Linked by Hadrien Grasland on Sun 9th Jan 2011 12:39 UTC, submitted by RichterKuato
Graphics, User Interfaces "GIMP 2.8 has been talked about for more than a year and back in January there was a GIMP 2.8 release schedule by Martin Nordholts that had set the final release for the 27th of December. That date has now passed and, sadly, this major update to this leading open-source graphics program is still not close to being released."
Thread beginning with comment 456740
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
prokoudine
Member since:
2005-08-09

Oh is that the problem? I'm just not choosing to understand it?

Indeed so.

I'm going create a soda called negro-cola and anyone offended by the name just needs to choose to understand that negro means black in spanish.

Exactly. As a matter of fact, commercial companies rebrand some of their products locally to make the names sound good on local markets. Those who don't often fail in sales. But GIMP is not a commercial product. It's there because few people out there care to maintain and improve it. You are free to express your ideas and, as my experience tells me, you will be listened to. But you are not to dictate these people what and how to do things until you personally participate in making GIMP happen. It's called doacracy.

There's too much talking and too litle doing. Telling developers to rename GIMP for millionth time is not a contribution, it's a distraction from things that actually matter: features, usability, performance.

And by the way the largest market isn't English speaking. Perhaps you haven't noticed, but in XXI century it's rather Chinese. And this is not exactly a market, we are talking about free software after all.

I wouldn't call Paint.NET a simple painting tool, it has layers and is catching up in features

Last time I tried it it was hiding layer blending modes from user making it a complete PITA to do even basic things. That's what i call simple.

Reply Parent Score: 2

nt_jerkface Member since:
2009-08-26

Those who don't often fail in sales. But GIMP is not a commercial product. It's there because few people out there care to maintain and improve it.


The US is the largest software market for $0 software as well. Financial contributions to open source projects are disproportionately from the US. Why risk losing contributions from the largest source? What is the gain from keeping the current name?

And by the way the largest market isn't English speaking. Perhaps you haven't noticed, but in XXI century it's rather Chinese.


The largest software market is the US market. China has a large population but their GDP is still about a third of the US.

Reply Parent Score: 3

prokoudine Member since:
2005-08-09

The US is the largest software market for $0 software as well. Financial contributions to open source projects are disproportionately from the US. Why risk losing contributions from the largest source?

I'm afraid the message didn't get through. Let me try it once again, for the last time: the issue is not in amount of donations and where they come from. It's in communicating requirements of the project to its user base. This is No.1 priority to fix.

Thus far the project was worked on by people who are attached to it whatever the name is. And this is exactly what the project needs: dedicated contributors, people who do things. I've been watching the project for a little over a decade and I've yet to see someone who argued about the name and still contributed to the project.

Which only proves that there are people who talk and argue, and there are people who do. If some people can't let go of self-inflicted offense, there's not much there can be done for them.
What is the gain from keeping the current name?

The question is not about gain. It never was, it never will be. There is a whole infrastructure around GIMP: websites, books and so on. There's no gain in messing the whole thing up just because some people are undereducated to know what an acronym is.

I see that you are set in your views, I don't think you'll be able to see the point I'm making.

Edited 2011-01-10 05:48 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

tyrione Member since:
2005-11-21

FWIW: China's GDP is > $9 Trillion.

The US GDP is > $14 Trillion.

Reply Parent Score: 2