Re: [Gimp-developer] Why be cryptic? 'Xtns' should be name 'Extensions'
On Wed, Mar 22, 2006 at 08:20:51PM -0500, Brendan wrote: Please, oh Lord, someone fork Gimp. Actually, I doubt that forking the codebase and starting a new project will solve the problems we're facing. Starting new projects is always easier than manage them, as well as facing problems and solving them. It would make sens if the project comes to a nearly dead end. But this is not the case. Be patient and/or join the development would be much smarter, in my opinion. Greetings, -- Roman Joost www: http://www.romanofski.de email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] pgpGPeRjDoVBk.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Why be cryptic? 'Xtns' should be name 'Extensions'
Brendan writes: Please, oh Lord, someone fork Gimp. I can imagine the scenario: (This is a parody, not a flame) Someones forks GIMP, sets up a project on (say) SourceForge. He spends lots of effort on the project's web page. (He is a c00l web designer.) It has a long list of features that this forked GIMP will have. The small print at the bottom says looking for developers. --tml ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Why be cryptic? 'Xtns' should be name 'Extensions'
Hi, Martin Nordholts [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: 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 are very effective for handling multiple documents. We are already addressing the taskbar problem in the development version but some more changes will be needed to get this right. Having the possibility to combine multiple images in a single image window using tabs is not a new idea and it has always been welcomed. I wonder why we are discussing this again. The tabbed image window has been suggested before and I don't think that we have ever objected that it is a good idea and that it would fit well with the GIMP UI. Someone just needs to implement it. Sven ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Why be cryptic? 'Xtns' should be name 'Extensions'
Hi, Brendan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I wonder how many times it will take to hear the Perhaps Gimp should think about having a Photoshop-mode before we'll stop defending Gimp's interface... How many times will it take before people realize how much work it would be to add and support different modes in the user interface? It's simply not worth it, especially since it is a widely accepted fact in user interface design that such modes are a bad idea. We can improve the GIMP UI and it will improve. But if you really think that the only acceptable user interface is a perfect clone of Photoshop, then why don't you go ahead and start a project that aims to create such a clone? Sven ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Why be cryptic? 'Xtns' should be name 'Extensions'
Hi, Alexandre Prokoudine [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: When you say get rid of you mean distribute its menu items over menus in each document's window? Yes. And when it's done will toolbox still be an always floating window or optionally dockable one? We will have to evaluate this based on user scenarios. ButI don't think we would reject a clean patch that adds this functionality. Simply distributing menu items sounds like a fairly easy task. It is definitely not easy to get a menu structure done right. OK, the File menu will be easy because most of its entries are already in the image's File menu. Help will be easy as well, it would just be moved as is. But can you make reasonable suggestions for where to place all the items that are currently in the Xtns menu? Sven ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Why be cryptic? 'Xtns' should be name 'Extensions'
On Thursday 23 March 2006 03:44, you wrote: Hi, Brendan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I wonder how many times it will take to hear the Perhaps Gimp should think about having a Photoshop-mode before we'll stop defending Gimp's interface... How many times will it take before people realize how much work it would be to add and support different modes in the user interface? It's simply not worth it, especially since it is a widely accepted fact in user interface design that such modes are a bad idea. We can improve the GIMP UI and it will improve. But if you really think that the only acceptable user interface is a perfect clone of Photoshop, then why don't you go ahead and start a project that aims to create such a clone? I am primarily a KDE hacker. I already donate piles of time to that effort, including writing docs. I use Gimp almost every day, but I hear it continuously about the need to have it at least have a PS compatibility mode, from graphic designers who would love to use it. ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Why be cryptic? 'Xtns' should be name 'Extensions'
On 3/23/06, Brendan wrote: I am primarily a KDE hacker. I already donate piles of time to that effort, including writing docs. I use Gimp almost every day, but I hear it continuously about the need to have it at least have a PS compatibility mode, from graphic designers who would love to use it. Okay, 1. You are a KDE hacker. 2. You know what donating time is. 3. You need PS compatibility mode in a graphics editor. 4. You already have Krita that looks and behaves more like PS in some ways. Why do you keep using GIMP? Why don't you help Boudewijn with tracking down bugs in Krita 1.5 beta2? Alexandre ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Why be cryptic? 'Xtns' should be name 'Extensions'
For people who want layer erffects and photoshop style interface. goto... http://www.kanzelsberger.com/pixel/?page_id=9 Can we have a section in Gimp's FAQ about why the Gimp does not directly copy Photoshop? - Cam Brendan wrote: On Thursday 23 March 2006 03:44, you wrote: Hi, Brendan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I wonder how many times it will take to hear the Perhaps Gimp should think about having a Photoshop-mode before we'll stop defending Gimp's interface... How many times will it take before people realize how much work it would be to add and support different modes in the user interface? It's simply not worth it, especially since it is a widely accepted fact in user interface design that such modes are a bad idea. We can improve the GIMP UI and it will improve. But if you really think that the only acceptable user interface is a perfect clone of Photoshop, then why don't you go ahead and start a project that aims to create such a clone? I am primarily a KDE hacker. I already donate piles of time to that effort, including writing docs. I use Gimp almost every day, but I hear it continuously about the need to have it at least have a PS compatibility mode, from graphic designers who would love to use it. ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer -- Campbell J Barton 133 Hope Street Geelong West, Victoria 3218 Australia URL:http://www.metavr.com e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] phone: AU (03) 5229 0241 ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Why be cryptic? 'Xtns' should be name 'Extensions'
On Thursday 23 March 2006 05:46, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote: On 3/23/06, Brendan wrote: I am primarily a KDE hacker. I already donate piles of time to that effort, including writing docs. I use Gimp almost every day, but I hear it continuously about the need to have it at least have a PS compatibility mode, from graphic designers who would love to use it. Okay, 1. You are a KDE hacker. 2. You know what donating time is. 3. You need PS compatibility mode in a graphics editor. 4. You already have Krita that looks and behaves more like PS in some ways. Why do you keep using GIMP? Why don't you help Boudewijn with tracking down bugs in Krita 1.5 beta2? Because I've used Gimp since pre1.0 and I want to see it succeed? ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Why be cryptic? 'Xtns' should be name 'Extensions'
Why do you keep using GIMP? Why don't you help Boudewijn with tracking down bugs in Krita 1.5 beta2? Great way to attract collaborators. I guess many people love the GIMP, but they don't have the attitude to cooperate in its development; I could not be this harsh even if I tried. Alex. ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Why be cryptic? 'Xtns' should be name 'Extensions'
On 3/23/06, Alex Fernandez wrote: Why do you keep using GIMP? Why don't you help Boudewijn with tracking down bugs in Krita 1.5 beta2? Great way to attract collaborators. I guess many people love the GIMP, but they don't have the attitude to cooperate in its development; I could not be this harsh even if I tried. I wasn't going to be any harsh, sorry if I was. Please bear in mind that for every action there is a reason. If someone with experience of contribution to FOSS keeps insisting that other people should change their plans and start playing catch-up games with Adobe and use UI approach almost everybody else has abandoned, if he keeps doing it though it was publicly annonced that it's not going to happen, there must be some reason why he thinks it's a good idea. And that's what I'm trying to find out. Alexandre ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Why be cryptic? 'Xtns' should be name 'Extensions'
Alex Fernandez wrote: Why do you keep using GIMP? Why don't you help Boudewijn with tracking down bugs in Krita 1.5 beta2? Great way to attract collaborators. I guess many people love the GIMP, but they don't have the attitude to cooperate in its development; I could not be this harsh even if I tried. Both questions are valid. How would you phrase them to be less harsh? Please also keep in mind that many people here aren't native speakers, and this question wouldn't necessarily be harsh in any way in e.g. German (it would depend a lot on the tone to make it harsh there). HTH, Michael -- The GIMP http://www.gimp.org | IRC: irc://irc.gimp.org/gimp Wiki http://wiki.gimp.org | .de: http://gimpforum.de Plug-ins http://registry.gimp.org | ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Why be cryptic? 'Xtns' should be name 'Extensions'
Both questions are valid. They are not valid. If someone said she was a KDE developer on a Mozilla list, would you think it right to ask why is she using Firefox instead of helping out with Konqueror? How would you phrase them to be less harsh? Not making them. It is one thing to be curt and to the point; but suggesting your users to go use something else is always harsh. To do it with potential developers is just crazy. How about Hey Brendan, glad you use our program even if your primary desktop is KDE; we would be glad to accept any patches you cared to send our way, but our primary focus is not Photoshop emulation? Please also keep in mind that many people here aren't native speakers, and this question wouldn't necessarily be harsh in any way in e.g. German (it would depend a lot on the tone to make it harsh there). Not true. In any language they translate to why do you keep playing in our playground? why don't you go play in yours instead? Not very polite. Alex. ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Why be cryptic? 'Xtns' should be name 'Extensions'
Alex Fernandez wrote: Both questions are valid. They are not valid. If someone said she was a KDE developer on a Mozilla list, would you think it right to ask why is she using Firefox instead of helping out with Konqueror? If he wants to convert Firefox into Konqueror, I would ask this, yes. How would you phrase them to be less harsh? Not making them. It is one thing to be curt and to the point; but suggesting your users to go use something else is always harsh. To do it with potential developers is just crazy. Well, if a user comes with needs that your product can't fulfill, isn't it polite to tell them that there are others (Alexandre did this) and then ask them why they don't use it? E.g. people are pointed to ImageMagick, Inkscape, Blender and Cinepaint on gimp lists and forums, because each of these apps ahs different strengths than GIMP. This time, it was Krita. How about Hey Brendan, glad you use our program even if your primary desktop is KDE; we would be glad to accept any patches you cared to send our way, but our primary focus is not Photoshop emulation? See, now this is something I'd read as ironic :) Please also keep in mind that many people here aren't native speakers, and this question wouldn't necessarily be harsh in any way in e.g. German (it would depend a lot on the tone to make it harsh there). Not true. In any language they translate to why do you keep playing in our playground? why don't you go play in yours instead? Not very polite. If you like to read them like this, it's your opinion. But maybe you should lower your expectations in regard to politeness on a mailing list and assume that as long as someone isn't insulting others directly (by using words that clearly indicate that he is), he isn't trying to be impolite either? HTH, Michael -- The GIMP http://www.gimp.org | IRC: irc://irc.gimp.org/gimp Wiki http://wiki.gimp.org | .de: http://gimpforum.de Plug-ins http://registry.gimp.org | ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Why be cryptic? 'Xtns' should be name 'Extensions'
On 3/23/06, Sven Neumann wrote: And when it's done will toolbox still be an always floating window or optionally dockable one? We will have to evaluate this based on user scenarios. ButI don't think we would reject a clean patch that adds this functionality. Sure :) Simply distributing menu items sounds like a fairly easy task. It is definitely not easy to get a menu structure done right. OK, the File menu will be easy because most of its entries are already in the image's File menu. Help will be easy as well, it would just be moved as is. But can you make reasonable suggestions for where to place all the items that are currently in the Xtns menu? It seems to me that bugzilla is a better place for further discussion. I found following relevant entries: http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=116145 (UI clarity - re-organize scripts and plug-ins in the menus) http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=145507 (rearrangement of Xtns Menu options) Which one would you pick to proceed further? Alexandre ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Why be cryptic? 'Xtns' should be name 'Extensions'
They are not valid. If someone said she was a KDE developer on a Mozilla list, would you think it right to ask why is she using Firefox instead of helping out with Konqueror? If he wants to convert Firefox into Konqueror, I would ask this, yes. But he doesn't! He said that the GIMP could have a PS compatibility mode (not even for him, but for designer friends); and he was asked why he didn't hack on Krita which is a different tool (but with overlapping functionality). How about Hey Brendan, glad you use our program even if your primary desktop is KDE; we would be glad to accept any patches you cared to send our way, but our primary focus is not Photoshop emulation? See, now this is something I'd read as ironic :) This says a lot about the tone of the mailing list. If you like to read them like this, it's your opinion. But maybe you should lower your expectations in regard to politeness on a mailing list and assume that as long as someone isn't insulting others directly (by using words that clearly indicate that he is), he isn't trying to be impolite either? I have been reading many different developer mailing lists for several years now, and I've seen endless bickering, flaming, trolling, baiting... but this aggressive attitude towards potential developers and despise for users is unheard of. It is IMHO very unprofessional and steers people away from the list and the program. Don't get me wrong; I love the GIMP, it's a great piece of software. I have even contributed a tiny patch to Peyronnet's great FFT filter: http://people.via.ecp.fr/~remi/soft/gimp/gimp_plugin_en.php3 For my needs GIMP is perfect; I would love if it could grow to fulfill the needs of many different people, from complete novices to 32-bit-crazed professionals, and there is a lot of work to do. It is not like you can afford turning away any helping hands. People are usually proud of belonging to a helpful community, and are turned away by impolite answers like this one. Alex. ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Why be cryptic? 'Xtns' should be name 'Extensions'
Alex Fernandez wrote: It is not like you can afford turning away any helping hands. I think this gets us back on track. People are usually proud of belonging to a helpful community, and are turned away by impolite answers like this one. IMO is is still arguable whether Alexandre's questions were impolite. As he states himself, he didn't intend them to be read this way, and there's no indication that we shouldn't believe him (if anything is impolite towards others, it's our current off-topic meta-discussion). So, let's try some kind of summary (I'll try not to judge the points): - GIMP is not aiming to be a copy of Photoshop - people can suggest better solutions that fit other's needs - direct questions are impolite - impoliteness drives away potential GIMP users and developers We've already established that the two of us disagree on the third point, so it's probably pointless to discuss this further. I woin't mind if you'd like to comment on this message, of course, but we could declare EOT otherwise. HTH, Michael -- The GIMP http://www.gimp.org | IRC: irc://irc.gimp.org/gimp Wiki http://wiki.gimp.org | .de: http://gimpforum.de Plug-ins http://registry.gimp.org | ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Why be cryptic? 'Xtns' should be name 'Extensions'
On 3/23/06, Alex Fernandez wrote: But he doesn't! He said that the GIMP could have a PS compatibility mode For usability's sake it's not good to introduce modes that make same application look and behave different. It was countless times announced by developers in this and other mailing lists that they do wish to improve GUI of GIMP, but that they don't want to clone PS. Sven wrote a special posting about it in his blog recently. All of this is publicly available information, cached by Google. Do you think GIMP needs a full-time employee to talk to every single person who doesn't want to read what is already written and listen to what he is told? ;-) To put an end to this dejavu-making thread I suggest extending http://www.gimp.org/about/introduction.html with the following text, originated from Gnumeric's description at gnomefiles.org: GIMP is intended to be a powerful innovative tool, not a drop-in replacement to any of existing proprietary software. We are not attempting to clone existing applications. That said, I'm quitting reasoning anyone who starts this old good gimme PS-like GUI here. Sorry for any inconveniences whatsoever. Alexandre ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Why be cryptic? 'Xtns' should be name 'Extensions'
We can improve the GIMP UI and it will improve. But if you really think that the only acceptable user interface is a perfect clone of Photoshop, then why don't you go ahead and start a project that aims to create such a clone? Weren't people complaining about Gimpshop forking instead of trying to help change the GIMP? I am primarily a KDE hacker. I already donate piles of time to that effort, including writing docs. I use Gimp almost every day, but I hear it continuously about the need to have it at least have a PS compatibility mode, from graphic designers who would love to use it. Are they aware of the psmenurc which can be used to give photoshop like keybindings? I find it very useful but unfortunately there is no way to set this in the user interface which is probably enough to guarantee most users never discover it (I've added similar comments to a few bug reports over the years). There are a few other extension and plugins which can help smooth the transition. Instead of all those Versus articles it would be nice if a journalist could for a change write about similarities and what functionality most closely corresponds to what they are expecting which might help users to adapt. (Although like others I'd prefer if users didn't have to adapt quite so much and if more changes were made to meet peoples expectations unless there was a specific reasons not to accept changes.) Sincerely Alan Horkan http://advogato.org/person/AlanHorkan/ ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Why be cryptic? 'Xtns' should be name 'Extensions'
Alex Fernandez wrote: I have been reading many different developer mailing lists for several years now, and I've seen endless bickering, flaming, trolling, baiting... but this aggressive attitude towards potential developers and despise for users is unheard of. It is IMHO very unprofessional and steers people away from the list and the program. Don't get me wrong; I love the GIMP, it's a great piece of software. I have even contributed a tiny patch to Peyronnet's great FFT filter: http://people.via.ecp.fr/~remi/soft/gimp/gimp_plugin_en.php3 For my needs GIMP is perfect; I would love if it could grow to fulfill the needs of many different people, from complete novices to 32-bit-crazed professionals, and there is a lot of work to do. It is not like you can afford turning away any helping hands. People are usually proud of belonging to a helpful community, and are turned away by impolite answers like this one. Um, perhaps it is a matter of tone, but knowing Alexandre and working with him on projects, he is a: very professional b: not agressive with users. In defense of the GIMP team, they are (unfairly IMO) criticized by those who are not attuned to the actual state of development and their stated goals. Call it support fatigue if you will, but these kinds of issues have been discussed to death and the GIMP developers have clearly, in many places, stated their goals and their reasoning behind it. I think Alexandre was rightly trying to point you in a direction which might be more productive to achieve your wishes. (e.g.) Your familiarity with KDE/Qt, the Krita's team obvious need for help etc. Peter ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Why be cryptic? 'Xtns' should be name 'Extensions'
But he doesn't! He said that the GIMP could have a PS compatibility mode For usability's sake it's not good to introduce modes that make same application look and behave different. I completely agree with this. Probably docking palettes or something like this would be all that is needed to make people feel comfortable with the interface. It was countless times announced by developers in this and other mailing lists that they do wish to improve GUI of GIMP, but that they don't want to clone PS. Sven wrote a special posting about it in his blog recently. All of this is publicly available information, cached by Google. Yes, I have read it countless times on this very same list. I suppose it must be tiring after a few years, but still. Do you think GIMP needs a full-time employee to talk to every single person who doesn't want to read what is already written and listen to what he is told? ;-) If need be. What is really missing is someone who listens carefully and tries to accomodate users' needs. Users probably don't need a Photoshop clone; as has been pointed out elsewhere in the thread, Photoshop changes regularly so it's a moving target. But if 100 users tell you something, then there is probably a need; they probably would appreciate a different interface which does not need a desktop all for itself. I know I would; at home on my SUSE I can spare a desktop, at work on Windows I can't. Please, please think that these same people are honestly trying to help. They take the trouble to write to a mailing list full of strangers and put out a suggestion which is usually new for them. Thanks for your time, we appreciate your efforts. Just be patient with us people. Alex. ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Why be cryptic? 'Xtns' should be name 'Extensions'
On Thu, Mar 23, 2006 at 06:59:40PM +0100, Alex Fernandez wrote: Alexandre Prokoudine wrote: It was countless times announced by developers in this and other mailing lists that they do wish to improve GUI of GIMP, but that they don't want to clone PS. Sven wrote a special posting about it in his blog recently. All of this is publicly available information, cached by Google. Yes, I have read it countless times on this very same list. I suppose it must be tiring after a few years, but still. there is a bigger picture that is missing when people make this request, at least it might be. let me try to explain this bigger picture as i see it. it is much more fun to write this stuff to fill in gaps that the big guys left out. i watch in my world as the large and capable merchant machines squeeze out the little merchants, for instance. at the same time, i lived there and the little merchants were not the best players in the world either, so it is really not a good guy vs bad guy example i am making. i have been watching the gimp developers work for years now. it is interesting to see the impact that gimp has had on photoshop. gimp improved photoshop, if what i saw was accurate. lately, it *looks* like the only thing that photoshop has left to work with is that everyone wants gimp to look like it. poor photoshop! this once proud application is now seeming to beg gimp to look like it. it is a better world and a better (for lack of a different word) game and more fun to play (play like play the game or play like play in the world) if photoshop can stress the gimp developers by its functionality and its ability to change the world by making good graphics and not stressing the gimp developers. gimp should be there for those users who understand that they do not want to steal and that this desire to not steal means they might have to learn to do things differently. i probably should apply the same logic to points in my life, but that is a different thread that does not belong on this list. no matter how direct our answers or tired the developers seem, honestly, it is really cool to have gotten your attention. if you can help photoshop to not look so desparate, the software world will probably be better for it. as usual, i might be wrong again about all of this carol ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Why be cryptic? 'Xtns' should be name 'Extensions'
On Thu, Mar 23, 2006 at 04:22:19PM +0100, PLinnell wrote: In defense of the GIMP team, they are (unfairly IMO) criticized by those who are not attuned to the actual state of development and their stated goals. Call it support fatigue if you will, but these kinds of issues have been discussed to death and the GIMP developers have clearly, in many places, stated their goals and their reasoning behind it. if i can add my view to this i remember when tor first ported gimp to windows. this was a wonderful time in gimp development and a lot of that had to do with tor himself. he did not demand and insist that the port be made, he asked questions as he worked on it. those emails were some of the nicest of exchanges i have ever read on this list. the way tor spoke so respectfully to all of the people who were active at the time, even old enemies dropped their problems with each other and joined together to help him. this was inspite of the fact that none of them were very happy about gimp being used on windows. i don't think that everyone needs to be as eloquent as tor lillqvist (although, wouldn't that be nice! me included!) but it is easier to be have effective communications with this group if you ask questions while you are working yourself on it. and tor, god bless him, was having problems getting his scanner to work on linux, heh. i read that page. thanks for all of the interested parties... carol ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Why be cryptic? 'Xtns' should be name 'Extensions'
Looking at the menu we have. 1) Plugin/script development tools 2) Scripts that create new images. 3) The Module and Unit Editors Wouldn't it make sense to refactor 2) into the file menu - either as a new from script, or into the new file dialog - as a special type of template even. 3) should probably be folded into the preferences dialog. Which leaves 1) I would suggest Tools as a menu name purhaps. I would also suggest moving the debug submenu here... (note word suggest, I encourage somebody to think of something better) -- Grief can take care of itself; but to get the full value of a joy you must have somebody to divide it with. -- Mark Twain ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Why be cryptic? 'Xtns' should be name 'Extensions'
On Wed, Mar 22, 2006 at 12:37:52AM +0100, Axel Wernicke wrote: Exactly. So, do you have some Inkscape-like GUI on your mind? well I know this is insane, but I have Mac OS X in mind, where the menu is sticked to a menubar that is always located at the top of the screen :) And even that is not very usable today. I spoke with Ellen Reitmayr about that and she told me that this methology isn't the best (Ellen - correct me if I'm wrong here) I mean... it seems to be so easy to put a fixed menubar at the top of the screen. Users can place the mouse faster to a top aligned menubar than on floating ones. But if you have a lot of windows open, it's getting worse. For example, I always trap into the problem, that the menubar of Mozilla Firefox isn't raise after the browser is started. You've to click in the main window to raise it. I think not copying from Apple nor from Photoshop will be a good start ;) Greetings, -- Roman Joost www: http://www.romanofski.de email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] pgpUqBwKv8uW8.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Why be cryptic? 'Xtns' should be name 'Extensions'
First of all I have to tell I'm not a developer, but just I'm helping with italian translation of the program. I read all the messages that created this flame war. Through the lines I found a few good ideas that if implemented toghether should be a good compromise between Gimp and PS interface. IMHO the first one is to make the image window dockable beside the toolbar. Try to figure out the GIMP in this way you'll have the toolbar, under it the tool options window, at their right the image window and at its right the other dockable windows. In this way, with all windows docked toghether, it may look like an MDI application but it's not. In these configuration you should place in the image window (just under the menu or just above the status bar) the tabs to switch between the images that are opened. If you undock the image window, every image should have back it's own window as it is in GIMP today. Doing so every one should be able to choose to use GIMP the way they like better docked or undocked, having one big block of attached windows or tons of windows floating all around. Marco Marega -- -- ...can't buy what I want because it's free... (da Corduroy - Pearl Jam) ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Why be cryptic? 'Xtns' should be name 'Extensions'
On Wed, Mar 22, 2006 at 02:39:04PM +0100, Marega Marco wrote: First of all I have to tell I'm not a developer, but just I'm helping with italian translation of the program. I read all the messages that created this flame war. Through the lines I found a few good ideas that if implemented toghether should be a good compromise between Gimp and PS interface. we have different definitions of flamewar i think. when i read this thread, it really seemed like a discussion to me. there is one thing that we all were in agreement on at the lgm meeting this last weekend. i would like the following to be read as a simple statement of fact and not as a means to hurt anyones feelings. the single thing we easily agreed on is that gimp doesn't really need new users or strive to be the most used software. gimp is in need of developers. not just any developers either. it is somewhat difficult to get into stride with the ones that have been working on gimp for so long. there is a desire for elegance in the code that is not understood by everyone. there were several art making applications at the meeting. everyone was surprised at how few actual developers there were making these wonderful and free applications. in this very big world now, it can be confusing (i imagine) to join us in our little part of it. gimp has never been written with the goal of huge masses of users that need to be pleased. it has been written with quality and efficiency in mind. as a long time user, i get frustrated because many of the people who want compromise from gimp developers have paid for photoshop instruction either through classes or literature. i really really found that if you learn how gimp works, you will find yourself not limited to only gimp in your newly acquired abilities. it should be like changing your diet, i think. where you discover that certain foods hurt you even when you like them. it takes a little discipline and open mindedness and you can change your diet and improve yourself. i am certain it is confusing to users of other software from other environments. gimp development has never ever been driven by the need to get and show multitudes of users. this would probably be the gnu and the gpl in the name GNU Image Manipulation Program. it is available to you and you can use it but no promises or guarentees are made about it. this seems to be more typical of GNU than of the larger group called Open [whatever]. one thing i overheard at the meeting was that the developers did not want to make gimp so that they themselves could not use it. if you do not like how gimp works, i would be more than happy to provide many other softwares that might work the way you like it to. everyone at the meeting who is involved with gimp seemed to be very proud of what they have, so any suggestions that needy users make should start from this point of view. out of the corner of my eye, i could see the other art apps wondering what made gimp and its developers so dynamic in this world. i can tell you for certain it is love and familiarity and similar vision. i don't think that any of the humans have a history of being overly popular among other humans and none of us mind that either. we did decide that if it came to a critical point, gimp would be developed only with professionals in mind. as someone who has spent many hours and even years of my life advocating gimp as a graphics teaching instrument, this is discouraging to me. but like a change in my diet, i would be willing to stop seeing gimp as an educational software and change my imaginary audience to only professionals. suggesting it work differently means that it has not actually been effective at education and perhaps i see too much potential in human beings to be able to learn. in truth, there could be only the developers using this application and it would still be developed. it is about love and not popularity. it should be interesting to review yourself as a user and how you interface with this powerful application. humans are more intelligent than computers. please help us to prove this first before you ask for compromises that you think you need. there is actual work that can and should be done. are you helping this or detracting from it? help us not to start to limit gimp to only use by professionals. to all of the new faces and old friends at the meeting, it was nice to see you again or meet you for the first time! thanks everyone :) carol ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Why be cryptic? 'Xtns' should be name 'Extensions'
On Wednesday 22 March 2006 16:55, Carol Spears wrote: in this very big world now, it can be confusing (i imagine) to join us in our little part of it. gimp has never been written with the goal of huge masses of users that need to be pleased. it has been written with quality and efficiency in mind. Oh god, that is lame. We want to write good, quality code, that 4 people will use. We could make a few concessions and get 4 million using it, but no, we're good with the 4 people. Please, oh Lord, someone fork Gimp. ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Why be cryptic? 'Xtns' should be name 'Extensions'
On 3/23/06, Brendan wrote: Oh god, that is lame. We want to write good, quality code, that 4 people will use. We could make a few concessions and get 4 million using it, but no, we're good with the 4 people. Please, oh Lord, someone fork Gimp. I'm doing my best to understand why people say such things at all. Since operation system is something one's favourite application runs on, and Photoshop runs natively on Windows and Mac only, why don't they simply use Photoshop on Windows or Mac? Why do they bother subscribing to gimp-developer@ and ask for Photoshop-like interface? What is your reason for not buying licensed Windows and Adobe Photoshop and using it instead of struggling with lame developers and contributors? Alexandre ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
[Gimp-developer] Why be cryptic? 'Xtns' should be name 'Extensions'
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 one :) Thanks for any replies! Martin Nordholts, Sweden _ Hitta rätt på nätet med MSN Search http://search.msn.se/ ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Why be cryptic? 'Xtns' should be name 'Extensions'
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, it is not very good... OK, so if you like Open Source Software you probably know about the permanent lack of time and resources and the invitation to enhance projects? Asking questions about things is a good start. I'd just like to encourage you to go one step ahead and think about answers. Make a suggestion how to solve this so we can discuss it. While thinking about that, take in concern issues as space and the possibility of an already ongoing diskussion about this at the gimp bugtracking system. I also have some other questions regarding usability, but I will start with this one :) Again, having a concept or at leas an idea how to improve the usability is better that just asking a question. Having the resources to implement it after convincing the crowd is even more appreciated. Thanks for any replies! You are welcome! Greetings, lexa Martin Nordholts, Sweden _ Hitta rätt på nätet med MSN Search http://search.msn.se/ ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer --- Live is like a chocolate box, you never know what you wanna get... GPG Signatur auf http://wernicke-online.net/Impressum/ prüfen PGP.sig Description: Signierter Teil der Nachricht ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Why be cryptic? 'Xtns' should be name 'Extensions'
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 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 whythere is a menu item named 'Xtns'? From a usability point of view,it is not very good...OK, so if you like Open Source Software you probably know about thepermanent lack of time and resources and the invitation to enhanceprojects? Asking questions about things is a good start. I'd justlike to encourage you to go one step ahead and think about answers.Make a suggestion how to solve this so we can discuss it. Whilethinking about that, take in concern issues as space and thepossibility of an already ongoing diskussion about this at the gimpbugtracking system.I also have some other questions regarding usability, but I willstart with this one :)Again, having a concept or at leas an idea how to improve theusability is better that just asking a question. Having the resourcesto implement it after convincing the crowd is even more appreciated.Thanks for any replies!You are welcome!Greetings, lexaMartin Nordholts, Sweden_Hitta rätt på nätet med MSN Search http://search.msn.se/___Gimp-developer mailing listGimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDUhttps://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer---Live is like a chocolate box, you never know what you wanna get...GPG Signatur auf http://wernicke-online.net/Impressum/ prüfen PGP.sig När du tar kärleken på allvar MSN Dejting ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Why be cryptic? 'Xtns' should be name 'Extensions'
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 Adobe PS be the best thing to do? By having an identical interface, more people could migrate, more people would help on development, and everything would become better. Hmm, maybe I should start a new Photoshop interface or not-thread. I googled for Photoshop in the archives, and I didn't find an thoroughly discussion of this, so let's take it now. From: Axel Wernicke [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: Martin Nordholts [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: [Gimp-developer] Why be cryptic? 'Xtns' should be name 'Extensions'Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 20:18:03 +0100so "Extensions" takes compared to "Xtns" considerable more space - doesn't it? Might that be a problem? Might there be people, who want the toolbox as tight as possible? Please think again, you can do better that that. Hint: the more simple solutions to this might have been under consideration already. Greetings, lexA Am 21.03.2006 um 20:10 schrieb Martin Nordholts: Well, in this particular case, I would just encourage to rename 'Xtns' to 'Extensions'. I'm sorry for not being especially constructive, this is my first mail to this list and I'm just 'tasting' the GIMP developers :) And also, I realize my mail was i bit confusing; I did not suggest redisigning the menu or something, just that 'Xtns' is a cryptic caption, and that 'Extensions' would be better. I guess the name is defined in a single place in a lanugage file somewhere, so changing it would be quite quick? /Martin 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 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 whythere is a menu item named 'Xtns'? From a usability point of view,it is not very good...OK, so if you like Open Source Software you probably know about thepermanent lack of time and resources and the invitation to enhanceprojects? Asking questions about things is a good start. I'd justlike to encourage you to go one step ahead and think about answers.Make a suggestion how to solve this so we can discuss it. Whilethinking about that, take in concern issues as space and thepossibility of an already ongoing diskussion about this at the gimpbugtracking system.I also have some other questions regarding usability, but I willstart with this one :)Again, having a concept or at leas an idea how to improve theusability is better that just asking a question. Having the resourcesto implement it after convincing the crowd is even more appreciated.Thanks for any replies!You are welcome!Greetings, lexaMartin Nordholts, Sweden_Hitta rätt på nätet med MSN Search http://search.msn.se/___Gimp-developer mailing listGimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDUhttps://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer---Live is like a chocolate box, you never know what you wanna get...GPG Signatur auf http://wernicke-online.net/Impressum/ prüfen PGP.sig Bygg din egen dynamiska visningsbild - Meego! Klicka här --- Live is like a chocolate box, you never know what you wanna get... GPG Signatur aufhttp://wernicke-online.net/Impressum/ prüfen PGP.sig Boka konsertbiljetterna Klicka här ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Why be cryptic? 'Xtns' should be name 'Extensions'
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 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. We have at least done some restructuring over the last releases (and quite a few more in the current development cycle). 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 has a user interface that is worth to be copied. That doesn't mean that we think that the current GIMP user interface can't be improved or should not be improved. It just means that we think that any user interface change should be made by looking at use cases and by checking how we can improve our user's workflows, not by copying from some other program. 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 aren't the first one who has brought this up. The general consensus here seems to be that we want to get rid of the toolbox menu in the long run. Sven ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Why be cryptic? 'Xtns' should be name 'Extensions'
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 agree. To me Photoshop's interface is much more thoroughly designed. 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. (This is based on PS7 and GIMP 2.2.9) 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? The general consensus here seems to be that we want to get rid of the toolbox menu in the long run. I agree. As it is now, it feels like the toolbox window_ is_ the main window, i.e. it is from the toolbox you create new files and so on. And if you close the toolbox, entire GIMP is closed. It would be more logical to have a separate toolbox, and a separate 'GIMP window'. The GIMP window would be a container for toolbox window, the layer window etc (á la PS). If you minimize the GIMP window, the toolbox windows also gets minimized. And the toolbox window and all other windows would not have its own item on the taskbar, they should be a part of main window. I have a prejudice, which is that most of the GIMP developers has not taken time to understand the concept of the interface PS provides. If you don't take the time to understand that interface, it will feel unlogical (I had the same feeling) and it can easily be dismissed as 'badly designed'. Once you know it though, the workflow is absolutley brilliant. /Martin Nordholts _ Chat: Ha en fest på Habbo Hotel http://habbohotel.msn.se/habbo/sv/channelizer Checka in här! ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Why be cryptic? 'Xtns' should be name 'Extensions'
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 haven't taken any class? I have a prejudice, which is that most of the GIMP developers has not taken time to understand the concept of the interface PS provides. If you don't take the time to understand that interface, it will feel unlogical (I had the same feeling) and it can easily be dismissed as 'badly designed'. Once you know it though, the workflow is absolutley brilliant. It would be nice if you took the time to understand the GIMPs interface and _then_ make more comments about it. ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Why be cryptic? 'Xtns' should be name 'Extensions'
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 understand, why so many people can't figure it out: innovation is about making difference, not copying. You are doomed to fail if you try to make a great tool by carbon copying it. Alexandre ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Why be cryptic? 'Xtns' should be name 'Extensions'
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 https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Why be cryptic? 'Xtns' should be name 'Extensions'
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 have experience with both of Photoshop and GIMP, and I don't agree. To me Photoshop's interface is much more thoroughly designed. 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. (This is based on PS7 and GIMP 2.2.9) Personal experience is one thing, but wide ranging studies are better. Among other things I had been a Photoshop user since early on, but personally found the GIMP's interface much better. Additionally, there are many issues such as its use of MDI. After extensive study Microsoft officially deprecated the MDI interface with the introduction of Windows 95 back in 1995. However, Adobe kept it mainly from inertia. First thing I'd suggest would be to take as much training in the GIMP as you did in Photoshop. Once you get a comparable amount of qualified training, things will be much easier to compare. And as to it's interface being designed... The GIMP has had one main factor for interface design : What will make this tool work well for its end users? Photoshop, on the other hand, has had many other factors, including large amounts of marketing influence. For example, they have the mandate that all is driven by what sells, not by what works. And also they have the probably of being told to do things in ways that can help sales of other company products, regardless of whether or not they get in the way of better workflow. And then there's the huge factor of inertial. They have kept things around for over a decade just because that's the way we first did it, and they don't want to startle casual purchasing managers. 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? Why? Well, personally I don't want it to be Photoshop because I like being able to get work done quicker and with less pain. To me, the main thing is to have a very efficient tool, not to be compatible with one that just happens to be prevalent. Even after working for years in multimedia (or probably because of), I will still go first and install the GIMP on boxes when I have to do graphics work even if I have full Photoshop licenses and installations already. To see the problem inherent in your logic, it's easy to apply it to cars. Your process would tell me to go out and buy a Honda Civic even if I had the needs and ability to purchase a BMW 3-Series (or Honda Accord or Toyota Prius, or Kia Sedona depending on what my specific needs were) The general consensus here seems to be that we want to get rid of the toolbox menu in the long run. I agree. As it is now, it feels like the toolbox window_ is_ the main window, i.e. it is from the toolbox you create new files and so on. And if you close the toolbox, entire GIMP is closed. It would be more logical to have a separate toolbox, and a separate 'GIMP window'. The GIMP window would be a container for toolbox window, the layer window etc (á la PS). If you minimize the GIMP window, the toolbox windows also gets minimized. And the toolbox window and all other windows would not have its own item on the taskbar, they should be a part of main window. Actually... that sounds explicitly like the MDI interface approach, which research in the early nineties showed to be a very sub-optimal one. I have a prejudice, which is that most of the GIMP developers has not taken time to understand the concept of the interface PS provides. If you don't take the time to understand that interface, it will feel unlogical (I had the same feeling) and it can easily be dismissed as 'badly designed'. Once you know it though, the workflow is absolutley brilliant. Actually, I have to strongly disagree with you here. I know that at least since the late nineties many of the GIMP developers have been very aware of the PS interface. Perhaps it is more that you are the one who just didn't quite understand the GIMP interface and workflow (for example, just being able to right-click on the canvas where ever I happen to be and get the full menus is a *huge* productivity boost. Configureable keys and *real* scripting are also huge wins). If you have enough experience working in many different tools, then perhaps that might help with insight on workflow. Remember what Maslow said... If the only tool you have is a hammer, you tend to see every problem as a nail. ___
Re: [Gimp-developer] Why be cryptic? 'Xtns' should be name 'Extensions'
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 Document Interface) be very tough to implement in GIMP? TDI's have become very popular, and afaik lots of people agrees that TDIs are very effective for handling multiple documents. Also, I don't agree that having a separate GIMP and separate Toolbox window would be MDI-ish. Having a TDI with dockable windows for layers, tools, colors etc in the I think would be a very good change in the interface. _ Hitta rätt på nätet med MSN Search http://search.msn.se/ ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Why be cryptic? 'Xtns' should be name 'Extensions'
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 dont have much time for these people, because they obviously are not using the Gimp long enough to appreciate its advantages over photoshop. The UI is important, but its only 1 aspect of a program. Somthing people dont focus on as much is the application work-flow. which I feel is more important in the long run. (ok the UI has to work of course) Basicly - Once you know where all the buttons are, how efficently can you get the job done? - In my experience, The Gimps workflow is very nice, I have no complaints. so it always baffels me when people complain about the gimp not being like photoshop. I use Blender3d every day and the gimp most days also for work as a 3d modeler. Blender is more extreme in that its UI is not that good, but it has an excellent work flow. In some ways its better to be different. - Because its very unique, we rarely get the Why dont you work like 3dsMax?? posts anymore... viva la difference! - Cam ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Why be cryptic? 'Xtns' should be name 'Extensions'
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 aren't the first one who has brought this up. The general consensus here seems to be that we want to get rid of the toolbox menu in the long run. When you say get rid of you mean distribute its menu items over menus in each document's window? And when it's done will toolbox still be an always floating window or optionally dockable one? Simply distributing menu items sounds like a fairly easy task. P.S. Sorry for sending it twice to you. Alexandre ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Why be cryptic? 'Xtns' should be name 'Extensions'
-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 architecture of GIMP right now. greetings, lexA P.S. Sorry for sending it twice to you. Alexandre ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer - --- Live is like a chocolate box, you never know what you wanna get... GPG Signatur auf http://wernicke-online.net/Impressum/ prüfen -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (Darwin) iD8DBQFEIIQxR9mXLVsAbiQRAsiDAJ95GFfCeyxqdDZyiNJ+pa3drdTN+ACcDG9X jpLmchhK/Xs/vvsXM1ItB34= =1k9L -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Why be cryptic? 'Xtns' should be name 'Extensions'
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 mind? Alexandre ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Why be cryptic? 'Xtns' should be name 'Extensions'
-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 in the gui architecture of GIMP right now. Exactly. So, do you have some Inkscape-like GUI on your mind? well I know this is insane, but I have Mac OS X in mind, where the menu is sticked to a menubar that is always located at the top of the screen :) To have a dummy image window open all the time just to have the file/ open commands accessible does not sound very smart to me to be honest :( May be we can shrink the menu in the toolbox down to an GIMP menu that just contains some About GIMP, Open / Acquire / New Image, GIMP Preferences and Quit command contains. Questions left: how about the Xtns and more seriously how about the help? All in all I'm pretty used to the menu bar in the toolbox now and the only reason for shrinking it is for me to be able to have a toolbox that consists of two columns of tools only. (To be honest that works always this wan on OS X, but I had to sacrifice the help menu that is now always hidden to me). But even if I knew what I would like, I'm not a usability specialist, may be there come other smart ideas up when needed. Greetings, lexA Alexandre ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer - --- Live is like a chocolate box, you never know what you wanna get... GPG Signatur auf http://wernicke-online.net/Impressum/ prüfen -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (Darwin) iD8DBQFEII5QR9mXLVsAbiQRApDaAKDDqZZxl9ujunn8xN4Pjhgi/2IhbQCeJDmH zs8S9FjOgAZJoKocBuruD+k= =zZ6O -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Why be cryptic? 'Xtns' should be name 'Extensions'
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 are very effective for handling multiple documents. Please read http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7379 - there already has been an awful lot of discussion about this and your idea is nothing new (Sorry). Please feel free to comment on this enhancement request if you think you have something new to contribute. Bye, Simon -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://simon.budig.de/ ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Why be cryptic? 'Xtns' should be name 'Extensions'
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 has a user interface that is worth to be I wonder how many times it will take to hear the Perhaps Gimp should think about having a Photoshop-mode before we'll stop defending Gimp's interface... ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Why be cryptic? 'Xtns' should be name 'Extensions'
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 developers are actively doing now. But as Sven said, the point is not to make GIMP look like Photoshop. 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. The same approach would work as well for GIMP, too. 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? Why would we want it to be Photoshop? That would be silly. It will take years for GIMP to have the same features as Photoshop has now, and by then, Photoshop will have evolved again ;) This is just a fact that I assume most fellow GIMP developers realize. GIMP developers are not motivated by making PS users switch. Most of the (actually quite few) GIMP developers work on GIMP because they love to program. Not because GIMP wants increased market share. It would be more logical to have a separate toolbox, and a separate 'GIMP window'. The GIMP window would be a container for toolbox window, the layer window etc (á la PS). No, having a big GIMP window with the image and tool dialogs inside it is definitely something that the developers don't want to implement (themselves). However, the way free software works is that if somebody wants a feature hard enough, they write a patch that is clean and implements the feature, and submit that to the maintainers. (Or alternatively, they convince (perhaps through funding) somebody, like their Linux distro company, to write the feature.) The writer of such a patch should also be prepared to maintain her code for at least some years. It's not nice to just dump a bunch of code on people who are kind enough to accept it even if they don't really like the features it provides, and leave. I assume GIMP maintainers would gladly accept such a patch as long as it was well-written and clean. That would at least make a part of the users happier. (Clean meaning here that it doesn't unnecessaily stomp on other parts of the code, uses the same coding style as the rest of the code, and doesn't break anything else.) It would have been much more productive if the author of the GIMP deweirdifyer, for instance, would have cooperated with GIMP developers and searched for ways to have that code in the official GIMP sources instead of as a freestanding separately distributed tool. If you don't take the time to understand that interface, it will feel unlogical (I had the same feeling) and it can easily be dismissed as 'badly designed'. Once you know it though, the workflow is absolutley brilliant. This can be said about GIMP, too. Watching an experienced GIMP user work can be a revelation. The GIMP workflow looks absolutely brilliant then, too. --tml ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
