Adobe moves the rental/service economy onward

In article , Mayayana
wrote:


I'm surprised, though, that this category hasn't
developed better.

anyone who says that hasn't looked. there is a lot of graphics software
available.

I've written limited graphic software
myself. There's lots of freeware. There's GIMP. Yet
no one seems to have come up with a clean, complete,
well designed raster graphics program to stop the PS
lock on the market.

many have tried, but none have matched what photoshop can do.

Maybe it's just that techie people
don't usually care much about graphics. All I want is
something intuitive, with full functionality, at a reasonable
price.

photoshop elements for $50ish is exactly that.

The problem in the 90s was lack of functionality.
The problem these days is the opposite: Companies
add gimmicks in an attempt to wow customers into
buying a new version they don't need.

nonsense.

"android" wrote

| Yes that's the price what? It's 59 euros? so
| something like $65 then.
|
| What's your problem? Are you offended that there are other currencies
| than USD out there?

I'm not familiar with the notation *,- and the
page is in English. So it wasn't clear whether there
was perhaps a typo or some other mixup. I'm not
offended, but I'd have to fill out a form in order
to go to the next page to find out what I'd actually
pay. That seems like rather poor webpage design
to me. It has nothing to do with nationalism or
regional pride. Presumably at some point they'd tell
me what I have to pay in dollars. Doesn't it make
sense to do that before I have to fill out forms
and give them all my personal information?

But hiding prices is not an unusual strategy. A lot
of companies do that. It seems to be the car salesman
approach: Get them interested before talking about
money.

So far two problems: The help file has a CSS error
that makes the text invisible on my system. The color
picker is horrendous. But the program does seem to
have a lot of functionality. I haven't tried a RAW
photo on it yet.
I'm mainly curious because I like to have things to
recommend to others. But given the price, the slight
funkiness of the layout, and the complexity, i'm nbot
sure I'd recommend it to anyone. If they don't
mind funky they can have GIMP for free. But
Photoline is certainly interesting.

"Savageduck" wrote

| OK! Now, why don't you tell us how you really feel?
|

You just posted a long opinion about Lightroom CC.
I thought it was interesting and possibly useful for
anyone who wants to use Lightroom. Why do you
resent when others post their opinions? It's a lot
of work to try out new software. Getting opinions
from others is part of the point of groups like this.
Or is it just that you don't like people talking about
non-Adobe? For anyone contemplating buying
Corel products it might be worth seeing a criticism
of them.

On Oct 20, 2017, Mayayana wrote
(in article ):

wrote

OK! Now, why don't you tell us how you really feel?

You just posted a long opinion about Lightroom CC.

Yup!

I thought it was interesting and possibly useful for
anyone who wants to use Lightroom.

I hoped that it would possibly be useful information.

Why do you resent when others post their opinions?

I don’t.

It's a lot of work to try out new software.

Yup!

Getting opinions from others is part of the point of groups like this.
Or is it just that you don't like people talking about non-Adobe?

Opinions are subjective. However, if you read what you have written, your
opinion in this thread has the flavor of a rant, and that was what I
responded to.

For anyone contemplating buying
Corel products it might be worth seeing a criticism
of them.

It might be. It is just that your preference would be to exclude all features
you don’t care for, when they might be important to some potential buyers.

--

Regards,
Savageduck

In article ,
"Mayayana" wrote:

I'm not familiar with the notation *,- and the
page is in English.

The off the page "59,- Euro" equals Euro 59.00. Should be simple enough
even for you. Can't find some *,- on it anywhere...

HTH
--
teleportation kills

"Savageduck" wrote

| Opinions are subjective. However, if you read what you have written, your
| opinion in this thread has the flavor of a rant, and that was what I
| responded to.

We *do* have different styles. you tend
to be diplomatic, while I like to spice things
up with more provocative language.

In article , Mayayana
wrote:

I had to recompile the help file, after fixing
the CSS, so that I could read it. (The text is invisible!)
Very few people can or will recompile help files.

very few people intentionally cripple their browser to where most sites
fail to display properly.

those who do know what they did to cause that and can easily remedy the
situation.

How
many people have setups that prevent reading the
help file? Maybe not a lot.

one.

I don't know. But they say
they support WinXP. I'm running it on WinXP with the
default WinXP CHM file help system. They should have
tested to make sure their help files don't break on a
standard WinXP setup.

your setup is anything but standard and the fact that they still
support xp means it won't be competitive with modern apps running on
modern operating systems.

Another typical issue: There are two separate menu items
for dummy brightness "correction", whatever that is, but
no brightness tool. The only way to do it is from
the menu Tool - Color - Hue/Saturation.

the issue is your lack of understanding.

Am I being picky? Yes. Why not? We're talking about
the pros and cons of possibly buying a graphic editor
that costs $70+-. It doesn't help anyone to say, "Oh.
This is pretty good." My overall sense after limited
experimenting is that the program has a lot of functionality
but is poorly designed and rough around the edges. It's
also overproduced at the same time. Click the forecolor
box and you get a 5-or-6-tab menu where you can pick
background patterns, web-safe colors, and all sorts of
other nonsense. (The Jews have a delightful word for
that: ungepachkit. [OONG-geh-poch-kit] It means
overdone and is the scourge of too much modern
software.)

antisemitism noted, and it's actually ungapatchka:
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=ungapatchka
a Yiddish word that describes the overly ornate, busy, ridiculously
over-decorated, and garnished to the point of distaste.

photoline is not that. it's not even remotely close to that. photoline
is actually the *opposite* of that. there is zero polish.

however, you are correct that it's poorly designed.

Double-click the forecolor box and you at least get a
color picker, but it's a badly designed one. (And double
clicking the forecolor box is non-intuitive. I only know
about it because I found it in the help. Most people don't
even read the help, so they're likely to assume that Photoline
only deals in web-safe colors. I was reading the help
because I couldn't believe there was no basic color picker.)

websafe colours??? wtf.

1995 wants you back.

But of course, none of that will matter for 98% of
people. They lost interest at the purchase page when they
couldn't immediately, effortlessly figure out what the
software costs.

no, they lost interest when they realized that photoshop elements costs
less, does much more and is a *much* easier to use app and one with a
huge support network should there be any issues.

photoline is complete garbage. it's based on the gimp's source code and
is only slightly more tolerable.

On Sat, 21 Oct 2017 11:47:05 -0400, Tony Cooper
wrote:

Those of us who routinely prowl the internet are quite used to using
conversion apps for currency, weights, and measurements. I was just
viewing a discussion where it was brought up that in the US vision
acuity is expressed as "20/20" (meaning seeing something at 20 feet
away as a person with normal vision would see it at 20 feet away) but
that same expression is "6/6" in Europe. A measurement conversion app
tells you that "6 meters" is 19.685 feet.

Apps aren't needed. Just use Google.

"Tony Cooper" wrote


| I spent my working career in sales

Interesting. But you don't subscribe to the idea that
you shouldn't argue with the customer and tell them
that what they want is not valid? I ran into that
the other day in a Sherwin Williams paint store. The
clerk is trained to "upsell" constantly and to suggest
new products. I told him I'd like to switch to SW acrylic
wall paints but I've been finding they go rotten in under
2 years. When I open the can it's an unbearable stench.
Something like ammonia and sulfur. Benjamin Moore
paints are not as good in my view, but they don't do that.
The clerk told me that what I've experienced is not true.
I had to smile. He was trained to be a salesman but
wasn't trained to listen to the customer.

| You seem to be taking the position that using a currency converter app
| it is something difficult to do.

Not at all. This has nothing to do with currency
conversion. Someone is leaving your website to
go figure out the conversion. You're not making it
easy for them.

Some years ago I read about a software company
that was trying to figure out why they got a lot of
downloads but few sales. It turned out that 2/3 of
the downloaders couldn't find the installer after
they'd downloaded it and forgot about it.

There are other popular stats for webmasters that
a page needs to load in under .25 seconds or people
may get impatient and leave.

So all I'm saying is that they should do what you
said you would do: If they're going to build a dedicated
website aimed at Americans then sell from that site
in dollars. Don't create unnecessary obstacles. Ditto
for the rest of my post. The best software is functional
and intuitive. To go against the grain -- on the webpage
or in the software -- is a case of ignorance, inferior design,
or even arrogant aggression. An example of the latter
would be GIMP, where the File - SaveAs menu saves
in GIMP format. To save in normal formats requires going
to an "Export" menu. Why? It's clearly a Gimpian imposition.
They want to tell us that we should save files in their
format. They broke functionality in order to do that. It's
not broken in a big way, but it's one detail that doesn't
work smoothly and requires the user to do some research.
Dozens of such quirks are what make GIMP an inferior
piece of software that few people use despite the fact
that it's free.

| A measurement conversion app
| tells you that "6 meters" is 19.685 feet.

I wrote a small program to access Google maps,
streetview, satellite images. It provides an option
to show elevation and distance scale in km or
miles. Should I expect people to use a conversion
program with my software? Why? Are you on some
kind of politically correct kick that you think people
who think in miles and dollars should be inconvenienced
because American imperialism has been oppressive
for Europeans? Do you share the anti-American
resentment that android expressed? I'm not inclined
to be political about it. It's just a practical issue.
I provide metric conversion because some Europeans
use my software and they need it.

The whole point of good software is that it does
what you need well and doesn't do what you don't
need. It's the same with anything. And that includes
website functionality.

"Bill W" wrote

| Apps aren't needed. Just use Google.

I actually keep a VBScript on my desktop to
convert temperatures. With km I just think
of it as 3/5 mileage and that's close enough.
I can't remember the last time I needed to
convert between metric and feet/inches/yards.
I can't think of anything I use that doesn't
at least have the American measurements in
parentheses.