Liste des Groupes | Revenir à ol advocacy |
On 3/29/2024 7:00 PM, -hh wrote:Ah, got it; no worries.
Your original quote:>'What -hh said about Photoshop - expensive, waste, Gimp does the same>
for free - is exactly the written position of most if not all
"advocates" on cola.' - DumFSck, lying shamelessly
>
I wouldn't assert that GIMP is in every respect equal to Photoshop,
I'd also like to see the original statement made, because the above kinda looks like a misquote or misstatement: I've never claimed that Adobe Photoshop was an expensive waste. Sure, its expensive and it is overkill for a lot of people (usually the ones who complain about its cost), but it has been the industry's premier digital graphics tool for the better part of two decades.
"Specifically, they whine about how Photoshop costs £600 and is a
waste, while claiming that the same capabilities can be accomplished
for free."
I unintentionally made it sound like you felt that way about Photoshop, when you were just recapping the position of the "advocates":
--------------------------------------------------------------------------That's 4 for 4 whining on money, yet we're somehow supposed to believe that no Linux fanboy considers cost a factor on Linux 'superiority'; seems more that they know of their wallet's personal inadequacies! /s
Creepy Chris Ahlstrom: "Yeah, everyone who wants to manipulate images needs to pay $600 for Photoshop and then use only a 16th of its functionality. <rolls eyes>"
JED: "As far as not wanting to spend $600 on a professional tool when I am not a professional... that just makes me a normal person."
Homer: "AFAICT the only substantial difference [between gimp and Photoshop] is about £600 that could be put to far better use, and a whole lotta hype."
Homer: "I'd never, ever waste my money on Photoshop."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.