Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics > #530878 > unrolled thread

Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming.

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-07 14:41 +0000
    Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-11-07 09:59 -0500
    Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-11-07 10:26 -0500
      Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-07 18:33 +0000
        Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-11-07 13:35 -0500
          Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-07 19:07 +0000
            Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-11-07 14:17 -0500
              Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-07 19:32 +0000
                Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-11-07 19:33 +0000
                  Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-11-07 16:56 -0500
                Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-11-07 16:56 -0500
                  Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-07 22:18 +0000
                    Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-11-07 22:21 +0000
                      Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-07 22:31 +0000
                        Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-11-07 17:36 -0500
                        Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-11-07 23:17 +0000
                        Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-11-07 19:58 -0500
                        Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-11-07 22:28 -0700
                          Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-08 07:20 +0000
                            Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-11-08 08:13 -0500
                              Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-08 17:36 +0000
                              Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-08 17:58 +0000
                                Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-11-08 13:05 -0500
                            Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-11-08 11:33 -0700
                        Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-11-08 10:11 -0500
                          Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-08 17:31 +0000
                            Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-11-08 17:33 +0000
                              Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-08 17:51 +0000
                                Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-11-08 12:56 -0500
                                  Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-11-08 18:18 +0000
                                  Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-08 18:19 +0000
                                    Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-11-08 13:41 -0500
                                      Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-08 19:00 +0000
                                        Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-11-08 14:54 -0500
                            Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-11-08 12:35 -0500
                              Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-11-08 17:42 +0000
                                Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-11-08 12:53 -0500
                            Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-11-08 12:48 -0500
                              Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-08 18:31 +0000
                                Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-11-08 19:21 +0000
                                  Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-08 19:34 +0000
                                    Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-11-08 15:02 -0500
                                    Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-11-09 11:50 -0700
                                Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-11-08 18:40 -0500
                                  Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-11-08 18:47 -0500
                        Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2015-11-10 08:41 +0000
                      Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-11-07 17:32 -0500
                    Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-11-07 22:34 -0700
                      Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-08 07:12 +0000
                        Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-11-08 11:39 -0700
                  Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-11-07 17:25 -0500
                  Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-07 22:41 +0000
                    Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-11-07 17:45 -0500
                  Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-08 01:15 +0000
                    les trois m-tEErs. noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-11-07 17:25 -0800
                    Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-11-07 22:27 -0700
            Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-11-07 13:48 -0700
              Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-07 21:22 +0000
                Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-11-07 17:00 -0500
                  Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-07 22:08 +0000
                    Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-11-07 17:12 -0500
                    Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-11-07 22:34 -0700
                  Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-08 02:02 +0000
                Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-11-07 18:27 -0700
              Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-07 21:35 +0000
                Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-11-07 18:29 -0700
                  Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-08 01:52 +0000
                    Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-11-08 12:31 -0700
                      Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-08 20:00 +0000
                        Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-11-08 15:04 -0500
                          Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-08 20:22 +0000
                            Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-11-08 15:30 -0500
                            Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-11-09 11:53 -0700
                        Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-11-09 11:53 -0700
                Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-11-08 09:53 -0500
                  Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-11-08 16:03 +0100
                    Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-11-08 10:07 -0500
                    Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-11-08 15:14 +0000
                    Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-11-09 07:30 -0600
                      Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-11-09 08:34 -0500
                    Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-11-09 08:17 -0600
                      Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-11-09 10:22 -0500
                  Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-08 17:25 +0000
                    Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-11-08 12:45 -0500
                      Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-08 18:08 +0000
                        Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-11-08 13:16 -0500
                          Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-08 18:43 +0000
                            Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-11-08 13:49 -0500
                            Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-11-08 14:50 -0500
                          Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-11-08 15:45 -0700
                        Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-11-08 15:45 -0700
                        Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-11-08 18:35 -0500
                        My desktop is blank. Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> - 2015-11-08 17:15 -0800
                      Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-08 22:00 +0000
                        Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-11-08 22:57 +0000
                          Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-11-08 18:06 -0500
                        Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-11-08 16:53 -0700
                        Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-11-09 12:56 -0700
                    Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-11-08 12:37 -0700
                  Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-08 19:27 +0000
                    Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-11-09 12:59 -0700
        Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-11-07 14:08 -0500
        Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-11-07 14:50 -0500
          Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-11-07 16:45 -0500
        Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2015-11-08 15:49 +0000
    Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. gilber34 <fafa@invalid.com> - 2015-11-07 10:26 -0600
      Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-07 18:44 +0000
        Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-11-09 08:12 -0600
          Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-09 19:35 +0000
    Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2015-11-07 22:58 +0000
      Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-08 01:37 +0000
        Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2015-11-08 14:37 +0000
          Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-11-08 08:34 -0800
        Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-11-09 08:44 -0600
          Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-09 19:32 +0000
    Re: Richard Stallman on Valve/Steam gaming. Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2015-11-10 14:12 -0800

Page 3 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 6  Next page →

#531227

On Sun, 08 Nov 2015 19:21:48 +0000, Lloyd Parsons wrote:

> 
> I really can see someone hiring you to teach.
>

You won't.  My "old school" tactics of rigid discipline and erudition
will never make it the effete and squeamish contemporary world.

The Chinese, with Red Star Linux, will soon be eating our lunch.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#531234

On 8 Nov 2015 19:34:18 GMT, Fabian Russell wrote:

> On Sun, 08 Nov 2015 19:21:48 +0000, Lloyd Parsons wrote:
> 
>> 
>> I really can see someone hiring you to teach.
>>
> 
> You won't.  My "old school" tactics of rigid discipline and erudition
> will never make it the effete and squeamish contemporary world.
> 
> The Chinese, with Red Star Linux, will soon be eating our lunch.

Yea.
And they will be spying on every single one of their own citizens.
Don't kid yourself, that version of Linux is going to be reporting back to
the government.

-- 
You Ain't The Biggest Fish In The Crotch.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#531468

On 11/08/15 12:34, Fabian Russell wrote:
> On Sun, 08 Nov 2015 19:21:48 +0000, Lloyd Parsons wrote:
>
>>
>> I really can see someone hiring you to teach.
>>
>
> You won't.  My "old school" tactics of rigid discipline and erudition
> will never make it the effete and squeamish contemporary world.
>
> The Chinese, with Red Star Linux, will soon be eating our lunch.
>
Are you joining the chinese then?  When?

-- 
My problem is that I don't have enough middle fingers.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#531278

On 2015-11-08 1:31 PM, Fabian Russell wrote:
> On Sun, 08 Nov 2015 12:48:25 -0500, Slimer wrote:
> 
>>
>> What you're proposing as a substitute for a person paying for an
>> immediate answer that will likely salvage a critical project is that he
>> figure things out on his own
>>
> 
> If a person requires such assistance, he should not be hired in the first
> place.

Blame the user, typical Linux loser rebuttal.

> If an employer can't find good people, then that's his problem.

Blame the employer, typical Linux loser rebuttal.

> Using standard software is not like exploratory rocket science.  The
> capabilities of both Adobe Photoshop and MS Office are simple and
> straightforward and should not be a puzzle to anyone, especially
> a professional.

And yet they sometimes are and things are not as straightforward as the
developer always hopes.

> Did you ever hear of a manual?  If you are uncertain, a quick consultation
> of the reference manual will clear things up.

RTFM, typical Linux loser rebuttal.

> Before I gave it up, I used to teach Intuit QuickBooks (a widely used financial
> package) to so-called accounting "professionals."  These people were pathetic.
> They would rather pay me $60 per hour for personal instruction than purchase
> a simple reference manual for $29.95.  I guess they have serious trouble reading.
> 
> I would never have hired those idiots, yet they hold high positions in large
> corporations.

Yet Redhat, the company you Linux losers keep citing as an example of
success, sells exactly the kind of support you are ridiculing for
exactly the kind of users you are ridiculing. Considering the way you
losers see the users and think that they're all lazy and stupid for
experiencing problems, it's no wonder nobody cares about Linux.



-- 
Slimer

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#531279

On Sun, 8 Nov 2015 18:40:52 -0500, Slimer wrote:

> On 2015-11-08 1:31 PM, Fabian Russell wrote:
>> On Sun, 08 Nov 2015 12:48:25 -0500, Slimer wrote:
>> 
>>>
>>> What you're proposing as a substitute for a person paying for an
>>> immediate answer that will likely salvage a critical project is that he
>>> figure things out on his own
>>>
>> 
>> If a person requires such assistance, he should not be hired in the first
>> place.
> 
> Blame the user, typical Linux loser rebuttal.

It's right out of the Linux loon play book: The Linux Elitist tactic.
 
>> If an employer can't find good people, then that's his problem.
> 
> Blame the employer, typical Linux loser rebuttal.

It's right out of the Linux loon play book: The Linux Elitist tactic.
  
>> Using standard software is not like exploratory rocket science.  The
>> capabilities of both Adobe Photoshop and MS Office are simple and
>> straightforward and should not be a puzzle to anyone, especially
>> a professional.
> 
> And yet they sometimes are and things are not as straightforward as the
> developer always hopes.

Even professionals had to learn the software at some point.
There is a reason Photoshop or Protools (recording studio software) is
taught in schools and gimp and Ardour are not.

 
>> Did you ever hear of a manual?  If you are uncertain, a quick consultation
>> of the reference manual will clear things up.
> 
> RTFM, typical Linux loser rebuttal.

Classic. 
The only part he left out was fucking.
As in Read the FUCKING manual.

As for Linux help systems, Windows applications have full context help
systems.
Does Linux?
Last time I looked at the KDE help file it went on for pages explaining how
to use a mouse. 

>> Before I gave it up, I used to teach Intuit QuickBooks (a widely used financial
>> package) to so-called accounting "professionals."  These people were pathetic.
>> They would rather pay me $60 per hour for personal instruction than purchase
>> a simple reference manual for $29.95.  I guess they have serious trouble reading.
>> 
>> I would never have hired those idiots, yet they hold high positions in large
>> corporations.
> 
> Yet Redhat, the company you Linux losers keep citing as an example of
> success, sells exactly the kind of support you are ridiculing for
> exactly the kind of users you are ridiculing. Considering the way you
> losers see the users and think that they're all lazy and stupid for
> experiencing problems, it's no wonder nobody cares about Linux.

Yep.
You get what you pay for.

BTW the Linux loons are mobilizing and attacking RedHat for partnering with
Microsoft.



-- 
You Ain't The Biggest Fish In The Crotch.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#531734

In article <pan.2015.11.07.22.31.33@localhost.localdomain>, Fabian Russell wrote:

> > Lloyd Parsons:
> > I'm waiting for one of the 'advocates' here to comment about the
> > utter  stupidity of your posts.
> 
> Answer this one, Mr. Photoshop guru:

> With my digital SLR (containing an RGB Bayer CFA) , I take a photo
> of a bright red pickup truck under the blazing noontime summer sun.
> The white balance is set at 5400K, but the color of the truck in the
> image is ORANGE!

> What is happening?

> Maybe a call to the Adobe hotline can help you -- at $99.95 per
> call.  LOL!

This has nothing to do with Photoshop or any image editor. Red in direct sunlight 
will look orange when overexposed since the camera RGB sensor has a maxed out red 
channel but not a maxed out blue and green channel (mostly green), so they are 
proportionally bigger, making the color orange.

This can be fixed in post, but not by using the white balance, you have to turn 
down green/blue on the parts of the car that is overexposed, to make it red 
again, but usually this means making them the same red color of the rest of the 
car. If you have the RAW file, you probably have more dynamic range to pull down 
into 8 bit RGB so your screen can show it somewhat properly, but your eyes have 
far wider dynamic range than your camera sensor, and certainly than your 8 bit 
screen, so the photo you see on the screen represented in RGB colorspace will 
always have problems like these, where your eyes had no problem discerning the 
color variations.

This, again, has nothing to do with Photoshop or Linux

-- 
Sandman

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#531047

On 7 Nov 2015 22:21:25 GMT, Lloyd Parsons wrote:

> On Sat, 07 Nov 2015 22:18:08 +0000, Fabian Russell wrote:
> 
>> On Sat, 07 Nov 2015 16:56:24 -0500, Big Fish in a Small Crotch wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> The industry I work in uses Photoshop almost exclusively.
>>>
>>>
>> Photoshop is the industry standard because no one in the industry knows
>> about any other program.  LOL!
>> 
>> Also, no one in the industry knows anything about digital imaging
>> anyway,
>> because with Photoshop, one doesn't have to.  In fact, most people who
>> use Photoshop can't even differentiate a bit from a byte,
>> let alone understand the physics and technology of color profiles.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> How's gimp these days?
>>>
>>>
>> The GIMP is only one of many image processing applications available on
>> Linux.  Most users, however, would rather write their own applications
>> using either libraries or processing pipelines because THEY KNOW EXACTLY
>> WHAT THEY ARE DOING.
>> 
>> The Photoshop user could only say: "Duh?"
> 
> I'm waiting for one of the 'advocates' here to comment about the utter 
> stupidity of your posts.  Of course, we have to wait for them to quit 
> bitching about trolls they read while in their killfiles.

It will never happen.
He's read the play book and is predictably singing all the usual lines;
source code, freedom, hate for Microsoft, who needs Photoshop etc.

I think we've stumbled upon a real live wire!


-- 
You Ain't The Biggest Fish In The Crotch.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#531136

On 11/7/15, 3:18 PM, in article
pan.2015.11.07.22.16.30@localhost.localdomain, "Fabian Russell"
<root@localhost.localdomain> wrote:

> On Sat, 07 Nov 2015 16:56:24 -0500, Big Fish in a Small Crotch wrote:
> 
>> 
>> The industry I work in uses Photoshop almost exclusively.
>> 
> 
> Photoshop is the industry standard because no one in the industry
> knows about any other program.  LOL!

It also has, even with its quirks, features no other program has. From some
older posts of mine:

From a recent posts of mine:
    -----
    Same is true of Photoshop. GIMP is just far, far behind. Does not
    mean, though, that it is not powerful and might not work for you. It
    might. But for me there are just too many things which GIMP is
    missing. Multiple levels of layer sets, multiple types of masks and
    the ability to add multiple masks to any given part of the image.
    Add to that Smart Layers / Objects... adjustment layers... just all
    sorts of things which offer amazing capabilities. It also has a much
    better sharpen tool, 3D tools, ability to copy CSS styling
    information you have set in it (and other tools to allow it to work
    with Dreamweaver and other web development tools), vector layer
    features, and on and on and on.

    It really is a powerhouse image editing program - there is nothing
    else like it.
    -----
    I really have a lot more... for example, when using it on OS X why
    does it not let me use the OS X color picker? For that matter, why
    does it not even use the OS X save and open dialogs and printing is
    even worse: when I click to print it opens a separate program in the
    background which I have to click on (and, of course, it looks
    nothing like the standard OS X print dialog).

    This means when I open and save documents I do not have access to
    the items have placed on my sidebar. This means with color I do not
    have access to my swatches from other programs nor to any of the
    default color selection options I have in almost every other program
    not any of the add-ons I have added to the color selector. This
    means I do not have access to my printer defaults. Heck, for most of
    the hotkeys it uses the OS X standard of Command+whatever but for
    printing it uses Control+P. When I select to "Hide" it (which shows
    the correct hot key but it does not work), it often hides and then
    pops back into view, though behind other programs (this is just
    *wrong* and absurd... I have never seen any other program act so
    oddly on OS X). I can go on and on - no system services... no access
    to the Media Browser... on and on.

    It really is quite a mess. Photoshop is not perfect - though Adobe
    has worked hard over the last few versions to improve it. For
    example, some of its traditional hot keys are the same as ones Apple
    uses (such as Command+H to hide the program... also used for years
    by Photoshop to hide grids and slices and the like). Well, people
    have been using it for years... what do you do? The first time you
    hit Command+H the program asks which you want it to do... and you
    can change it any time you want. Similarly, you can use the Adobe
    color selectors *or* the Apple one... or the Adobe file selectors
    *or* the Apple ones. Same idea on Windows. Neither Photoshop nor
    GIMP uses the newish forms of file revisions that OS X added a few
    years ago - though rumor has it they are working on it for the
    Creative Cloud suite. They have added built in Spotlight features
    into the Mac version.
    -----

Since then GIMP has added multiple levels of layer sets, but I do not think
it has fixed the other issues.



> Also, no one in the industry knows anything about digital imaging anyway,
> because with Photoshop, one doesn't have to.  In fact, most people
> who use Photoshop can't even differentiate a bit from a byte,
> let alone understand the physics and technology of color profiles.
> 
> 
>> 
>> How's gimp these days?
>> 
> 
> The GIMP is only one of many image processing applications available
> on Linux.  Most users, however, would rather write their own applications
> using either libraries or processing pipelines because THEY KNOW EXACTLY
> WHAT THEY ARE DOING.
> 
> The Photoshop user could only say: "Duh?"
> 



-- 
* OS X / Linux: What is a file?     <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI>
* Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu:     <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE>
* Mint KDE working with folders:    <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0>
* Mint KDE creating files:          <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8>
* Mint KDE help:                    <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8>
* Mint KDE general navigation:      <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI>
* Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs?     <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA>
* Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux:     <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk>
* OS / Word Processor Comparison:   <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#531146

On Sat, 07 Nov 2015 22:34:12 -0700, Snit wrote:

>   
> But for me there are just too many things which GIMP is
> missing. Multiple levels of layer sets, multiple types of masks and
> the ability to add multiple masks to any given part of the image.
>

You are actually not talking about image *editing* but rather about
image *manipulation*.  There is a difference.

The digital photographer only is concerned about tweaking the appearance
of nearly finished images by improving contrast, boosting or lowering
highlights and shadows, and perhaps modifying color balance.  This is
"editing" and it can be accomplished effectively with the GIMP or many
other Linux software and also with image pipelines/libraries.

Manipulation involves the creation of new images through cutting, masking,
and layer merging.  These techniques are more utilized by commercial marketing
or other artistic/creative enterprises.  Furthermore, development of cohesive
GUI tools for image manipulation requires substantial levels of investment that
Linux/OSS cannot attain.



>
> It also has a much better sharpen tool,
>

Sharpening is effected by well established standard methods that can
be implemented by any software.  Adobe has no monopoly on any of it.

The unsharp mask, for example, is nothing more than a convolution kernel
applied to an image and then added back to the original.  Any software
can do this equally effectively.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#531213

On 11/8/15, 12:12 AM, in article
pan.2015.11.08.07.10.33@localhost.localdomain, "Fabian Russell"
<root@localhost.localdomain> wrote:

> On Sat, 07 Nov 2015 22:34:12 -0700, Snit wrote:
> 
>>   
>> But for me there are just too many things which GIMP is
>> missing. Multiple levels of layer sets, multiple types of masks and
>> the ability to add multiple masks to any given part of the image.
> 
> You are actually not talking about image *editing* but rather about
> image *manipulation*.  There is a difference.

Sort of like I differentiate between screen recording and screencasting.
many good screen recording programs, few decent screencasting ones. OK. I
can accept that.

> The digital photographer only is concerned about tweaking the appearance
> of nearly finished images by improving contrast, boosting or lowering
> highlights and shadows, and perhaps modifying color balance.  This is
> "editing" and it can be accomplished effectively with the GIMP or many
> other Linux software and also with image pipelines/libraries.

Heck, you can do much of that with Photos or Picassa... though GIMP and
other tools give you more control.

> Manipulation involves the creation of new images through cutting, masking, and
> layer merging.  These techniques are more utilized by commercial marketing or
> other artistic/creative enterprises.  Furthermore, development of cohesive GUI
> tools for image manipulation requires substantial levels of investment that
> Linux/OSS cannot attain.

Fair enough... and I would even go so far as to say GIMP is decent at it.
Not top of the class by any means but on par with something like Photoshop
Elements (they do not overlap in features 1:1 but are roughly comparable
programs).

>> It also has a much better sharpen tool,
> 
> Sharpening is effected by well established standard methods that can
> be implemented by any software.  Adobe has no monopoly on any of it.
> 
> The unsharp mask, for example, is nothing more than a convolution kernel
> applied to an image and then added back to the original.  Any software
> can do this equally effectively.
> 
Smart Sharpen does a lot more than unsharp mask:
<http://www.peachpit.com/articles/article.aspx?p=2224031&seqNum=2>.

There is also a shake reduction - which I have read good things about but
rarely use myself (and to be fair I use Photoshop for anything "big" a lot
less than I used to, so I am not familiar with a number of it updates).



-- 
* OS X / Linux: What is a file?     <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI>
* Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu:     <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE>
* Mint KDE working with folders:    <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0>
* Mint KDE creating files:          <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8>
* Mint KDE help:                    <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8>
* Mint KDE general navigation:      <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI>
* Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs?     <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA>
* Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux:     <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk>
* OS / Word Processor Comparison:   <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#531042

On 2015-11-07 4:56 PM, Big Fish in a Small Crotch wrote:
> On 7 Nov 2015 19:32:25 GMT, Fabian Russell wrote:
> 
>> On Sat, 07 Nov 2015 14:17:00 -0500, Big Fish in a Small Crotch wrote:
>>
>>> I'm in the middle of a Photoshop session.
>>>
>>
>> And paying Adobe a monthly subscription tithe in perpetuity for
>> the privilege of doing so.  LOL!
>>
>> Don't miss a payment or you'll be locked out of your images on
>> their cloud.  LOL!
>>
>> Don't edit too much erotic art or else Microsoft's algorithms will
>> flag your activity as suspicious and devious.  LOL!
>>
>> Enjoy your life sentence without parole.
>>
>> LOL!
> 
> The cost of Adobe is but a spec of dust compared to how much business, thus
> income, the program generates for me.
> The industry I work in uses Photoshop almost exclusively.
> It's also tax deductible as a business expense.
> 
> How's gimp these days?
> The name says it all.

ROFL!


-- 
Slimer

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#531050

On Sat, 07 Nov 2015 16:56:24 -0500, Big Fish in a Small Crotch wrote:

> 
> The cost of Adobe is but a spec of dust compared to how much business, thus
> income, the program generates for me.
>

Keep on earning them big bucks.  Maybe one day you'll be able to
afford some real brains.  LOL!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#531051

On 7 Nov 2015 22:41:04 GMT, Fabian Russell wrote:

> On Sat, 07 Nov 2015 16:56:24 -0500, Big Fish in a Small Crotch wrote:
> 
>> 
>> The cost of Adobe is but a spec of dust compared to how much business, thus
>> income, the program generates for me.
>>
> 
> Keep on earning them big bucks.  Maybe one day you'll be able to
> afford some real brains.  LOL!

Please tell me where you bought your brains because I want to make certain
I avoid that outlet.
They sell defective brains.

-- 
You Ain't The Biggest Fish In The Crotch.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#531074

On Sat, 07 Nov 2015 16:56:24 -0500, Big Fish in a Small Crotch wrote:

> 
> How's gimp these days?
>

It's good question, and on-topic as well.

The GIMP is doing very well.  A fully functional and stable developmental
version is available on git (git://git.gnome.org/gimp).  All those who
have doubts should try this new version.

The developmental version of gimp is referred to as the "Goat Invasion"
because it has now fully incorporated gegl (the goat) and the ability
to handle extreme bit depths.

Is it on par with Photoshop?

The GIMP does not intend to imitate Photoshop or any other software.
The GIMP strives for image processing excellence and comprehensiveness
in its own way and does not follow any example set by others.

Of course, most Photoshop users would be dumbfounded by the gimp
and probably could not appreciate its qualities.  As I already
mentioned, most Photoshop users know nothing of digital principles.
The extent of their expertise is to point and click.  They could
not apply digital imaging principles in a general sense without
the help of their Photoshop crutch (actually a wheelchair).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#531078 — les trois m-tEErs.

three, is agOOd one-digit approximant of pi,
in any integral base bigger than three

> the help of their Photoshop crutch (actually a wheelchair).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#531134

On 11/7/15, 6:15 PM, in article
pan.2015.11.08.01.14.00@localhost.localdomain, "Fabian Russell"
<root@localhost.localdomain> wrote:

> On Sat, 07 Nov 2015 16:56:24 -0500, Big Fish in a Small Crotch wrote:
> 
>> 
>> How's gimp these days?
>> 
> 
> It's good question, and on-topic as well.
> 
> The GIMP is doing very well.  A fully functional and stable developmental
> version is available on git (git://git.gnome.org/gimp).  All those who
> have doubts should try this new version.
> 
> The developmental version of gimp is referred to as the "Goat Invasion"
> because it has now fully incorporated gegl (the goat) and the ability
> to handle extreme bit depths.
> 
> Is it on par with Photoshop?
> 
> The GIMP does not intend to imitate Photoshop or any other software.
> The GIMP strives for image processing excellence and comprehensiveness
> in its own way and does not follow any example set by others.
> 
> Of course, most Photoshop users would be dumbfounded by the gimp
> and probably could not appreciate its qualities.  As I already
> mentioned, most Photoshop users know nothing of digital principles.
> The extent of their expertise is to point and click.  They could
> not apply digital imaging principles in a general sense without
> the help of their Photoshop crutch (actually a wheelchair).

GIMP is fine software - on par with Photoshop Elements, though the UI, as
much as it has improved, is still generally rated as not as good. Still,
nothing wrong with it, esp. for the price!


-- 
* OS X / Linux: What is a file?     <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI>
* Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu:     <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE>
* Mint KDE working with folders:    <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0>
* Mint KDE creating files:          <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8>
* Mint KDE help:                    <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8>
* Mint KDE general navigation:      <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI>
* Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs?     <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA>
* Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux:     <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk>
* OS / Word Processor Comparison:   <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#531009

On 11/07/15 12:07, Fabian Russell wrote:
> On Sat, 07 Nov 2015 13:35:51 -0500, Big Fish in a Small Crotch wrote:
>
>>
>> You sound like a Linux user.
>>
>
> Microsoft knows exactly what you are.  You have "Big Brother" sitting
> on your desktop streaming oodles of telemetry back to headquarters
> about everything that you you do and about which you can do nothing.
>
> Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!

Mostly just FUD and can be shut off.

>
> You are a helpless pawn that cannot control his own machine.
>
> What a butt-raped loser!  LOL!
>
> Now go and put your head back up your ass via your favorite game.
>
No one can see your viewpoint, as no one can get their head up their ass 
that far, except you.



-- 
My problem is that I don't have enough middle fingers.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#531016

On Sat, 07 Nov 2015 13:48:38 -0700, GreyCloud wrote:

> 
> Mostly just FUD and can be shut off.
> 

How do you know?  Have you carefully audited the source code?

Has anyone yet published an exhaustive network/packet analysis?
(Someone may have done so, but I don't follow MS news at all.)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#531036

On 7 Nov 2015 21:22:03 GMT, Fabian Russell wrote:

> On Sat, 07 Nov 2015 13:48:38 -0700, GreyCloud wrote:
> 
>> 
>> Mostly just FUD and can be shut off.
>> 
> 
> How do you know?  Have you carefully audited the source code?

Have you done so with Linux?
 
> Has anyone yet published an exhaustive network/packet analysis?
> (Someone may have done so, but I don't follow MS news at all.)

How's Heartbleed these days?
lol !

You might want to educate yourself on the topic of Linux security.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/business/2015/11/05/net-of-insecurity-the-kernel-of-the-argument/


-- 
You Ain't The Biggest Fish In The Crotch.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#531037

On Sat, 07 Nov 2015 17:00:58 -0500, Big Fish in a Small Crotch wrote:

> 
> You might want to educate yourself on the topic of Linux security.
> 
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/business/2015/11/05/net-of-insecurity-the-kernel-of-the-argument/
>

There is no such thing as "The Kernel."

The Linux kernel can be configured to an extreme degree to accommodate
a variety of needs and intentions.

With MS Windows, you get only what they give.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 3 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 6  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web