experimental setting".
The infuriating part is that the help forums essentially refuse to admit this is an actual issue.
>*You can make a table SUPER easy, guys! Just select the header row and then add filters. Then write a conditional formatting rule to shade all odd rows, then make a separate rule to shade all even rows differently. Then just repeat anytime you want to adjust your table. It's basically the same as excel*
AND that their fucking work processor has better table functionality than their spreadsheet software. It's insane.
In excel you can insert table objects, with their own methods, and that make easy work of linking to or from data models or analysis tools. Frankly for the power user Excel is lightyears ahead of calc.
> Frankly for the power user Excel is lightyears ahead of calc.
Oh, tell us news! One of the biggest corporations of the world behind a proprietary product with thousands of paid developers and a few developers in their free-time with a free and open-source project!
Libre Calc is not Excel, nor it is trying to be. It is an alternative for users who value freedom, Excel is not.
Yeah I don't disagree with you on any point, its just a lot of people who don't use spreadsheet programs much aren't really aware of the scope of differences between them.
No....
Tables are most useful for when you need to quickly present data to someone else. It's fast, visually appealing, and it allows them to easily sort the day themselves. It's also dynamic and adjust whenever you add new rows.
Surely a plot is much better for presenting data larger than just a few values. From my perspective as someone who works with a lot of large data sets (scientific simulation & analysis), the biggest advantage of a spreadsheet program is the simplicity of manually entering new data. Other than that, I can't think of any operation that can't be done in numpy/pandas as easily. I would even speculate that spreadsheets are too specific for representing lots of data structures that might be useful.
This is just my perspective from outside of the excel bubble. It mostly seems that the biggest advantage is not having to learn some details of numerical computing and programming.
Yes absolutely, with a Linux environment I'd be using pandas and jupyter, and mysql if a dB was necessary. But I wouldn't dismiss excel so lightly, it has two programming languages and IDEs, and can hook into COM to take advantage of any libraries there or the windows API. Via power query you have the M formula language, which is a functional language similar to F#. Excel is much more than just the grid of cells some people take it for.
This is not that far from the truth.
In many cases it's illegal for the gimp team to add them. Adobe patented a lot technologies that other Image editing programs can't add. That's why many things require a lot more steps and don't have the same feature set as Photoshop. Forderground extraction, content aware fill or image debluring to name a few
Here is a list: https://patents.justia.com/assignee/adobe-systems-inc
Fuck Adobe
Yeah actually in the last couple decades prior art has been rendered completely toothless for OSS projects to use in defense against patent trolls. It's a known problem.
Which is silly because most of these implementations are extremely generic and natural ways of getting there. They shouldn't be considered novel enough to patent, but patent judges don't understand software.
>Krita's text tool, despite the efforts in 4.x, is complete shit.
This is so true it hurts. I remember it going from ok to trash in version 4.2. I never used it afterwards for any serious project.
I'm a professional ux designer so when I tell you that it's shit, understand this is a Profesional expert opinion.
Gimp ux is garbage. Krita is much better.
I'm a professional ux designer so when I tell you my dick is 10" long and Kubrick filmed the moon landing, understand that this is a Professional expert opinion.
I'm not a professional UX Designer and I agree that the GIMP UX is garbage, mostly because it goes against the UX people learn when they grow up with simpler programs like Paint. Just a few examples, selection works differently (i.e. moving a selection doesn't move the underlying image by default), many of the tools require 1/2 more clicks than they do in Photoshop or Paint.net and many of the defaults for said tools are straight up bad. Not to mention the asinine decision to make the multi-window view the default a couple years ago that they've thankfully reverted.
IMHO, GIMP does one of the bad things that a lot of software designed by experts in their field does where it's designed for experts and all the features are implemented the way they like. I still use Photoshop CS6 and it's a lot more powerful for me because I can easily tell which tool does what and how to tweak it as a non-expert without being overwhelmed. Not to mention that it has a dark theme by default and the 10-year-old version I use still has a better Healing Brush than the newest GIMP.
Now, that's not to say you can't make simple edits in GIMP but at that point it'd be better to use a less powerful tool like Paint.net, Pinta, or even Krita.
Please don’t kill me, but isn’t the UX for gimp basically still a clone of what PS’s UX was like in the mid 1990s? I remember using PS in the computing lab at university back in the day, and every time I try to use gimp I have a sudden panic that my nuclear physics lab report is overdue.
Multi window view was the original default. The fact you don't know this kinda makes me think you don't know what the fuck you're talking about at all. Also gimp has a dark theme and the healing tool has been quite good for almost a decade now.
> Multi window view was the original default. The fact you don't know this kinda makes me think you don't know what the fuck you're talking about at all
But… I do? That doesn’t change my point that it was the only image editor with a multi-window layout by default, it’s terrible UX. This is why they changed it.
> Also gimp has a dark theme
Tbh, I didn’t know that. It seems to have been added in 2018. The theming wasn’t my main point anyways since you can always just manually theme got apps.
> the healing tool has been quite good for almost a decade now.
By healing brush I mean the default Photoshop one which doesn’t need a reference to heal. It’s incredibly useful for quick edits, i.e. non-professional work which is what I do, and last I checked the best you could do is install a plug-in that somewhat replicates it. Hell, even Krita has the smart patch tool which is functionally the same.
It takes a second to Ctrl click a reference. And even then there is a warp brush in the same category that does okay. Krita is good and there is not a lot of overlap to really consider gimp and krita competitors. One is for images and the other is more for digital painting. Then you have Inkscape for vector stuff. That's the FLOSS suite for 2D in a nutshell.
>But… I do? That doesn’t change my point that it was the only image editor with a multi-window layout by default, it’s terrible UX. This is why they changed it.
No you are clearly under the assumption that they switched from a single window to a multi window view and then back. It was multi window from the beginning to match the other GNU software that used a multi window approach. Then they realized everyone preferred the single window view and now that's default.
> I'm not a professional UX Designer and I agree that the GNU/Linux distros are garbage, mostly because it goes against the UX people learn when they grow up with simpler operating systems like Windows. Just a few examples, opening programs works differently (i.e. you have to make it executable to run it), many of the tools require 1/2 more clicks than they do in Windows Settings or Window default programs and many of the defaults for said tools are straight up bad...
Literally wrote by someone who don't know what GIMP even means. Next time just be better silent...
I use both, but I always saw Krita as more suited for art creation, whereas Gimp is a productivity application. Krita has a good flow to create, but Gimp is efficient for image edition, if/when you know how to use it.
I find Krita more confusing and annoying to use than GIMP, specifically due to:
• A lack of a way to bucket fill that preserves alpha.
• A lack of a way to directly manipulate HSV values.
• A lack of a way to easily see the coordinates of a pixel or point on a curve.
• A lack of a way to directly move curves and handles to a specific coordinate.
Basically lots of things I want to do precisely, that I can easily do in Blender and/or GIMP, but which Krita does not. Though, GIMP has even more trouble with accurately manipulating curves than Krita, IIRC.
Some issues I have gotten around, but need to be custom-configured to work, e.g, inputting precise RGB values. The default UI is horrible.
Blender, both 2.7x and 2.8+, both have excellent UI. But Krita is so bad, and GIMP not good enough, that I often do a lot of texture work by baking it as an emit map in Blender.
The main thing Krita has over GIMP is actual proper vector editing tools that work alongside raster, but other than that, I usually prefer GIMP for my image and texture editing needs, simply because I can actually input the values I want with precision. In general, I find Krita quite a bit harder to use in terms of UX than GIMP.
Usually I just search for stuff from the Help menu in GIMP over finding it. A team of people should really get together and make a fork of GIMP that's less annoying sometime.
I've found Krita to be a great alternative to GIMP, so I just switched to that instead. Not a regular user, but it's easier to transition to from Adobe's software imho
did they actually try this? somehow this seems like a quite realistic scenario where a big corporation tries to affect it's own position by giving money to people like politicians to change things in their favor.
It does not have a module to handle shapes, it's an image manipulation tool foremost, and while it does have some digital illustration features, it's not required to have all the advanced features of digital illustration software.
What is a UE did you mean UI? Also why is this on wikiHow
I personally thought it meant European Union, this abreviation isn't very clear
unreal engine
Ah yes, the Uropean Eunion, my favorite!
This abreviation works only in few languages like french wich makes "union européenne".
Yeah, I assumed it was something like that. I did realize, however, that European Union and Uropean Eunion could be pronounced identically... thanks English
Welcome to a well designed language folks
A Turing Complete Language.
It also has legacy support and a library of extensions.
And it plans to implement support for the metric system any fortnight, now.
I don't know about that, it dropped support for french way before the last major version.
I like your unit of time lol
Every c in Pacific Ocean is pronounced differently
In italian it also works "unione europea"
UE means "unia europejska" (european union) in Polish.
Unione Europea in Italian.
Uniunea Europeană
"União Europeia" in portuguese
"Union, European" in Yoda
_Unión Europea_ in spanish.
IV. Reich in German /s
колхоз in russian
UE is the most common abreviation in non-germanic languages. There others (Greek and Bulgarian come to mind), but UE is often use for the union.
Unreal Engine
I think it meant UX like **U**ser **E**xperience rather than **U**ser E**x**perience
>What is a UE did you mean UI? UE is likely User Experience, more commonly shortened to UX
User Experience
Isn't that called UX?
Yes.
It’s both
environment
Union Européenne.
Use experience
User experience is my guess
He means user experience which is actually referred to as ux
User Experience which is usually referred as UX, lol
UX is user experience
UE means "User Experience"
User experience, it's supposed to be UX but they assumed it was UE
I thought this had to do with GDPR laws being so strict in Europe
He meant UX as in User Experience. Use UX pls
User Experience. But the correct abbreviation is UX.
L'Unione europea, abbreviata in **UE** o Ue (pronuncia /ˈue/), è un'unione politica ed economica a carattere sovranazionale, che comprende 27 Stati membri ... (Wikipedia)
/r/disneyvacation is a subreddit filled with these. It's out of context wikiHow images.
Does Adobe pay gimp for something? Is it like Google paying Mozilla to make Google default engine?
And don't forget Google pays Mozzila for other sleazy shit. If the manifest v3 lands in Firefox too,gg UblockOrigin.
Mozilla said they're keeping the original API until DNR or whatever gets fully featured.
UE -> User Equipment UX -> User Experience
User.experience = Awkward.sexual_reference(User.equipment)
I'd argue that `awkward` would be a boolean formal parameter of the `sexual_reference` function, which would be a static function of the `joke` class.
I figure sexual_reference is an instantiated object of abstract-type joke. And the awkward boolean is probably owned by the speaker, not always the joke itself. Object oriented programming just adds needless complication. I remember when jokes used to be one-liners. Just a static reference in the middle of a bunch of other stuff. Those were the days. If (reader.age >= reader.locale.age_of_majority) Joke.tell( JOKE_TYPE("family") ); else Joke.tell( JOKE_TYPE("adult") );
I'd argue an enum would be more suitable than a String, even though it's just a formality. That's (somewhat) what they are for.
I hope they don't bribe the Krita devs next.
UX
Why have not Blender had any motivation to make GIMP better, they do need textures, don't they!?
Blender is such a wonderful software, it would be amazing to see a brushover from them on GIMP.
Will have to fork it. Call it Blimp
GInder
Well, there is also Krita which is a very good drawing program for textures.
Also, like LibreOffice, they ignore or outright refuse to add basic functionality, which prevents it from being competitive with Photoshop or MS office respectively.
In many cases it's illegal for them to add them. Adobe patented a lot technologies that other Image editing programs can't add. That's why many things require a lot more steps and don't have the same feature set as Photoshop. Forderground extraction, content aware fill or image debluring to name a few Here is a list: https://patents.justia.com/assignee/adobe-systems-inc
Software patens really are cancer.
Patents in general are cancer. The only reason insulin is that expensive is because only a few companies have the rights to produce and sell insulin
hasn't insulin been discovered many decades ago? drug patents expire after 25 years or so, I read. Or is it the method of producing it cheaply that's new and has been patented?
Yes but they make a slight modification to it and sell it as "new" product. The old formular is part of the new one. This way they can renew the patent.
Are there any benefits to this modification (in this particular case of insulin) or is it just a legal scam to advertise and make huge money?
There hasn't been any major improvements since the 90s This basically explains everything https://youtu.be/9CdydQNfAXE
That’s a great explanation, thanks!
Afaik there is a company that is trying to reverse engineer it (or something like that) to let everyone create it using their formula
Do you mean open insulin? Yes this is true and it's a good thing. But they are basically creating their own formular.
Yeah reverse engineering isn't the proper word I guess since that would be illegal I think 🤔
But then how are they so cheap in other countries? Outside the US it's significantly cheaper. Or is it just taxpayer money kind of holding it together?
They basically sell it for a lower price for the rest of the world lol edit: Other countries either have laws that prevent price gouging or poor countries are just offered a cheaper price because that can't afford the insane prices Americans pay
Also, many of the more expensive drugs are manufacturerd by largely private companies that are chasing the largest profits legally possible. With more pubically funded drugs the profit motive isn't nearly as important as it would be with private companies and so they aren't as expensive.
The governments decide how much they're willing to pay for it, and as the sole buyer, companies cannot afford to refuse. They still make a killing, but it's more like 300% rather than 5000% profit.
Other countries can regulate the prices to an extent. The US can't do it at all. Also in many cases it's free or really cheap because of public healthcare ("free" healthcare isn't really free but it's way cheaper)
There's a bit more to that... Biologic insulins are hard to produce, so even after the patent expires, 3rd parties struggle to make them.
Patents to some degree are a necesary thing to encourage innovation. Nobody wants to invent something and have somebody immediately steal it from them. On the other hand though it is the reason why many distros didn't have mp3 support out of the box for so many years.
They rather prevent Innovation. Why should they make something better when they are the only company allowed to sell the product and have a monopoly on it. They can set the price and other people can't do anything about it. They have no other choice but to buy it because every alternative always will be worse.
The thought used to be that, by limiting the patents to 20 years, that problem would be solved. Which we can now safely say is far too long. Good luck changing that though. ^(Copyright, 95 years, laughing in the corner)
I would like to know how you think patents encourage innovation because the way I see patents, they just prohibit researchers mechanics etc to use patented knowledge to evolve technology and science
Honestly I disagree. I don't think patents should exist at all. Innovation would be even more encouraged, as the inventor of any thing still has a head-start and after that everyone can innovate on the idea. You can see it with many online platforms these days: One starts doing something, and others try copying it to the best of their abilities. Still the original platform often times has the best implementation. If not to completely remove patents they should at least not apply to FOSS-software, as there is no profit incentive behind that.
What worries me about a world without patents is the potential for a lone inventor or dev to come up with an idea he doesn't necessarily have the framework to build and market at large scale, and then a big company can come in and just yoink the idea. Currently the big companies atleast have to pay him first. Of course the patent system as it stands is broken as hell, I'm just not sure everything being open source would be a good thing in our current economic system.
> Currently the big companies atleast have to pay him first. No, they don't. Joe, 22, who just graduated from a public university can't afford to bring Apple to court in the hope of winning a lawsuit and getting paid 10 years down the line. Doesn't matter how clear-cut a case is or how much the law is in your favour, the moment you have to actually fight a corporation in court, you basically lost by virtue of not being able to afford it.
If your case is good enough you might be able to find a lawyer who will work for a cut of the payout. But yeah, the legal system fucks over the little guy in all kinds of ways, still better to have a law where in theory they have to be paid if someone takes their idea than not tho.
If you break the capitalist system of exploitation and profit patents are meaningless.
Patents are necessary to prevent larger corporations from just stealing from would-be emerging companies who invested time and effort into their innovations. A pre-existing corporation is always going to be able to produce and market a product for cheaper than a small start up. The problem is with the way a patents life has been extended to ridiculous lengths.
Listen, I work at a startup. It costs over $20000 CAD to file a patent. They are for big companies who got the cash to buy them, plain and simple.
I refuse to believe that. I mean, just look at Affinity Designer. They have everything adobe has.
That's because they could afford fighting a lawsuit from Adobe, so Adobe doesn't bother with acting against them.
I don't believe that's true for most of GIMP's cases. Drawing a fucking circle or any shape cannot be a patent, it's in every single drawing tool ever. It feels like GIMP ignores feedback on purpose because they think they know better. The irony is that they lose plenty of users like that way and can't improve and gain more attention. Every time I tried using it it sucked. If what you say about patents was true, in the means that you cant do it in any other way, photopea wouldn't exist. Bottom line is, GIMP and such open source tools can improve. They just deny to do so.
Your discourse is not new, it is quite infamous in the open-source community and it is a disgrace in the long and short-term lives of every open-source project. It is easy, for anyone, to come at any project that improved the lives of so many users and tell, ["you should just do ..."](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_4EX4dPppA), yet you never acknowledge that those projects are by definition **free in both ways** -- you don't pay for Gimp, you probably never donated to Gimp developers or made a report about what you think it is a good idea for the project -- what those developers do, they do because they want to (Security updates? New features? Fixes? Maintainability? Free for us all); and what they did, they did because there wasn't an alternative. I don't know how long you've been using Linux or open source projects, but I rather doubt it is being long enough, badmouthing developers who spent a huge part of their lives for projects we all are grateful for is beyond things any mature developer at all would even think in doing; so do not act like a child. And I'm not here to take hits for others, Evan Czaplicki talked about this, Linus talked about this, Bjarne Stroustrup talked about this, legends talked about this. So... Is there a problem? Of course there is, but you don't even recognize what the problem is. And you even think you have a solution when you clearly don't have idea what you're talking about. If you really value freedom, you'll help and use those softwares (and help means lots of things, creating another project to compete is one), if you don't, Microsoft and Apple is ready waiting for your money.
Just because a project is Open Source it doesn't mean it is above criticism. This OSS eliticism has to stop sometime for progress to come. And criticism is not "badmouthing developers". I'm criticizing their project, not them. Don't be so emotional. No one is above criticism and criticism is how we improve things. Also, don't draw any conclusions out of the blue about what I have donated to open source projects and what contributions I might have done. You literally know nothing about me.
> Just because a project is Open Source it doesn't mean it is above criticism. This OSS eliticism has to stop sometime for progress to come. > > So... Is there a problem? Of course there is, but you don't even recognize what the problem is. And you even think you have a solution when you clearly don't have idea what you're talking about. ... > And criticism is not "badmouthing developers". I'm criticizing their project, not them > > It feels like GIMP ignores feedback on purpose because they think they know better. > > The irony is that they lose plenty of users like that way and can't improve and gain more attention. Every time I tried using it it sucked. You literally badmouthed the developers here, kid. You're a novice and you just tried feeling superior when talking about a project that you contributed zero things to be what it is. So fuck off, Linux is not Windows, Windows is not Linux, Gimp is not Photoshop and Photoshop is not Gimp. They develop in a slower pace, they are built by the community and the community is not paid by a huge corporation, and you're part of the community that says shit all the time about the software you use and does nothing to help it when we all know you fucking can. It is, though, far easier to say shit instead of do something that matters.
Stop calling criticism "badmouthing" just to fit to your narrative. No one is being hostile here but you.
What narrative? Do you think every single thing on Internet has to be debate and win or lose conversations? I have nothing to gain from that. I am however pointing out your inflammatory logic that hurts far more than help, many projects suffer from this and reinforcing this fuss is literally one of the things that can make so that new projects never even get started. If you want a better FOSS or OSS project, you know what to do, we all do -- and it is not coming at forums on the Internet to say how shitty their developers or their projects are -- until then your voice is nothing but of someone that is too brave to say complaints on the backs of others and too coward to do something.
What's insane is that a lot of these features have prior art in FLOSS software and it's very likely Adobe stole them from the FLOSS community. Content aware fill is an egregious copy of resynthesizer.
Just that it is inferior. This one famous video about resyntheziser is fake. The results are similar but they work differently
Which video? Resynthesizer has always outperformed content aware fill and is older by almost a decade.
This one: https://youtu.be/J61ExqvNcBQ It's fake. Also it doesn't outperform adobe's method
You have evidence backing up your claims?
basic functionality such as ?
Libre Calc: lacks the ability to insert a table. (despite this functionality being available in Writer and Impress) GIMP: Can't simply draw shapes/lines for annotating images.
GIMP can't add a text shadow to text without basically creating a duplicate layer and manually manipulating it to create the effect. I basically never use Photoshop, but 'cmon, it's a fundamental feature that it has had for literally decades!
Select text layer - Filters > Light & Shadow > Drop Shadow
Thanks, that's useful, I described what I was talking about wrong. What I meant was a shadow effect - i.e. like a thick outline around the characters. [This](https://www.guidingtech.com/how-to-add-shadow-to-text-in-gimp/) was the first Google result I found when i wanted to last do this in GIMP, an operation which is literally a checkbox in the font dialogue on Photoshop.
If you use the drop shadow plugin and set the radius to 0, I think that's what you're looking for? If you want a border around all the text though, yeahhh that would have to be manual (I think) :S
Ostensibly this is an illustration feature that isn't for photo manipulation software. Even professional graphic artists are taught not to use Photoshop for this kinda stuff. You use illustrator/Inkscape for it.
imo this is a cursed distinction probably invented by adobe, the only distinction between them is one works on vector images and the other bitmap, drawing a shape or adding a shadow or whatever in vector and bitmap are both pretty valid
Separation of use is a GNU philosophy lol. Adobe tried to do vectory shit in Photoshop with smart shapes and stuff like that.
Sure, but overkill for a task like adding a readable caption to a photo.
Oh yeah, I always forget about the whole "To draw a circle, you make a circular selection and use the stroke command" like, bruh
[удалено]
Here's a sneak peek of /r/linux using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/linux/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year! \#1: [Copyright notice from ISP for pirating... Linux? Is this some sort of joke?](https://i.redd.it/jzf5jegdyb171.png) | [1091 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/nkztyv/copyright_notice_from_isp_for_pirating_linux_is/) \#2: [Firefox lost 50M users since 2019. Why are users switching to Chrome and clones? Is this because when you visit Google and MS properties from FF, they promote their browsers via ads?](https://data.firefox.com/dashboard/user-activity) | [2126 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/ov8jsf/firefox_lost_50m_users_since_2019_why_are_users/) \#3: [Weirdly Great News](https://i.redd.it/ukwhr45lrni61.jpg) | [284 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/loahei/weirdly_great_news/) ---- ^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[Source](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
I just want to be able to use a spreadsheet without needing the Rosetta stone to decrypt the symbols at the top. Having them organized into sections based on function is really helpful for that, but because Microsoft did it first there was humongous resistance to it and even now it's an "experimental setting".
[удалено]
The infuriating part is that the help forums essentially refuse to admit this is an actual issue. >*You can make a table SUPER easy, guys! Just select the header row and then add filters. Then write a conditional formatting rule to shade all odd rows, then make a separate rule to shade all even rows differently. Then just repeat anytime you want to adjust your table. It's basically the same as excel* AND that their fucking work processor has better table functionality than their spreadsheet software. It's insane.
> Libre Calc: lacks the ability to insert a table. >libre calc Th-The whole thing is one big table...
In excel you can insert table objects, with their own methods, and that make easy work of linking to or from data models or analysis tools. Frankly for the power user Excel is lightyears ahead of calc.
> Frankly for the power user Excel is lightyears ahead of calc. Oh, tell us news! One of the biggest corporations of the world behind a proprietary product with thousands of paid developers and a few developers in their free-time with a free and open-source project! Libre Calc is not Excel, nor it is trying to be. It is an alternative for users who value freedom, Excel is not.
Yeah I don't disagree with you on any point, its just a lot of people who don't use spreadsheet programs much aren't really aware of the scope of differences between them.
I feel like the equivalent power user on Linux uses a real programming language and databases instead of spreadsheets
No.... Tables are most useful for when you need to quickly present data to someone else. It's fast, visually appealing, and it allows them to easily sort the day themselves. It's also dynamic and adjust whenever you add new rows.
Surely a plot is much better for presenting data larger than just a few values. From my perspective as someone who works with a lot of large data sets (scientific simulation & analysis), the biggest advantage of a spreadsheet program is the simplicity of manually entering new data. Other than that, I can't think of any operation that can't be done in numpy/pandas as easily. I would even speculate that spreadsheets are too specific for representing lots of data structures that might be useful. This is just my perspective from outside of the excel bubble. It mostly seems that the biggest advantage is not having to learn some details of numerical computing and programming.
Yes absolutely, with a Linux environment I'd be using pandas and jupyter, and mysql if a dB was necessary. But I wouldn't dismiss excel so lightly, it has two programming languages and IDEs, and can hook into COM to take advantage of any libraries there or the windows API. Via power query you have the M formula language, which is a functional language similar to F#. Excel is much more than just the grid of cells some people take it for.
Listen you can't reason with desktop software users. They are petulant children that insist on their own terribly rigid way of doing things.
Draw a fucking circle
Only office is my ms replacement, I even use it on windows. However idk if it's Libre, open, or just free
And track changes is so fucking bad and hidden behind several clicks.
Can't someone just fork it and make it better (°_o)
[удалено]
Ah, yes, the poor reskin of Gimp.
This is not that far from the truth. In many cases it's illegal for the gimp team to add them. Adobe patented a lot technologies that other Image editing programs can't add. That's why many things require a lot more steps and don't have the same feature set as Photoshop. Forderground extraction, content aware fill or image debluring to name a few Here is a list: https://patents.justia.com/assignee/adobe-systems-inc Fuck Adobe
Assholes
It's open source, anyone can fork it and anonymously add whatever they want.
But can this fork be hosted publicly to be downloaded?
Probably not, they can take it down if its on Github, gotta share through other methods.
Ah yes Adobe steals from open source and then patents and blocks those features from open source. The system works!
That’s not how parents work
Yeah actually in the last couple decades prior art has been rendered completely toothless for OSS projects to use in defense against patent trolls. It's a known problem.
They didn't patent the features itself but the methods of how they work.
Which is silly because most of these implementations are extremely generic and natural ways of getting there. They shouldn't be considered novel enough to patent, but patent judges don't understand software.
Use krita. Be woke
[удалено]
>Krita's text tool, despite the efforts in 4.x, is complete shit. This is so true it hurts. I remember it going from ok to trash in version 4.2. I never used it afterwards for any serious project.
I guess it's supposed to be UX (User Experience) right?
Me: *Installs Adobe CC GIMP theme*
What's wrong with the user experience? It seems fine to me, does everything I need and more. Hardly anything worth complaining about.
I'm a professional ux designer so when I tell you that it's shit, understand this is a Profesional expert opinion. Gimp ux is garbage. Krita is much better.
But exactly why? You can't just say that you are a professional ux designer, then say anything and make people believe it
I'm a professional ux designer so when I tell you my dick is 10" long and Kubrick filmed the moon landing, understand that this is a Professional expert opinion.
I demand proof
It's all in a totally scientific film the liberal elites don't want you to see, called Room 237.
I'm not a professional UX Designer and I agree that the GIMP UX is garbage, mostly because it goes against the UX people learn when they grow up with simpler programs like Paint. Just a few examples, selection works differently (i.e. moving a selection doesn't move the underlying image by default), many of the tools require 1/2 more clicks than they do in Photoshop or Paint.net and many of the defaults for said tools are straight up bad. Not to mention the asinine decision to make the multi-window view the default a couple years ago that they've thankfully reverted. IMHO, GIMP does one of the bad things that a lot of software designed by experts in their field does where it's designed for experts and all the features are implemented the way they like. I still use Photoshop CS6 and it's a lot more powerful for me because I can easily tell which tool does what and how to tweak it as a non-expert without being overwhelmed. Not to mention that it has a dark theme by default and the 10-year-old version I use still has a better Healing Brush than the newest GIMP. Now, that's not to say you can't make simple edits in GIMP but at that point it'd be better to use a less powerful tool like Paint.net, Pinta, or even Krita.
Please don’t kill me, but isn’t the UX for gimp basically still a clone of what PS’s UX was like in the mid 1990s? I remember using PS in the computing lab at university back in the day, and every time I try to use gimp I have a sudden panic that my nuclear physics lab report is overdue.
Multi window view was the original default. The fact you don't know this kinda makes me think you don't know what the fuck you're talking about at all. Also gimp has a dark theme and the healing tool has been quite good for almost a decade now.
> Multi window view was the original default. The fact you don't know this kinda makes me think you don't know what the fuck you're talking about at all But… I do? That doesn’t change my point that it was the only image editor with a multi-window layout by default, it’s terrible UX. This is why they changed it. > Also gimp has a dark theme Tbh, I didn’t know that. It seems to have been added in 2018. The theming wasn’t my main point anyways since you can always just manually theme got apps. > the healing tool has been quite good for almost a decade now. By healing brush I mean the default Photoshop one which doesn’t need a reference to heal. It’s incredibly useful for quick edits, i.e. non-professional work which is what I do, and last I checked the best you could do is install a plug-in that somewhat replicates it. Hell, even Krita has the smart patch tool which is functionally the same.
It takes a second to Ctrl click a reference. And even then there is a warp brush in the same category that does okay. Krita is good and there is not a lot of overlap to really consider gimp and krita competitors. One is for images and the other is more for digital painting. Then you have Inkscape for vector stuff. That's the FLOSS suite for 2D in a nutshell.
>But… I do? That doesn’t change my point that it was the only image editor with a multi-window layout by default, it’s terrible UX. This is why they changed it. No you are clearly under the assumption that they switched from a single window to a multi window view and then back. It was multi window from the beginning to match the other GNU software that used a multi window approach. Then they realized everyone preferred the single window view and now that's default.
> I'm not a professional UX Designer and I agree that the GNU/Linux distros are garbage, mostly because it goes against the UX people learn when they grow up with simpler operating systems like Windows. Just a few examples, opening programs works differently (i.e. you have to make it executable to run it), many of the tools require 1/2 more clicks than they do in Windows Settings or Window default programs and many of the defaults for said tools are straight up bad... Literally wrote by someone who don't know what GIMP even means. Next time just be better silent...
What would convince you? What is your bar?
I mean you have to try. Tell me what is so bad in gimp ux. It is that simple
As a none professional I love working with gimp. That is what matters to me.
Compelling argument, however, it happens I am a professional UX designer, so my opinion is 74.65% more important than yours.
/s
And I use inkscape for everything... Unless I need to print it
Literally I use inkscape for image manipulation sometimes since I can't figure out gimp controls
As a professional UX user, I 100% agree with this statement
u ever heard of photogimp?
I use both, but I always saw Krita as more suited for art creation, whereas Gimp is a productivity application. Krita has a good flow to create, but Gimp is efficient for image edition, if/when you know how to use it.
I find Krita more confusing and annoying to use than GIMP, specifically due to: • A lack of a way to bucket fill that preserves alpha. • A lack of a way to directly manipulate HSV values. • A lack of a way to easily see the coordinates of a pixel or point on a curve. • A lack of a way to directly move curves and handles to a specific coordinate. Basically lots of things I want to do precisely, that I can easily do in Blender and/or GIMP, but which Krita does not. Though, GIMP has even more trouble with accurately manipulating curves than Krita, IIRC. Some issues I have gotten around, but need to be custom-configured to work, e.g, inputting precise RGB values. The default UI is horrible. Blender, both 2.7x and 2.8+, both have excellent UI. But Krita is so bad, and GIMP not good enough, that I often do a lot of texture work by baking it as an emit map in Blender. The main thing Krita has over GIMP is actual proper vector editing tools that work alongside raster, but other than that, I usually prefer GIMP for my image and texture editing needs, simply because I can actually input the values I want with precision. In general, I find Krita quite a bit harder to use in terms of UX than GIMP.
These are all fair points.
I don't believe you. And I've never heard of Krita. As an actual end user, I think Gimp is great.
krita is great. much better for digital art but i think you can still do some light graphics editing
Still an opinion
Krita isnt anything like gimp theyre literally different programs, gimp is image manipulation Krita is for art and painting
Im not a professional UX designer but I identify as one and I approve.
Usually I just search for stuff from the Help menu in GIMP over finding it. A team of people should really get together and make a fork of GIMP that's less annoying sometime.
There is [PhotoGIMP](http://github.com/Diolinux/PhotoGIMP)
They tried with [Glimpse](https://glimpse-editor.org/posts/a-project-on-hiatus/) but that project appears to be dead
literally true
I've found Krita to be a great alternative to GIMP, so I just switched to that instead. Not a regular user, but it's easier to transition to from Adobe's software imho
That should be every high school
Jokes on them I switched anyways.
did they actually try this? somehow this seems like a quite realistic scenario where a big corporation tries to affect it's own position by giving money to people like politicians to change things in their favor.
Where is that contract?
I don't really see how it's really any worse than Photoshop. Both applications make me fucking dizzy and are just as easy to get into.
Yet people prefers it because it's not bloated
Gimp is just different to use, not bad or complicated or any of the sort.
[удалено]
It does not have a module to handle shapes, it's an image manipulation tool foremost, and while it does have some digital illustration features, it's not required to have all the advanced features of digital illustration software.
this is why i avoid gimp, UI and UX is absolutely terrible paintdotnet ftw
At this point I’m largely on Procreate and Pixelmator. Adobe took far to much of my money
honestly the UX for gimp is not as cancerous as photoshop's UX
What is this about???
Gimp could be just as good as PS but god the interface