On Wed, Feb 09, 2005 at 05:15:36PM +0100, Jakub Steiner wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-02-08 at 20:03 -0800, Carol Spears wrote:
> > while i have no idea what the developers are doing, either as a group or
> > individually (it is always just a guess about everything and anything,
> > not just gimp stuff), i always thought that they kept the ability to
> > read psd to a minimum to force people away from stealing and using
> > photoshop. it would make sense if you look at it like a war.
> I'd say quite contrary. Giving the abilkity to read PSD will make it
> possible for people to convert their old work and give them a way to
heh, weird. usually i am the optimistic one. :)
> > THEN i spent a week following things on #gimp some. there was lots of
> > talk and exchange of facts about the gimp raw plug-in. i haven't seen
> > anything here about the raw plug-in, but i did see that Adobe has
> > released an updated raw thing themselves.
> > all this stuff, and i just got to sit back and ask myself, whatsup?
> > Jakub, do you know whatsup with all this?
> As for the raw format (DG, Digital Negative), Adobe did the right thing
> and published the spec. 
>  - http://www.adobe.com/products/dng/main.html,
okay, that is cool. better to have an enemy who is somewhat healthy and
Gimp-user mailing list