On Sat, Feb 18, 2017 at 11:12 AM, Alexandre Prokoudine <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sat, Feb 18, 2017 at 3:45 AM, Mark Morin wrote: > >> Photoshop is not the gold standard by which all other programs are to be >> evaluated. > > It is. Sadly so.
Speaking without metaphor: Gold standards only exist in the minds of those who think gold standards exist. Speaking in metaphor: For those willing to use a different currency, gold is just another metal with some really useful properties that is harder to get access to because people want to use it for something it is not. >> One could just as legitimately ask why photoshop's UI is not >> like gimp's > > 1. Photoshop predates GIMP by 10+ years For real graphics artists, Adobe is a latecomer and still an outsider. > 2. GIMP contributors specifically copied some of its features in the past. Most of those features well predate Adobe and the software they built Photoshop's original version on top of. > Would you like to reconsider your point? :) > >> Gimp is not nor ever was and never will be a "free version of photoshop." > > True. > > Alex :-) -- Joel Rees I'm imagining I'm a novelist: http://joel-rees-economics.blogspot.com/2017/01/soc500-00-00-toc.html More of my delusions: http://reiisi.blogspot.jp/p/novels-i-am-writing.html _______________________________________________ gimp-user-list mailing list List address: [email protected] List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list List archives: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-user-list
