If you can't give mature comments to something, than better don't comment it.
So people should work for free as in beer ? I don't care if software is free. I don't care if its open source. I just want it to work. As for cost, well beer isn;t free either.
I never said that someone must work unpaid. You're bending my words dude. I was mentioning cost savings on software, not on people.
And in fact companies often pay for open source software, only less because they pay a certain amount ("flat rate") instead of paying per install.
OpenOffice Libreoffice, same god damned thing isn't it ? except libreoffice is a fork of openoffice, though I forget when specifically this occured.
The fork occured soon after Oracle purchased Sun. Oracle was rumoured to be planning to quit the OpenOffice project (or whatever), hence the fork. And if you had read what I've linked to, you would have known how things have ended up to.
You can't give me a copy of openoffice and libre office won't do my books.
If it doesn't meet your requirements, this doesn't mean it sucks generally. It only implies it's not suitable for your specific use.
I am ashamed to admit that after getting an Office students pack I have been almost exclusively using Microsoft Windows rather than LibreOffice. That said though, I think its a personal preference thing, and I would be just as comfortable using LibreOffice if I didn't buy the Office.
In my case it depends, which of the two I use. If I need to exchange documents with Office 2007 users, while those docs still need to be edited then I choose Office 2010, or if read-only files are fine I make the docs in LibreOffice and export them to PDF. Except when needing to use pictures (which is seldomly the case), in that case I use MS Office 2010 too, no matter with who I need to exchange.
If I will exchange with fellow LibreOffice users or if it is for private use, I prefer to use LibreOffice.
I understand both sides of the argument, because I am actually using Gimp over Adobe Photoshop (mainly because I can't afford the £150+ license fee, and the 7/14/whatever day trial was not long enough for me to acclimatise). That and Chrome over IE9, and trying to use Mozilla Thunderbird to play nice (it doesn't, I probably need to spend more time to actually attempt it properly).
Let's not forget that Portage/APT make it quite easy on Linux installs to add plugins to GIMP; so I guess that even if it is not "the same" as PS it comes very close. Those plugins should be available for the Windows/Mac versions of GIMP, but I guess you need to DL them separately from the www.
In case of Mozilla TB, let me know what you are struggling with, and I may be able to help you out. It's in minor things, often. E.g. when the sending/receiving e-mails has its flaws, a manual set-up me solve the problem (the automagic stuff seems to select wrong ports and such, in certain cases).
Gimp has to many problems and to difficult a workflow for most professionals and they are acting like fixing the multwindow view is some sort of monumental task, that tells me the application is full of spaghetti code workarounds.
"Fixing" is not the right word here, dude. The multiwindow thing has been there with a
purpose. That GUI design allows the user to spread the program across several
virtual desktops and/or monitors.
Because there are people who don't like it, the developers are adding a all-in-one interface to the program without ditching the other (because some would still prefer the old design).
The fact that they wish to offer 2 GUIs at once (offering choice), combined with all the tools etc. makes it hard for them. And possibly the GIMP core development team is rather small, increasing dev time even more.
