While I agree that the Gimp hardly has the greatest interface in the world, I don't think Photoshop's is the archetype of graphics manipulation interfaces either. Despite having had access to it for several years, I still don't know how to use it properly. About the only graphics program that I'm could sit down and use were some of the older versions of Paint Shop Pro. I think this is indicative more of the larger tool set in these sort of programs. It's like reading the man pages for something like bash or cdrecord - simple tools, with a lot of options. (Bearing in mind that I'm not a graphics artist, and really need only the more basic functions these packages provide.) Personally, I agree with the concepts, not products ideal. However, given the way there seems to be an all out attempt to dumb computers down to the level of a toaster, we're going to be fighting this one for a while. My take is that Linux (or anything that's not Windows) is a good thing, because it forces the student to learn that there's not a single way. The thinking being taught with specific types of products leads to the abject stupidity of having to retrain people between Windows 2000 and XP. Edward On Mon, 2003-08-25 at 10:04, Matthew Browne (DSL HN) wrote:
Well first I have to say I agree with your basic point here but I really think this is a bad example. Gimp may have the same basic functionality as Photoshop but it's nowhere near as usable. Dropping a newbie in Gimp would put them off the Graphic Design industry for life. Besides, most books on the subject refer to Photoshop's implementation. I agree this is not ideal but until Gimp improves and other factors (like books, etc) are addressed I don't think anything will change. That said Gimp can be very handy at times and certainly isn't lacking functionality.
Just using 1c here. Never know when I might need the other 1c.
Matt Browne _______________________________________________ wlug mailing list wlug(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/wlug