Hi!
I am I big fan of OSS and I love the GIMP initiativ.
I am also a big fan of usability though, and I must wonder why there is a
menu item named 'Xtns'? From a usability point of view, it is not very
good...
I also have some other questions regarding usability, but I will start with
this
Hi Martin,
Am 21.03.2006 um 19:17 schrieb Martin Nordholts:
Hi!
I am I big fan of OSS and I love the GIMP initiativ.
That is an very honorable attitude :)
I am also a big fan of usability though, and I must wonder why
there is a menu item named 'Xtns'? From a usability point of view,
From:Axel Wernicke [EMAIL PROTECTED]To:Martin Nordholts [EMAIL PROTECTED]CC:gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDUSubject:Re: [Gimp-developer] Why be cryptic? 'Xtns' should be name 'Extensions'Date:Tue, 21 Mar 2006 19:34:15 +0100Hi Martin,Am 21.03.2006 um 19:17 schrieb Martin Nordholts:Hi!I
I think this implies a design flaw. IMHO, you should neverneed to sacrifice understandability for layout.
As I think usability (or rather a lack of it) is the main obstacle for people to migrate to freely availible software, wouldn't implementing the GIMP interface identicly to the market leading
Hi,
Martin Nordholts [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
As I think usability (or rather a lack of it) is the main obstacle for
people to migrate to freely availible software, wouldn't implementing
the GIMP interface identicly to the market leading Adobe PS be the
best thing to do?
The
The user interface of Photoshop has the same problem that GIMP's user
interface has: It has not been designed but it is grown into what it
is today. In that aspect the Photoshop user interface is definitely
worse than GIMP.
I've have experience with both of Photoshop and GIMP, and I don't
On 3/21/06, Martin Nordholts wrote:
At first I had a
hard time grasping the philosify behind Photoshop's interface, but after
taking a class where we learned PS, it all made sense.
You took a class to understand PS interface and now you find it
better than GIMPs, for which, by the way, you
On 3/21/06, Martin Nordholts wrote:
GIMP does not attempt to be Photoshop nor to be like Photoshop.
Well, I think it should! If there is any software today that has potential
to be a PS counterpart, it is GIMP. I mean why, would we not want it to be
Photoshop?
It's so simple that I fail to
On 3/21/06, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
are doomed to fail if you try to make a great tool by carbon copying
it.
By carbon copying other tool, sorry :)))
Alexandre
___
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
First of all, I probably should mention that I'm not a GIMP
developer. However, I have worked with user interface design
professionally for over a decade and a half, and had been doing
plugins for Photoshop since before 3.5...
On Mar 21, 2006, at 12:19 PM, Martin Nordholts wrote:
I've
First, thanks for an insightful reply.
I read about MDIs at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_document_interface and I was conviced,
MDI seems like a thing of the past.
However, I think that when you use GIMP, the taskbar quickly gets bloated
with lots of images. Would a TDI (Tabbed
This is one of those debates which dosent thrill me.
Gimp != Photoshop.
People often misunderstand free software and think.
Hey here is a free Photoshop, cool. What?? its not the same...
why not???
People open the gimp. poke about. and complain if its not what there
used to. *(Grrr)
I
On 3/21/06, Sven Neumann wrote:
Well, in this particular case, I would just encourage to rename
'Xtns' to 'Extensions'.
The problem here is that the toolbox is rather small and if we renamed
the menu as you suggested, that would push the Help menu off the
window. Of course you
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Alexandre,
Am 21.03.2006 um 23:51 schrieb Alexandre Prokoudine:
Simply distributing menu items sounds like a fairly easy task.
Doing so would assume that there is always at least one document
window. This is not the case in the gui
On 3/22/06, Axel Wernicke wrote:
Simply distributing menu items sounds like a fairly easy task.
Doing so would assume that there is always at least one document
window. This is not the case in the gui architecture of GIMP right now.
Exactly. So, do you have some Inkscape-like GUI on your
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Am 21.03.2006 um 23:58 schrieb Alexandre Prokoudine:
On 3/22/06, Axel Wernicke wrote:
Simply distributing menu items sounds like a fairly easy task.
Doing so would assume that there is always at least one document
window. This is not the case
Martin Nordholts ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
However, I think that when you use GIMP, the taskbar quickly gets bloated
with lots of images. Would a TDI (Tabbed Document Interface) be very tough
to implement in GIMP? TDI's have become very popular, and afaik lots of
people agrees that TDIs
On Tuesday 21 March 2006 14:45, Sven Neumann wrote:
By having an identical interface, more people could migrate, more
people would help on development, and everything would become better.
GIMP does not attempt to be Photoshop nor to be like Photoshop. We do
not believe that Photoshop
Martin Nordholts writes:
I've have experience with both of Photoshop and GIMP, and I don't agree. To
me Photoshop's interface is much more thoroughly designed.
Well, using usability expertise and the experience of real power GIMP
users in (re)designing GIMP's UI is something which the GIMP
19 matches
Mail list logo
