[plug] Linux ideology

[Craig Ringer]

> I'm thinking of writing an article that touches on this subject, not 
> looking at the technical specs here, but in terms of cost, how many 
> graphics editors have actually paid for their copy of Photoshop? Most of 
> the people I know have pirated it and don't see the GIMP as a worthy 
> alternative because of it's lack of these options, but fail to take into 
> consideration that Photoshop costs a lot of money, and their conscience 
> isn't even bothered by their 900 dollar (I think, how much does it cost 
> nowdays?) theft, because "everybody does it".

We have 6 paid-up copies of Photoshop from versions 5.5 to 7, plus 6-ish 
(can't remember now, we don't use them anymore) copies of version 3.

Most people pay for it, at least for business. With the marauding BSAA 
its not worth the risk of doing anything else - and anyway, compared to 
Quark photoshop costs peanuts.

> I can see the argument forma technical point of view, but I'm only 
> really willing to submit to this argument provided the pro-Photoshop 
> party is willing to actually take cost into consideration and would 
> actually fork over the money needed. As far as pirates go though, I'm 
> not listening.

Oh yeah, cost is a factor. If someone PAID me $2500 per copy to try to 
use the GIMP instead of photoshop for what we do here, I'd still tell 
them to go away - because it /just can't do it/.

The GIMP has potential, but not for print media yet.

Craig