On 07/24/2012 02:55 AM, Kevin Brubeck Unhammer wrote: > Ofnuts <ofn...@laposte.net> writes: > > [...] > >> I'd go for GINP. GINP Is Not Photoshop. > > Ahah, make people think it's a new name, while they pronounce it the old > way due to phonological assimilation. Sneaky.
A certain well known "closed source" image editor needs to be renamed: Call it PING. The shoe fits. I have tried that editor a couple of times - and by "try" I mean that I got a bunch of manuals and tutorials and made a serious resolution to use it for at least a month. The longest I ever managed to keep trying was about two weeks. Some of that thing's deficiencies are possible to work around, others NOT, as far as I could tell. Photoshop Is Not GIMP. Not even close. Of course, anyone who has invested thousands of hours in Photoshop would rather fight than switch, for perfectly understandable reasons. I only wish there were more of these folks: I have had to deal with a lot of printers and publishers over the years and about half of these encounters have been horror stories. :o/ Steve _______________________________________________ gimp-user-list mailing list email@example.com https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list