Re: [Gimp-user] OT: Was: Gimp name-picking
On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 12:51:30PM -0800, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote: Frankly, and meaning no offense to any party, I do think that this discussion is a bit absurd. I mean it is as if someone proposed changing the name of the Empire State Building, or the name of Topeka, Kansas. What's the point? Everybody already knows these things by their current names, and that kind of inertia is historically almost impossible to change by fiat. Full ack. Take openSUSE. Many people still call it SuSE even though the original name is S.u.S.E, then SuSE, then SUSE and now openSUSE. Renaming it would have more disadvantages then it would have advantages. The ONLY advantage would be that it won't have the same meaning as some other word. The disadvatages are plenty. P.S. I happen to like the name Gimp. It's consistant with the (intentionally humorous) tradition of having the names of most or all GNUish (copylefted?) free software packages begin with the letter `g', and also be easily pro- nounced. In this case, it all rolls easily off the tounge. I was explaining to my neighbor just the other night that Gimp is the GNU Image Processing package. There is also an advantage (at least for some) for those that never heard of the program and think of it as something else: They won't forget it. It is something marketeers dream about and we have it for free (as in beer). A nice piece of reading: http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/305250.html houghi -- Filled with mingled cream and amber I will drain that glass again. Such hilarious visions clamber Through the chambers of my brain -- Quaintest thoughts -- queerest fancies Come to life and fade away; Who cares how time advances? I am drinking ale today. -- Edgar Allan Poe ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] OT: Was: Gimp name-picking
On 12/29/2011 05:29 PM, peter kostov wrote: +1 My +1 also, and above is just another reason *not* to use html on an email list, PLEASE. +1 to leave it alone. And guys, please try to think of the names in English like a person that doesn't speak English natively. I am sure many of you will realize how stupid and funny they sound. Every day I encounter new and new examples of this. I don't understand how you English speaking people perceive these names, but what the hell is Adobe Photoshop?! A shop for photographic stuff made of adobe?! Down the corner?! Stupid, yes? And funny. So leave it alone. Somebody who feels his/her ego hurt by a software name should think that in some other language the same name maybe sounds totally different, should we inspect each end every language to find a neutral name? And should we let our ego be influenced by such things - no. +1. Non-native English speakers are the majority of Gimp users. The top country for the Gimp-win installers on Sourceforge is Russia (25% of downloads); in the top 30 countries, there are 20 millions downloads from countries where English isn't the main language of people, and 5 millions from English-speaking countries (US/UK/OZ). The case of India (240K downloads) can be debated since English is one of its official languages, but IRL I deal with many people from there (outsourcing) and they know very little slang. ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] OT: Was: Gimp name-picking
+1 My +1 also, and above is just another reason *not* to use html on an email list, PLEASE. +1 to leave it alone. And guys, please try to think of the names in English like a person that doesn't speak English natively. I am sure many of you will realize how stupid and funny they sound. Every day I encounter new and new examples of this. I don't understand how you English speaking people perceive these names, but what the hell is Adobe Photoshop?! A shop for photographic stuff made of adobe?! Down the corner?! Stupid, yes? And funny. So leave it alone. Somebody who feels his/her ego hurt by a software name should think that in some other language the same name maybe sounds totally different, should we inspect each end every language to find a neutral name? And should we let our ego be influenced by such things - no. ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] OT: Was: Gimp name-picking
* s...@tryding.se s...@tryding.se [12-29-11 07:05]: htmlhead link media=all type=text/css href=/webmail/static/deg/css/wysiwyg-3933289048.css rel=stylesheet /headbody I didn't have time to read this whole thread, so pardon me if it's already beenbrpointed out that the idea of changing the name of GIMP has come up more thanbronce in the past.brbrMy vote:nbsp; leave it alone.nbsp; The recognition it has gained over the years is invaluable.brGo to google and type in photoshop.nbsp; GIMP is listed fifth.nbsp; You can't beat that.brbrPeace,brTombrbrDec 28, 2011 05:36:16 PM, ad...@pilobilus.net wrote:brblockquote style=border-left: 3px solid rgb(102, 153, 204); div class=moz-text-plain wrap=true style=font-family: -moz-fixed; font-size: 14px; lang=x-western pre wrap=On 12/28/2011 02:14 PM, Stefan Maerz wrote:span class=moz-txt-citetags gt;/span span class=moz-txt-citetagsgt; /spanPIMP - The Photoshop-like Image Manipulation Program /pre pre wrap=That one gets my vote, but only if the acronym can stand for Primary Image Manipulation Program. After all, the title should be as accurately descriptive as possible. IMO the idea that GIMP is somehow chasing after or trying to be an Adobe product is very dangerous, and it comes straight from Adobe's marketing department. I happen to LIKE the difference, and by like I mean, the differences have a positive impact on my productivity. Does Gnome try to be the latest Microsoft or MAC desktop interface? Does VLC try to be Windows Media Player, or Amarok aspire to be iTunes? Do the users of these tools feel compelled to name a commercial package that does roughly the same things every time they mention the tool they DO use? :o) Steve /pre /div brhr size=1br___brgimp-user-list mailing listbrgimp-user-list@gnome.orgbrhttp://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-listbr/blockquote/body/html ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list +1 My +1 also, and above is just another reason *not* to use html on an email list, PLEASE. -- (paka)Patrick Shanahan Plainfield, Indiana, USA HOG # US1244711 http://wahoo.no-ip.orgPhoto Album: http://wahoo.no-ip.org/gallery2 http://en.opensuse.org openSUSE Community Member Registered Linux User #207535@ http://linuxcounter.net ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] OT: Was: Gimp name-picking
On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 18:30, Steve Kinney ad...@pilobilus.net wrote: Right you are, and my apologies... I thought I was sending plain text. I have tweaked Thunderbird's settings and now it should send plain text even in reply to HTML formatted messages. Thanks for pointing it out. This is a test... Test confirms that you set it right: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii However, I recommend UTF-8 instead of us-ascii. You might want to use (or quote) a Euro symbol, some Greek letter, or some other symbol sometime. -- Dotan Cohen http://gibberish.co.il http://what-is-what.com ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] OT: Was: Gimp name-picking
On 12/29/2011 08:41 AM, Patrick Shanahan wrote: gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list +1 My +1 also, and above is just another reason *not* to use html on an email list, PLEASE. Right you are, and my apologies... I thought I was sending plain text. I have tweaked Thunderbird's settings and now it should send plain text even in reply to HTML formatted messages. Thanks for pointing it out. This is a test... :o) Steve ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] OT: Was: Gimp name-picking
On Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 20:48, Steve Kinney ad...@pilobilus.net wrote: Accurately converting a GIIMP-made CMYK TIFF file to PSD for proofing and color adjustment on the computer connected to the production printer is a one click operation. And where does one perform that single click? I am currently designing business cards and this will be the first time that I send something to the print shop. So I expect to hit this issue soon. Thanks. -- Dotan Cohen http://gibberish.co.il http://what-is-what.com ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] OT: Was: Gimp name-picking
In message 253415241.1190746.1325133986615.javamail.r...@vms228.mailsrvcs.net , to...@verizon.net wrote: I didn't have time to read this whole thread, so pardon me if it's already been pointed out that the idea of changing the name of GIMP has come up more than once in the past. My vote: leave it alone. The recognition it has gained over the years is invaluable. Go to google and type in photoshop. GIMP is listed fifth. You can't beat that. I'm new here, so by all rights I shouldn't even really have a vote. However, that notwithstanding, allow me to say: Seconded! Frankly, and meaning no offense to any party, I do think that this discussion is a bit absurd. I mean it is as if someone proposed changing the name of the Empire State Building, or the name of Topeka, Kansas. What's the point? Everybody already knows these things by their current names, and that kind of inertia is historically almost impossible to change by fiat. In the case of Gimp, there are already at least a half a dozen books IN PRINT with that name in the title and that describe this great program, and probably hundreds of thousands of copies of said books already in circulation. In televised news reports about Myanmar, on either the BBC or on NBC Nightly news the announcer always says ...Myanmar formerly known as Burma... because most people _still_ have no idea WTF Myanmar is. (And if you google for Myanmar, the first non-news hit that comes up is the Wikipedia entry for Burma.) In short, names are very sticky things. Separately and also, what difference does the name make anyway? A rose by any other name... My dear departed father, God rest his soul, imparted to me many small bits of wisdom as I was growing up, often by way of various aphorisms. One of the many he repeated to me often was: It isn't what you are called that matters. It is what you can do WHEN you are called that matters. Gimp is a fine program, and it can do much when it is called upon to do so. Changing its name would neither add to nor subtract from that. Regards, rfg P.S. I happen to like the name Gimp. It's consistant with the (intentionally humorous) tradition of having the names of most or all GNUish (copylefted?) free software packages begin with the letter `g', and also be easily pro- nounced. In this case, it all rolls easily off the tounge. I was explaining to my neighbor just the other night that Gimp is the GNU Image Processing package. P.P.S. Whoever wrote that dictionary entry saying that one definition of gimp is somebody who likes to dress up in leather from head to toe and be treated as a sex slave obviously just saw the movie Pulp Fiction one too many times. I really do not think that this (postulated) definition of the word gimp is actually part of the common vernacular among the populace at large. (But even if it was, that would make no difference to anything, since _our_ gimp is clearly a different kind of gimp altogether.) ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] OT: Was: Gimp name-picking
I didn't have time to read this whole thread, so pardon me if it's already been pointed out that the idea of changing the name of GIMP has come up more than once in the past. Frankly, and meaning no offense to any party, I do think that this discussion is a bit absurd. I am also new to the list and found this discussion ludicrous albeit interesting. I am a bit of a lurker, but over the last few change-the-name discussions have been almost exasperated enough to make a post :). Just wondering, is it possible to prevent the discussion arising again? Hard link the archives of the various discussions that have arisen over the years? Make a highly visible FAQ? Or is it something the list will just field ad infinitum? ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] OT: Was: Gimp name-picking
On 12/29/2011 05:24 PM, Xiella Harksell wrote: I am a bit of a lurker, but over the last few change-the-name discussions have been almost exasperated enough to make a post :). Just wondering, is it possible to prevent the discussion arising again? Hard link the archives of the various discussions that have arisen over the years? Make a highly visible FAQ? Or is it something the list will just field ad infinitum? I don't know if I am exactly guilty of feeding the trolls, but close enough: Mea culpa, and I for one won't comment in these threads again. Or at least I will try not to. Oops I just did. Last time though. :o) Steve ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] OT: Was: Gimp name-picking
* Xiella Harksell xie...@gmail.com [12-29-11 17:26]: I am a bit of a lurker, but over the last few change-the-name discussions have been almost exasperated enough to make a post :). Just wondering, is it possible to prevent the discussion arising again? Hard link the archives of the various discussions that have arisen over the years? Make a highly visible FAQ? Or is it something the list will just field ad infinitum? A script dumping all those threads in their entirety to the *offending* poster would be appropriate and maybe a deterrent (perhaps detergent would fit better :^). -- (paka)Patrick Shanahan Plainfield, Indiana, USA HOG # US1244711 http://wahoo.no-ip.orgPhoto Album: http://wahoo.no-ip.org/gallery2 http://en.opensuse.org openSUSE Community Member Registered Linux User #207535@ http://linuxcounter.net ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] OT: Was: Gimp name-picking
On 12/29/2011 02:24 PM, Xiella Harksell wrote: I didn't have time to read this whole thread, so pardon me if it's already been pointed out that the idea of changing the name of GIMP has come up more than once in the past. Frankly, and meaning no offense to any party, I do think that this discussion is a bit absurd. I am also new to the list and found this discussion ludicrous albeit interesting. I am a bit of a lurker, but over the last few change-the-name discussions have been almost exasperated enough to make a post :). Just wondering, is it possible to prevent the discussion arising again? Hard link the archives of the various discussions that have arisen over the years? Make a highly visible FAQ? Or is it something the list will just field ad infinitum? +1 to you, Xiella ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] OT: Was: Gimp name-picking
On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 6:20 AM, Burnie West wrote: I am a bit of a lurker, but over the last few change-the-name discussions have been almost exasperated enough to make a post :). Just wondering, is it possible to prevent the discussion arising again? Hard link the archives of the various discussions that have arisen over the years? Make a highly visible FAQ? Or is it something the list will just field ad infinitum? +1 to you, Xiella The question is never going to cease reappearing. Sad but true. Nevertheless FAQ rewrite is a work in progress. Alexandre Prokoudine http://libregraphicsworld.org ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] OT: Was: Gimp name-picking
On 12/28/2011 11:02 AM, Daniel Smith wrote: It's just funny! It's a play on the idea that it's the not-quite-capable version of Photoshop. At least they didn't name it SIMP! That IS funny. I started using the GIMP when Tor Lillqvist ported it to Windows many long years ago. At that time, it was not-quite-capable in two senses: It had WAY fewer useful tools and functions than it does today, and it tended to crash a LOT on the OS in question. But I kept it and have been using it ever since. Warning: I have not been on this list long enough to know whether what follows might start a pointless debate or even a flame war. It would be very naive to think that Adobe does not have a PR contractor monitoring this list, armed with focus group tested talking points. So please put on your asbestos gloves... On a couple of occasions I tried Photoshop: Installed the thing, bookmarked a bunch of tutorials and how-to docs, checked out textbooks from the library, etc. And on these occasions I have found no reason to prefer the Adobe beast. The largest differences I saw were an inherently awkward interface paradigm and slower workflow. A lot of familiar tools seemed to be missing. The price tag was the least important factor weighing against Photoshop IMO. Maybe getting used to the GIMP ruined me for life. Maybe all the tutorials, howto docs, and manuals I found for Photoshop suck. Maybe forcing myself to use nothing but Photoshop for a few weeks at a time was not a fair trial of the product. But my working hypothesis is that Photoshop is a not-quite-AS-capable version of the GIMP. Millions of dollars have been spent to make photoshop a verb. But the days when sneering, condescending print shop sales reps refused to take any work not submitted in PSD format are over - I watched that change happen between about 2005 and 2007 in my local area. And from what I have seen IRL in the last couple of years, the GIMP is starting to eat Adobe's lunch in terms of mindshare in the geeky teenager market that determines the shape of tomorrow's software landscape - only starting, but it's a solid start. Under the hood, Photoshop uses more bits per channel to represent and process images. It also uses the LAB color model, which requires more bits per channel to represent the same color gamut as RGB, so the difference is not as large as it would seem at first glance. Bigger numbers mean smaller rounding errors, this is a Good Thing, and the GIMP will be getting more bits per channel shortly. But way over 95% of those who believe that the GIMP is a less capable Photoshop will never process an image for an application where this difference in bit depth makes any difference in the finished product. The fact that Adobe Inc. has a partner relationship with commercial printer manufacturers is an important difference if you happen to own and operate such a printer. But this has noting to do with producing the source files submitted to the said print shop, Accurately converting a GIIMP-made CMYK TIFF file to PSD for proofing and color adjustment on the computer connected to the production printer is a one click operation. So this is a difference that makes no difference unless you do happen to own and operate that printer. In some circles it is an article of faith that the GIMP is not suitable for professional graphics work. But in recent years over half of my income has come from editing images with the GIMP. And that, not has a vendor training certificate or paid for an expensive product, is the definition of professional graphics work. :o) Steve ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] OT: Was: Gimp name-picking
On 12/28/2011 12:48 PM, Steve Kinney wrote: On 12/28/2011 11:02 AM, Daniel Smith wrote: It's just funny! It's a play on the idea that it's the not-quite-capable version of Photoshop. At least they didn't name it SIMP! That IS funny. I started using the GIMP when Tor Lillqvist ported it to Windows many long years ago. At that time, it was not-quite-capable in two senses: It had WAY fewer useful tools and functions than it does today, and it tended to crash a LOT on the OS in question. But I kept it and have been using it ever since. ... In some circles it is an article of faith that the GIMP is not suitable for professional graphics work. But in recent years over half of my income has come from editing images with the GIMP. And that, not has a vendor training certificate or paid for an expensive product, is the definition of professional graphics work. I think we have covered every possible topic in these thread(s). :D Anyways, to contribute: PIMP - The Photoshop-like Image Manipulation Program LIMP - The Lovely Image Manipulation Program WIMP - The Wonderful Image Manipulation Program Any better? ;) -Stefan Maerz ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] OT: Was: Gimp name-picking
Steve, if you don't mind, what kind of work do you do? Just wondering, you can reply off list if you'd rather, or on. Thanks Dan On 12/28/11, Steve Kinney ad...@pilobilus.net wrote: On 12/28/2011 11:02 AM, Daniel Smith wrote: It's just funny! It's a play on the idea that it's the not-quite-capable version of Photoshop. At least they didn't name it SIMP! That IS funny. I started using the GIMP when Tor Lillqvist ported it to Windows many long years ago. At that time, it was not-quite-capable in two senses: It had WAY fewer useful tools and functions than it does today, and it tended to crash a LOT on the OS in question. But I kept it and have been using it ever since. Warning: I have not been on this list long enough to know whether what follows might start a pointless debate or even a flame war. It would be very naive to think that Adobe does not have a PR contractor monitoring this list, armed with focus group tested talking points. So please put on your asbestos gloves... On a couple of occasions I tried Photoshop: Installed the thing, bookmarked a bunch of tutorials and how-to docs, checked out textbooks from the library, etc. And on these occasions I have found no reason to prefer the Adobe beast. The largest differences I saw were an inherently awkward interface paradigm and slower workflow. A lot of familiar tools seemed to be missing. The price tag was the least important factor weighing against Photoshop IMO. Maybe getting used to the GIMP ruined me for life. Maybe all the tutorials, howto docs, and manuals I found for Photoshop suck. Maybe forcing myself to use nothing but Photoshop for a few weeks at a time was not a fair trial of the product. But my working hypothesis is that Photoshop is a not-quite-AS-capable version of the GIMP. Millions of dollars have been spent to make photoshop a verb. But the days when sneering, condescending print shop sales reps refused to take any work not submitted in PSD format are over - I watched that change happen between about 2005 and 2007 in my local area. And from what I have seen IRL in the last couple of years, the GIMP is starting to eat Adobe's lunch in terms of mindshare in the geeky teenager market that determines the shape of tomorrow's software landscape - only starting, but it's a solid start. Under the hood, Photoshop uses more bits per channel to represent and process images. It also uses the LAB color model, which requires more bits per channel to represent the same color gamut as RGB, so the difference is not as large as it would seem at first glance. Bigger numbers mean smaller rounding errors, this is a Good Thing, and the GIMP will be getting more bits per channel shortly. But way over 95% of those who believe that the GIMP is a less capable Photoshop will never process an image for an application where this difference in bit depth makes any difference in the finished product. The fact that Adobe Inc. has a partner relationship with commercial printer manufacturers is an important difference if you happen to own and operate such a printer. But this has noting to do with producing the source files submitted to the said print shop, Accurately converting a GIIMP-made CMYK TIFF file to PSD for proofing and color adjustment on the computer connected to the production printer is a one click operation. So this is a difference that makes no difference unless you do happen to own and operate that printer. In some circles it is an article of faith that the GIMP is not suitable for professional graphics work. But in recent years over half of my income has come from editing images with the GIMP. And that, not has a vendor training certificate or paid for an expensive product, is the definition of professional graphics work. :o) Steve ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] OT: Was: Gimp name-picking
On 12/28/2011 02:14 PM, Stefan Maerz wrote: PIMP - The Photoshop-like Image Manipulation Program That one gets my vote, but only if the acronym can stand for "Primary Image Manipulation Program." After all, the title should be as accurately descriptive as possible. IMO the idea that GIMP is somehow "chasing after" or "trying to be" an Adobe product is very dangerous, and it comes straight from Adobe's marketing department. I happen to LIKE the difference, and by like I mean, the differences have a positive impact on my productivity. Does Gnome try to "be" the latest Microsoft or MAC desktop interface? Does VLC try to "be" Windows Media Player, or Amarok aspire to "be" iTunes? Do the users of these tools feel compelled to name a commercial package that does roughly the same things every time they mention the tool they DO use? :o) Steve ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
