[plug] Linux ideology

[indy at THE-TECH.MIT.EDU]

On Tue, May 27, 2003 at 12:37:03PM +0800, Craig Ringer wrote:
> 
> 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.

Hear, hear... I'd also like to point out that Photoshop is a heavyweight
professional tool. People who use it in that capacity might not enjoy
forking out for it, but compared to the old ways of doing things it
pays for itself pretty quickly.

Of course, many home users (whether or not they paid for Photoshop) don't
really use it's full feature set and might well be quite happy with The Gimp
(although it might be argued they'd get more out of a simpler, less bloated
tool than either Pshop/Gimp). The real issue for home users tends to be the
old bugbear of HW drivers. Getting $digicam or $scanner working with
Windows is still easier and better supported (by manufacturers) than
with Linux. As that situation changes you'll find many home users
really give the Gimp a go.

> 
> 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.

No argument there.

The last time I really looked at The Gimp situation was a while ago, but
it also highlights the Graphics Tablet situation. Perhaps recent kernel
revisions are already addressing this, but tablet support is still very 
patchy, which makes Gimp-on-Linux a bit of a crapshoot for serious users.
Some people who know say scanning is now "there" using Vuescan, so maybe that 
bit is solved.

Indy

-- 
Indranath Neogy
<indy at the-tech.mit.edu>