Does any other program (windows or linux) do screenshot annotationefficiently?

In article , Alan Meyer
wrote:

It seems to me that you have spent an enormous amount of time testing
"free" software, without, apparently, any regard to the cost of your
time. Is it worthless? I don't understand the fixation of things that
are "free"? I believe the old adage that "there is no such thing as a
free lunch".

Doesn't commercial software require the same amount of reading reviews
and testing?

the point is he only looked at free solutions, ignoring a whole class
of apps just because he's too cheap to spend a couple bucks on quality
software. how much did he really save by wasting so many hours without
finding a solution?

There are a few commercial products that are so well established
(Windows, Office, Photoshop, Acrobat, Flash, etc.) that you may not need
to test them, but there are a lot of freeware programs in that category
too (Linux, Apache, OpenOffice/LibreOffice, MySQL, Python, Perl, Java,
Emacs, vim, etc. For image viewing or editing IrfanView [viewing] and
the GIMP [editing] have been around forever and are really good.)

emacs and vim? seriously? the gimp is not 'really good', it's roughly
where photoshop was a decade ago. openoffice might be ok by itself but
it won't work particularly well for those who exchange files with
others who use the real thing. apache, mysql, perl and python are not
apps people run. java is a security nightmare, as is flash.

Free has some financial benefits that go beyond initial purchase price,
including:

Put it on all of your computers at no extra charge.
Update to latest version at no extra charge.

depends on the apps.

many paid apps work the same way. all apps from the mac app store do.

If you have 3-4 computers in your household and new versions of the
software come out every 3-4 years, over 10 years, the cost advantages
add up.

depends on the apps.

meanwhile, using software that does exactly what is needed is usually
well worth whatever extra expense might be incurred.

I also like the security you get with open source programs. Security
holes get found and plugged. If you're running Linux, the security and
stability updates will happen automatically, not just for Linux itself,
but for all of your applications. On Windows, Microsoft will do that
for Microsoft's products, but for the rest you're dependent on whatever
update policies the vendor provides. Oftentimes you get very
inconvenient demands from 3 or 4 different programs that clamor for
separate updates - where Linux applies all of them automatically and at
once.

again, depends on the apps.

some paid apps auto-update, and on a mac, all apps from the app store
update automatically (unless disabled). also, linux updates don't
necessarily affect apps.

The authors of open source programs don't have the same motivation or
the same opportunity to bury spyware in their products. Even if they
wanted to they know that other programmers would spot it and blast them.

the authors of open source programs don't have the same motivation to
make their products not suck either, namely money. money is a very big
motivator.

that's why commercial software is usually significantly more capable
and more reliable than open source solutions. it's why pros use
photoshop instead of the gimp. there is the occasional exception, but
it's rare.

Besides the spyware issue, open source programs are often better behaved
with regard to not installing third party toolbars, not running
services, not grabbing file extension handlers without permission, not
putting stuff in the Windows registry that doesn't go away during an
uninstall, etc. I'm not saying that all commercial programs are
offenders in those areas, or that no open source programs are, but my
impression is that the track record for open source is better in these
areas.

depends on the app and what options the user picked in the installer.
often, avoiding that extra stuff is nothing more than deselecting a
checkbox.

And if you install a free program and two weeks later learn about a
better one, you're not out any money for the product you no longer want
to use.

that's why you use the trial version first or do more research before
purchase.

On Mon, 22 Apr 2013 15:24:19 -0700 Savageduck wrote:

BTW: here are a couple of curved arrows, a circle and some text done in
Photoshop on to of what has become my annotation demo.
http://db.tt/Q5JNM5Fz

Exactly! Those arrows are beautiful!

I especially like the variable width of the streamlined arrows
(although I would have made the point a lot smaller!).

And the text is fine ... as is the circle and ellipse.

Those three things are the hardest to find in freeware, done well:
1. Text (just typing without having to define an area)
2. Arrows (you draw them and the arrows are automatically put in)
3. Circles, boxes, ellipses, etc. (often used to isolate something)

I presume they were all easy to add in both Photoshop & Elements?

On Mon, 22 Apr 2013 17:14:36 -0400 Tony Cooper wrote:

If you want a second or third arrow, you merely copy/paste that layer
and move the arrow on that layer. You don't have to re-draw the
arrow.

That's a very nice feature, especially when you have tiered arrows,
as shown in the Bugatti picture.

On Mon, 22 Apr 2013 21:48:32 -0400 Alan Meyer wrote:

Besides the spyware issue, open source programs are often better behaved

Regarding behavior ...

One huge difference I've noted in installing freeware over
bloatware is the HUGE difference in installation & removal times.

For example, installing iTunes (freeware but also bloatware), takes
quite a long time, adds hidden daemons (such as bonjour & apple device
services), and doesn't even respect the place you tell it to put it.

Likewise with Office, which takes forever to install, and anything
from Adobe or Oracle (even Quicktime, ironically, takes forever to
install).

With almost all freeware, they install quickly - and - best of all,
they almost always uninstall just as quickly.

On Tue, 23 Apr 2013 00:17:22 -0400 nospam wrote:

the point is he only looked at free solutions, ignoring a whole class
of apps just because he's too cheap to spend a couple bucks on quality
software. how much did he really save by wasting so many hours without
finding a solution?

The canonical rule in all software whenever you have a task to accomplish,
is to first perform that task in freeware - and then - only when you
can't possibly perform it in freeware - by then - you know enough to
figure out what features in the payware are worth paying for.

If you just dumbly go and buy payware, you'll never know what could
have been done just as easily in freeware - and - worse yet - you may
not have the best solution but you're stuck with it (unless you have
infinite money).

For example, if you need to burn a DVD, on Windows, you try imgburn.
Likewise, on Linux, you'd try K3b or Brasero to burn DVDs.
If the freeware doesn't do what you need, then (and only then), you
bother researching & buying Nero or the equivalent in payware.

The beauty of doing it first in freeware, even if you fail, is that
you then know EXACTLY what you need in the payware - hence - you'll
make a much smarter payware decision.

Bringing it back to the point, were I to consider payware for screen
annotation, I know EXACTLY what I want that payware to do BEFORE I
lay down the money for the payware.

Freeware is, essentially, the 1st step in the payware decision tree.

Danny D. posted Tue, 23 Apr 2013 05:26:40 +0000 (UTC)


The canonical rule in all software whenever you have a task to accomplish,
is to first perform that task in freeware - and then - only when you
can't possibly perform it in freeware - by then - you know enough to
figure out what features in the payware are worth paying for.

..........
Freeware is, essentially, the 1st step in the payware decision tree.

Very good point.
To buy it, and to know why I have bought it
are qualitatively very different levels.


--
Poutnik

On Mon, 22 Apr 2013 21:48:32 -0400 Alan Meyer wrote:

Doesn't commercial software require the same amount of
reading reviews and testing?

Here's one functional freeware/payware decision tree:

a) Define the task you need to accomplish:
e.g., Let's say you want to create a pencil drawing from this JPG:
http://www4.picturepush.com/photo/a/...g/12760612.jpg

b) Find & test the best freeware for the task:
e.g., Inkscape: Path-Trace Bitmap-(o)Edge detection-Update-OK
Or, Gimp: Filters-Edge Detect-Difference of Gaussians
etc.
http://www3.picturepush.com/photo/a/...g/12760601.jpg

c) If that freeware fails, or only partially performs the desired task,
then, after having tested it, you now know much more about what to
look for in the payware that you shell out your hard-earned cash for.

In fact, the payware, to be worth anything, has to do the task better,
or easier than the freeware did it - or - it has to do a task that the
freeware just couldn't do.

The point is:
Armed with freeware knowledge, you'll make better payware decisions!

In article , Danny D.
wrote:

In fact, the payware, to be worth anything, has to do the task better,
or easier than the freeware did it - or - it has to do a task that the
freeware just couldn't do.

which is almost always the case, otherwise nobody would pay for it.
they'd use the free stuff.

as they say, you get what you pay for.

The point is:
Armed with freeware knowledge, you'll make better payware decisions!

nonsense. the best way to make a decision is ask those who have done
similar tasks what the various options are.

In article , Danny D.
wrote:

Besides the spyware issue, open source programs are often better behaved

Regarding behavior ...

One huge difference I've noted in installing freeware over
bloatware is the HUGE difference in installation & removal times.

a huge generalization, contradicted by your other post regarding cd
burning software.

installing either of the two examples you list is more involved than
paid software which is nothing more than dragging the app to wherever
or clicking a download button. but when have facts mattered to linux
zealots anyway.

For example, installing iTunes (freeware but also bloatware), takes
quite a long time, adds hidden daemons (such as bonjour & apple device
services),

those *have* to be installed for itunes to work.

and doesn't even respect the place you tell it to put it.

that is a flat out lie.

Likewise with Office, which takes forever to install, and anything
from Adobe or Oracle (even Quicktime, ironically, takes forever to
install).

big apps take longer to install than small ones.

With almost all freeware, they install quickly - and - best of all,
they almost always uninstall just as quickly.

again, it depends on the apps. there is plenty of freeware that's a
bitch to install (particularly on linux) and plenty of paid software
that's trivial, as simple as dragging or clicking a download button.

In article , Danny D.
wrote:

the point is he only looked at free solutions, ignoring a whole class
of apps just because he's too cheap to spend a couple bucks on quality
software. how much did he really save by wasting so many hours without
finding a solution?

The canonical rule in all software whenever you have a task to accomplish,
is to first perform that task in freeware - and then - only when you
can't possibly perform it in freeware - by then - you know enough to
figure out what features in the payware are worth paying for.

that is the stupidest thing i've heard in a very long time.

if you don't know what features you need to do a task, how the hell are
you going to find freeware to do it?

there also might be freeware that does whatever it is but the user
experience sucks and paid software is just more pleasant to use.

If you just dumbly go and buy payware, you'll never know what could
have been done just as easily in freeware - and - worse yet - you may
not have the best solution but you're stuck with it (unless you have
infinite money).

nobody said to ignore freeware. if a free solution does the job,
great. however, if a paid solution does a better job, then *that* could
be the way to go, rather than suffer with something that doesn't work
that well only because it's free.

evaluate all options and choose the best tool for the job.

For example, if you need to burn a DVD, on Windows, you try imgburn.
Likewise, on Linux, you'd try K3b or Brasero to burn DVDs.
If the freeware doesn't do what you need, then (and only then), you
bother researching & buying Nero or the equivalent in payware.

or just use what's built into the os.

The beauty of doing it first in freeware, even if you fail, is that
you then know EXACTLY what you need in the payware - hence - you'll
make a much smarter payware decision.

nonsense. you need to know that *before* you start looking for any
software.

Bringing it back to the point, were I to consider payware for screen
annotation, I know EXACTLY what I want that payware to do BEFORE I
lay down the money for the payware.

you should know what you want before you look at any solution, free or
paid. otherwise you'll waste your time looking at dozens of apps and
get nowhere.

Freeware is, essentially, the 1st step in the payware decision tree.

no it isn't. look at all options and see which one best fits the task.