On Wednesday 03 October 2007 04:35:36 David Southwell wrote:
> IMHO photoshop is NOT a tool designed for the "average user".
"Average" can mean "typical" & it can mean numbers (as in
mean/mode/median), either way, PS fits the bill.
So if you want to struggle with an "average" creativity ceiling
& suffer "average" problems, you would choose CS.
A lot of people (can't offer you numbers on this one, have to
settle for "many") regard "average" as the only reasonable
alternative to "failure." They won't necessarily _say_ this when
discussing it, but that's how it operates in Real Life.
The essence of this approach is that it makes them allergic
to true success & to attributes like innovation. When "marketing"
to these users (or their bosses) I suspect you'd have to figure
out what they're hedging against in specifying PS, then show
how GIMP clearly offers them better results _in_their_terms_.
This is doubly hard because opening discussion on the very topic
which subtly terrifies them simply raises internal horror & shuts
down communication. So you have to be subtle about it, &
probably approach it under the guise of "the fabulous new gadget
I found which seems to solve X, Y & Z" rather than "this PS
replacement that we're going to bet the boat on."
Gimp-user mailing list