Forums | MacLife

You may want to look at Seashore. It's still in early development, but the cocoa interface is MUCH better.

Ohh ya... and it's free.

MacGIMP is free, they just charge for distribution.  In fact they provide the source code for free download.

A MacSlash poster wrote:

The GPL does not require free (zero-cost, or "free as in beer") download of anything--not binary, and not source code.

It allows the author to charge anything he wants for binaries, and use any distribution method. He can include the source code on the same site or CD as the binaries, or tell people where to write for a copy of the source code. In the case of separate distribution, the source code charge cannot be higher than "your cost of physically performing source distribution".

However, the GPL gives all recipients the ability to, in turn, distribute the GPL'd code in any way they like, including zero-cost download. So, developer A can charge money for his GPL'd product, and then watch customer B turn around and make it available for free on a website.

Thus, as a practical matter, many GPL software developers make their code available as a zero-cost download. But it's not required, and the FSF encourages authors to consider charging fees and funding further development of free (as in speech) software.

http://macslash.org/comments.pl?sid=3435&cid=41218

Can't you install GIMP via Fink or DarwinPorts?

Miles wrote:

MacGIMP is free, they just charge for distribution.  In fact they provide the source code for free download.

A MacSlash poster wrote:

The GPL does not require free (zero-cost, or "free as in beer") download of anything--not binary, and not source code.

I'm really not up on the lingo here, but it sounds to me like they charge for compilation, not distribution. And I hate that free as in beer smurf.

resedit wrote:

Pariah wrote:

The GIMP is free only if your time is worthless.

It does more than I need from a graphics program.
Yes, Photoshop is nicer. But for some of us, the GIMP is good enough.

Ya, but you use Linux too and that reduces your options greatly. It would be accurate to say you are just stuck with The GIMP cuz it's the only thing anywhere near a decent Linux graphics app.

There is a certain dishonesty about comparing The GIMP to Photoshop.
A much more accurate comparison would be to Photoshop Elements or Paint Shop Pro. Both of which are available for around $70.
The GIMP has none of the professional pre-press tools that accounts for Photoshop's premium price.

Last edited by Pariah (2006-03-24 7:24 am)

Metacell wrote:

On the other hand, GIMP has all the color distribution tools missing from Photoshop elements.  And it is free (my version was a free downloadable already compiled ready to run application--I don't know where this price thing came from). I don't really understand all the criticism. I find it easy to use, powerful, well-documented, and feature rich. I couldn't ask for more in a free image editor. If I was a professional publisher, maybe, in which case I would just buy Photoshop.

Some people seem to find the GIMP usable, I dunno.
All I can say is I am familiar with pretty much every graphics app you could name and I find the GIMPs interface to be obscure to  the point of uselessness.
Part of it I am sure is that I am just not willing to completely relearn how to do stuff cuz thats my main problem with the GIMP, it has nothing in common with any other graphics app on the planet so really having prior editing experience is more a handicap than an advantage.
Knowing Photoshop wont help you with The GIMP and knowing the GIMP wont help you if you finally graduate to Photoshop.

just tested seashore, it's still quite limited, but very cute. I hope they keep on with the project.